Came back and had a sudden energy slump.  Randomly cast my eye over 2011′s NaNoWrioMo novel. Should really go through it – I can feel the jar of the bits that need fleshing out and editing, but on the whole I like it, and actually enjoy reading it.

A friend suggested I had a National Novel Editing Month, where I could take my novel and focus on editing it for a month in the same lighthearted way I approached NaNoWriMo itself – see it as practice for the fun of it and see what happens.

Perhaps this year I should have a ‘NaNoEdMo’ in November instead, if I can cope with not writing another novel.  Part of me wants to write the sequel – last year’s is actually set up to be a series, or at least a trilogy, which was rather daring of me!  Alternatively I could take another month and label it NaNoEdMo but that would take away from writing and editing my main book…hmmm.

Food for thought, though.

Update:

Apparently there is a NaNoEdMo.  Designated month is March.  Yeech.  March is pretty busy for me…but I’ll bear it in mind. http://www.nanoedmo.net/ (@NaNoEdMo)

I SAVE THE CARDS that people send me over the years – a medley of them are scurried away in old shoeboxes. Every now and then I shuffle through them and remember forgotten stories.

One I never forget is a card sent to me by my friend in Canada – on the front it says I like you.  On the inside it says You’re not a poopy head.  The thought of it always makes me grin.  Ha!  I have proof!  I am not a poopy head! (It seems you really can get cards for any occasion).

Sometimes we need to be told that we’re okay.  That we’re liked.  That we haven’t messed up beyond all measure.  That we’re not total failures or lost causes or just plain silly.  That we’re not poopy heads.  That God never gives up on us.

So that’s my word for you today: whatever you may feel, you’re liked.  You’re loved.

You are not  a poopy head.

Cracking up and complaining

I fractured a rib for Christmas. Please, no cracker jokes. I had flu, which led to a violent cough, which led to a cracked rib. I didn’t know that was possible – well, you learn something new every Christmas, right? So, what did I do, when feverish with flu, choking with coughing, and rupturing ribs? (Not precisely accurate medically speaking, but allows for a nice bit of alliteration.) I felt the need to…tweet. Well, more specifically, grumble. Since poor hubby was ill too, grumbling at each other got a bit boring, so I hurled it into cyberspace. I tweeted. Groan, moan, OW. Not entirely content with this, I did it on Facebook too. Fishing for sympathy? But of course. I won’t deny it. My serene, elegant, uncomplaining side went offline for a while. The most vigorous complaining was reserved for my closest friends who got – wait for it – texted about it.

Comforting and Commiserating

The responses arrived on my Smartphone (I was unable to cope with computer) and were suitably soothing. Yes, it helped. When you’re stuck inside feeling horrible and ill and disgusting and can’t even speak, the power of social media takes on a different side. Be it through social media sites, or email, or simply text messaging, there is a sense that no, you’re not alone, yes, there is still a world out there, and people are rooting for you. It struck me (in the very tiny part of my brain that wasn’t grumbling) that we have so many tools for comforting those who feel isolated by illness. The digital world opens up a whole arena of communication which is especially helpful for those who feel unable to cope with phone calls or visits, their energy simply not allowing for it. A tweet, a text message, an email can lift someone’s spirits without asking anything of them. Too ill to talk to me? That’s okay. I’m just letting you know I’m here.

Communication Cop Outs?

But this won’t help everyone. For some, a text message or a tweet is a cop out. For them, they need the one to one contact. What about those who aren’t on Facebook or Twitter, who rarely text? It’s a world full of opportunity and inclusiveness – but ironically it can get horribly exclusive. Do we save our comfort and companionship just for those who are easily reached on our devices? Do we neglect those who are not part of this happy digital ‘community’? So we never get round to – dare I say it – writing a letter or a card to someone who would deeply, desperately appreciate it in a world of 140 characters or less?

Every coin has two sides. So as disciples – digi or otherwise – I believe we need to pray for discernment. Discernment to know when to use social media and when to use our own hands and feet. Understanding that while some find it the most helpful thing, others will find it the least helpful thing.  Often, a mixture of both works well. We adapt our language and behaviour with everyone in our lives.

This is not a new thing.  We’re all unique, after all.

