This post is probably more for myself than for anybody else, considering that I have a total of six whole people who actually read my fiction (and almost none of them end up at my blog), but perhaps this will serve some potential use in the future should I acquire any devout followers (oops, letting the grandeur get to me again!). As I've stated in the introduction to my book, Adolescence, I absolutely despise the thought that I could be revising again and again continuously until the end of my life. I want to reach an absolute end on my projects, although I want to do so while allowing readers to experience each step of the process (I, for one, know that I prefer some of my earlier drafts over some of my later ones despite their less practiced voice and skill). To that end, I've decided only to revise any given piece so many times. If you have picked up Adolescence on some Kindle or equivalent app, you'll have noticed that the end of the book features earlier drafts of the included stories which are all distinguished by a letter ranking. "Fairy Glasses A" is an example, and is also the first version of that story I wrote.
I've come to the decision to simply reach "Z" and end it. If I can't figure it out in twenty-six copies, it's not going to be figured out. I might break the rule (in which case I will move into lower case letters, ex: "Aa") as I get a better grasp on the personal grammar and spelling I'm working out for myself, but any structural changes will cease at Version Z. I doubt, however, that many stories or poems will ever reach that number of rewrites. There's a point where I just have to draw the line and say: "No, this is how it canonically happened."
That out of the way, I'll use this post to explain how I'm going to be handling the print editions of my books: I'm not. Not exactly, anyways. It doesn't seem likely that Adolescence will see print in its current form, mainly because in order to deliver the same experience, I'd have to release the book in full color to accomodate the photographs and sketches. I've decided to do something different with print and will be releasing a time-to-time collection called "Welcome to the Multiverse." This collection will be numbered using the same comic-styled box I use to number 2-Bit Comics, and each book will be printed in pure black and white at approximately 150 pages to the issue. Actually, you'll be seeing Glitch the Gaming Gremlin show up much more frequently than he has been since the closing of 2-Bit, primarily as a sort of gatekeeper for my printed works. Interesting, because it's so far from his original intended purpose as a gaming gremlin. I don't know if I should try to work him back in that direction or not. On the one hand, I could reform this blandly-titled blog back into 2-Bit, but I mean, I already ended that chapter prematurely and should probably just deal with it. If I change up my title and url every year, bad things are going to happen to my viewership. My focus is also much more broad now than I had intended it to be with 2-Bit (which was strictly going to be gaming originally). Granted, I still do talk about games an awful lot, but the focus and intent of my blog has changed to strictly being... me. The blog is to be about me, about what I do, about what I like, and about being a window into my soul (for my eyes are empty and lifeless.)
(I'm working out this new thing with parantheticals which I just came up with during the post. See, I don't understand the difference between quotation marks and parentheses. They serve almost the same purpose, although they indicate different actions and tones. As such, it makes sense to me that their uses should be grammatically identical [I'm attempting to streamline the language in a hierarchy of characters.] However, my previous form had been to end sentences after the parantheticals had closed. I realized this is not true of dialogue, where the sentence is ended within the marks. As such, I am modifying the behavior of my other parenthetical symbols to match dialogue behavior. The process might be rocky, and I haven't worked it all out yet.
(For example, you'll notice that paragraph became rather long so I ended it openly and started this one with a fresh paranthesis, just like one would with dialogue quotes. My original reasoning for ending the sentence after the parenthesis was for instances where a parenthetical was used in the middle of a sentence or at the end of a phrase which would be separated from a following remark by a comma. It made more sense to me if that comma were on the outside of the entire parenthetical phrase, and it seems that such form has made sense to a number of other individuals. However, I now see the benefits [aesthetically and functionally] of having such marks within the parantheses. I also see the faults I had originally thought of. It seems that I may have to rethink my treatment of dialogue quotes as paranthetical units, though I think I will try out modified comma placements instead. Considering it now, though, commas within paranthesis will look messy and screw with the flow of a phrase. I'm so confused as to how to handle such things. Perhaps I will have to amalgamize my previous thoughts. Humorously, I believe I will eventually evolve into the already set standard I sought to improve upon in the first place. Only time will tell, I suppose.
(For the time I believe I shall consider dialogue a distinct matter, as I am none too keen on including the comma after the quotation marks. I suppose it makes sense when considering it as replacement for a period, which is not done when using other parentheticals. That does, though, beg the question of why do we not use commas within parentheses to end that statement? Oh, so confusing to me. I'm also wondering whether I could avoid this mess by using the em-dash for mid-sentence tangents. Of course, following an em-dash with a comma would be ridiculous, and I'd still have to set apart one portion of the sentence from the first. Briefly I liked having found a solution to the question "Em, comma, or parantheses?", but alas, I found only more mess.
(Of course each letter does not behave in a uniform fashion either. Perhaps it makes the most sense, to myself, to apply special rules to each side-denoting character and simply live with that. Of course, I still have to figure out a rule for when to use a comma or when to use an em-dash, as in the last sentence. Such a maze, our language is.)
That was a much longer tangent than intended. Dear readers, that is perhaps your first glimpse into my habit of monologuing to help myself reach an understanding about something. I will not remove it or make it more brief because, as stated above, this blog is for the defining of myself, and I feel that little exercise a perfectly good demonstration of just what that means. For those curious, yes, you have seen similar self-discussions in the Mystery Man stories, and will continue such in the future.
I think this post has gone on well long enough. Enjoy your midnight, kiddies, and hopefully I'll manage to catch up on my serials before retiring for the evening.
(Seriously need to get this balance of work and play under control...)
