Dave,The Homonym Ray Manticore made me wonder if you have read or are planning to read Alan Moore's Jerusalem?
Carson - No, as I've said before I really don't have time to read anything besides SDOAR research materials. Sandeep's reading it right now, hauling it back and forth to Waterloo on the bus, so the shoulder he has his satchel on is getting noticeably lower than the other one. I WAS tempted to borrow his copy of the book on Muhammad Ali/Malcolm X's interwoven lives. If I was going to read a book for entertainment primarily/edification secondarily it would be that one, hands down. Darrell Epp read JERUSALEM and told me, "It really picks up after page 840."RAVE full page front of the Arts & Life section in the NATIONAL POST for it. The reviewer was most of the way through and was already planning to re-read it. Evidently, his significant other said, "You're going to read it AGAIN?"
I'm almost at page 100. It's getting better.
Sandeep,LOL, you have a looooong way to go. Interested to hear what you think when you are done. My opinion was, Just go read Promethea, From Hell, and Dave's interview and you will get all of the same ideas in a much better package.
I liked the Woolly Mammoth.
Well, you got me to look up Jerusalem in the local library systems. It's either out or far from me. But there is a 49 disc audiobook version, if you want to go that way ;)Anyone know who does own the baby throwing page?
You can get it from audible.com so you don't have to fumble with the discs. If you are a monthly audible subscriber it would only be fifteen bucks.
Ibis - YOU CAN GET THE BABY-THROWING PAGE FROM audible.com FOR FIFTEEN BUCKS!?? WHOA! AWESOME!
Mmmm. Jerusalem for 15 bucks. Sorry for any confusion. I should have been clearer.
There's always this though:http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cerebus-as-Pope-Bless-My-Baby-Joke-Signed-art-by-Dave-Sim-/302188382992?hash=item465bd4cb10:g:zwkAAOSwMgdX0huq.
Okay, enough about Jerusalem (or, "Jerusalem"). Here are this week's suggested corrections (a lot of them!):Strip 2, sidebar, line 3: I think, because the force (speed) of gravity is a little over 32 feet per second, squared, you should insert a comma after "second" on line three.Strip 4, panel 2, balloon 3, line 2: The close quote marks should be before the period.Strip 4, panel 3, balloon 1, line 5: The close quote marks should be before the period.That's it. BTW, if approved, look for a CIH? strip from me (well, my idea, anyway) sometime in the next six months, or so.If not approved, well, then, I'll just tell you about it. Made me laugh, anyway.
I think that first suggestion is an unnecessary comma you're suggesting there, Jeff. I believe the actual scientific way of writing it out, if not saying "per second squared", is the way it is on the strip.Also, wouldn't the fourth panel's quote also need the close quote marks before the period as well, then?
Travis. No. Look at how I wrote it. Per second, squared. Per second, per second. Also, no, in the fourth panel, that's a complete sentence. The previous two are phrases. I see what you're saying, and I gave it thought when I was proofing, but it's a complete sentence.Also, not to rub it in, but I kinda won on the cover issue of issue #1 of CIH?. And, I don't mean I won the auction.
I may have been unclear on what I meant for the acceleration bit. I meant that no comma should be necessary in what is written in that strip. Looking further, I believe that since it is a unit of measurement, no commas should be necessary, regardless if you write it "feet per second squared" or "feet per second per second". Here's a link as to what the term actually means (although I still can't wrap my head around it. I used to know this stuff!): https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/what-does-per-second-per-second-mean.428250/And the Wikipedia too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_per_second_squaredI see what you mean with the quote marks, though. But I really have to question how you "won" on the word balloon for the cover of CIH? 1. Unless it appears differently on the actual cover than the image here (on the Jan. 13 post), "scary" and "pants" are boldfaced, which is an elegant (and comic-booky) (in a good way!) solution. It shows the stressing of those words, which is where the emphasis should be with that sentence. You wanted commas in there (as the comments on the October 23, 2016 post about CIH? 1 show), which isn't the same thing. Unless you changed your mind somewhere along the line that I'm not seeing, Dave and Sandeep didn't change it to what you suggested.
Actually, to be precise, you wanted A comma on the CIH? cover.And I just finally sounded out that "Wise Sieve..." word balloon in the one strip this week. D'oh!
That one took me a while, too, Trav. I say I "won" because, without the bold print or the comma, the caption just didn't "read" right. So, since they emboldened the two words, they were tacitly agreeing with my point.But, hey, we *all* win, right?
Hmm. I suppose I'll grant that they acknowledged that the "line read" was helped by emphasis, but because your solution was to include a pause that doesn't exist with this emphasis, I give you only partial credit, sir! 3/8ths of a point!
Hey, I'll take any percentage points I can get. In baseball, 3/8ths would make me a superstar!
Post a Comment