About
This site is a little project that lets me make fun of some things and sense of others. I use it to think a little more relationally without resorting to doing actual math.Subscribe
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
Categories
- 5×7
- arrogance
- BOOK!
- booze
- brands
- communication
- consumption
- creeps
- crime
- easter bunny
- ego
- ethics
- excuses
- expectations
- experience
- faith
- family
- fashion
- finances
- friends
- gum
- halloween
- hipsters
- inequality
- kids
- language
- love
- men
- moderation
- monsters
- music
- optimism
- orthodontics
- pain
- parties
- patience
- perception
- philosophy
- politics
- pop culture
- queens
- santa
- school
- sickness
- snobs
- snuggling
- sports
- standards
- stress
- success
- technology
- television
- tooth fairy
- travel
- Uncategorized
- value
- virginity
- weight
- women
- work
- xenophobia









I would say Harry Potter is not on that line
Is that because the author hasn’t read much good material, but the books are well written? Or, because the author is well read, and still the books are poorly written?
What are your definitions of well written or poorly written? Good/bad stories, good/bad form, good/bad technique or style?
Note, I haven’t read any of them, nor have seen the movies. Regardless of the hype, I’m not that into witchcraft.
And I would direct you to this card: http://photo.cobundle.com/image/22545-card2376
May I post this on the wall of my classroom?
Very true. *nods* I’ve been following you for ages by RSS feed, by the way, and really enjoy your often wicked smart and funny insights! :-)
Why are there always comments on these posts made hours before it comes to my mailbox?
if only the authors understood that…
Thank you Jessica! It’s often taken for literary snobbery, but so far I’ve seen it proved true.
A good graphic is worth a thousand words. Love it!
It’s hard to believe that good writing would not be good reading.
It makes sense. Yet if one reads a lot and their writing is horrible, are they the odd ball out?
*nods* also. I definitely agree with this, but my husband is definitely an “odd ball out” here. He never reads (almost cause of divorce when discovered after the wedding :)), but he is an excellent writer. He’s also very intelligent…something I thought was only achieved through reading. Hmmm…he did read all of his texts in high school and college. Does that count?
Ah. Only after reading the comments did I understand what this card means. And I agree, too.
Guess I’ll have to read cards more often to better understand them.
Most likely, but as in anything, there’s exceptions.
A good one. Might also work with the axes reversed.
Being well read doesn’t make a good writer. Just like being a good writer doesn’t make a great speaker. Different parts of the brain utilized for associated, but clearly different tasks.