A quick blog sparked by two things. First (and I hesitate to write this because putting it on paper commits me to follow through on it), I decided at last to start on a sequel to The Figurehead. That doesn’t appear until May, so that gives me time to get ahead of the game. I also thought it might help me to keep track of exactly how I go about writing a novel and how long the various phases take. So today I went to the library and got out three books on the history of Aberdeen in the 19th century to refresh my memory about it all and maybe give me a few clues as to where the novel will take me. I already have the main characters. This is the start of the search for what they get up to, who gets killed, whether anyone falls in love with anyone else (and admits it), and so on. So I guess this is the beginning of the research phase. (The books are on the desk unopened. Tonight there’s a football match on TV, so today doesn’t count.)The second spark came as I was about to leave for the library. A company for which I write commercial stuff phoned then sent me a document asking for ideas on a specific training programme. I won’t name the creators of the document but it was written in the type of English that has become prevalent under New Labour in the UK. It’s language designed not to say something but to hide it in order that they can duck responsibility for any information that might accidentally be conveyed. Here’s a taster:
“The materials for each module will directly relate to and be interspersed with web-based exercises or reflective interaction. Therefore, it is envisaged that a mini-series of visual materials will be used to enhance each module. The voiceovers or visual materials with each visual subsection will prompt the viewer to undertake the web-based components and acknowledge their return to the next instalment of the visual material. Reference to the correct web-based section will be used to create an overall impression of a journey through the module.”
There were three pages of this (although the full document apparently ran to thirty-two pages). I’ve collected many such examples of confused and confusing emptiness from commercial (and, tragically, academic) sources over the years and I’ll put some of them in a blog soon. I’m sharing this with you so that you’ll understand why I sometimes question the whole process of evolution. This was written by someone in charge of supplying training services, in other words an educator and communicator. He (I bet it’s a he) should be strapped to a chair and have these words soaked in vinegar (or worse) and fed to him as a sort of verbal porridge – preferably up his nostrils (decorum prevents me from articulating alternative routes to his digestive system).
Wot. You, decorum?
ReplyDeleteAmen.
ReplyDeleteYes, Michael, decorum. Between you and me, it's a sly way of implying things even more disgusting than those I might invent. I just leave it to the reader to supply the extremes - some will resort to the feather, others to the whole chicken. Notice, for example, that Linda prefers a liturgical solution. Thank you Linda for helping to raise the tone.
ReplyDeleteYour example is typical, perhaps even mild, compared to some of the abortions I saw in years of IT Consulting.
ReplyDeleteWhat I noticed was, the larger the organisation, the more likely it was to produce this trash.
I agree Gary. The real sadness is when academics perpetuate the garbage. They ought to know better.
ReplyDeleteOh my eyes, my eyes!!!! My brain....It reminded me of my MBA studies....And I already felt a bit down after holidays...thanks for this! :)
ReplyDeleteActually, Bill, I was trying more for subtlety. Something those organizations who write all the garbage don't seem to understand... Maybe it's because the word "subtle" does not appear in their dictionary?
ReplyDeleteMBA Studies - yes, Scary, I can imagine that they'd be jam packed with such terminology. Now just give your eyes a quick rinse in witch hazel and your brain a few sloshes of Sauvignon blanc and you'll feel fine again.
ReplyDeleteLinda, you mean they have a dictionary? Amazing. I bet it's not like any of the ones I have on my shelf. And I did understand your comment - I just used it to take the chance of impressing Michael again with a big word.
Sounds like everything written by a supervisor or aspiring in our government!
ReplyDeleteHow did the game go?
Bill, Glad I could assist with the impressing. (Is he someone IMPORTANT? Should I try impressing him?)
ReplyDeleteMartie - the game went goal-less for 90+ minutes, then the opposing team scored, all of which caused me to use rather intemperate language, I'm afraid.
ReplyDeleteLinda, Michael is a friend, an excellent poet and a novelist. So far, his novels haven't appeared but they will. He also writes a very funny blog called May Contain Nuts. But he's frequently impressed by my long words.
Good luck researching and writing your sequel to The Figurehead. I agree that it's good to get a head start. I hope the Figurehead does well.
ReplyDeleteThanks Theresa. You're right, the 'head start' theory is to be commended - but it also has to be implemented, and that's where my sloth may have a say.
ReplyDeleteDoes the buck take precedence over decorum? I'd like to ask that of a fellow novelist who writes copy for big Pharma.
ReplyDeleteAh Jean, now that depends on which of the possible meanings of 'buck' is involved - as in 'the buck stops here' or buck as unit of currency or some obscure but no doubt eminently explicable allusion to the habits of deer. But the Pharma reference is, of course, the key and all I can say is that yes, I do accept the tainted buck but I defend absolutely my right to say that I should be ashamed of so doing. (On the other hand, how many novelists make a living out of their fiction?)
ReplyDelete