Closed Doors

Some people won’t complain at all. They’ll keep so quiet we don’t know how much they’re hurting. They’re not going to tweet about it, post it on Facebook, or even volunteer it in casual conversation. We need to make an effort to get to know them – really know them - for ourselves. In a world where so much information is volunteered, pushed in our faces even, let’s remember those who cannot even find the words to say how they feel.

To think about:

• In what ways do you find social media helpful when life is difficult?
• Is it a valid aspect of pastoral care – if so, how and when do we use it?
• Have we neglected those outside of our digital community?
• What is appropriate to share in this way?  Where are the boundaries?

***

One thing I didn’t mention in the original post is the idea of  blogging as therapy and a form of sharing.  I think the last question has particular relevance here.  What do we share on our blogs?  What should remain private? (See also  an old entry called ‘blogging with care‘).

THIS COMMENTARY is volume 18B of the Word Biblical Commentary series.  It is the third in a sequence looking at Job, and focuses on the dialogue between Job and Yahweh himself.  I have not had the chance to look at the first two, so am unable to comment on those.

Firstly I should say that reviewing a commentary is slightly different from reviewing other types of book.  You won’t read them from front to back (certainly not with a technical commentary such as this), and people will have differing preferences as to the types of commentaries they read.

WBC commentaries are not everyone’s cup of tea, although I like to use them.  They are copiously detailed and have some heavily academic elements.  However, they are divided into sections which allow the reader to select the approach they find most helpful. Clines’ commentary uses the standard WBC framework, and for each section it gives first a bibliography, then the author’s translation, then notes (on the translation), then a section on  Form/Structure/Setting, then a detailed comment section which digs into the text in detail and considers its meaning.  It sums up with an explanation section, which is a handy overview to what has gone before and is probably the most accessible.

Despite being a scholarly volume, from what I have read it does not seem dry – Clines has a helpful, accessible tone.  It’s also good if you love digging into the biblical text and get irritated when less detailed commentaries fail to satisfy your curiosity.

As a thorough, in-depth commentary I’m not sure you could beat it – it contains an awe-inspiring if slightly daunting bibliography section, indexes of authors mentioned as well as word-related indexes.

If you really want to get to grips with this part of Job, want to know what scholars say about it and enjoy digging deep, you may well want to check this out.

I received this book free from the publisher through the BookSneeze®.com <http://BookSneeze®.com> book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. 

The ‘taking wing on the night’ cracks me up.  And the cloudy lemonade, of course. Can’t remember when I last saw a tambourine, though.

Alas!  this video has been removed. .. sorry!  

EARLIER TODAY I was dispatching some emails as part of my role in co-editing an issue of Magnet Magazine (which comes out next year).  After writing one email pointing out what needed to be done and why, I had a moment where I got up, removed my editor’s hat and re-read it.  I had to laugh.  I went through and softened it a little.  It was so…editorish.  Which is a good thing; after all, I am an editor.  But I felt the need to temper it slightly because I am a writer too – and I know what it’s like from the other side.

I’m finding the whole experience enormously illuminating.  It doesn’t matter how much people reassure you that editors are human and don’t have fangs, there’s nothing like becoming one to get a real sense of understanding.  So as an editor and writer I can say:

• Editors want the best for their magazine. That’s why they keep tweaking at things. They want it to be good  and to fit with the rest of the magazine – in style and in relation to the rest of the content. They have guidelines they have to stick to, limits on what they can use. They haveto make difficult decisions.

• Editors want the best from you. If someone gets back to you and asks you to amend your article – this is a really positive response.  They want to use your work and they want it to work for them – and their publication.

• It really, really, really isn’t personal. Criticism of your work is not criticism of you.  In fact, if an editor points out potential problems, they’re doing you a huge favour.  They don’t need to do this.  When you can bear it, read through their comments and learn from them.  By telling you what they want, they are actually showing respect for you.

• Editors are people. They get overwhelmed and overwrought.  They have lots to juggle.  They are not carbon copies of each other.  They have different personalities and assorted characters.  They can be easy going or awkward, kind or careless.  Much like anyone.  Including writers.

