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

Sure, the UG has place for pieces like this. Trouble is, UG entries are pretty much singletons, and don't link to any others. They stand by themselves, and they don't really lend themselves to being part of a larget body of work. If this was in the EG, on the other hand, it would be reachable/linkable from more places, catalogued in many more places, and generally more visible. Entries like this that have content that could be put into the EG are much more valuable there than in the UG. One shouldn't just be content with "having a place for" - one should aim to make sure that the place is warm and nice and has large windows to let the readers in.

in my very humble and generally disregarded opinion

~ db

Well in that case, maybe we are kicking on the wrong door.

Maybe we should be encouraging polishers to put links to other guide entries into UG entries, or to put in references if they do not want to put links into the body of the text.

Maybe we should be asking the Italics to include UG entries in the entries which can be linked to by EG entries.

Maybe we should be working on archiving and promoting the UG better.

Maybe we should be concentrating on improving the UG rather than the EG?

Btw, db, are you a Miner yet? You sure should be.

Ben

you're right. perhaps we _are_ kicking down the wrong door. i don't understand the situation yet, so my participation in all this is an attempt to understand it. let's hope something useful comes of it.

~ db

PS: kitboyes, my apologies for having hijacked your review thread

Yeah, it struck me that some of the things said here deserve a larger audience.

And I am a great believer in dealing with concrete examples rather than abstracts, so this is a good one to work with. Perhaps there IS an argument for putting it into PR as a test-case, and pointing the PRers to this thread.

Kiteboys, no only am I sorry for hijacking your thread for this debate, but I am sorry that we are proposing to baptize you in fire. But you are a Big Strong Grownup, and I am sure you'd find the process - er - interesting.

Ben

this thread has been brought to the attention of the PROD "factions" here: F2111414?thread=643760&post=7049884#p7050039

~ db

>> Btw, db, are you a Miner yet? You sure should be.

nope. don't think i can honestly commit to that with all the school work. but yes, it'd be interesting.

Well ask the sheep to let you in, you can at least join the Yahoo group.

Ben

sheep?

Jodan

Gee, y'know, call me a dreamer, but I was really hoping there were enough threads for the PROD debate without it coming to AWW. I clicked to come comment on the HST piece (which I find... oh, hell, what difference does that make?!?!) and voila! Another page of PROD debate.

Oh me, oh my.

m

*hangs head in shame*



Ben

Ben

m

What a very fine piece of writing this is. Really evocative.

Thanks for posting it.

Thanks all for your comments, it's good to know someone is reading, and and I wouldn't be worried about hi-jacking my thread. Though having said that, m, I'd be interested to hear what you were going to say about HST, before PROD interupted.

I've given the peice a quick edit, but no doubt missed a fair few typos, please those who saw them before, do let me know what they were.

As far as the PROD discussion goes, I'm not sure sending Odi et Amo to peer review is a good idea. In a fit of displacement activity from my upcoming orthopaedics exam, I did read the writing guidelines, though not of course until after I'd written the peice. You can tell I read them from the way I sent it to the underguide. Not that I'm too sure what I need to do to make it into the underguide, but that's cause I've been too much reading orthopaedics instead of the web .

I think this article breaches (inter probably alia) the guidelines;

- Fill in the gaps - There are already at least 5 guide entries about Hunter S Thompson. (I have now listed 4 of these in footnotes).
- Write in your own style rather than that of Douglas Adams - as several of you quite rightly say, the article is written in a poor imitation of Hunter's style.
- Try to make your entry balanced - er, sorry Tom Wolfe.
- Don't try too hard to be funny - well, I did loose a couple of the worse puns, but...
- Write Entries of appropriate length - doh! it's way too long.
- Write about subjects that can be verified - even if I don't need my practising certificate anymore, I'm still hoping the first person narrative parts are NOT verifiable.
- Avoid writing in the first person - er, whoops.
- Try to use good spelling and grammar - er, damn.
- Oh, and apparently you're not supposed to put anything in here that is published elsewhere - I picked Odi et Amo off the shelf - I'd sent it Auckland University Student magazine Craccum in March, and it wasn't used, so I thought I wasn't going to break that rule - but typically, this Monday, after I post it to h2g2, Craccum went and published it too (5 months after Hunter's death) - so I've now blown that guideline as well.

