February's Feature Book: Little Women

            If you have been paying attention to popular culture or been to the theaters lately, you probably know about the newest version of Little Women. Discussions with my brother about this new version got me thinking a lot about both the book and the author’s intentions. My questions soon led to my rereading the book. I last read it in elementary school, though I never reached the ending, and have seen four of the movie adaptions. It seemed like the perfect time to renew my acquaintance with the March family. Little Women has been loved by many both in book form and its subsequent movie adaptions. I believe one reason everyone loves the March sisters is how relatable they are. One can usually find a reason to sympathize with at least one of the four girls.

            I thought I was simply reading a book, but it turns out I was in for a few revelations. Three aspects especially surprised me. Only, keep in mind with my following remarks that I have not seen the new movie and know nothing about its contents. The characters were one aspect that surprised me. Movies can be more limited than books and can’t tell a story in the same way. I was taken aback when I realized that the movies completely cut out several characters. My biggest shock was that Aunt March does not have a sole reign! In the book, she is joined by Aunt Carroll. Even more shocking are the additional Uncle Carroll and Cousin Flo. Amy's European tour completely changes with Aunt March's absence. There is also Esther, a maid at Plumfield who makes more than a small impression on Amy. My memory might be fuzzy, but I do not recall Fred Vaughn from any movies. I think it would be worth mentioning that Amy had a marriage proposal before Laurie.

            On top of these unexpected revelations, I was also astounded by how different some of the known characters are in the book. Jo March may not be conventional, but she knows her limits. She might shock people, but she never goes so far as to scandalize. I feel like many movie adaptions give Jo a decidedly feminist ideology, but I saw no hint of that in the book. Granted, Jo gets upset with conventions. It strikes me more as her being annoyed with anything that goes against her blunt mannerisms than some type of ideal though. The only reason I can fathom for that feminist tone in the movies is others projecting Louisa May Alcott's feminist thoughts onto Jo March.

Amy also threw me through a loop. She is the one that many people love to hate. I didn't get that impression with the book. Yes, she could be a selfish and petty when she was a child. But she grew up to be a very sweet woman and to be a good sister to Jo. Jo even says that she thought Laurie and Amy should marry because they’re a perfect match. There was no animosity, hurt, or regret between Jo and Amy over Laurie. I was also happy to see more than a brief mention of Mr. March. Movies seem to relegate Mr. March to the background, but he is much more active in the book. He appears over and again to teach the girls, give them spiritual advice, and spend time with their growing families.

            Another aspect that surprised me was the events in the book. Of course, I know that movies always cut out scenes. I just never realized how altered Little Women has become. These events that I wasn’t familiar with added so much depth to the characters and their stories. It gave me a better understanding of them and how they approached the difficulties of life. For instance, Amy participates in a fair and has a falling out with the hostess and her daughter. How Amy and the March family handle it gives the first real insight into how much Amy has changed. The reader gets a glimpse into how much depth her character has developed over the years. Another scene I was not familiar with was Jo and Beth going to the seaside. Being able to see how Beth was handling her failing health and lingering worries made me not only love her more but also admire Jo with her reaction.

            The final aspect that I was not expecting but truly enjoyed was the moral tone. Every chapter had a lesson. Summed together, they become a book about the two important parts of life: love and faith. The family stays together and loves each other through everything. They guide each other through life with the basis of faith and choosing the higher road. The March sisters try hard to emulate Christian in Pilgrim’s Progress and each benefit from it. I feel like the book might stress striving for perfection a little too much, but I know that for the period it was a common outlook in religion. Besides, the main point is that the March family learned what was important in life. They were rich because they had each other, their faith, and the godly love that they shared with everyone.

            Overall, I found the book so delightful that I’ve already begun to read Little Men with the intention of continuing through Jo’s Boys. I want to follow the March family through the entire trilogy. I love how sweet Meg's daughter Daisy is because she reminds me of Beth. Demi, Meg’s son, appears to be a mixture of the March sisters because he is both impressively smart and a little mischievous. The books have changed my opinion of the March sisters and made me appreciate their role in popular culture even more.

            Every generation seems to have been affected in some way by the March sisters. They’ve left an impression on me about growing up and how much family influences a person. I’ve also concluded that I love the book the best. The movie adaptions are good, but it is hard to top the original. No matter one's opinion, everyone will likely agree that Little Women will continue to influence many generations to follow. Just the same, I wouldn’t mind hearing your opinion. Which sister is your favorite? Or the real trick question: Which movie adaption is the best?