If you are a writer and the opportunity comes up for you to get some editorial experience, I’d say – grab it.  Not only does it help you understand how the process works, it helps you understand the people behind the process.  Understanding lessens our fears and anxieties and helps us cope with criticism and rejection of our work. ( Note I say of our work - not us.  In fact, I think we need a better word – rejection does sound so very personal.  Anyone up for inventing a new bit of vocab so that we can think of the whole process more positively?)

So – swap hats once in a while.  It’s refreshing and can make the other easier to wear.

It cites a list of terms (and situations) that cannot be used in inspirational romance novels (Steeple Hill Women’s Fiction) from Harlequin publishers (USA). (Now, I should say first of all that these are supposedly CBA guidelines, not Harlequin, who publish a whole variety of imprints.) I don’t write Christian fiction, but my NaNoWriMo novel would surely fall foul of the censors anyway.  I’m sure my heroine may have said something along the lines of “gosh” on occasion.  Yes, “gosh” is out, as is “heck” and “golly”.  Neither can you talk about bishops.  Backside or derriere if necessary (!) but never buttocks, and certainly no undergarments. Even more bizarre are the situations in which ‘Christian characters’ cannot be involved e.g. waltzing cheek to cheek.

Sheesh (that one is allowed, apparently).

Let me quote:

Bodily functions, like going to the bathroom, should be mentioned as little as possible and some euphemism may be necessary but we don’t want to sound quaint or absurd.

Er.  Too late on the absurdity front, I think.

I should add that I can’t actually find this on the Harlequin website now – have they taken it down?   The closest I could find was this page, which states (in relation to its ‘Love Inspired’ range):

Because Love Inspired sells to both CBA and ABA bookstores, we must adhere to CBA conventions. The stories may not include alcohol consumption by Christian characters, card playing, gambling or games of chance (including raffles), explicit scatological terms, hero and heroine remaining overnight together alone, Halloween celebrations, magic or the mention of intimate body parts. Lying is also problematic in the CBA market and characters who are Christian should avoid lying or deceiving others. Exceptions can be made but must be approved by an editor.

Trying to find CBA guidelines (conventions?) proved unfruitful, although I did hit upon this post at christianwriters.com in which the author (“Contrary Texan”) relates an email exchange with Eric Grimm, who is CBA Manager of Strategic Partnership.  He  said:

CBA is a trade association and does not publish or sell books. We also do not create or publish any guidelines about creative content…The idea that there is some censorship body that controls content in Christian publishing is incorrect…

I suggest you read the whole post to get the drift, and then come back and explain it to me, please.  The plot thickens, certainly.  Gosh, you might say.

This is what happens when you research a blog post as you go along!  What was meant as an eyebrow-raise over a list of allowed terms has become a ‘who controls what’ kind of question. Are the Trade Associations* casting a shadow over the publishers?  Or are the publishers making assumptions?  Or…is it the buyer who is driving the whole thing? Is it purely a USA issue?

Discuss.

***

*The whole Trade Association thing has got me thinking of Star Wars, now. Yes, I know that should be federation…

After removing it from my smoothie bottle, I tried it out on various friends around the house.    

But…winning the who-it-fits-best is this little wooden owl.

Okay, so it drapes over his head quite a lot, but he is rather timid. He now has a hat to keep him warm through the winter.

Woot!  As they say.

I’VE DECIDED to read the New Testament in a year.  The Greek New Testament.  It should increase my familiarity with it,
plus it gives me a framework to revise my Greek, which helps.  It’s quite funny hearing me do it, though.  Yes, I did say hearing. I tend to translate aloud.  Even if it’s a quiet muttering.  I’ve decided to go with the flow as much as possible and not stop constantly to look things up – absorbing the language as I go.  Since I’m using my (supremely stroke-able) Reader’s Edition of the UBS, there is a running dictionary at the bottom of the page with less common words, so that works well for me.

However, when I’m muttering (a mixture of the Greek and my attempts at English equivalents) I tend to increase volume when I hit a word I’m really familiar with.  Hence I end up sounding something like this: mutter mutter mutter THE TREE! mutter mutter BEHOLD! mutter mutter SON OF GOD! ….mutter etc.

Hopefully by the end of the year, I’ll be doing a lot of yelling!

Related Posts

Book Review: Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament

Lost in Translation?