i still don't really stop and think about the am, i just say me or i. sometimes i hear the haunting reminder but i honestly just laugh about it.
i have never been one for conforming to "the rules" just because someone made it so. for instance, not a fan of caps. maybe its lazy typing (i also do not type with the "right" fingers on the "right" keys) but i think its much more an aesthetics thing. i like the way the lower case letters look. except in a few people's handwriting that is all caps - and i envy it. weird i know!
but i never liked all the rules that went along with writing. i think that's a big part why i didn't pursue a career (paid at least!) in writing. the rules always took away the pleasure of the expression, the art of writing...
in the beginning of my dream internship at an advertising agency, the creative director told me that "..." was not to be used in advertising. it wasn't good. period. i could have quit right then but there are actually some rules i follow.
so, i use the "..." and did in my various work beyond there, but, i wasn't going to quit my internship on the spot, or not follow through with my degree....i just wasn't necessarily going to be doing anything related to it for a career...
i obviously use more than needed commas, or so i have been told. but i write as i think and i need to denote a pause somehow, when i pause for thought. maybe it's cocky.
i like changing spelling of words to suit my fancy, shorten words (again maybe laziness but maybe aesthetics....) and on the rare occasion i have enjoyed (making) a word longer. hott. "(it's) so hott (it) got an extra t"...kerry. (www.kerrykrenzin.com)
i specifically like adding/using k's, x's, and words with z's. k because my name starts with a k, and most people will never ever ever remember that. i once got a note on a self-addressed envelope addressed to "cori". and even in emails when using my email that has my name in it, still - dear cori. i like x's and z's because they're just not used enough. and they're "hard" letters. if you don't get that i don't know what to tell you. it made my first sighting of zzyzx road very very exciting. well, that and something else. i really pretty much wish i could live on that street. if it wasn't in the middle of nowhere. would just be a bad ass address.
i don't know why/what differentiates my use of "..." versus "-" versus ",". they're all pauses. different kinds somehow.
i doubt i could ever be a legitimate paid writer, as i doubt i will ever conform to any writing style out of a text/hand book. not to pat myself on the back, but i could count on one hand the number of non "A" papers i got throughout my whole life, mostly because the few that were not, were very impactful for reasons much greater than the grade itself). furthermore i took a variety of writing courses from creative writing to journalism, copy writing, scriptwriting, copy editing, press writing, and so on, and seemingly did so well enough. i just "abhorred" the rules. that "abhorred" is a quirky reference to my father, also a "writer". he, i think, thrives on those rules? (i just LOL'd remembering some funny moments. and i would NEVER use LOL like that had it not been a hank moody reference. i doubt you're keeping up with me. whoever YOU are...)
CAPS. for yelling or VERY very important emphasizing. (changed emphasis to emphasizing to get in a z....)
so, i apologize now, and likely only now, for my abhorring grammar, spelling errors (which i promise you is almost always intentional as i always spell check...), lowercase letters, abbreviations, extra punctuation and such. i hope, you can read past that, and read just simply what i write, the content, the words, and not be too concerned with all the rules...
i came across this seth godin blog recently and i think it nicely applies here....
Interpreting criticism
Check out this letter from the publisher of a magazine you've never heard of to the founder of a little magazine called Readers Digest:
But, personally, I don't see how you will be able to get enough subscribers to support it. It is expensive for its size. It isn't illustrated... I have my doubts about the undertaking as a publishing venture.
Of course, he was right--given his assumptions. And that's the except part.
Criticism of your idea is usually based on assumptions about the world as it is. Jackson Pollock could never have made it as an painter in the world as it was. And Harry Potter was rejected by just about everyone because for it to succeed the way kids read would have to change.
The useful element of this sort of criticism isn't that the fact that people embracing the status quo don't like your idea. Of course they don't. The interesting question is: what about the world as it is would have to change for your idea to be important?
In the case of Readers Digest, the key thing that changed was the makeup of who was reading magazines. Most of the people (and it was a lot of people) who subscribed to the Digest didn't read other magazines. And so comparing to other magazines made no sense, except to say, "this is so different from other magazines, the only way you're going to succeed is by selling it to millions of people who don't read those magazines." And Starbucks had no chance if they were going to focus on the sort of person who bought coffee at Dunkin Donuts or a diner, and the iPad couldn't possibly succeed if people were content to use computers the way they were already using them.
Keep that in mind the next time a gatekeeper or successful tastemaker explains why you're going to fail.
No comments:
Post a Comment