GOM Snippets
Aug. 31st, 2008 12:16 amThere's a fad which, I regret, seems to have originated in US documentary programmes, wherein the narrator insists on speaking in the present tense. "It's September 16 1550", he says ( to take an example I heard this evening on a non-American programme). "No it isn't!" I cry in response. "You are a fool! Were it September 16 1550, you aould not be narrating a television programme. You would be a peasant wallowing in the mud, as you deserve".
I'm not quite sure why this style of narrating has become popular, and I'm not quite sure why it drives to incandescent rage. An otherwise excellent series on the US Civil War a few years ago was almost unwatchable (for me) because of its insistence on the use of the present tense. Am I alone?
The FT continues to reach new height of hopelessness in sub-editing land. One well-known publisher of dailies (Montgomery) wants to eliminate the sub-editor altogether (he wants to eliminate offices for journalists as well, so perhaps he isn't all bad). However, assuming that the FT still uses sub-editors (which I'm beginning to doubt), I'd love to know how the following got through in a feature (i.e., one where there is no time pressure, in theory!) and, indeed, how the writer, Ludovic Hunter-Tilney, let it get past his own read-through.
The article is a review of Paul Auster's work in general and of his latest book, Man In The Dark in particular.
At the end, this sentence brought me to rather rapid attention:
What? I asked? Auster is writing about a man's marriage to his granddaughter?
Oh, no. I think not. The sentence should read: "...as he delivers to his granddaughter a mini-memoir of his marriage...".
I'm sorry, but this is truly dreadful. It's not a split-infinitve kind of error, where one could perhaps argue that the whole thing is really a matter of taste rather than rules. This is writing that causes the reader to pause and have to do a double-take.
Unless Brill does marry his granddaughter -- in which case, apologies all round.
+++++++++
I won 32 big bets an hour just two-tabling for an hour this evening. Bad news, it was at 2¢-4¢.
I was experimenting with an auto hot-key (ahk) script. The I-Poker network as neat buttons for betting half the pot, three-quarters of the pot and the pot. On other sites you have to type in the raise amount or move the slider. It's all rather unsatisfactory, and I've been thinking for some time that autohotkey might be a solution on Stars and Party.
Unfortunately, I couldn't get the system to work that's meant to generate bets relative to the size of the pot. I got the call and fold buttons right, plus the auto reload, and a few other not-that-important keys, but the bet generator steadfastly refused to generate a bet. However, if I have numlock on, I can just type the amount into an activated bet-size box without going near the mouse. I'm not sure whether this will prove quicker than using the mouse, but I think it would definitely be less straining on the wrist and on the tendons in the body of the hand.
+++++++++++
I'm not quite sure why this style of narrating has become popular, and I'm not quite sure why it drives to incandescent rage. An otherwise excellent series on the US Civil War a few years ago was almost unwatchable (for me) because of its insistence on the use of the present tense. Am I alone?
The FT continues to reach new height of hopelessness in sub-editing land. One well-known publisher of dailies (Montgomery) wants to eliminate the sub-editor altogether (he wants to eliminate offices for journalists as well, so perhaps he isn't all bad). However, assuming that the FT still uses sub-editors (which I'm beginning to doubt), I'd love to know how the following got through in a feature (i.e., one where there is no time pressure, in theory!) and, indeed, how the writer, Ludovic Hunter-Tilney, let it get past his own read-through.
The article is a review of Paul Auster's work in general and of his latest book, Man In The Dark in particular.
At the end, this sentence brought me to rather rapid attention:
The latter stages of the novel shift awkwardly to Brill, as he delivers a mini-memoir of his marriage to his granddaughter in dialogue so excrutiating it's almost cruel to quote...
What? I asked? Auster is writing about a man's marriage to his granddaughter?
Oh, no. I think not. The sentence should read: "...as he delivers to his granddaughter a mini-memoir of his marriage...".
I'm sorry, but this is truly dreadful. It's not a split-infinitve kind of error, where one could perhaps argue that the whole thing is really a matter of taste rather than rules. This is writing that causes the reader to pause and have to do a double-take.
Unless Brill does marry his granddaughter -- in which case, apologies all round.
+++++++++
I won 32 big bets an hour just two-tabling for an hour this evening. Bad news, it was at 2¢-4¢.
I was experimenting with an auto hot-key (ahk) script. The I-Poker network as neat buttons for betting half the pot, three-quarters of the pot and the pot. On other sites you have to type in the raise amount or move the slider. It's all rather unsatisfactory, and I've been thinking for some time that autohotkey might be a solution on Stars and Party.
Unfortunately, I couldn't get the system to work that's meant to generate bets relative to the size of the pot. I got the call and fold buttons right, plus the auto reload, and a few other not-that-important keys, but the bet generator steadfastly refused to generate a bet. However, if I have numlock on, I can just type the amount into an activated bet-size box without going near the mouse. I'm not sure whether this will prove quicker than using the mouse, but I think it would definitely be less straining on the wrist and on the tendons in the body of the hand.
+++++++++++