Guidance sought

[geronimo_appleby]

I would appreciate it if any of the AH could spare a few moments to look over and critique the paragraph below. I am in the process of trying to get to grips with simple punctuation, syntax, grammar, and all the remaining intricacies of English in the written form. My brain really hurts. *sigh*

As a result I have written an intro paragraph to a piece I hope to continue. I wrote it initially in my old 'style'. Style is something I've never been accused of in the past... Hovever after re-working the paragraph I would now like to see if I'm getting anywhere.

Help, please help!

Geronimo.


The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during the September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

 

[DesertPirate]

I would appreciate it if any of the AH could spare a few moments to look over and critique the paragraph below. I am in the process of trying to get to grips with simple punctuation, syntax, grammar, and all the remaining intricacies of English in the written form. My brain really hurts. *sigh*

As a result I have written an intro paragraph to a piece I hope to continue. I wrote it initially in my old 'style'. Style is something I've never been accused of in the past... Hovever after re-working the paragraph I would now like to see if I'm getting anywhere.

Help, please help!

Geronimo.


The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest, and that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

There are a couple of minor changes.

 

[Liar]

"And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years." sounds like something out of a financial report.

Doesn't play well with the style of the rest of the paragraph, and definitely not with the style of erotic, let alone any, fiction.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

There are a couple of minor changes.

thanks for taking the time. i appreciate it.

"And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years." sounds like something out of a financial report.

Doesn't play well with the style of the rest of the paragraph, and definitely not with the style of erotic, let alone any, fiction.

told ya i have never been accused of style. thanks for the input nevertheless.

 

[tickledkitty]

I think you're worrying too much about one paragraph. Write the whole thing and then go back and edit.

If you focus too much on this one paragraph, you'll never finish.

 

[Emerald_Dragon]

I would appreciate it if any of the AH could spare a few moments to look over and critique the paragraph below. I am in the process of trying to get to grips with simple punctuation, syntax, grammar, and all the remaining intricacies of English in the written form. My brain really hurts. *sigh*

As a result I have written an intro paragraph to a piece I hope to continue. I wrote it initially in my old 'style'. Style is something I've never been accused of in the past... Hovever after re-working the paragraph I would now like to see if I'm getting anywhere.

Help, please help!

Geronimo.


It had never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for my freshman year at the university during the fallof 1972, I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. That naivety remained largely unaltered over the next two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I had grown up in, With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

Just my take on how I would write it.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

I think you're worrying too much about one paragraph. Write the whole thing and then go back and edit.

If you focus too much on this one paragraph, you'll never finish.

i just wanted to get a take on things, kitty. i want to be clear in my own mind before i continue. i'm happy enough that i have enough experience but am trying to develop a little rather than just churn out the same old crap.

Just my take on how I would write it.

thank you, Emerald_Dragon. i'll keep your points in mind. i shoulda mentioned that the piece is set in UK and some of the terms don't cross the pond too well but i do thank you for the other titbits.

GA.

 

[tickledkitty]

i just wanted to get a take on things, kitty. i want to be clear in my own mind before i continue. i'm happy enough that i have enough experience but am trying to develop a little rather than just churn out the same old crap.

Ok. I'm sorry. Didn't mean to offend. My own experience is that I tend to over-analyze and edit repeatedly and end up rarely finishing anything.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

thank you, Emerald_Dragon. i'll keep your points in mind. i shoulda mentioned that the piece is set in UK and some of the terms don't cross the pond too well but i do thank you for the other titbits.

GA.

Think you're wrong. The only word I see as an atlantic prob is 'fall'. Why not use 'October/November'. My vote goes with Emerald.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

I would appreciate it if any of the AH could spare a few moments to look over and critique the paragraph below. I am in the process of trying to get to grips with simple punctuation, syntax, grammar, and all the remaining intricacies of English in the written form. My brain really hurts. *sigh*

As a result I have written an intro paragraph to a piece I hope to continue. I wrote it initially in my old 'style'. Style is something I've never been accused of in the past... Hovever after re-working the paragraph I would now like to see if I'm getting anywhere.

