Tag Archives: literature

Hatefully Addicted: George R.R. Martin

Yes.  I hate you, George R.R. Martin.

You write the longest damn novels I have ever seen.  Novels that are filled with more death, destruction, and despair than I have ever cared to expose myself to.  There is no hope to be found.  Anywhere.  You kill off my favorite characters with wild abandon like it’s your most favorite thing in the world to do.  Your writing is borderline pornographic in places; and if I have to read one more sentence about a glistening manhood, I am going to have to gouge my eyes out with a comb just like Oedipus Rex.

But I don’t hate you for any of those reasons.

I hate you because I am masochistically addicted to your porn-filled-despairing-death novels.   And because you have somehow brainwashed half the country into encouraging me to read and finish your terribly long book series.

Tell me something.  How does one write a seven-volume series comprised of 1000+ page novels?  Moreover, how does one publish three 1000+ novels in four years?* Your dedication, it is crazy.

Reading your novels is like climbing Mt. Everest barefoot, wearing a swimsuit, and carrying a rabid squirrel: impossibly long, difficult, torturous, and frustrating.

But I will continue to do so until this series ends.   Because sometimes I finish what I start.  And because I enjoy commiserating with my literary-minded friends who have also read the books.

That’s your legacy, Mr. Martin.  You’ve made a series that brings people together to talk about how frustrated they are with you.  You’ve taken the phrase “rock bottom” to new lows.  It’s nearly admirable how you lavish your characters with misfortune.

Are you brilliant? Absolutely.  You’ve weaving a complicated story with a ton of characters.  Dedicated?  Yes.   Hardworking? Obviously.

But I just cannot like your books.   Which is a problem because I am honor bound to finish them.   And I have to find out what happens to Arya Stark.

Probably death at the jaws of her own direwolf.  That seems like something that would happen.

*Martin published the first three novels of the A Song of Ice and Fire series in 1996, 1999, and 2000.  I don’t even know how he published two of them in two years.  He must have lived off of coffee beans and distilled caffeine to have the time to write that much.

Advertisements

I Am Not the Grammar Police

I’m normally really chill about grammar.  It’s a tough thing to learn, and my grammar’s not perfect (I like comma splices.  A lot.  And sentence fragments.), but there are still some things that really bug me.  But there is one that bothers me above all others.

Irregardless

….guys, this one is just ridiculous.  If something is “regardless,” it is without regard, i.e., it doesn’t matter.  Here’s how I remember it: regard-less.  Less than regard.

If something is “irregardless” it is without less than regard.  Ir is a prefix that means “without” or “not.”  “Irregardless” does not mean “regardless,” and they are not interchangeable.  Does that mean “irregardless” has regard?  Can “ir” before “regardless” be constituted as a double negative that somehow makes “irregardless” mean that you care a whole, whole lot?

“Irregardless” is redundant.  And it frustrates me.  Can we stop using it? Please?  It’s wrong, and it makes me want to become the grammar police, and that’s not my job.

Regardless (see what I did there), I might just have to learn to deal with it.

But if you use “irregardless,” and you’re just an acquaintance, I won’t correct you.  I will silently judge you from my place atop my grammar high-horse.

Or, if you use it enough, I might throw an angry cat at your face.

Just kidding.  Maybe.

UPDATE:  I figured it out.

Why you guys like “irregardless” so much.  It’s because of “irrelevant.”  It’s got to be.   “Irrelevant” is a correct “ir” prefix attached to the root word “relevant.”  “Relevant” means “to be important, to matter.”   “Irrelevant” means “to be unimportant.”

The two words “relevant” and “regardless” sound sort of similar, I guess?  And since the “ir” rule works with one, I figure that language intuition (which is a thing that happens with native speakers–you get to a place where you can basically just feel your way around grammar and be mostly correct) says that you can use “ir” with regardless, too.

The problem with that is that you already have a suffix (“less”) with “regardless” that negates the root word “regard.”  So the “ir” is unnecessary.  But that apparently doesn’t always register.

“Irregardless” is still wrong, and I will probably still have to throw angry cats, but….at least I know why it’s so blatantly used?