Internet Grammar 101

The popularity of the internet has, without a doubt, altered grammar as we know it.  What is deemed acceptable and unacceptable depends greatly on the medium I'm writing in.  For example, even though I'm making a conscious effort to include proper punctuation and capitalization, this is my own blog.  no one could reasonably judge me if i started typing my posts like this.  because it's the internet.

Personally what I deem as having more relevancy that the actual proper rule-following is the consistency- if you're not going to capitalize I on the internet, that's fine, just don't only do it every other time.  Honestly that fluctuation would seem much more unreliable to myself as a reader than "bad" grammar in general.

Now of course there is a large difference between dropping the capitalization of some proper nouns and leaving out a few commas and entirely forgetting how to speak the English langauge.

Tumblr is the reigning master of such babble, which at first seems idiotic but becomes oddly familiar and almost endearing.  Many bloggers there are so full of feelings (or feels, as they prefer to call them) that they're reduced to simply shouting things like "I CAN'T", implying that they can't handle all the emotion they're feeling.  Even better than that is when they elaborate, such as "omg i can't even, i've lost the ability to can."

Beyond this they have a habit of randomly stARTING TO GET EXCITED IN THE MIDDLE OF A SENTENCE.  I'm honestly not sure who began that practice, but it is sort of oddly helpful to be able to read how they would be speaking the words they typed (for me, at least, since I'm very obsessive about things being read as they would be said- see previous post about my punctuation abuse and writing voice).

But even these weird little internet quirks don't bother me.  I can handle a little bit of funky grammar, and even a few wonky sentence structures.  Where I draw the line is at made up words, which make you seems like an uneducated person trying to sound smart.  If you say supposably instead of supposedly or expecially instead of especially, you've lost all credibility in my eyes and I will probably not continue to read a word you have written, unless it's to make fun of you.  Harsh but true.

Fact vs Fiction

Nobody wants to be boring.

It's easy, outwardly, to say that you'd prefer a quiet, discrete life to a dramatic one, but I believe that there's a part of all of us that wishes for drama and adventure (both the ups and the downs).  After all, that's what makes your story worth being told.  If you have a healthy relationship with your family, live safely in the same town your entire life, get decent grades and get a steady career, etc. well... that's just great, but it's certainly not the making of a bestseller.

Why bother documenting all that, when there's no conflict?  Even if your intention is to keep your journal only for yourself, perhaps eventually your children and grandchildren, what's the point in documenting all these events if nothing exciting or abnormal ever happens to you?  How memorable are we, as individuals, anyways?  Some names last through the centuries, but those are the people who conquered and created and mystified.  The ones who stole the heart of nations or tried to destroy them.  They aren't the everyday, they are the extraordinary.

When I think about who may think of me in 200 years... maybe my great-great-grandchildren?  If they're so inquisitive as to spare a fleeting thought for me, that is.  I know my own curiosities toward my ancestors are minimal.  But why should I be so concerned with who remembers me beyond my lifetime?  I'm not curing polio I'm just living my life... and I'm really not in the mood for waxing philosophical, so I'll just get down to the point.

Nobody wants to admit to living a dull life, and it's turning the literary world mad.  Remember when James Frey's bestselling memoir A Million Little Pieces was debunked for half of it never even happening?  It's not the only fabricated and embellished work of "nonfiction" that has popped up within the last decade.  It seems that the more people will do anything to spice up their life (even if it means lying, which to me just seems pointless because he could have published such a book as fiction and had just as much critical and popular success, I'm sure).

People lie to make themselves seem more interesting.  People plagiarize to appear to be better writers than they are.  It's not a nice reality, but it's the one we live with.

A Question of Originality

I remember being told once by a high school English teacher that nothing was original anymore.  Not that people have become lazier, or less creative- just that everything was inspired by or copied from something else (even if it was unintentional).  The class around me seemed a bit startled and sullen about the fact, but I my own reaction was a resounding "duh!"  I mean, I had never before articulated that thought, but it made total sense to me that everything we've seen in our lives became an influence for all that we make and do.

But it is a little scary to ponder.  Could we really have used up every idea- every plot concept, every twist, each character and personality and dialogue?  It's not a reality that I'd like to have, but it very well may be the case.

Even the thoughts that sound original can be categorized and proven otherwise (something I've done my fair share of).  For example- have you ever walked through the young adult section of a bookstore?  There are only about four genres that every book falls under, and each only has so many plotlines.

If I may:

The "Realistic" Fiction

• The first type of realistic fiction novel is the literary answer to Mean Girls- cliques of girls at some kind of prep school.  They are concerned with boys, and fashion, and shallow things, and though the setting is generally at school you won't hear them discuss grades once.  There will be one brunette, one blonde, maybe even a redhead, but the majority of the characters will be white.  The one main character who isn't will have skin that the author compares to a Starbucks drink, or will have the word "exotic" abused as an adjective for her.  The plots are never particularly longitudinal, which is why each series can go on for 10+ books without boring their audience.

