53 Comments

#1 lacks clarity. #2 is clear.

Expand full comment
Apr 10, 2023Liked by Terry Freedman

Nice work here

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, David

Expand full comment

"Aforementioned." Ugh.

Yours is better. Who is the editor of these selections you've posted? Needs a bit of a talk, I think.

Expand full comment
author

You've put your finger on it, Mark: I couldn't quite work out why I didn't like the published version despite the fact that it was hardly different from my original. it's that ghastly word: so impersonal

Expand full comment
Apr 9, 2023Liked by Terry Freedman

I experience either-or posts (from anyone) similar to being at the eye doctor's when the tech is flipping back and forth between two lens strengths asking, "Which is clearer? This one? Or this one?" over and over. I break into a flop sweat, and my mind goes blank. The pressure in these situations is just too great! Which do I prefer? I don't knooooooow! 😩🤣 Let's just say yours are always better and leave it at that, shall we? 😁😂

Expand full comment
author

I know what you mean, Kerri! And thanks for the vote of confidence. 😂 But no need to get into a cold sweat: these 'tests' are extremely low stakes!

Expand full comment
Apr 7, 2023Liked by Terry Freedman

This time I prefer yours. Just reads better. There was no need to edit at all.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, Ehud. Well that's what I thought, but I may be slightly biased 😃

Expand full comment

I prefer the unpublished one, primarily for the ending, which took out any distance from writer and reader.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks,Renee. Yes, that's a good way of putting it!

Expand full comment

Oh, I forgot to say, as a student I greatly appreciate these posts with pointed questions that help me learn.

Expand full comment
author

Great! Thanks, Renee 😀

Expand full comment

I love these 'compare and contrast' review posts, Terry! This time the published version isn't all that different from your unedited one yet I prefer yours, because you're expressing disappointment which you have clearly actually felt, rather than - in the published version - just stating that something has been 'let down' by 'pointless inclusion'. I feel the published version shows you as an active participant in the reading of the book, whereas the edited version has, well, edited you out...!

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, Rebecca. I think you've hit the nail on the head there. I do try to make my reviews personal in the sense that I'm not just ChatGPT summarising something.

Just out of interest, WHY do you love these posts? My aim in doing them is to help people think about how small changes can have big effects when it comes to writing. My hope is that writers will find them useful.

Expand full comment

I like these posts because I learn so much by challenging myself (no: by being challenged by you!) to consider differences between two pieces of writing - it's a really good thing to ask questions of writing, of writers, or indeed my own thoughts. I'm learning a tonne, Terry!

Expand full comment
author

Brilliant! Thanks, Rebecca. I think quite often a change in just one word can make all the difference to the tone of a piece.

Expand full comment
Apr 5, 2023Liked by Terry Freedman

I prefer the original because it is more direct about Stephen King and the disappointment of the maps being included — and is therefore more complete.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, Louis. That's kind of what I thought. The published version seems to me to play down the maps comment.

Expand full comment

Yes, I was kinda blindsided by the map comment in the original. Took me by surprise a bit, whereas in your original I got a sense of what you thought before the final comment.

Expand full comment
Apr 7, 2023Liked by Terry Freedman

I just reread them and maybe that's not true about the map comment as it comes at the same moment, but somehow that's what I felt when reading them.

Expand full comment
author

I know what you mean, Nathan. When I read the published version I thought at first that the maps comment at the end had come out of the blue, and that there had been no previous mention of the maps.

Expand full comment

Peregrinations???!!!

Expand full comment

I had to google that word.

Expand full comment
author

Chortle 😁

Expand full comment
author

'Under the impression,' said Mr. Micawber, 'that your peregrinations in this metropolis have not as yet been extensive, and that you might have some difficulty in penetrating the arcana of the Modern Babylon in the direction of the City Road, - in short,' said Mr. Micawber, in another burst of confidence, 'that you might lose yourself - I shall be happy to call this evening, and install you in the knowledge of the nearest way.'

Expand full comment

Ah!

Expand full comment
author

From David Copperfield, by Chas Dickens :-)

Expand full comment

There are some lovely editions now of Dickens.

Expand full comment
author

Oh, I haven't looked.

Expand full comment

You must!

Expand full comment

I shall be commencing upon a season on Dickens - eventually.

Expand full comment
author

Me too. I've dipped in, and love some of some of them, like Bleak House, Hard Times and, indubitably, David Copperfield because of Mr Micawber

Expand full comment

12 quid - does look like a good book though.

Expand full comment
author

I enjoyed reading it. It's a great book for dipping into.

Expand full comment

The first - the tone is more intimate - not in a creepy way mind you!

Expand full comment
author

<Strikes Marple off Xmas card list>. Thanks, that's interesting. I don't think either version is especially intimate :-)

Expand full comment

Wrong again - the first version has a warm tone whereas the second does not.

Expand full comment
author

Well ain't that just dandy. I don't do warm tones on a Wednesday.

Expand full comment

I reckon that heights of pointlessness is just plain incorrect and therefore alienating. But I had to think about it!

Expand full comment
author

😂

Expand full comment