For those of you who thought I would break my streak, in the words of former president Calvin Coolidge, "You lose." That said, these are all remnants unworthy of being turned into posts of their own:
- Re. the FTC blogger crackdown: The way I understand the rules, I don't have to disclose any book I don't specifically get from a publisher or author for the purpose of reviewing on this blog. But I think I'm going to try massively over-disclosing for a while, so the FTC gets bored and go away. (Joke!) You probably don't care whether I got a book from BookMooch or as a birthday present or from the library, but maybe you do. Also, despite what some bloggers who have gotten thousands of dollars of freebies have whined, it's not that hard.
- Don't you hate it when the lyrics of the song you're listening to have a very glaring grammatical error in them, the type that rankles every time you listen to it? I'm thinking of one in particular where making it correct would not affect the rhyme scheme or melody at all, but fill in your own example. (ETA: This is exactly the one I was talking about.)
- I strongly feel there should be a term for a superhero's sole weakness that is not his/her/its Kryptonite or Achilles' heel. Even in metaphor I find those too specific. If you prefer, put it like this: Imagine you are taking superheroes with a group with no knowledge of the Trojan War and only the most basic knowledge of Superman -- how do you address this? Surely there is a lexicon.
- Speaking of creating words, I don't normally get indignant about nouns that have been converted into verbs, but I have to call out Markus Zusak's THE BOOK THIEF for this sentence: "Every night, Liesel would nightmare." Was it really necessary to use that over "have a nightmare"? At some point an editor must have said "Hey, just because this book was a best-seller in Australia doesn't mean we need to let it run rampant over the rules of grammar." (So saith a person who uses the word "unbooken" regularly.)