So, I'm quite happy to send this to peer review if you like (I'm sure I can take the abuse), but I think it's pointless unless it could actually make the guide, and I'm guessing, given the number of guidelines it bent, this article will never make the guide proper. Though if you disagree I'm happy to submit it.

Time permitting, in the next couple of weeks I'll post a test drive report of the Morris Marina on the underguide (similar mix of fact and stupidity to this article), a review of Bernal Diaz' history (pushing the borders of what might be acceptable for the guide) and some straight and serious stuff Wikipaedia would consider too dry.

Thanks for your comments all,

Kit.

P.S. I was going to say that some really good writing which pushed the guidelines envelope can get through, cause a very funny short history of America has just been put up. But then I saw who wrote it .

Hi Kit

My pleasure. I liked your approach to 'the bizarre and mind-bending story of the Good Doctor' very much. Having been a... well, I hesitate to say fan, and I don't want to claim discipleship, and... OK, having been a dedicated reader of HST since before the numerical demise of the 60s, Ive always been intrigued by others' takes on the guy.

I think I may give him a bit more credit as a 'writer' than you do, but it's clear you (your character?) drew a fair amount of inspiration from 'the mad b*****d' nonetheless!

(And I love the fact that you seem to have gone nine for nine on the Writing Guidelines! That alone is worth a 'let's drink to that!')

As for suitability for EG, well, these days, who knows. I'm inclined to say, "Nope, no way, forget about it, you gotta be kidding," but as I actually did say, these days, who knows?

If it were me, especially given the piece has now been set in ink in the dark and dangerous world of print publications, I wouldn't try to run that gauntlet. (There are, after all, far more rewarding gauntlets to run, if you're inclined to that sort of punishment! Especially if you have a few drinks first.)

All that being said, if you choose to make a go of it, I'll be happy to read the piece again with both the Writering and PR Guidelines in mind and help out any way I can.

If, on the other hand, you'll be just as happy with my pointing to a few minor grammar / syntax / punctuation bits for your consideration, just give me a little time to gather them together and my suggestions will be on their way to you.

To bring this full circle, Kit, good work -- a great approach to an interesting (now isn't that banal?) subject! Thanks for a good read.


m

I think it's a shoe-in for the UnderGuide, anyway. I'd bet folding money on it, , but would be accused of insider knowledge, so I won't!



B

Thanks all for your kind words. Please do send lists of corrections and thoughts - (including on a macro level - I think the implied criticism that the article fails to cover the qualities of HST's writing - apart from sensationalism - that made famous is quite valid).

Cheers,

Kit.

OK Kit... here's a note on 'nits' with no implied commentary on content (except maybe in the one or two places where I've slipped in a word of my own choosing as I offered fixes for syntactic mysteries. )

I hope this is a clear way to do this - I couldn't think of a better methodology.

---------

Just in general throughout: I believe the Guidelines call for single quotes (sometimes called ‘inverted commas’ for some reason which remains only slightly comprehensible to me) in almost all circumstances. Unfortunately, as my Internet connection is down as I write this, I can’t check to be sure. In case I forget to check before I pass this along to you... well... check.

Also, the eds may try to get you to put quote marks in your Author/Pete dialogue. I disagree, but it would be hard to fight for it on any technical basis.

------------------------------------


The flash of moon white flesh. Somewhere behind palm trees.
-> moon-white

FORE yelled Pete and sliced another ball into the grass a dozen feet away.
-> FORE, yelled Pete as he sliced another…
or
-> FORE, yelled Pete, slicing another…

Graduation was over. Well over. It was coming on for 4am.
-> …coming on 4am. (do you need the ‘for’?)

Pete hadn't wanted to get changed in case it interrupted his drinking.
-> Pete hadn't wanted to get changed. It might interrupt his drinking. (Just an option)

write about the Hells Angels, he had to be the hack beaten up by them.
-> …the hack they beat up.

Hawaii, without proclaiming himself the locals returned God Lono.
-> locals’

FORE yelled Pete.
-> FORE, yelled Pete.

Of course Hunter loathed mainstream media.
-> Of course, Hunter loathed mainstream media.

He must have hated to see them becoming him.
-> He must have hated to see them trying to become him. (Just an option)

You're getting any closer I suggested, helpfully.
-> You’re not getting any closer…
or
-> You’re getting closer

Not that me and Pete gave a stuff about the history of gonzo journalism.
-> Not that Pete or I Pete gave a stuff...

We only cared Hunter was outrageous. And funny. And cool.
-> We only cared that Hunter was...