Help, please help!

Geronimo.


The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during the September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. And that naivety remained largely unchanged over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons, but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically, my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

My changes are in bold.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

Ok. I'm sorry. Didn't mean to offend. My own experience is that I tend to over-analyze and edit repeatedly and end up rarely finishing anything.

no offence taken. i didn't mean to imply any offence had been taken. dagnabbit, i hate it when that happens.

My changes are in bold.

thank you. i do appreciate all this.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

Think you're wrong. The only word I see as an atlantic prob is 'fall'. Why not use 'October/November'. My vote goes with Emerald.

uhm... i originally used September. i'm kinda confused by your post.

 

[Stella_Omega]

My red pencil;

The idea never occurred to me, that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I came to university during the September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest; that naivety remained largely unchanged over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more, to travel and to broaden my horizons, but sexually, I was stuck in the dark ages. My carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to my childhood home. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

("Ironically" seems pretty obvious in the context, although you could put it back in)


I looked at the title of this thread and kept reading it as "Geronimo Sought"

 

[fifty5]

Trying to summarise...

The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during the September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

It had never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for my freshman year at the university during the fall of 1972, I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. That naivety remained largely unaltered over the next two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I had grown up in, With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

The idea never occurred to me, that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I came to university during the September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest; that naivety remained largely unchanged over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more, to travel and to broaden my horizons, but sexually, I was stuck in the dark ages. My carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to my childhood home. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during the September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. And that naivety remained largely unchanged over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons, but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically, my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

"And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years." sounds like something out of a financial report.

In no particular order...

"It had" and "came to" seem to me to change the tense of the original. "It had" moves it to the pluperfect (?), while "came to" seems to move it to the imperfect (?). My terms may well be wrong, but my point is that these changes alter the relationship between when this para is intended to be, in comparison with the events being described here - and to be described in the main story. Do you see what I mean, geronimo? You need to decide which you want.

"freshman year" and "fall" do definitely sound American to me. At least in my day, while "freshman" was understood, it was only ever spoken in full as a piss-take on transatlantic jargon. The abbreviation "fresher" was used during "Fresher's Week" and maybe for a few days after. Subsequently, we just used "first year". Personally I like your original form. Together with "the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life" it dates things precisely - I know you are 4 years younger than I am, and can expect to relate closely to at least the timing of the events to be described. Others can also understand the opposite implication if they are a very different age.

In addition, "the one I had grown up in." ends in a trailing preposition (is that the right term for the "in"?). These days folk don't seem to worry about that 'error', but your original avoids the issue completely - there is no need to go to the extreme of "up with which I will not put".

"sexually" versus "sexual awakening" - another tense change (though shorter and simpler is a good general rule). The first form is a continuous state, the latter is a single event. You choose which you want. Stella is right though, because "I was stuck in the dark ages" is also a continuous state. If you want the event, maybe it's the other bit that needs to be changed - and that phrase is a bit hackneyed: something simpler could well be better than the cliché.

I take Liar's point, but this paragraph reads to me like a formal preface, so that the style needn't suit the main narrative. If this aspect worries you, maybe you might turn the whole sentence around. Something like: "The next couple of years didn't alter me much." (But in your own words.)

You may want to think about my reaction there: "this paragraph reads to me like a formal preface." Is that what you want? It implies to me that you are now older and wiser, maybe sadder, than when the events to be narrated took place - in the long dead past of your youth. Creating that impression now could be a useful device to allow you to write the main narrative in the style of the younger you - giving a potentially much fresher feel to the writing, while the reader still knows that it is a 'period piece'.

Finally, Stella's tentative point about "Ironically" - Given the context I've just elaborated, I think you are entitled to point up the obvious for the sake of readers who might not recognise the irony (or may not take time to consider the factors that make it so). She's right that it shouldn't need saying, but we're all aware that many readers here ... well, Ill just say: aren't so analytical in their thinking.

