I bumped into discussion elsewhere saying that people already know if they want to eat the healthy option (or the diet option), in which case they'll eat from that section of the menu (and drink diet drinks), so adding detailed information doesn't really tell people much.
I'm sure _something_ was billed as healthy. Or maybe "lighter". I think it might even have been written in green. I thought it was a reasonably nice idea, even though I basically glossed over it.
Yeah, that makes sense. I think it was optimistic to think that anyone would change their mind immediately (although that might just be hindsight), I assumed the point was more that people might get a better general idea about what tradeoffs are worthwhile (like "this restaurant is actually healthier" or "ordering a smaller main course is at least as important as choosing a different drink"). Although I admit that's the sort of thing that will be hard to test objectively.
I don't know if the idea will be practical, but it at least seems mildly helpful and not horribly discriminatory, which puts it miles ahead of lots of pro-health initiatives.
I think there's probably some sample bias in giving food information to people who have already chosen to eat at Taco Time in the first place. I mean, when I go for MacDonalds, I've _already_ made a decision that this is an 'unhealthy food treat', so giving me further calorie information doesn't really shift my mind. Whereas if I was in a work canteen I might pay more attention to the information.
Indeed. It's possible that one of the macdonalds meals is very different to the others, but I doubt it's very much so, so comparative ratings won't make much difference.
I don't understand all the people in the comments of that fantasy naming LJ post saying 'yes, but I use Celtic naming conventions, therefore I am Doing My Part to not homogenize things'. Have they ever read any fantasy?
Hi there! The person who is talking about Celtic names (aberwyn is in fact one of the pioneers of Celtic fantasy, if that helps and was one of the first people to achieve international success with a Celtic-inspired series. (And I'm a Celticist by training. I don't write Celtic fantasy, however, as that is too much like Real Life Work.)
Actually, not that much -- the big explosion in Celtic fantasy was around then -- not just Kit, but Guy Gavriel Kay, Patricia Keneally Morrison, and various Arthur books (though most of those were more following the French tradition with a few famous Celts thrown in, ie The Mists of Avalon). Prior to that, I can only think of Evangeline Walton (and parts of Tolkien, but it was well-disguised) writing pure Celtic stuff. There were children's books but they were mostly either retellings of legends or set in a modern world with folkloric incursions (The Owl Service, for instance). I used to teach a course on this, for my sins. The success of these series (plus Mists of Avalon) fuelled a much bigger wave from c.1990. Which is, I have to say, about when I stopped reading the stuff, by and large, as it was getting more and more recursive, and more and more riddled with modern sensibilities and wish-fulfilment around religion, feminism, psychic powers and so on. I remember the first of Kit's novel's coming out, in fact, and it was very fresh and different -- the other Celtic stuff from around the same time was very much more Arthur influenced and less based on genuinely early materials. I'm a bit of a nerd about this, alas: being a Celtic historian, these books get mentioned to me a lot.
Well, The Dark is Rising, which is technically kids' fantasy, springs to mind, and then there's Marion Zimmer Bradley as referenced by both yourself and Erin. Mostly, see Erin's comment for my feelings on this. Celtic inspired naming conventions feel to me like the single most banal choice in fantasy fiction - moreso even than Germanic - so I found it comical that this was being cited in the comments (by multiple people, not just Kerr) as in some way 'different' or original - and I really don't care how long she's been doing it. That's all.
I'm sure they have - I just also find Celtic naming to be the go-to for many authors even if they aren't writing a specifically Celtic-themed novel.
On a side note - it seems to me that the rant is not actually about names, but about the basis in which fantasy novels are set. Too many focus on what is basically medieval Britain, with all the whitewashing and Euro-centricism that implies. I've read quite a few good blog posts on the subject from authors of color, and I agree that there does need to be more fantasy that involves characters of color and different backgrounds and inspirations. I just don't particularly find the Celts to be that unused as inspiration nowadays. People like Marion Zimmer Bradley have been tapping that source since the 70s to good effect.