We were just like every responsible 22 year old that way.
-> (I think ‘22 year old’ needs some hyphenation but I can’t remember what)

You had the same mixed admiration for Thompson, one reviewer wrote, as you'd feel for a streaker at Queen Victoria's funeral.
-> (Single quotes around quoted material)

-> FORE, yelled Pete.

A self publicising recluse.
-> A self-publicising recluse.

There was silence, then pane meet pavement.
-> …then pane met pavement.

In 1965 he spent a year hanging out with some bikers.
-> He spent 1965 hanging out with some bikers.

…covered the 72 election, demonising Richard Nixon - a man he said, so crooked…
-> covered the ’72 . . . a man, he said, so crooked...

He was strafed by teh USAF.
-> the USAF

As others round hit the ground, HST stood proud
-> As others around him

Hunter's muse was often inspired, and equally often swallowed or injected;
-> (I’m a little stuck here with lack of parallel: inspired / swallowed or injected. I’ll give it more thought.)

Hunter became less prolific and increasingly less coherent. Arguably he has not written a couple of pages worth reading since 1975.
-> (If you go for the Edited Guide, be careful here; many would disagree with these statements and that, I fear, would make it ‘opinion rather than fact’)

And for 30 years Hunter retreated to become the self publicising recluse, emerging occasionally to fend off drugs, firearms or sex related charges to complain about Bill Murray’s bio-flick Where the Buffalo Roam, or his cartoonisation as Uncle Duke in Doonesbury.
-> (I’m not sure he actually was in the act of retreating for 30 years)
-> …self-publicising...
-> …sex-related...

A month ago, at Owl farm, Hunter S Thompson shot
-> In February 2005, at Owl…
(I know it was ‘a month ago in terms’ of your narrative, but this section is already ‘removed’ somewhat from the narrative and so should probably impart a usable time reference)

Hunter was the Sheriff candidate of the Freakpower party;
-> Hunter was the Freakpower Party’s candidate for sheriff;

Hunter's last column was promoting his invention of 'golf cross' – cross with clay pidgeons that is:- competitors shoot at each others balls.
-> Hunter's last column was a screed promoting his invention of 'golf cross' – an unlike combination of golf and skeet shooting in which one competitor hits a golf ball and his opponent attempts to knock it out of the air with a shotgun blast. (Just a suggestion. or something like that)

A police search of his property found a page long list of different sorts of illicit drugs.
-> Police compiled a page-long list of the different illicit drugs found in their search of his property. (Or something – the point is, they didn’t find a list, they found drugs and listed them.)

And now the pretence of impartiality has disappeared the weaknesses of Thompson’s instant history stand out – the sensationalism, the ego driven personalising, the aching liberties remodelling reality to fit the peoples’ fickle interest. The shaky camera work, the scripted stutters - what you see tonight on news-lite or news like ads was all present years ago, when Hunter rewrote history to sell his experience with the Angels.

-> And now that the pretence of impartiality has disappeared, the weaknesses of Thompson’s instant history stand out – the sensationalism, the ego-driven personalising, the aching liberties remodelling reality to fit the peoples’ fickle interest. The shaky camera work, the scripted stutters - what you see tonight on ‘news-lite’ or news-like ads was all present years ago, when Hunter rewrote history to sell his experience with the Angels.

Thompson spent the last weeks of his life semi-psychotic, talking conspiracies, death and suicide.
-> (Did he? I hadn’t heard this.)

Course he spent most of the rest of his life like that to.
-> ‘Course, he spent the rest of his life like that, too. (or: Of course, he…)

Thompson’s new young wife was speaking to him on the phone at the time.
-> (I haven’t read this anywhere else either.)

Hi there Kit, and all you readers and reviewers!

It's great to see something of this fine quality on h2g2, and getting a good response in the workshop!

I don't have time to say much more than that I really like it; stylish and informative.

I haven't even had time to read the 2nd half!!!

Well, I will definitely get round to it.

May i just say that I love the fact that the footnotes alone are greater in length and perhaps fuller in content than many a worthy entry in full. Respect to that!

I'm no connoisseur of hst, myself, but this piece works for me, even with my minimal knowledge of the inspiration. And indeed, all the more so, in some ways, as I know more now than I did before I came to it.

Which I guess is why there is some suggestion that it could end up in the EG.