All the above sounds incorrectly authoritative (if not opinionated or pompous). It's based on being around at the time; having a wife from down south, that I met at Uni in Scotland, while living now where I was born-and-bred: Yorkshire; and having read a lot - and now that I've started writing myself, thinking about what I've read and advice about writing that I've picked up.

Either your approach - thinking consciously about the mechanics of writing - is right, or I'm wrong too.

 

[sr71plt]

The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during the September of 1972, I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons, but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned, I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically, my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.


I found what you wrote to be more elegant than any of the suggestions for changes. Publishing uses more commas than are being taught in school these days, as it leans hard on the reader understanding side. So, realizing (note the American difference to "realised") that this is British style, both in style and presentation, I'd just suggest adding the commas I noted (in red)--and keeping your style, which is quite good, I think.

 

[jomar]

The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during the September of 1972, I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons, but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned, I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically, my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.


I found what you wrote to be more elegant than any of the suggestions for changes. Publishing uses more commas than are being taught in school these days, as it leans hard on the reader understanding side. So, realizing (note the American difference to "realised") that this is British style, both in style and presentation, I'd just suggest adding the commas I noted (in red)--and keeping your style, which is quite good, I think.

Huh. Commas are what I zeroed in on before getting sidetracked and not returning until now. I struggle when critiquing because I have my own style preferences and don't want to impose them on someone who has their own style. Could be I'd make a lousy editor because of that.

 

[sr71plt]

Huh. Commas are what I zeroed in on before getting sidetracked and not returning until now. I struggle when critiquing because I have my own style preferences and don't want to impose them on someone who has their own style. Could be I'd make a lousy editor because of that.

Um, sorry. I'm not sure what you mean. The "huh" indicates you disagree with something I posted or thought I was disagreeing with something you posted(?)

From the standpoint of professional editing (and figuring that it is in the British idiom), I found that the original was elegant and some of the suggestions made it stilted and degraded its elegance. All it needs for a published piece is more punctuation--and that only because publishers are very conservative about punctuation to very clearly map sentences for readers. And the suggestions made aren't from my own preferences--when professional editors edit, they try to keep their own preferences out of the mix (which I don't think some of the ones suggesting word changes here were doing). The point is not for the piece to end up with the editor's voice but that it retain the author's voice.

 

[fifty5]

Huh. Commas are what I zeroed in on before getting sidetracked and not returning until now. I struggle when critiquing because I have my own style preferences and don't want to impose them on someone who has their own style. Could be I'd make a lousy editor because of that.

Not necessarily. Give notice about it and it could be way good, indicating that there are alternatives available for conscious choice. What would make you (to me) a bad editor would be insisting that your version is the one true way. An editor who said, "this is another way - with this advantage and that disadvantage - which of them fits your own desires?" would be my dream-boat!

Of course, I want the "sorry, that's just wrong" as well - and the "that bit was brill!" (with the reason why, so I can do it again) too, but offering alternatives, with explanations of how they produce different reactions, is input on the gold standard!

NB Throughout, explain how and why your suggestions work. The what is, to me, vital, but still secondary. If I know the how and why, then sometimes I can use the what straight out of the tin, but other times I can take their essential point and do it differently, but more 'me'.

 

[jomar]

Um, sorry. I'm not sure what you mean. The "huh" indicates you disagree with something I posted or thought I was disagreeing with something you posted(?)

From the standpoint of professional editing (and figuring that it is in the British idiom), I found that the original was elegant and some of the suggestions made it stilted and degraded its elegance. All it needs for a published piece is more punctuation--and that only because publishers are very conservative about punctuation to very clearly map sentences for readers. And the suggestions made aren't from my own preferences--when professional editors edit, they try to keep their own preferences out of the mix (which I don't think some of the ones suggesting word changes here were doing). The point is not for the piece to end up with the editor's voice but that it retain the author's voice.

Not at all, I agree with you. I could have added a 'too' to my comment and it might have been clearer. The 'huh' was more of an "interesting' or how bout that' sort of exclamation. Sorry for the miscommunication.

