Comments for Precise Edit's Blog

Comment on Is Mankind Sexist? by Derek

Derek — Fri, 10 May 2013 06:03:51 +0000

I would argue that no word is intrinsically sexist. It can only become so by content (the message is sexist) or by assignment (someone calls it sexist). Man is not sexist. It isn’t even gender specific. In English, we do not assign a gender to words; while he can specify a man, it is also used as a neutral pronoun when the gender is unknown or mixed. She on the other hand is gender specific, so of course no one calls a woman he or him (to her face or otherwise). Some may disagree that words like “mankind” are the results of a gender bias created by the patriarchal shapers of the language, but this argument treats language as if it were a static entity that still retains sexist ideology. This is not representative of the nature of language that changes with the ideas and concepts of the people (so secretary, nurse, and prostitute also represent men as more men fill these jobs) . And while we could endlessly debate the role of language in the formation of these ideas, it seems improbable that language can hold some sinister sexist code that is understood by everyone. Therefore if someone becomes offended by the use of “man”, they are responsible for the word’s sexist denotation (this includes those who feel neglected or unrepresented). The denotation is also subjective because not everyone using the language makes the same assumptions or assignation. Does that mean we shouldn’t be aware of the word’s effect on audience? As the author points out, we should make sure the words we use have the effect we want, and perhaps that means avoiding the semblance of sexism; however, we should not eliminate these words from the language. On of the beauties of English is the abundant and diverse word choices we have. Let businesses worry about preventing their own liability when using sexist language; leave creative nonfiction, journalism, and fiction out of the witch/sorcerer hunt.

Comment on End Apostrophe Abuse by Mike in Boston

Mike in Boston — Thu, 09 May 2013 07:14:47 +0000

I would be remiss not to point out that Bob the Angry Flower also has an excellent summary, available in poster form. (I have no connection with the site other than being a fan.)

Comment on Writing Fiction in the Present Tense by T.

T. — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:20:13 +0000

I wouldn’t know. I write in present tense because of Faulkner. I haven’t read many recent novels, and the ones I have read weren’t written in present tense.

Comment on Writing Fiction in the Present Tense by preciseedit

preciseedit — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 15:25:11 +0000

T.--Good comments. I would be interested in finding out whether the number of books written in the present tense is increasing annually.

Comment on Writing Fiction in the Present Tense by T.

T. — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 04:30:33 +0000

The criticism of present tense in fiction today reminds me of Truman Capote saying Kerouac’s “On the Road” was not writing but merely typing. Capote and Updike and that older generation of established literary elites were not very fond of the Beat Generation and the new literary techniques they were using. Just as I’m sure Modernists like Hemingway and Faulkner and Joyce received harsh criticism from the older, established generation that turned up their noses at their extreme Modernist styles.

The point is, the older generations tend to reject the younger generations when the younger generation rejects the status quo and experiments with something new. It has always been that way and it always will be. The good news is (for the younger generation, that is) that the younger generation ends up winning in the end and what was deemed a passing fad becomes the new norm.

I see a lot of critics of present tense fiction blaming this “fad” on social networking and reality TV and magazines, but so what? Did the novel reach its final stage of evolution in the 1980s or something, after four hundred years of incessantly evolving with each new generation? No, the novel is always adapting to the needs and interests of the new generation, and it always will. The older generation just needs to accept that and acknowledge that the use of present tense in modern literature is the new generation’s contribution to the evolution of the novel and their attempt to redefine the novel to make it more relatable to their own generation.

That said, I think present tense works best when you’re writing in first-person steam of consciousness. It also helps to use multiple narrators so that it doesn’t get so “claustrophobic.”