Using "Who" and "Whom"

            Every day brings new examples of English's fluidity. Sometimes the change comes swiftly. Other changes take many years and face much resistance. One change that has been slowly coming is the usage of who and whom. One side declares that whom is dead and that only who should be used. The other side stubbornly insists that whom is still relevant enough to be used in modern English. The question is which side is in the right. Which word should one use in their writing and speech?

            Before we can make a certain decision about these two words, we need to do some research. It is important to understand how to use the words and what their purpose has been in the past. Both who and whom are pronouns but serve slightly different purposes. Who completes several different jobs, but as a pronoun it acts as the subject. As a slight variation, whom is an objective pronoun meaning that who becomes whom when it acts as an object in a sentence. For example, you can say “I asked my friend who gave him the gift.” In this case, who is the subject of the clause "who gave him the gift." However, you can also say "To whom did you give the gift?" Whom is the object in the phrase “to whom.”

            Both who and whom have existed in English since before the 12^th century according to Merriam-Webster[1]. They have also seen relatively little change in their meaning. The spelling has gone through a transformation as the language moved into Middle and then Modern English[2]. If anything, these two pronouns have proven a great tenacity. As was the case for many words, grammarians of the 18^th century had much to say about their usage. The grammarians of the following century declared that whom was dying out. Unlike with other words, English-speakers largely ignored these grammarians and continued to use both words as they always have.

            That brings us back to our original question. Which word is the correct one to use? The experts of today see it in two ways. One side says that whom is a valid word but is tricky to use. Thanks to the aforementioned grammarians, many English speakers are out of practice concerning the correct way to use it. Therefore, people either avoid the word at all costs or use it everywhere. If one can learn to use the two words in the right context, there is no problem with them.

            However, other experts say that it shouldn't matter. Because people don't understand how to use it, the word should be allowed to die. They believe that who can easily replace its counterpart and clear up the confusion once and for all. Besides, these experts say that whom is pretentious and gives the wrong tone in most forms of writing and speech today.

            Who should we listen to? I honestly believe that it is a matter of personal choice. If you like having separate words, you should use them. Only be careful that you are using them correctly. You'll be doing yourself no favors if you continually use whom in the wrong context. You should also consider tone. Sometimes, whom might be correct but causes a sentence to sound clunky because it doesn't match the tone of the surrounding text. If you're of the party that wishes whom would disappear, using who is perfectly fine. That is part of the beauty of the English language. It is fluid and gives much leeway towards a person’s style and personality.

---

[1] Merriam-Webster, s.v. “whom,” accessed February 9, 2020, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whom.

[2] Ibid.

Descriptions in Fiction

            Over the last six months, I have learned much from fiction writing. This novel-writing attempt looks like it might be successful. I now have just over 10,000 words. Previously, I talked about what I was learning as I sketched a cast of characters. I am now several scenes into my story and am realizing that there is much to learn about other types of descriptions.

            Describing action is one type that can be difficult. I can think about a scene and see it unfold in my head. It is another matter to put what I am picturing down on paper. I want to describe the action so that the reader can see what I am seeing and be able to enjoy the story. I can say that a character is speaking. But how is he talking? What is his facial expression? His body language? It can completely change the meaning of his words based on what he's doing. For me, the difficulty is capturing every detail I see in my mind. However, I am learning that details are especially important with one of my supporting characters. If I only put down her words without anything else, she doesn't come across as the kindest person. I need her facial expressions, her tone of voice, and her hand gestures to show that she means no harm by her words. She is simply passionate and extroverted.

            Another form of description that I have been wrestling with is the characters' environment. I might be able to see exactly where the characters are and what is going on around them, but the readers can't unless I tell them. I tend to focus on the dialogue when I am writing and forget about the surroundings. The setting is imperative because it affects the characters and what they are doing. For instance, in my opening scene, the main character is annoyed with the crowds around him and what he considers childish behavior. That is only going to make so much sense unless I make it clear that the opening scene occurs at a masquerade ball.

            The main question I have struggled with as I write these descriptions is what counts as enough. Too much description will bog down my story and bore readers. Not enough will make the story vague and confuse readers. How do I find an equilibrium in description writing? As usual, I turn to published authors to discover an answer. Some books like Thomas Hardy's are so filled with descriptions that it can feel like a chore to read the book. The descriptions do make a very detailed and vivid picture but require effort on the reader's part. On the other hand, I've read some books that are so sparse on descriptions that I constantly find myself thinking, "Wait! What? Where did that come from? Has that always been there?"

