h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

In reply to Rita's #117:

Thanks for your support, first of all. I'm working on this entry... as well as pursuing life in various other ways. I'm actually getting help from a writer-friend, and I've got some ideas. I wanted to reply just now to something else you said.

"Still, it strikes me as quite ironic that Doug Adams' work wouldn't make the cut here either. There seems to be something uniquely disingenuous about that somehow and I suspect I'm not the only one uncomfortable with the insight."

I don't find it disingenuous, but I guess I can see why you'd say that. The thing is, this isn't intended to be the exact Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy described in the books. Adams himself didn't intend that. He decided that a dynamic, user-driven guide/online community was a good idea, and that such a thing was possible now that we have the internet. He didn't say anywhere that h2g2 should take the same tone as the guide in the books. It's still his project, and it's being pursued according to his vision, as far as we are able.

I think that should be made clearer somewhere, either in the Welcome pages, or in the FAQs, or in the Writing Guidelines, or something. Every now and then, I see the sentiment expressed that we're betraying Adams if we create something different from the guide he wrote novels about, but what we're creating here was *also* his idea.

Check out A550955, where Adams talks about the direction he was imagining h2g2 going. He was really thinking ahead, rather than staying within the confines of his earlier, fictional ideas. I'm pretty curious what you think of that, and I'm certainly happy to continue this discussion.


GTB

In reply to Paulie's #118:

Thanks for your good wishes, Paulie. Your suggestion about including Lil's writing as quotes is pretty close to my current idea. I'll keep you posted. If it seems to be a lot of time going by, feel free to keep tugging on my sleeve by posting in this thread.

Your answer is quite satisfactory. I didn't mean to imply that the Guide would have to follow Adams ca. 20 years ago certainly.

One thing I did notice though is that Adams uses the first person plural a lot. That's a big no no in Guide Style, so in a limited sense I think my criticism is justified. Clearly his style differs from the accepted one in that small respect and I don't find it in the least bit disturbing or distracting. What do you think?

Also, what do you think about my suggestion on how to handle this entry as a kind of a case study? Does that at all resemble what you were planning with your writer colleague?

Finally, in reply to Rita's #119:

Now that's a good idea! Actually, I'd like to expand on that, and instead of just writing an entry about why "Dancing on Tables..." wasn't accepted, write an entry pointing to a few examples of high-profile, popular entries that didn't make the cut, explanations why, and links to subsequent versions that *did* make the cut (where such versions exist). This has happened several times in the last few months of PR, and looking at those examples could be very instructive, as you suggest. I'm going to take this idea and see if I can't turn it into a Help Page.



Two examples that spring to mind are Ben's "Hellman's Anachronism" and "A Short Guide to Short Words". Ben, are you still subscribed here? Wanna collaborate on this? I could probably find old versions of the God entry, which was a while ago, but was a big deal at the time.... maybe Lucinda's "7-card *********", which was recent and precedent setting.



This idea is not, IMO, a replacement for using material from "Dancing on Tables..." in a potentially Edited Guide Entry. It's just another worthy project.

Spiff:

Most "Manual Linguists" are members of the deaf community like me. Manual Linquistics deals with sign as a natural language rather than just manual code for English or whatever language. I've studied it a little more because I tend to study things a little more that's all, but I use Ameslan mostly.

Does that explain it for you?

Simulpost there....

Regarding Adams writing style, I'm not sure what you're referring to. Do you mean he uses 'we' a lot in the entry I pointed you to? That one's not Edited Guide, but more along the lines of a Help Page, where it makes more sense to use 'we', IMO. Maybe I misunderstood you...

I addressed the case study idea in my last post... a great idea, worth developing and pursuing, but not as a replacement for a "How to be a Table Dancer" entry for Peer Review, which is higher on my to-do list.


GTB

No, you didn't misunderstand. We just disagree about style, that's all. &;D

A872787

I still haven't heard back from my writer friend, but I finally heard from some kind of muse or another at 5 o'clock this morning, and the result is at the above link. I'd like to know what you guys in this thread think of it. Lil's prose is unchanged, except for taking out the Alpha Centauri paragraph, and one more sentence where a transition was otherwise impossible.

Since they wouldn't take her original with an introduction merely tacked on the front, I tried interspersing paragraphs that add information throughout...

I'll shut up now and hear what others have to say. It's a draft; criticisms are totally welcome; I apologize for the delay.


GTB

Hi GTB, and Rita, and all,

I think this is very effective indeed. It renders the entry editable, imo, by balancing out the 'go girl' aspect of the original with some sound advice and useful circumstantial info.

And, as promised, all the bright original prose is there in all it's glory.

it works for me.
cya
spiff

I agree.

Since you've chosen to edit it as a narration together with dialogue, it might be appropriate to show it something like a playscript, don't you think? It's a very creative concept I think.

Hmm... That's a thought. It's already obvious that there are two distinct voices, and I think the script format would make more sense if we were recording a dialogue that had actually taken place, whereas this is a virtual one at best...

If I do it like "GTBacchus: [text]... Lilithcookie: [text]...", that probably wouldn't survive subediting. (Researcher names never do.) One difference between my text and hers is that mine's just copy, which they can edit the hell out of; I don't care. Hers is in blockquote format because we're trying to preserve her actual wording. If I put it in dialogue format, they'd be placed on equal footing, which isn't accurate, in my eyes.

Does that make sense?

I've submitted the new version to PR at F48874?thread=230481. If we could continue the discussion there, that'd be great. I'm still eager to hear from more of Lil's friends here, who've commented earlier in this thread.

GTB

It's just a naming convention really, don't you think? "Narrator" and "Veteran Table Dancer" might be appropriate. While it's clear there are two distinct voices the identity of the respective voices isn't exactly clear. I'm thinking people might ask where the other voice that seems to speak somewhat colloquially really comes from.

Indeed, people in Peer Review have begun asking just that. The solution I'm thinking of now is to footnote the first blockquoted paragraph, explaining where the quotes come from. When I've got something there, I'll let you know. Just now, I'm on the road, and probably not doing very much until Wednesday.

GTB