How queer.

Flash to the past; Little nine year old Lea is driving with her dad. She is discussing something older Lea can no longer remember, but knowing her past self, it was probably something weird. During the course of the conversation, she uses the word 'queer.' To use it in a sentence 'yes, the situation was quiet queer.' She meant to use it to say something was weird, or odd. Her father tells her she should be careful using the word; it doesn't mean weird, it means gay. It's derogatory.

Now, fast forward back to 2016. When asked what I identify as, and don't want to go into specifics, I can simply use the word 'queer.' It's a word I'm comfortable with, and hearing it doesn't make me cringe. Transformed from an insult into something that has been claimed by the LBGT+ community, queer has a strange history. It's a word that has changed over time, and gained popularity.

People have done research to try and figure out where it first appeared, and to figure out what it really means. It is best explained by this article: http://www.autostraddle.com/more-than-words-queer-part-1-the-early-years-153356/

"No one can even agree on where “queer” was born, or its parents. The predominant theory holds that it’s a descendant of the Proto-Indo-European morpheme “*twerk,” which means “to twist, turn, wind, or cut,” and is also likely the root of several other vocabulary staples, including “thwart” and “sarcasm.” “Twerk” led to Old High German’s “twerh,” which means “oblique,” and then to German, where it morphed to “quer” and picked up associations of strangeness and eccentricity. By 1500, it had stretched out to “queer” and could be heard around Scotland." (Cara)

It did not start out as something negative, but was used as a derogative in 1894, in a letter between father and son. After this, queer becomes something terribly negative, and this moves into our time. It's meant as an insult, and delivered as such.

However, this is where things become interesting. Instead of letting this get to them, the community took the word back. It's something people can call themselves with pride (pardon this pun, I think I'm kind of funny.) That's one of the great things about language; meanings can change. Not only does this word mean something new, it's something people can identify with and embrace.

People are the ones who decide what words mean. It's up to us to identify and understand language, and make it our own. Something bad can become something good; How queer is that?

White girls and rap.

Allow me to preface this; I am a small white girl with little knowledge on the world of rap. I grew up in the whitest state in the US, and don't think I could bust a rhyme if my life depended on it. That being said, I do have a certain appreciation for the rhythm of it.

Writing rap requires a lot of skill, and word smithing ability. The words need to flow in order to sound good when sung. It's not just a matter of speaking fast, it's also about making sense and getting your point across.

When done well, rap can be done brilliantly, and can sound amazing. Take, for instance, this lyric taken from Hamilton: An American Musical.

I’m past patiently waitin’. 
I’m passionately Smashin’ every expectation.
Every action’s an act of creation!

While simple, when spoken out loud it's little complexities that make it so brilliant shine. It's written so precisely, and the word choice is incredibly clever. It hits all the right notes when spoken out loud, and leaves me smiling. Simply put; it has amazing rhythm.

However, some rap songs are less than stellar. For this, we look to Iggy Azalea.

Peach four a point, better pass me joint 
Gotta twist this beat, gonna sprain my joint 
Straight crack rap! PAP PAP POOM going to Rack City!

Not only is this poorly written, but it sounds terrible when spoken out loud. It does not have the thought that was put into the Hamilton lyric, and has absolutely no flow. It's not clever, and it makes my ears sad.

Rap can be great, but it requires skill. Skill that neither I nor Iggy posses, evidently.

Metaphor and ambiguity.

The power of words never ceases to amaze me. The fact that we as a species communicate by making a series of vocal chord vibrations, and gave symbols to those sounds so we could universally understand them is mind boggling. And sometimes, people can be very clever with their wording. Take, for instance, metaphor in microstyle. It's a clever way to get across an idea without having to use long, unending paragraphs.

A great example of this is Tropicana's old slogan "Your Daily Ray of Sunshine." It's understood that the consumer isn't actually drinking a glass of sunshine (because that would probably burn a little bit), and that the slogan is instead using what we understand in our cultural space as being a metaphor. Sunshine is equated with happiness, and drinking Tropicana will light up your life! It's a smart use of the slogan; simple and understandable by a large majority.

And then, of course, there is ambiguity in mircostyle. When done intentionally, it's very clever, but when it's not, it's downright hilarious. For instance, the news headline "FARMER BILL DIES IN HOUSE." When first reading this, is looks as if poor old Farmer Bill has died in his home. However, what it means to say is that a farmer bill, or law, died in the House of Representatives. This shows how strange, yet entertaining language can be, if you don't say the right thing.