I don't think it will in the near future; like Ben I think the *UG* is specifically there as an outlet for this kind of quality writing on the site.

well, I'm actually just sposed to be writing a '15 words or fewer' comment before popping off to bed with my dearly beloved - did I go over?

Once again, great to see this kind of convo about this kind of writing here in the AWW, . Long may it continue.

ta-ta
spiff

Thanks for that, it wa a big help - thoughts under, as you can see I'm adopting about half your changes, thinking about a quarter, and rejecting mostly the "that"s and quote marks - feel free to disagree or make any comments.

The flash of moon white flesh. Somewhere behind palm trees.
-> moon-white

Definite improvement, thanks.

FORE yelled Pete and sliced another ball into the grass a dozen feet away.
-> FORE, yelled Pete as he sliced another…
or
-> FORE, yelled Pete, slicing another…

Still thinking - I thinking ',slicing another' may be best.

Graduation was over. Well over. It was coming on for 4am.
-> …coming on 4am. (do you need the ‘for’?)

Nah i'm keeping that, both for sense and the repeated sound.

Pete hadn't wanted to get changed in case it interrupted his drinking.
-> Pete hadn't wanted to get changed. It might interrupt his drinking. (Just an option)

Two scentences sounds reasonable. May alter your suggestion slightly.

write about the Hells Angels, he had to be the hack beaten up by them.
-> …the hack they beat up.

short is good. Whole para may get a work over.

Hawaii, without proclaiming himself the locals returned God Lono.
-> locals’

My bad.

FORE yelled Pete.
-> FORE, yelled Pete.

,, ,,

Of course Hunter loathed mainstream media.
-> Of course, Hunter loathed mainstream media.

Not sure, I have a nasty habit of using commas, -s, brackets et C essentially as pauses, and I dunno if that scentence needs a pause. Also not sure i like "Of course"

He must have hated to see them becoming him.
-> He must have hated to see them trying to become him. (Just an option)

Will have a think about that scentence.

You're getting any closer I suggested, helpfully.
-> You’re not getting any closer…
or
-> You’re getting closer

My typo. I'll loose the "any".

Not that me and Pete gave a stuff about the history of gonzo journalism.
-> Not that Pete or I Pete gave a stuff...

I'll claim it's the narrator who has bad grammar and keep it as it is .

We only cared Hunter was outrageous. And funny. And cool.
-> We only cared that Hunter was...

It's just that I don't like thats - sorry, I think that I'll write that without that .

We were just like every responsible 22 year old that way.
-> (I think ‘22 year old’ needs some hyphenation but I can’t remember what)

I think you're right. Neither can I .

You had the same mixed admiration for Thompson, one reviewer wrote, as you'd feel for a streaker at Queen Victoria's funeral.
-> (Single quotes around quoted material)


Hmmm, fell quotes clutter the page unless needed for sense, so tend to avoid them where the sense is obvious - yes, guide editorial policy ids very different.

-> FORE, yelled Pete.

Okay.

A self publicising recluse.
-> A self-publicising recluse.

Why? (no really, I'm curious, not knocking).

There was silence, then pane meet pavement.
-> …then pane met pavement.

@#$%^&* I'd meant to fix that typo .

In 1965 he spent a year hanging out with some bikers.
-> He spent 1965 hanging out with some bikers.

Much better. May have to alter, as bits of it were 66; am trying to fact check.

…covered the 72 election, demonising Richard Nixon - a man he said, so crooked…
-> covered the ’72 . . . a man, he said, so crooked...

Fair enough, will add.

He was strafed by teh USAF.
-> the USAF

Thanks, also wondering whether enough people know what the USAF is, or whether I should say American aircraft or something.

As others round hit the ground, HST stood proud
-> As others around him

Yours is technically more correct, but read the two out loud.

Hunter's muse was often inspired, and equally often swallowed or injected;
-> (I’m a little stuck here with lack of parallel: inspired / swallowed or injected. I’ll give it more thought.)

Inspired means inhaled, or breathed in; but is this usuage too obscure & medical? Pun is fairly groan worthy anyhow. Dunno, should it saty or should it go?

Hunter became less prolific and increasingly less coherent. Arguably he has not written a couple of pages worth reading since 1975.
-> (If you go for the Edited Guide, be careful here; many would disagree with these statements and that, I fear, would make it ‘opinion rather than fact’)

yeah, hence "Arguably". May increase "a couple".