            Based on the books I have read and studied, I think that going with descriptions through the eyes of the characters is the best way. Allow the reader to see whatever the character sees but not that much more. By doing so, I feel like I’m including what is critical to the character's story without adding in a lot of trivial details that mean nothing to what the character is doing. I imagine at some point I will reach a part where I’ll need to describe something that doesn’t seem important at first, but I’ll make those decisions when I get to them. Time will tell how my descriptions will fare, but I’m hoping I have found a good amount that makes the story come alive for more people than just me.

            In addition to thinking about things through the character's eyes, I have also picked up a few other tricks to help. First, pictures are a lifesaver. Even if I can imagine what a scene or character looks like, a picture can be beneficial. I can study that picture and pick out which details are important enough to include. Going by mental images might not allow the same amount of accurate details. Accuracy is another point. A picture that I can save helps me stay consistent as I return to certain scenes.

            Another thing I find works well is talking. Describing something out loud helps me figure out what works and where I might have holes in my descriptions. Talking it out forces me to fully explain what I can easily gloss over in my head. As I talk, I sometimes compare it with examples from reality to consider what might make it more believable and clearer to the reader. I suppose one could describe scenes to another person who can ask questions, but I have yet to get that brave.

            As your writing descriptions for your fictional story, I hope some of my discoveries will help you out. If you have any tips for writing excellent descriptions, please mention them in the comments. I’m always ready to try out new ideas. Whether this novel experiment works out or not, I have learned a great deal about writing because of it. Writing is a completely different thing from editing. If I didn’t believe that before, I certainly do now. I’m developing a healthy appreciation for the patience, talent, and effort that authors put into their stories.

Business Jargon: Can You Talk the Talk?

            Jargon has become increasingly easier to find in both speech and text. Essentially, jargon is the technical terms and buzzwords associated with a particular topic or field. Jargon can be frustrating to an outsider because it makes it difficult to understand what others mean. The problems and emptiness of jargon gave it a negative connotation long ago. That has not stopped people from using it. What is a person to do as jargon persists?

            Jargon is especially a problem in the world of business. Different fields have their language and appear to take pride in using it. They have no problem dropping their buzzwords and peculiar phrasing because it is assumed that everyone else understands. It isn’t just technical terms that serve as roadblocks. Common words such as “empower,” “innovate,” or “diversity” are used so often in written materials that they’ve lost their meaning. This has created many issues and wasted too much time.

            The way to survive business jargon is twofold. First, don't accept it as a reasonable answer. Speak up if something does not make sense. Ask for an explanation. It is better to get an answer right away than to waste time trying to figure out what it means. It is not going to make you look bad or taint your reputation. It is honestly the responsible approach because you're taking the initiative to keep clear communication and use your time efficiently. Those are two things that businesses love.

Sometimes asking for an explanation is not possible such as when one is dealing with written materials. In that situation, it is best to begin researching. Sadly, business jargon has initiated the creation of many jargon dictionaries. If you often come across jargon, it might be a good idea to invest in such a dictionary. A simple internet or book search can also provide the meaning of the troubling word or phrase.

            The second part of dealing with business jargon is to not use it. Don't be part of the problem by keeping these words alive. As jargon continues to be used, it loses its meaning and becomes nothing more than a trite expression. At that point, it becomes an excuse. Rather than taking the time to write something meaningful that readers can understand, the writer inserts jargon. This is far from right. If something is important enough to be said, it should be important enough to say in common sense terms. It might require more effort on the part of the writer, but it is worth it because of the benefits to readers and businesses. Work will get done and communication won't be a confusing jumble of words.

            Jargon and buzzwords are persistent problems in the business world and other industries. The best way to handle it is by asking questions and researching meanings. It is also important that you don't use jargon yourself because it only makes the problem worse. Writers need to think about what they want to write and write it in common sense terms that explain their full meaning. If writers will take the time to use plain English, readers will be able to do more with the information that they’re reading.

Making Sense of American and British English

            As I continue in my career as a copyeditor, the many differences between American and British English have become more apparent to me. On the one hand, I have gotten great pleasure out of discovering the many British words that have worked their way into my vocabulary. I assume that is a direct result of the amount of British literature and TV that I indulge in regularly. On the other hand, it has also served to be a conundrum. There are so many differences and I don't want to jump back and forth between the two versions of English within the same work. I am certain I am not the only editor or writer who has quickly become confused and uncertain of what is right. With personal experience in mind, I am offering you several tips that I have found work best when dealing with American and British English.

            The first tip is fairly basic but very much a necessity. Learn about the most common variations. Research either American or British English so that you can know how that form of English works. You don’t have to be an expert, nor have it all memorized. You do need to be aware of what differences exist so that your mental editor can recognize any possibilities for trouble. The first difference to be aware of is spellings. That is a sticking point for me that has often resulted in me cursing the name of Noah Webster and wondering why one spelling wasn't good enough. Be aware of differences like "colour" versus "color" or "centre" instead of "center." It is the slight deviations in spelling that can be the trickiest to catch.