Language is so strange, and yet I can't help but love it. Guess it's a good thing I'm an English major.

Post title here, read post below.

Five six word stories for you to all enjoy;

1.) It went from 'us' to 'me'.
2.) Death got the best of me.
3.) "I am okay," spoke the liar.
4.) Returned home; Never really came back.
5.) Love was everything, death meant nothing.

New or improved.

Advertising is a strange business, and isn't something I could ever get in to. However, I appreciate what good advertising can do, and understanding how microstyle works is not important for people in advertising, but writers across the board. Take, for instance, book titles or character names. There is so much importance in a name, and finding one for a character is one of the hardest things for me to do, personally.

Take for instance, the character Solas from Dragon Age: Inquisition. His name is dervied from Irish decent, and literally meaning "light", "flame", or "beacon". His role in the game is to guide the main protagonist, and as you learn more about him, the name becomes that much more fitting. Finding this out was mind blowing, because it added a whole new level to his personality.

However, not everything in mircostyle is as well thought out. I am speaking, of course, of my least favorite thing;

Nothing can be new and improved. They are either one or the other. The product is brand new, or it's been improved upon. It can't be both. However, we see it adverts all the time, because it sounds good. It's so common, people don't even think of it as an issue.

As I write this post, I'm discussing with my friends the phrase. They had never even thought about it, that's how engrained it is.

Sometimes, microstyle is super cool and smart. Sometimes it's not.

On the opposite page.

I remember learning all about Shakespeare in high school vividly. My English Lit teacher had never read Hamlet, and was about as excited as we were about learning it. She had to have another teacher come in and help out, because she simply didn't know what she was doing. It was so strange, seeing this woman, who I assumed knew all, floundering.

Shakespeare still kind of makes me feel that way. It's not that I don't appreciate his work, or can't possibly imagine tackling the challenge, but I picture Shakespeare much like I picture tackling a huge mountain if I hiked. It's daunting, and the fact that he had to explain what he meant on the opposite page is never a good start.

Take for instance, Hamlet's soliloquy:

HAMLET: To be, or not to be--that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune Or to take arms against a sea of troubles And by opposing end them. To die, to sleep-- No more--and by a sleep to say we end The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks That flesh is heir to. 'Tis a consummation Devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep-- To sleep--perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub, For in that sleep of death what dreams may come When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause. There's the respect That makes calamity of so long life. For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, Th' oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, The insolence of office, and the spurns That patient merit of th' unworthy takes, When he himself might his quietus make With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear, To grunt and sweat under a weary life, But that the dread of something after death, The undiscovered country, from whose bourn No traveller returns, puzzles the will, And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of? Thus conscience does make cowards of us all, And thus the native hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, And enterprise of great pitch and moment With this regard their currents turn awry And lose the name of action. -- Soft you now, The fair Ophelia! -- Nymph, in thy orisons Be all my sins remembered. (Read more at http://www.monologuearchive.com/s/shakespeare_001.html#uuyeUXLZrrCob1sz.99) 

Trying to figure out what he was trying to say was difficult. I didn't want to be wrong in front of everyone for starters, and his language was intimidating. It can be partially blamed on the times, but Shakespeare isn't a walk in the park for anyone. 

If the language in his writing was only a bit more understandable for this current generation, then perhaps his work wouldn't be feared by high schoolers everywhere. I appreciate everything he did for language and english, like inventing words and gracing us with his stories, but his work is pretty hard to understand if you don't have a handle on it.

Why?

Sometimes you read something, and you're not sure what just happened to you. It is forever burned in your mind, and no matter how many years pass, it will never leave you. You could be sitting on your deathbed, and it crosses your mind one last time, for old times sake.  That is how would describe my feelings toward Fanfiction Jesus and Hitler: A Romance.

Yes, this is a real thing that exists, and it just as disturbing as one would think. I will provide the link at the end for the full text, just incase you feel like reading it for whatever reason, but the summary goes like this; Hitler goes back in time, and ends up meeting Jesus, who will, according to the author will "change his life forever."

This is a weird fanfic, for multiple reasons, and is also very bad. Why the author is so worried someone will steal their ideas and feels the need to claim copyright over this work, I do not know.
Take this paragraph, lifted straight from the text:

Lets look at what makes this terrible, shall we? First of all, it's weird. Really, really weird. I think everyone who reads this fanfiction is going to be offended in one way or another, for multiple reasons that are totally legitimate. The scenario doesn't make any sense. The fact that a whole bunch of things happen in one tiny little paragraph leaves the reader scratching their head. It's also clearly not proofread, if you want to be super nit-picky about this Jesus/Hitler mash up.