And for 30 years Hunter retreated to become the self publicising recluse, emerging occasionally to fend off drugs, firearms or sex related charges to complain about Bill Murray’s bio-flick Where the Buffalo Roam, or his cartoonisation as Uncle Duke in Doonesbury.
-> (I’m not sure he actually was in the act of retreating for 30 years)
-> …self-publicising...
-> …sex-related...

Okay, remeber where in the style of HST, so exaggeration and hyperbole will be included.

Retreat is an exageration. He became a lot less prolific between 1975 and the last decade, but had picked up his output again, so this isn't entirely fair. Which doesn't mean to say I'll necessarily change it.

Recluse is an exaggeration - well he certainly chased people off his property and refused to see people within ordinary business hours.

Sex related. Entirely accurate. HST was (unsuccesfully) charged and wrote at length about the court case. In fact I think from memory firearms could be inaccurate - I think it was explosives.

A month ago, at Owl farm, Hunter S Thompson shot
-> In February 2005, at Owl…
(I know it was ‘a month ago in terms’ of your narrative, but this section is already ‘removed’ somewhat from the narrative and so should probably impart a usable time reference)

Sorry, my bad - I wrote this a month after the event, when it wasn't published. Should have up dated this the same time I removed most of the New Zealand reader specific references. (N.B. do you have any issues with the ones I left in? "Thanks Lion Red" I'm guessing makes no sense to non kiwis, and the central Auckland geography will be confusing - like you won't know what kinetic sculpture the ball hit - or that the golfers must have been standing beside a pair of gigantic cannon - but I'm hoping this won't make too much difference.

Hunter was the Sheriff candidate of the Freakpower party;
-> Hunter was the Freakpower Party’s candidate for sheriff;

That would be better English, but I need the weirdness at the end - will think of possible rewrites.

Hunter's last column was promoting his invention of 'golf cross' – cross with clay pidgeons that is:- competitors shoot at each others balls.
-> Hunter's last column was a screed promoting his invention of 'golf cross' – an unlike combination of golf and skeet shooting in which one competitor hits a golf ball and his opponent attempts to knock it out of the air with a shotgun blast. (Just a suggestion. or something like that)

Well the pun really should go, even Benny Hill would wince. Not sure an extended explanation is the answer.

A police search of his property found a page long list of different sorts of illicit drugs.
-> Police compiled a page-long list of the different illicit drugs found in their search of his property. (Or something – the point is, they didn’t find a list, they found drugs and listed them.)

Okay, it needs imporvement, wil have a think.

And now the pretence of impartiality has disappeared the weaknesses of Thompson’s instant history stand out – the sensationalism, the ego driven personalising, the aching liberties remodelling reality to fit the peoples’ fickle interest. The shaky camera work, the scripted stutters - what you see tonight on news-lite or news like ads was all present years ago, when Hunter rewrote history to sell his experience with the Angels.

-> And now that the pretence of impartiality has disappeared, the weaknesses of Thompson’s instant history stand out – the sensationalism, the ego-driven personalising, the aching liberties remodelling reality to fit the peoples’ fickle interest. The shaky camera work, the scripted stutters - what you see tonight on ‘news-lite’ or news-like ads was all present years ago, when Hunter rewrote history to sell his experience with the Angels.

Hmm, I'm not adding the "that". I really neee to losing aching - and anthropromorphisng would be more accurate than personalising, but has way too many syllables. Um, will have a think.

Thompson spent the last weeks of his life semi-psychotic, talking conspiracies, death and suicide.
-> (Did he? I hadn’t heard this.)

No, hyperbole and exaggeration again. Press coverage indicates he at least mentioned all three.

Course he spent most of the rest of his life like that to.
-> ‘Course, he spent the rest of his life like that, too. (or: Of course, he…)

Must be a better word that "course".

Thompson’s new young wife was speaking to him on the phone at the time.
-> (I haven’t read this anywhere else either.)

Actually her own story has been rather inconsistent - due to her confusion rather than dishonesty. On my bet guess interpretation, (and running on memory of what I read in the days after), she was talking to HST, he said an unusual goodbye, she heard typewriting, a click, which didn't sound like a phone, and the line stayed open, she thought he'd just not hung up, but when hearing from his son that the shot was very quiet, decided it may have been the shot she heard. Can dig out and flick accounts from the interviews she gave. Suggest "his young wife has said..."

Thanks once again for taking the time to edit, that was really helpful .