• Less offensive than this first category is the real life tragedy.  Chances are your main character or someone close to them (or bonus points for both!) has a terminal illness.  If not, it's likely that the person close to them has already died.  This book is about struggle, and hope, and adapting to change, sometimes funny but guaranteed to make you cry (either from the beauty of it's message or the sheer awfulness of the writing).  John Green's The Fault in Our Stars is the most (perhaps only) successful book I've ever come across in this category.

The "Classic with a Twist"

• This genre is very hit or miss- the books that fall in this category are either genius or worthless heaps of paper and ink.   The first section of this sort are the fairy tales.  Typically more importance is placed on historical details, greater character depth, or expanding on the plot... half of them will take place in the point of view of the villain.   Either the ending is the same as the original or the exact opposite, and either way it's predictable by the time you've hit the story's climax.

• Another take on this is what gives this category it's namesake- a twist on a classic novel (nine out of ten times it'll be Jane Austen or a Bronte).  Usually the same tale is told from a different perspective (either a pre-existing character or an original one, and if it's not someone from the original novel then there's almost a hundred percent guarantee that they're from the future).  Sometimes this crosses over into the sci-fi/fantasy genre, either by having one of the characters we know and love revealed to secretly be some kind of vampire, werewolf, etc, or by incorporating an entire "species" into the novel (see Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, the 2009 bestseller that is exactly what it sounds like.

The Supernatural Novel

• Twilight, The Vampire Diaires, Marked, Vampire Academy, Blue Bloods... it only took one vampire book to start a trend, and the rest came naturally.  (Though, actually, the vampire trend was probably actually started by the Sookie Stackhouse novels and the hit HBO show they inspired, True Blood).  Still, each series seems virtually never-ending- the House of Night series, with it's cliched cast of students and it's pretentious, ancient spelling of vampyre, is going on it's 11th novel.  But soon vampires became old hat.  We needed werewolves, witches, ghosts, zombies, aliens... the young adult section of bookstores had turned into a Halloween party.  As fun as this tread was at first, it quickly got old thanks to the predictable plotlines.

•  The "I'm in love with a monster" novel, which is exactly what it sounds like.  Our human protagonist falls in love with someone who turns out to be some kind of monster, but eventually figures out that A) They aren't dangerous the way everyone thinks they are, B) they can try to restore their humanity, or C) they just want to be turned into the same kind of creature as well.

• The other most popular variation is the monster hunter- someone who has either been chosen or has taken it upon him/herself to rid the world of insert-monster-type-here, and are really good at it.  They'll either meet someone else of their kind and fall in love with them, or fall for one of their targets.  Either way, you won't get through the book without romance.

The Dystopian/Utopian World

• While doubtlessly the most interesting of all of the genres above and certainly the most varied, the only variation is in characters and setting and perhaps pacing of the plot.

There is a girl in a future society (you can bet a large sum of money that she is sixteen years old).  She is not exceptionally pretty, but don’t worry because the guy who is secretly in love with her doesn’t care about that/sees her as beautiful anyways (plus at some point a greater power will come in and make her over to a varying extent).  Now this girl just wishes for happiness and something beyond the life she has now.  However, the world that she lives in probably doesn’t allow for that, because it is divided into hierarchical groupings of people that probably don’t come in contact with one another.  And- hint- she's not at the top. But luckily/unluckily this society also has some kind of dramatic ritual or rite of passage that can instantly alter her life, during which something will go wrong or she will be outstanding for some reason.  She garners some attention or becomes notorious in some way because of her abnormality.  She has to be secretive, because she probably figures out some powerful, dangerous information.  The government gets wind of her and she’s suddenly public enemy #1, except to all of the little people who see her (originally unintentional) rebellion as brave.  At some point the guy reveals his love for her and she doesn't understand what he could see in her.  They kiss and then she’s okay with it.  They team up, along with a few others, but the government will definitely use their love against them (our protagonist’s biggest weakness is her attachment to someone, most likely the boy and/or family member[s]).  Lots of battle scenes.  Lots of torn emotions.  Things probably end up seemingly alright but the government is still in power and will have to be defeated within the next 2-3 books.

 And the best part is that I can effortlessly name multiple YA series off the top of my head that fit that description perfectly and, despite how well-written and interesting each of them is, you boil them down and we end up with the exact same synopsis.

Now I'm sorry for ranting (really, I am!) but I think this is just a major issue in the world of writing today, and young adult literature is the best way to exemplify it.  (Note: honestly, I could probably write a different tirade altogether about the lack of books targeted at teenage boys/with male main characters, which is another huge issue altogether.  And maybe I will....)

But this has been something running through my head for a long time.  If I'm so easily able to mentally categorize all of my favorite (and not-so-favorite) books into such categories, I think it says a lot about the state of writing and originality in today's world.

Even if there aren't many unused ideas left, I strive to write with creativity, with passion, and with unpredictability.  I would want someone to look at a novel I've written and struggle to find it's place amongst this list.  Even  if the ideas aren't new, the way you implement them can be.

A Story Without Words.

It's happened to all of us.  From the lowly writer of an essay for class to the finest novelists the world has known, we've all shared a common experience.  Writer's block.

