No, I'm not married! Good grief, what are you thinking?!?
Nope. Two years ago today, I started blogging on Blogger. But the blog wasn't The Lair of the Silver Fox, the blog you're reading now. No, it was a blog with a slightly different, usually-edgier tone called David'Z RantZ, the blog I "retired" in March of last year.
I'd actually begun David'Z RantZ in late 2003, truth be told, on a hosting site called Diaryland. In time, however, the mental & emotional demands of my last Crappy Day Job took their toll on my creative energy, and I ended up going for months at a time without a new post! Finally, sick of saying that "This isn't what I want to do when I grow up," I decided to ignore all the warnings about the crashing economy and cut the dinghy loose. I left the financial security of that Crappy Day Job and plunged headlong into an up-and-down career as a "real" writer. The writing gigs pay very well... when I get them. Sometimes, I've been able to spend like a drunken sailor. Other times, I'm damned glad I got the part-time job that my doctor insisted on, in order to get me off of my... umm... chair... once in a while.
(Why'd I move from Diaryland to Blogger? I wanted to add all those annoying little co-op ads you see here and there on my blogs. And boy, did it pay off! In the last two years, I've raked in nearly fifteen dollars!)
But enough about me. Let's talk about... me!
David'Z RantZ, as I said, had a different slant than the blog you're reading now. With one major exception, there were no stories, per se. Mostly "rantz," except for the occasional tribute to a celebrity who'd died. It was generally humorous. I often wrote with a voice which was not quite my own, one which took the minor annoyances of life and blew them way out of proportion. Kind of like Andy Rooney on speed.
David'Z RantZ had a few regular readers, but it wasn't until I started what I call my "Foxyblog" and (eventually) got involved with Theme Thursday that my readership really increased. I often feel that a lot of my current readers missed out on some really good RantZ, if I do say so myself.
So, for today and the next six days, I'll be posting what I pompously call "The Best of David'Z RantZ." I went through a list of all of my posts, picked out two dozen I was really pleased with, and trimmed that list down to seven. (Well, eight, really. I combined two of them which my comic book geek self wrote about Superman.) Where necessary, I've done the most minor of edits. This will also buy me another week in which I can hopefully come up with some new
posts for my Foxyblog.
posts for my Foxyblog.
Here goes, fellow babies...
* * * * *
You Can't Have It Both Ways
I understand and accept that the English language is a "living" language and, as such, is constantly being reinvented by those who use (or misuse) it on a day-to-day basis. So someday in the very near future, I expect grammarians to throw up their hands in collective surrender and say, "Fine! You want to make a word plural by adding an apostrophe 'S' instead of just an 'S?' Go ahead! That's the way you freakin' idiots have been doing it for the past few years anyway!"
But if you're going to change things, at least try to be consistent, willya?
Throughout most of my life, I've seen people write "mike" when they want to abbreviate "microphone." And in terms of what we laughingly call the "rules" by which the English language is governed, that spelling makes perfect sense. It rhymes with "like," "hike," "bike," etc. However, more and more, people are abbreviating "microphone" as "mic." That's wrong. Sorry, but I don't care if you're one of the increasing zillions who write it that way, but you're wrong. "Mic" should be pronounced "mick," as in "Mick Jagger." It should not rhyme with "mike."
Stop arguing with me! You're wrong! Shut up. Shut up! Will somebody shut off his mic? I mean, his mike? (That was my Bill O'Reilly impression, in case you're wondering.)
I've mentioned this annoying trend to at least one person who seemed to think it was merely the new way of doing things, and that it would soon be a universal practice, and that I should just get over it.
Okay, then riddle me this, Batman:
Another trend I've seen developing over the last few years, especially where internet usage is concerned, is the tendency for people to use the term "pic" (short for "picture") in lieu of "photo" or "photograph." I'm not sure why "photo" is suddenly finding such disfavor. Maybe with the advent of digital cameras, people don't think the term "photo" should be used unless film is specifically involved, kinda like the "CD" versus "album" argument I discussed here?
But I guess it doesn't matter, since "pic," of course, is pronounced "pike," so it rhymes with "like," "hike," "bike," and...
Oh, it isn't? Really? It's pronounced like... well, like "mic" ought to be pronounced?
Well, whattya know about that!
Like I said, folks. All I ask for is a little consistency. But I'm not holding my breath.
Thanks for your time.
* * * * *
Tomorrow: "Write On, Brother!"