Two more differences to keep in mind are wording and grammar. For instance, a muffin in American English is a very different thing from a muffin in British English. Also, Americans and British treat verbs and subject/verb agreement differently. The British have also retained some words and verb conjugations that have already fallen from favor in America. While I am on the subject, it isn't enough to be aware of American versus British English. For the sake of your audience, you need to think about what dialect the text is using. Just like there are differences between the parts of the US, different parts of Britain will have variations.

            At this point, it might sound hopeless. How is anyone supposed to make it through a manuscript without botching the language? The second tip I have for you is the biggest lifesaver. Invest in both a good British English and American English dictionary. You can’t know everything, so it is best to be armed with the answers for when the questions arise. Even when you feel certain you have the right word or spelling, check the dictionary. You can never be too certain. It is much better to take the time to check a right answer than to miss a wrong one.

            A dictionary is fine but looking things up does take time and can throw you off when you're on a roll. This is where a style sheet becomes imperative. As you look things up or find yourself referring to a certain point repeatedly, write it down on a style sheet so that you can have easy access to the answers you need. This will save you time throughout your work and make it so that the most common answers you need are readily available.

            Finally, I suggest that you practice. The more you write or edit with a certain type of English, the more comfortable you will become. It will feel more natural as you learn how to use it and get used to the sound of it. Speaking of sound, it can also be helpful to read that variant of English. I can certainly testify to how well reading can work in teaching one either American or British English.

           An editor or writer who has to use either American or British English may find the differences in grammar, spelling, and meaning to be confusing. By being aware of these differences and preparing for them, one can master the variations and write clear English manuscripts. An editor or writer simply needs to arm themselves with a dictionary and style sheet so that they can use either form of English without the struggle of guessing which way is correct.

January's Feature Book: The Importance of Being Earnest

            I have a confession to make, readers. With holidays and sickness and a bout of winter laziness, working on a book review did not score high on my list of priorities and eventually fell by the wayside. If you are at all familiar with The Importance of Being Earnest[1], you probably think I’m cheating. Honestly, I am cheating because I could not let myself do nothing for this month. So instead of a full-length novel, you are getting a theatrical production. That does not mean that Earnest isn’t worth the read. This work by Oscar Wilde is a comedic classic and has long been one of my favorites.

            Earnest was first presented in London in 1895 on Valentine's day. I wouldn't really suggest taking your sweetheart to this one though because the characters' ideas on romance and marriage are highly questionable. The main character is the bachelor, Mr. John Worthing, who has an inconsistent relationship with the truth. This failure to adhere to honesty causes him a great deal of trouble when he decides it is time to get married. What follows is witty repartee and a hilariously tangled chain of events that teach Jack an unforgettable lesson about always being earnest.

            Oscar Wilde is one of those authors that I have a hard time liking. He goes on the same list as Jack London and Ernest Hemingway for me. Most of his works that I have read were plain not for me, but Earnest is an exception. Because of Wilde’s stellar humor spread throughout the play, I keep returning and still laugh even though I've read the jokes countless times. Whether it’s a play on words or a jab at the government, Wilde does have a knack for finding the right amount of humor in each moment. Even though society is not the same – and there's the pesky detail of the play being located across the Atlantic – the humor is still there and still packs just as powerful of a punch because it transcends time and place.

            A large part of the humor and what makes this play great are the characters. The ladies of Earnest are fickle and have absurd notions of what constitutes a good husband. Lady Bracknell won me over the moment she started in her ridiculous interrogation to decide if Mr. Worthing would be suitable enough for her daughter Gwendolyn. Starting with her comments about smoking being an occupation and ending with her emphatic assertion that Gwendolyn could not marry into a coat-closet, Lady Bracknell personifies the more questionable aspects of the Victorian era. Her social commentary about the shallowness of society matrons, the lack of proper education, and disgust over even the slightest hint of "French morals" ring very true for the era. For all the good and wholesomeness of the era, it also produced its share of hallow ideals and masked problems. Just the same, there are few ladies so formidable that they can easily decide to change what’s fashionable.

            Then there is Miss Gwendolyn Fairfax and Miss Cecily Cardew. Both ladies have plenty to say without really saying anything. They both personify fickleness in that they are both always right and never wrong in everything they say. Miss Fairfax just knew she would be friends with Miss Cardew and the next instant always knew that Miss Cardew couldn’t be trusted. Similarly, Miss Cardew regularly contradicts herself and changes her opinions as they suite her each moment.