Not necessarily. Give notice about it and it could be way good, indicating that there are alternatives available for conscious choice. What would make you (to me) a bad editor would be insisting that your version is the one true way. An editor who said, "this is another way - with this advantage and that disadvantage - which of them fits your own desires?" would be my dream-boat!

Of course, I want the "sorry, that's just wrong" as well - and the "that bit was brill!" (with the reason why, so I can do it again) too, but offering alternatives, with explanations of how they produce different reactions, is input on the gold standard!

NB Throughout, explain how and why your suggestions work. The what is, to me, vital, but still secondary. If I know the how and why, then sometimes I can use the what straight out of the tin, but other times I can take their essential point and do it differently, but more 'me'.

Partly I was thinking of Raymond Carver's editor who took license, but make Carver more 'brilliant.' On occasion I venture over to the SDC to critique. I'll keep your comments in mind. Thanks, fifty.

 

[Weird Harold]

The idea never occurred to me that I could both despise and desire a man simultaneously. When I left home for university during the September of 1972 I was as naive as my age and upbringing would suggest. And that naivety remained largely unaltered over the succeeding two years. I realised that I wanted to experience more of the planet, to travel and to broaden my horizons but as far as any sexual awakening was concerned I was stuck in the dark ages. Ironically my carnal epiphany came about in the house next door to the one I’d called home for the first twenty years of my life. With Ralph, the man I grew to loathe and to love.

I'm surprised that with all of the corrections suggested, nobody seems to have noticed the use of a non-word. It was the first thing that jumped out at me.

MSWord 97 suggests either naivete or [/b]naiveté[/b] (and word's thesaurus does give separate synonyms for withor without the accented character.)


The only other comment is that "The idea never occurred to me ..." sounds awkward, or overly formal, to me -- although it is technically correct.

 

[fifty5]

I'm surprised that with all of the corrections suggested, nobody seems to have noticed the use of a non-word. It was the first thing that jumped out at me.

MSWord 97 suggests either naivete or [/b]naiveté[/b] (and word's thesaurus does give separate synonyms for withor without the accented character.)

Both the spell checker in OpenOffice and my Oxford Concise validate "naivety" (though the OxCon gives two alternative pronunciations).

Blame Big Bill for the error, not Harold!

 

[sr71plt]

I'm surprised that with all of the corrections suggested, nobody seems to have noticed the use of a non-word. It was the first thing that jumped out at me.

MSWord 97 suggests either naivete or [/b]naiveté[/b] (and word's thesaurus does give separate synonyms for withor without the accented character.)


The only other comment is that "The idea never occurred to me ..." sounds awkward, or overly formal, to me -- although it is technically correct.

"naivety," as the other spellings (as I noted) is British idiom--and is identified as such in Webster's dictionary.

The wording was the author's voice and in keeping with the rest of what the author was writing.

Again, the point of helping is to help writers use their own voice, not yours.

 

[Weird Harold]

Both the spell checker in OpenOffice and my Oxford Concise validate "naivety" (though the OxCon gives two alternative pronunciations).

Blame Big Bill for the error, not Harold!

OK, my 1970's vintage "Lexicon Webster" does give the spelling with a y as an alternative noun form but it jumped out at me as "wrong" because I almost never see that spelling. What I've always seen as "correct" for half a century is the French spelling, naiveté. (with italics to indicate it's Foreign-ness.)

 

[fifty5]

OK, my 1970's vintage "Lexicon Webster" does give the spelling with a y as an alternative noun form but it jumped out at me as "wrong" because I almost never see that spelling. What I've always seen as "correct" for half a century is the French spelling, naiveté. (with italics to indicate it's Foreign-ness.)

I said it was Big Bill Gates got it wrong, not Harold. Yay! Validation at last!

You'll do for me, old fart! (One to another.)

 

[Darkniciad]

If it were me, the only change I'd make from SR71's comma suggestions is to join the final sentence with the one previous via an em dash. It just looks odd to me hanging out there by itself, and doesn't seem to flow from my tongue with a full-stop when I read it aloud.

But I know full well that I overuse em dashes when I write