Interesting Links for 15-1-2011

[andrewducker]

• A suggested for selling books/comics online, with no setup costs. It's actually pretty smart.
  (tags: writing marketing publishing comics online business distribution selfpublishing ebook)
• Swine flu gives its survivors supercharged immunity
  (tags: medicine science health swineflu virus)
• Putting food labels on restaurant menus does not affect customer choices even a tiny little bit.
  (tags: food law)
• $1,000 reward offered for stolen cancer research laptop. WILL SOMEONE TEACH RESEARCHERS TO BACK UP!!!!!!!
  (tags: research theft EpicFail OhForFucksSake)
• Researchers Use MRI to Predict 60% Of Your Gaming Prowess
  (tags: psychology games computers brain neuroscience)
• Woman claimed to have cancer and burns in order to have a relationship with another woman while claiming to be a main.
  (tags: relationships wtf)
• How drug classification really works
  (tags: drugs satire funny)
• Fantasy names: a rant.
  (tags: writing scifi fantasy language)
• Government not able to limit RBS bonuses, due to contract signed by Labour
  (tags: rbs bonus banking uk government finance)

Comments

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

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.

[andrewducker]

Darnit, where's my "like" button?

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Well, I like you, anyway :-)

[andrewducker]

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.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Goodness, no problem.

[marrog.livejournal.com]

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.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

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.

[marrog.livejournal.com]

I gave up on Hollywood and mainstream literary fiction some time ago, so I'm not a good case study.

How fashionably cynical of you. I never 'give up' entirely on anything.

[andrewducker]

Fashionably cynical? Is there a particular reason you're being so rude?

[marrog.livejournal.com]

I think 'giving up' on a large chunk of modern media is fashionably cynical. It's an expression I'm sure you've heard me use before.

[marrog.livejournal.com]

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?

[andrewducker]

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.

[marrog.livejournal.com]

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.