I really don't know what possessed this author to write this self described epic romance, but it does go to show just what weird things you can find on the internet if you look hard enough. Anyone can post anything, and share their very strange stories. I also think it important to encourage people to post their writing online. It's good to get feedback, and hey, push comes to shove, your writing it probably better than Jesus and Hitler: A Romance.

(Link to the full text: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/6130321/2/Jesus-and-Hitler-A-Romance)

Carrie Fisher :D :3 :) xD

Carrie Fisher is not only an inspiration because of her sense of self, her in-charge attitude, and her all around coolness, but also because of her very particular brand of tweets. It uses lots of emoticons, exclamation points, and general craziness that I don't often find in many tweets. I don't know why it intrigues me so much, but to see someone tweet the way she does it kind of nifty. Here's an example;

Link: https://twitter.com/carrieffisher/status/699773767741022208

Metaphors.

Methaphors - Sylvia Plath

(Sidenote: The line breaks have been changed.)

I’m a -

Riddle in nine syllables,

An elephant, 

A ponderous house,

A melon strolling on two tendrils.

O red fruit, 

Ivory, 

Fine timbers!

This loaf’s big 

With its yeasty rising.

Money’s new-minted

In this fat purse.

I’m a means, 

A stage, 

A cow in calf.

I’ve eaten a bag of green apples,

Boarded the train 

There’s no getting off.

No Homo

A poem created from the opening paragraph of a letter penned by Alexander Hamilton to John Laurens, 1779, aka -

Alexander Hamilton’s totally hetero poem for John Laurens:

Cold in my professions,

warm in my friendships, 

I wish, my Dear Laurens, 

It might be in my power, by action rather than words to convince you

That I love you. 

I shall only tell you that 'til you bade us Adieu, 

I hardly knew the value you had taught my heart to set upon you. 

Indeed, my friend,

It was not well done.

You know the opinion I entertain of mankind, 

And how much it is my desire to preserve myself free from particular attachments, 

And to keep my happiness independent of the caprice of others. 

You should not have taken advantage of my sensibility 

To steal into my affections without my consent. 

But as you have done it,

And as we are generally indulgent to those we love, 

I shall not scruple to pardon the fraud you have committed, 

On condition that for my sake, 

If not for your own, 

You will always continue to merit the partiality, 

which you have artfully instilled into me.

Breathe.

A character study -

Breathe. In through the nose, out through the mouth. Or is it the other way around? I can’t see, remember. I can’t remember much of anything right now, if we’re being honest. I’m wracking my brain, but nothing it turning up. The only think I can think about is breathing, focusing on breathing. I don’t remember it being this hard to breathe. I can’t breathe. My throat is closing up. I’m dying. This is killing me. I don't want this to be the end. How can I ensure this isn't the end?  Dear god, this is the end-No, it’s not. You’re doing it again; driving yourself up the wall. You need to focus. Just breathe. In through the nose, out through the mouth.

Viking Funeral.

We gathered around and watched as the strong hands of my father, brothers, and uncles pushed the boat from the shore. It was a viking funeral for a Christian man; his pale hands clutching a bible as we prepared the pagan ritual. It didn't make much sense, but neither did the fact he'd been taken from us so young. We dealt with what we were given. Thunder rolled in the distance, as if there were warriors in the sky rushing toward us, their horses hooves scattering the dust beneath their feet. The seas waves beat against the shore and rushed back in toward the center, carrying his body away. It was hard to look for too long. Instead I looked to the sky, and was met with stark gray, unforgiving yet even in a way that left me uncomfortable.

When the was far enough away, the bow was drawn. My oldest brother, the one he'd been closest to, steadied his hand. Before he let go, the arrow was light aflame, and the orange flicker reflected in his numb eyes which had seen their fair share of tears. It was loosed, and hit its mark head on. The boat caught, and I watched until my eyes burned just as surely as he did. The warriors in the sky has come to take him home.

- Prose inspired by "Memory of a Friend: Samuel Arthur", a piece done by Walter Collier Nicolai, located in the Thorne-Sagendorph Art Gallery in Keene, NH.

Those damned kids!

If you want to see me go from 0-100 real fast, go ahead and tell me that my generation is useless. Tell me how technology is ruining this country through a link you posted on Facebook. Tell me how we are whining about the price of college, when the prices for tuition have absolutely exploded since my parents were in school. Or, my favorite, tell me that we are the world's most apathetic generation when all you can do it seems is give us crap about what we're passionate about.

