David McLeod

Your interpretation is certainly more optimistic than mine, and it brightened (pun intended) my morning.

Jovian, "Icicle Dance" isn't weird, at all. At about 1 minute into the piece, the tempo picked up...as the icicle began to melt? About 30 seconds before the end, the tempo slowed. I presume this indicated the "death" of the icicle. Throughout, the higher register notes (the crystalline icicle?) contrasted with the lower register (the warm air? sun? meltwater?) The notion of an icicle, fixed to an eave, a dripping faucet, a tree limb, "dancing" is poignant, since the only way it can dance is by melting. Actually, it's a hell of an allegory.

I wanted a Cadillac Escalade, Lincoln Navigator, or similar vehicle. All I could afford was a Ford Escape. It's amazing, now, how I sneer at the gas-guzzling, road-hogging, can't turn a corner without taking up two lanes, can't park in a single parking space, Escalades, Navigators, etc.

Thank you all for your good wishes...it was a good day; now, I'm back to work!

Thank you all for your wishes--and some incredible art work!

Welcome, as well, from this relative newcomer. I was thinking, actually, of either the geologic subperiod (named for the historical region), or the laws originating there that prohibited inheritance through the female line (Salic law, Henry V, I:ii). Well, you wanted mature discussion. I don't know how mature this is, but it's definately pedantic!

Hey, hh5, Thanks for posting this. Now, all I have to do is figure out how to get the &%@**# cable box to tune to it. Oh, the trials of a luddite.

Hey, Marc, Welcome. Your profile said you were a reader; hope you've had a chance to check out the Anthology tab on the home page. Lots of variety, there, by some of the best authors on the site. It will give you an idea of what to find in the other sections, too. Happy reading!

It can be tedious, but it also can be extremely rewarding to edit the work of someone for whom English is a second language. I've learned some quite lyric sentence patterns, for example. I've also been forced to look up the meaning of words I thought I knew, only to find that I'd been using them incorrectly for years. That's a real treat! Yes, an editor might do better if he/she were editing a favorite genre; however, I have found that if I edit something I'm not "interested in," I can focus more on editing and less on losing myself in the story. I've edited for one author who sucks me into the story. I become so engrossed, I don't see errors. I have to start at the end of his stories, and work backward, paragraph or sentence at a time, in order to check spelling/grammar. (By the way, reading a sentence backwards is a pre-Microsoft-Spell-Checker trick for catching spelling errors.) The notion of putting a story aside, and then re-reading it months later is an excellent piece of advice. Approaching one's own stories as if they were new and unfamiliar reveals a lot about them. Good discussion! Hope others will join.

Graeme hasd covered the key points very well, I think. To reiterate and expand a little: "It's not the job of an editor to change things 'to suit their tastes.' " There are canonical rules for grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, dialogue tags--the minutiae of writing. Editorial changes to these things should rarely be contested. On the other hand, we have writers and readers whose first language is USA or UK English, as well as writers and readers for whom English is a second language. Speech patterns (which affect sentence structure) vary. This can be the root of disagreement between writer and editor. Further, rules for grammar, and the language itself, evolve. How close to the leading edge of this evolution the author wants to be, and how far back from that edge the editor is, can be a source of disagreement. Both author and editor need to be aware of these things, and understand that there will be disagreement, even in the simplest things. "...if an author rejects most of the editor's suggestions, then that's probably an example where the writer/editor match up isn't working." If the author rejects most of the editor's changes/suggestions despite explanation, the two need to evaluate the relationship. Is it a matter of style? Is the editor trying to change the author's voice? Is the editor trying to change things to suit his/her tastes/style? If so, then perhaps a new editor is needed. (As an editor, I hope that any author who found that true of my editing would tell me.) On the other hand, if the author rejects changes without explanation, and the editor finds that several hours work has been ignored, then perhaps the editor needs to terminate the relationship. (As a writer, I hope that any editor who found that true of me would tell me.) "...all too often [authors] see what they expect to see on the page, and not what they've actually written." I received a comment a few days ago from a new reader who had found one of my recent stories. She was quite puzzled by some of the concepts and ideas in the story. I realized that having set the story in the same fantasy world as earlier stories, I'd assumed all readers would be familiar with that world. Bad assumption. An editor could have discovered that, and saved the reader puzzlement and me embarrasment. Further, despite spell- and grammar-checkers, and reading my stories aloud, word by word, I still am surprised by spelling and grammar errors. Finally, having edited for several authors with widely different styles and skills, I realize that the editor's approach to each author must be different. One author writes stream of consciousness; my job is to help convert that into dialogue and narration. For one author, English is a second language, and his native speech patterns are wildly different from English. My job is simply to provide examples of USA-english sentence structure and patterns. And so on... Thanks for starting this topic. I hope to see a lot of participation...'cause I need help as a writer and an editor.