You are sadly all too right about the lazy tendency for writers to use Celtic materials as 'different' in naming conventions. It irritates the hell out of me. The starting point for that rant was a comment that 'bad' fantasy names are polysyllabic and that this latter is unrealistic. I thought about that for a while and came to the conclusion that it's not in fact true -- lots of cultures use polysyllabic names routinely, but the (Americanised) West doesn't do so as much. Hence the rant. You are absolutely right about the Eurocentricity. I really don't like books which are Europe-with-fantasy-names (Francika, Germanoria, Hispaniana etc etc). It's lazy, and it's a form of cultural imperialism and white-washing. I didn't say that Celtic names were underused and I don't think Kit did. I just quoted some of the longer (and, to lazy modern eyes less palatable) ones as an example of how polysyllabic names are not in fact odd or uncommon. (When I was still teaching full-time, I used to dream of a moratorium on Celtic fantasy so that I could get on with my subject -- mediaeval Ireland and Wales -- without having to deal with all the modern myths.)
Which, in a nutshell, shows how wrong computing has got. They're computers, damn it, and so backing up should be automatic with them. Out of the box. But no, your typical shiny laptop is sold with a single hard drive in and backing it up left to the sucker who bought it to figure out.
Friday is best for me - shall I wander over at 7:00 then? And would it be ok if Julie came over too? She was saying she hadn't seen the pair of you in an age, and would be happy to chat for an hour while I set things up.
I don't think I've ever claimed the names I use in my fiction are wildly original. The reason for the line you've quoted was information within the context of my post. A lot of those 'Southern English' names are polysyllable, too (which is what the post was about). They're also not really 'Southern English', but that's another topic. Do feel free to come and join the discussion on my blog. Everyone's welcome.
And vice versa. Apologies for not stepping into the other conversation sooner - I was out at a meal with friends, otherwise I'd have pointed things out sooner.
A lot of those ... names are polysyllable, too (which is what the post was about).
You know, with a Linguistics/English Language background it's not that I don't appreciate where you're coming from - I am aware that people all over the world have polysyllabic names.
It's just that polysyllabic made-up names sound so... wanky. It's not your fault. Blame Tolkien.
I've basically enjoyed the writing of exactly one fantasy author (no, not Tolkien) who uses very 'ordinary' and Western Europe rooted naming conventions, and all the fantasy I write has people with steadfastly ordinary sounding names, whether made-up or not, and that's because I like my writing to feel grounded in reality, and also because I want to be able to come up with original names off the top of my head that aren't going to mean I've accidentally named my character 'poo-head'. Thus I use Western European rooted naming conventions and since I'm writing in a Western European styled setting, that works just fine for me. Let other people branch out. I'm not trying to get published or to forward a cause with my writing, I really don't care if the setting is 'standard' - stories for me are about people. The rest is just set-dressing.
On a side note, look at the modern fiction you read, or films you watch. Mostly the characters have pretty deliberately 'ordinary' names. If they have a more unusual name it's probably making some sort point or is at least a talking point. We want to be able to self-insert when we read fiction, or at least to not have the characters weird name distance us from the story. When you name a character Alythestra Fairybuttons I feel her name rising up like this huge barrier between me and the character, I can't take her seriously, I can't connect to her. If she was just called 'Alyth' I have a moment's pause to think "Isn't that a town in Perthshire?" and then I move on to the important bit: the story.
Now, obviously this doesn't address the issue that nothing but rampantly westernised fiction, fantasy and otherwise, leaves a large section of people marginalised. But (a) I really don't think giving someone a fantastical polysyllabic name is really going to make a huge difference to that, (b) I do not touch race issues on the internet, and (c) you by your own admission aren't exactly branching out beyond Western Europe either, aside from your passing reference.
In other words, I'm the exact person you're targeting in that post. So I really doubt there's much of a middle ground to be found.