Now, I consider writer's block to be a separate entity from the lack of a muse- in fact, I consider it to be just the opposite.  In my mind, writer's block is about having an idea but being unable to articulate it.  My problems range between the two (it seems block strikes me more often in prose, while academic writing leaves my mind startlingly blank of ideas).

But recognizing that you have writer's block, however one may define it, and getting past it are two entirely different things.  Typically my methods involve distraction and procrastination, or the more innocent sounding "I'll give my mind a break and come back to it later".  Such efforts have been more effected in some cases than in others.  But the more I get into writing (and subsequently reading about writing), the more interesting ideas I find.  Take this thought by author Orson Scott Card, for example:

“Writer’s block is my unconscious mind telling me that something I’ve just written is either unbelievable or unimportant to me, and I solve it by going back and reinventing some part of what I’ve already written so that when I write it again, it is believable and interesting to me. Then I can go on. Writer’s block is never solved by forcing oneself to “write through it,” because you haven’t solved the problem that caused your unconscious mind to rebel against the story, so it still won’t work – for you or for the reader.” 

 It's not a way I've ever approached tackling writer's block, but certainly one I'm willing to try. 

The Internal Monologue

Writing a blog or a journal should be a personal experience (at least more so than other forms of writing).  But the dilemma is this... can a person truly shut out the world and solely vent for their eyes only?  Can we eliminate the idea of a possible reader in our minds just briefly enough to encapsulate our true thoughts and authentic voice?

For myself, the answer ranges from a hard-and-fast no to a grey shade of kind of...

The part about ruling out a reader, at least, is absolutely impossible for me to do.  Firstly I have a slight paranoia to blame.   In middle and high school my rough drafts would always come back very heavily edited- not because of the words, but the punctuation.  Apparently I had a bad case of comma abuse, as well as overenthusiastic parenthetical tendencies.  But I couldn't help it!  In fact I'm probably just as heavy-handed with my punctuation today.  It's just... I feel this compulsion to make sure that anyone who reads my writing the exact way I would.  I want no room for misinterpretation or personalization- these words are coming from me and therefore I want emphasis and pauses where I put them!  I'm still pretty defensive on the subject, as one can tell.

Secondly, I've been a reader my entire life.  Quite literally, there is not a single memory I have from a time where I didn't like books.  I'm pretty sure such a time never existed.  But I've grown so accustomed to reading the written word intended for others... maybe somewhere the line just became blurred.  In fact, many of my favorite books growing up were supposed to be like diaries (the Dear America series, specifically, which are still by far the best books anyone can buy for young girls interested in history).  But I've read so many incredible stories, it makes me want to be able to write like that as well.  And how could I ever know if I've accomplished their level of mastery if I'm simply writing for myself?

Lastly (probably the point that I'm least keen to admit)... I think that, over time, my voice as a writer may have just adapted to always seek an audience.  That is, I think my voice in everything is intended for the public.  I write everything in my head, pick different words, even edit my own thoughts until they sound more eloquent.  My own private feelings and opinions, even those which I never intend to expose to anyone, get played around with until they sound just right- until my pain sounds torturous enough, my joy lighthearted enough, my contentment perfectly adequate.  Maybe I've just seen one too many cheesy teen dramas on the CW, but I feel like my thoughts are a constant internal monologue, fit for an audio voice-over of my life at any given moment.  I'm not thinking, I'm narrating.  It's bizarre, to say the least, but it's very much the truth.

So, does the idea of someone knowing my thoughts effect my writing?  Yes and no.

I'm fairly uncensored.  My opinions aren't going to change on paper simply because I'm afraid someone will see them.  I have no trouble accounting the events in my life and my thoughts on them with candor.  That much, at least, I can write for myself.

But my voice will always and forever be for the world, not just for me.  But perhaps that's not even something to lament- maybe it shows a generosity in me, wanting to give people beautiful words and phrasings like the ones I've had exposure to.  Maybe I'm doing others a kindness, with very little cost to myself.

The Biggest Question

You're supposed to write about what you know.  Or at least that's what they say.  I'm not even sure where that old adage comes from, if it's a quote from some great author or just an observation by someone once upon a time.  But still, that's what you're supposed to do.

Only I don't.

Sure, I try.  It's easy to be given a topic and to rattle off words about what I think I know about it.  But sometimes I stop my writing and realize... I don't know anything.  I don't have any real life experience.

I've never fallen in love and been loved in return.  I've only left the country once (twice, if you count Canada, but I barely do).  I've never been in a life-threatening experience or witnessed something that changed my mindset or found hope through religion.  Hell, I don't like parties or meeting most new people or even stepping out of my comfort zone.  When it comes down to it, everything I "know" I've learned from someone else.  Characters live for me- in movies and novels and plays.  They make mistakes that I won't have to, make me think of how I would react to situations I'll never be put into, and becoming more emotionally attached to certain fictional people than I am to many I know in real life.  Through the characters I learn and experience and understand.

Sometimes I question whether this is a cowardly way to live or if it's somehow far more enriching than my middle class suburban life will ever be.  Either way I'll probably never stop.  I'll keep using them, and writing as though I know the things they know.

And, in a way, don't I?