How wonderful for you to be standing on the shore of an ocean of discovery. There is so much in the world for you to find, to see, to experience. Paying bills? That's routine, mechanical. Don't forget to pay them, but don't let them rule you, either. You've almost certainly heard the phrase, "Render unco Caesar that which is Caesar's..."? The underlying message was not the stated conclusion ("...and unto God that which is God's.") The underlying message was "and live the rest of your life as you will." I'd add, "and have sex as often as possible, but be careful," but that might lower the level of an otherwise sophisticated discussion. [seriously, do it while you can, but take your time. There's nothing like anticipation and foreplay to make it better. Much better.] Here's an aphorism for you: "You always have time for that which you put first." Decide what is important, and pursue that. And know, always, that there are those who love and support you. Be well, be strong.

First, welcome to the GA web site. There are a lot of very good people here, and a lot of people who both share your thoughts, hopes, and pains; and also who are very supportive without being "in your face." I've been a member for only about two months, but have found some wonderful friends, here. Second, please know that there are a lot of people here who will offer you a figurative hug any time you need one. It's not as good as a real hug, but it's no less sincere. Third, know that we all have our bad months and our good ones, and that we support one another during the bad ones, and celebrate with each other during the good ones. Hey, here's a figurative hug. Love, David

Not affluent? I understand the Zaglossus clan winters in Palm Springs. Seriously, though, this is a great idea for setting a theme for an anthology. I found this forum much too late to offer input, but I'm looking forward to your announcement.

The strength to say what you believe... That's heavy.

Yeah, by his standards, the Godfather had integrity: he followed the rules he believed in. That's a rather fundamental definition of integrity, but it is an important one. Integrity, in itself, isn't necessarily noble. It's the underlying values that determine nobility.

I'm thinking of a recent fracas that angered a lot of people, but made sense on a visceral level: a campaign urging people to "Be good for goodness' sake." A real person (man or woman) is someone who understands what is right, not because it was "revealed" by religion, but because it is innately right (and yes, I believe that there is such a thing), and who then follows that path.

Kit, Thank you for your thoughts. I

Demo, Thank you for your reply. I do tend to use people I know as the basis for characters; it

Clumber, You are correct in that emotions run a gamut from right to left, from black to white, from love to hate. On the other hand, I find it difficult to express anything other tha the strontest emotions in my writing. I would like to exlore ways of expressing "less than extreme" emotions in stories. David M.

Martin, Your angst cast a shadow on my afternoon. (Don't worry; I'll recover!) Please, tell me that you are working on a story idea and not expressing what you really feel. The notion that good cannot exist without evil, that light cannot exist withoug darkness, that happiness cannot exist with sadness is not only not true, it is an indidious serpent that seeks to steal your mind. It is a 6,000+ year old notion that the universe exists as a conflict betweem good and evil (Google "Zoroaster" for additional thoughts.). In a story, this conflict may become real...it's a legitimate construct. However, in whatever we consider to be reality, please know that good can exist without evil, and that love can exist without hate. David M.

I think you were maligned by at least one of the responses to your post. Admittedly, on the surface it's pragmatic (and a little bit pessimistic...perhaps sardonic). There's something to be said for "Mr. Right Now," if only in the courage to take a chance and find out if it's "real." Who was it? Teddy Roosevelt who said: It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat..." There's no answer to that, I think. David McLeod

Mike L: With regard to your notion of making ourselves into the "right one," I say, "right on." (Okay, the pun police may enter, stage right.) Seriously, you've made an important point. It's fantasy (my favorite genre) to expect that the right one is going to drop into our lives; it's reality that we have to both create ourselfes and actively search. (This isn't as insightful as I'd expected; I hope you are able to read beyone the platitudes.) David M.