Basically, I just don't really see how OF, ME and P-Celtic (or indeed Q-Celtic) are so much more original and daring than Germanic. It's still all old British. If you're going to lambaste people for not branching out you should probably be putting your money where your mouth is both in terms of the cultures you're portraying and the etymology of your naming conventions. If not, expect people to nit-pick. You make passing reference to non-WE settings/naming conventions, but then you say 'I use ME/OF/P-Celtic myself' and effectively hamstring your whole argument because seriously, that is no better, no different from just using Germanic, or just using Norse - or just using Q-Celtic.
Do feel free to come and join the discussion on my blog. Everyone's welcome.
I appreciate the offer but I'd rather be scathing and sarcastic from a distance.
I am always happy to agree to differ. I don't see made-up polysyllables as wanky -- some are, yes, but they don't have to be. As to the fiction I read/films I see... I gave up on Hollywood and mainstream literary fiction some time ago, so I'm not a good case study. And, as it happens, the book I've just finished has influence from mediaeval Chinese literature in it. Along with a lot of other stuff. I'm a messy writer who draws in stuff from all over. The previous book came from a different set of influences.
Secondly, if you're referring to my previous comment, I'm being dismissive of a public article that you linked to that I considered to be badly written, diffuse in point, and ignorant of numerous important variables. The writer of said article then dismissed said variables saying they'd 'given up on modern literary fiction'. Which I think is extra doubleplus ignorant. Should I be nicer about that than I would be about an article by, say, Julie Bindel, just because the writer happens to be on your flist?
I think that if you're going to engage other people in debate you should do it politely and in good faith and if you're not going to engage, but just snark then you should do it some where else.
I have no problem with disagreement, I just want it kept polite.
Oh, I'm speaking in good faith. I think it's fashionable cynicism. I'm happy to back this up. I'd be happy to go on. But the other party has chosen not to. And that's okay too.
I don't know if it was piggy flu, but I got viciously ill last Autumn. First day I got a horrid fever, actually passed out at work - then spent the next.. maybe 2 months miserably sick. Had to work through it.
this year I've encountered a lot of people with shitty flu's, and while I can tell I'm carrying, my immune system is kicking its ass.
by this gloriously unscientific reasoning, I declare the above potentially true. I have been, in general, a *lot* less ill this year than last
Depends how fast-foody we're talking. Bella Italia, McDonalds or a chip shop. If you go in with your friends because they want to pick something up while you're out shopping, you may well want something healthier than they do.
True. Although would suspect that friends would generally go to similar types of food places. Also Malls in states often have food courts. Would be interesting to see abreakdown on type of fastfood place and who its clientel were (e.g. socioeconomic group, by freeway, shopping center, etc.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I don't know if the idea will be practical, but it at least seems mildly helpful and not horribly discriminatory, which puts it miles ahead of lots of pro-health initiatives.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
The person who is talking about Celtic names (
no subject
no subject
I'm a bit of a nerd about this, alas: being a Celtic historian, these books get mentioned to me a lot.
no subject
no subject
On a side note - it seems to me that the rant is not actually about names, but about the basis in which fantasy novels are set. Too many focus on what is basically medieval Britain, with all the whitewashing and Euro-centricism that implies. I've read quite a few good blog posts on the subject from authors of color, and I agree that there does need to be more fantasy that involves characters of color and different backgrounds and inspirations. I just don't particularly find the Celts to be that unused as inspiration nowadays. People like Marion Zimmer Bradley have been tapping that source since the 70s to good effect.
no subject
The starting point for that rant was a comment that 'bad' fantasy names are polysyllabic and that this latter is unrealistic. I thought about that for a while and came to the conclusion that it's not in fact true -- lots of cultures use polysyllabic names routinely, but the (Americanised) West doesn't do so as much. Hence the rant.