            The two main gentlemen of the play, Mr. John Worthing and Mr. Algernon Moncrieff, each have their interesting qualities and character flaws. The most notable thing about Mr. Moncrieff is that when he’s not eating, he actually has more substance to him than one might think. The things he says are on the surface, outrageous and jaded. But if one takes the time to think about it, they have a grain of truth in them. Algy might actually understand the world much better than anyone realizes. Jack has his issues with life and society. He takes the wrong things too seriously and gets himself worked up over details that really shouldn't matter. Because of their opposing personalities, Algy and Jack's conversations hold some of the best jokes and most biting sarcasm.

           The truth, unfortunately, is the elusive piece throughout the play. Mr. Worthing has built an entire web of lies to make life easier for himself. When he decides to correct the matter by getting rid of the lies in one fell swoop, they all come back to haunt him. When finally faced with actual truth, Mr. Worthing's lies take on a whole new image that he never expected them to. Mr. Moncrieff’s series of lies is also a problem and when combined with Mr. Worthing's, they create a perfect storm.

While I agree with Wilde in his social commentary throughout the play, I have always questioned his treatment of the truth. There is something about the idea that the lies were truth and the truth was a lie that bothers me. It almost feels like Mr. Worthing gets off a little too easy after lying to everyone for so many years. On the other hand, it seems deserved. It’s not like Mr. Moncrieff or Miss Fairfax are saints. When one really thinks about it, no one in the play takes the truth very serious. I believe that the play is showing that honesty is better, but I’m not sure it does it in a very convincing matter.

            I suggest you either watch or read this fantastic play and tell me what you think of the ending. Did you see it coming? What do you think of Oscar Wilde's handling of the truth? No matter how one feels about the moral implications of the story, all must agree that the humor transcends the years making this play just as biting and hilarious now well over one hundred years later.

---

[1] Oscar Wilde, The Importance of Being Earnest: A Trivial Comedy for Serious People, http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/844, Accessed January 27, 2020.

My 2020 Book Challenge

            The holidays have ended; another year is gone. During the holiday season, I saw many posts on social media talking about how many books that person had read in 2019 along with a picture of an impressive stack of books. That got me thinking. How many books did I read in the past year? I know I read a lot because my shelves witness to that fact, but I've never actually kept track. The more I thought about it, the more curious I became. Thus, it is with much excitement I embark on 2020 intending to find an answer that will satisfy my curiosity.

            Books have always been an essential part of my life. My mom instilled a love for the written word in me at an early age and my face has been in a book ever since. I know from experience that reading can not only open up the fictional world but also enlighten a reader about the real world. Countless times a book has sparked a series of questions for me that results in an alarming amount of knowledge about unusual topics. I want that because with each book I finish my views about the world shift. Each story reveals more to me about people and cultures. They teach me about the effects of different circumstances and events. Books help me understand the world I live in and beyond.

            Because of my love of books, I have an eternal book list. You know what I'm talking about. That book list that you're never going to finish in your lifetime because you add books to it at a faster rate than you can read them. I know that I'm most likely not going to make much of a dent in my list this year, but I am trying to be optimistic as I plan out my reading goals. I’m not going into this experiment with a mere list of what I’ve read. Planning is a must in my world, so I’ve created a goal to pursue and set parameters for achieving it. To start, I am going to count both new books and old ones. Books are like old friends to me. I have to visit them often. While I'm not certain, I think it is safe to say I reread books more often than I read new ones. All genres are going to be acceptable as well as all formats. Collections and novellas are common reads for me because of how much easier they are to fit into a schedule. I want to count them to get a more accurate idea of how much reading I do in a year.

            Having some rules to follow is good, but I need a goal to pursue. For the year 2020, my goal is to read 50 books. A lot of thought went into this number. First, I've considered how much reading I do each day. Every day I read for research and educational purposes as well as the reading that I do for enjoyment. However, I've slowed down considerably from the amount of reading I used to do. I no longer have time to read a book in one day. I'm also taking into consideration that over my holiday break, I've read two novellas and nearly finished a full novel. I believe that fifty books are a challenge without being impossible. Knowing my personality, it's going to become a challenge to see how many books over fifty I can read.

            As much as I love books, I love them even more when reading them with others. This experiment would be so much better if everyone participated. I invite all of you readers to keep track of your book count with me. You can follow the same set of rules that I’m using or come up with your own that better fits the way you read. Set yourself a goal for this year and start turning those pages! As the year progresses, I will occasionally give updates. At the end of the year, we can reveal our results and maybe plan loftier goals for the new year. I have a feeling that this is going to be an adventure-filled year – in my literary world at least.