Go ahead, and see what happens (Incase you're wondering what would happen, and can't stand the suspense; I will go the route of Mark Twain, and beat you over the skull with your own shin bone.)

Our culture does little to appreciate it's children. It says it supports them, but actions speak louder than words, and somehow I don't thinks standardizing it's school systems is a actual form of care. However, that is a whole other rant. Instead, I want to complain about something that is equally bothersome to me; the way we look at stories aimed at younger audiences.

When someone is to think of influential literature, they think of the classics. Shakespeare and Austen pop into their heads, and can not help but be moved by their work. This is fine and all, but one should also consider what first piqued their interest. What made them fall in love with stories? What made them love to read?

For me, it was Junie B. Jones by Barbra Parker. The series was the first I read all on my own accord; I was in love with the story, and the characters. I couldn't wait to know what happened next. I spent hours tucked away in my room, After that, came the Harry Potter series, Molly Moon's Incredible Book of Hypnotism, and The Hobbit. All of these books shaped the reader and writer I am today, but they are largely discredited, because of their ties to younger audience.

For some book, this is understandable. But for books like Harry Potter, it is a huge issue. When I am told in my AP Literature class that Harry Potter is not a credible work to draw from, I'm appalled. Here is a story so incredibly woven, filled with intricate details, and messages important for all readers, young and old. To say this work lacks literary merit is ridiculous, and stems from a prejudice for younger readers.

The same thing occurs with movies and TV shows. Movies like Frozen win awards because they are popular, not because of their story. Committees don't care about animated films, as evidenced by the Academy voters during in 2014 (The year Frozen was up). Four out of the seven members abstained from voting, one going as far as to say "I did not see any of them. I have no interest whatsoever. That ended when I was 6." Similarly, when you tell people you watch cartoons, you get a look of disgust and confusion, because why would you, an adult, enjoy something made for children?

And here writers find themselves in a kind of predicament. Do they write children elaborate and creative stories, create complex and layered worlds, and put in the time and effort to teach them important lessons? Or do they just produce the bare bones skeleton with a few poop jokes thrown into the mix, to make everyone happy and not work hard because no one is going to care anyways?

For me, the first answer is the correct one. However, something has to change. We need to recognize those writing for children do so with a purpose, and just because you might think it below you because you are an 'adult', does not make it so. We need to create a space for children to learn important lessons as well as be entertained, and honestly, people my age and older need to sit back, relax, and enjoy it too.

Short to long.

1.) I like dogs better than cats

2.) I like dogs better than cats because dogs snuggle better

3.) I like dogs better than cats because, in my experience, dogs snuggle better

4.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because, in my experience, dogs snuggle better.

5.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because, in my childhood experience, dogs are better at snuggling

6.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling.

7.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling then cats are.

8.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling then cats are during the night.

9.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling then cats are during cold winter nights.

10.)  I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling then cats are during cold winter nights and keeping me warm.

11.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling then cats are during cold winter nights in the middle of January and keeping me warm.

12.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling then cats are during cold winter nights in the middle of January in New England, and keeping me warm.

13.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling and keeping me warm than cats are during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in New England.

14.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling and keeping me warm than cats are during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in New England where temperatures can dip below zero degrees.

15.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, in my own childhood experience, is that dogs are better at snuggling and keeping me warm than cats are during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in my small home town in New England where temperatures can dip below zero degrees.

16.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, from my own childhood experiences, is that dogs are better at snuggling and keeping me warm than cats are during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in my small home town in New England where temperatures can easily dip below zero degrees and leave you shaking from the cold.

17.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, from my own childhood experiences, is that dogs are better at snuggling and keeping me warm than cats are during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in my small home town in New England where temperatures can easily dip below zero degrees and leave you shaking from the cold if you don’t have a ready source of heat available.

18.) I enjoy dogs more than cats because what I have found, from my own childhood experiences, is that dogs are bette than cats are at both snuggling and keeping people warm during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in my small home town in New England where temperatures can easily dip below zero degrees and leave you shaking from the cold if you don’t have a ready source of heat available.

19.) I can’t help but enjoy dogs more than cats, primarily because what I have found, from my own childhood experiences, is that dogs are bette than cats are at both snuggling and keeping people warm during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in my small home town in New England where temperatures can easily dip below zero degrees and leave you shaking from the cold if you don’t have a ready source of heat available.