You are absolutely right about the Eurocentricity. I really don't like books which are Europe-with-fantasy-names (Francika, Germanoria, Hispaniana etc etc). It's lazy, and it's a form of cultural imperialism and white-washing.
I didn't say that Celtic names were underused and I don't think Kit did. I just quoted some of the longer (and, to lazy modern eyes less palatable) ones as an example of how polysyllabic names are not in fact odd or uncommon.
(When I was still teaching full-time, I used to dream of a moratorium on Celtic fantasy so that I could get on with my subject -- mediaeval Ireland and Wales -- without having to deal with all the modern myths.)
no subject
no subject
How do I do that?
no subject
Which evening (other than Tuesday) is good for you?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
So, you know. Southern English names. Wow, that's branching... in...
no subject
A lot of those 'Southern English' names are polysyllable, too (which is what the post was about). They're also not really 'Southern English', but that's another topic.
Do feel free to come and join the discussion on my blog. Everyone's welcome.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
You know, with a Linguistics/English Language background it's not that I don't appreciate where you're coming from - I am aware that people all over the world have polysyllabic names.
It's just that polysyllabic made-up names sound so... wanky. It's not your fault. Blame Tolkien.
I've basically enjoyed the writing of exactly one fantasy author (no, not Tolkien) who uses very 'ordinary' and Western Europe rooted naming conventions, and all the fantasy I write has people with steadfastly ordinary sounding names, whether made-up or not, and that's because I like my writing to feel grounded in reality, and also because I want to be able to come up with original names off the top of my head that aren't going to mean I've accidentally named my character 'poo-head'. Thus I use Western European rooted naming conventions and since I'm writing in a Western European styled setting, that works just fine for me. Let other people branch out. I'm not trying to get published or to forward a cause with my writing, I really don't care if the setting is 'standard' - stories for me are about people. The rest is just set-dressing.
On a side note, look at the modern fiction you read, or films you watch. Mostly the characters have pretty deliberately 'ordinary' names. If they have a more unusual name it's probably making some sort point or is at least a talking point. We want to be able to self-insert when we read fiction, or at least to not have the characters weird name distance us from the story. When you name a character Alythestra Fairybuttons I feel her name rising up like this huge barrier between me and the character, I can't take her seriously, I can't connect to her. If she was just called 'Alyth' I have a moment's pause to think "Isn't that a town in Perthshire?" and then I move on to the important bit: the story.
Now, obviously this doesn't address the issue that nothing but rampantly westernised fiction, fantasy and otherwise, leaves a large section of people marginalised. But (a) I really don't think giving someone a fantastical polysyllabic name is really going to make a huge difference to that, (b) I do not touch race issues on the internet, and (c) you by your own admission aren't exactly branching out beyond Western Europe either, aside from your passing reference.
In other words, I'm the exact person you're targeting in that post. So I really doubt there's much of a middle ground to be found.
Basically, I just don't really see how OF, ME and P-Celtic (or indeed Q-Celtic) are so much more original and daring than Germanic. It's still all old British. If you're going to lambaste people for not branching out you should probably be putting your money where your mouth is both in terms of the cultures you're portraying and the etymology of your naming conventions. If not, expect people to nit-pick. You make passing reference to non-WE settings/naming conventions, but then you say 'I use ME/OF/P-Celtic myself' and effectively hamstring your whole argument because seriously, that is no better, no different from just using Germanic, or just using Norse - or just using Q-Celtic.
Do feel free to come and join the discussion on my blog. Everyone's welcome.
I appreciate the offer but I'd rather be scathing and sarcastic from a distance.
no subject
no subject
How fashionably cynical of you. I never 'give up' entirely on anything.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I have no problem with disagreement, I just want it kept polite.
no subject
no subject
this year I've encountered a lot of people with shitty flu's, and while I can tell I'm carrying, my immune system is kicking its ass.
by this gloriously unscientific reasoning, I declare the above potentially true. I have been, in general, a *lot* less ill this year than last
no subject
no subject
no subject