20.) I can’t help but enjoy dogs more than cats, primarily because what I have found, from my own childhood experiences all those years ago, is that dogs are bette than cats are at both snuggling and keeping people warm during cold winter nights in the middle of January, especially in my small home town in New England where temperatures can easily dip below zero degrees and leave you shaking from the cold if you don’t have a ready source of heat available.

Fifty shades of bad sentences.

Fifty Shades of Grey is pretty terrible in a few respects. Its been criticized for it's portrayal of BDSM culture, specifically in the regard that it romanticizes an abusive relationship and calls it something it is not. One of the key elements of BDSM is aftercare and mutual respect, something that Fifty Shades seems to look over for some reason. While I could go into a much longer rant, that is not what this post is about. Along with being misinforming, Fifty Shades suffers from another flaw; Terrible writing.

Disclaimer: I have never finished the book. There was an attempt made once, however I have a certain standard of what I will read. I could hardly get passed the first chapter of Fifty Shades without wanting to take a cold shower and contemplate what I'd just read. This being said, I found a list of quotes online, helpfully titled "Fifty terrible lines from Fifty Shades of Grey" and went to work finding the worst of the worst.

When you read sentences like "Don't you like the butt drawer?” and “His voice is warm and husky like dark melted chocolate fudge caramel... or something.” it’s hard to think that a.) This is a real published work that sold over and million copies and b.) there is truly a terrible line. However, never fear, for I have read something so terrible my eyes will never be able to unread it and I don't know how I will ever be the same again. It reads as follows.

"He reaches between my legs and pulls on the blue string… what! And… a gently pulls my tampon out and tosses it into the nearby toilet. Holy fuck. Sweet mother of all… Jeez.”

There are so many things wrong with this sentence. First of all, it is absolutely disgusting. It is undoubtedly as gross as you think it is. Reading the passage around it makes me gag. There is no reason for this to exist anywhere.

Secondly, it’s poorly written. The ellipses are unneeded. It’s weirdly spaced out. The words don’t mesh together in the sentence correctly, and I had to double check the website hadn’t made a mistake when writing “And… a gently”. I suppose I understand what E.L. James was attempting to accomplish with all of this; to show the lead characters thought process. However it ends up a gross jumbled mess, and leaves everyone uncomfortable and wondering “why?”

Why did E.L. James include this in her book at all?

Why would she think this was a good idea?
Why didn’t her editor stop her?

Of all the cringe worthy sentences, this one wins the prize for being the worst, and the author has gone on to be more popular then I can conceive. I guess I’ll never know how this came to pass; It will be one of the great mysteries of my lifetime. 

Pinker and me.

As someone who likes writing, but is constantly nervous about how it is going to come across to the general public, Steven Pinker's lecture made a lot of sense to me. As if that wasn't enough, it also put me at ease. Listening to someone talk about the simplicities of writing, and how it doesn't have to be lengthy and cryptic to get a point across is like a huge sigh of relief. The fact that I don't need to bog down my work and make it a treasure hunt for my readers, and instead look at it as something to share with the general public is not an idea I'm used to. In all of my classes before this, it was always better to have more. More words, more pages, more round about ideas that slide around the topic but never fully engage with it. For me to hear that Pinker, a distinguished scholar in his field, finds that this classist way we think of writing absurd is a huge weight off my chest.

Pinker much prefers what he calls the 'classic method'. This style of writing is seen as a way to engage the audience, and open the world up to them. It is designed to be accessible, instead of blocking those seemingly 'unworthy' out. He breaks down this idea that in order to be academic you have to confuse everyone and make it difficult to read. Getting to the point is what the writer should be doing.

I myself have been a culprit of this type of writing, not because I wanted to confuse my readers, but because it is what I was taught to be the correct way of writing for the academics of the world. My teachers and professors told me that if I wanted to be considered a educated person, I had to make my work similar to those already published. While watching the lecture it was hard not to be brought back to my high school english class, reading the pieces Pinker was using as bad examples.  Long descriptions also happen to fill up a page, and when you're writing for length and not quality content it's easy to fall into this chasm.

This trend of unneeded long descriptions can also be found in my work outside of class. Looking over pieces I wrote for pleasure, or to give to a close friend, have evidence of mile long sentences that could be condensed into a few simple words. It's painful to read some of my older works, and I found myself cringing at my computer screen yesterday while trying to find examples of old writings that wouldn't be too embarrassing.

Writing is always evolving and changing. The more you write and the more you learn, the better you can get. I'm sure by the time Writing with Style ends, I'll be cringing reading this over again. But that's what you have to do to improve.