Another new "Black Stallion" book by Steve Farley is coming out next summer. I've been a loyal fan of Alec and the Black since I first discovered the books at age 9, which was 40 years ago (no, I don't care who knows how old I am.) But Steve Farley's last book as he attempts to follow in his father's footsteps, "The Black Stallion and the Shape Shifter," was just WEIRD, and the plot of this book as outlined on Amazon sounds even weirder. (Alec and the Black find themselves about to be sacrificed to flesh-eating mares in a city lost in time???)
Why does Steve Farley write weird fantasy plots? His father did a science-fiction plot in "The Island Stallion Races," and he himself got into weird fantasy in "The Black Stallion's Ghost" (Alec lost in the swamp in Florida, and were his encounters with this weird Kovi just hallucinations or real? That book creeped me out as a 1o-year-old and to this day it's one of my least favorite of the senior Mr. Farley's books) and "The Black Stallion Legend," which was just bizarre. I would rather read more traditional horse stories involving Alec and the Black, not weird fantasy tales that are totally improbable and off the wall.
That being said, I will, of course, be dumb enough to buy this book and add it to my collection simply because it is a Black Stallion book, but I have a strong feeling I'm not gonna like this one any more than I did "Shape Shifter." Please, Steve, write a book that is more plausible and less science-fictioney (did I just make up a word?)
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Sorry, I have to be grammar cop here
It drives me crazy to hear people say "in regards to" or "with regards to." The correct phrase is "in regard to" or "with regard to," singular, no "s" on the end.
And please, remember the apostrophe does NOT mean something is plural. The plural of "Smith" is "Smiths," NOT "Smith's." The plural of dog is "dogs," NOT "dog's." Etc.
Thank you. I feel better now.
And please, remember the apostrophe does NOT mean something is plural. The plural of "Smith" is "Smiths," NOT "Smith's." The plural of dog is "dogs," NOT "dog's." Etc.
Thank you. I feel better now.
Leave NPR alone!!
Ever since Juan Williams was so ridiculously fired by NPR for comments that were taken out of context (the people who run NPR can now challenge the people who took Miss California's crown away from her for "hypocrites of the year"), there has been a loud outcry for NPR (as well as PBS) to be defunded. There is a loud cry as well by people who seem to think NPR is a "left-wing commie network" that shouldn't even be on the air in the first place. My admittedly disgusted reaction to this is - have these people even bothered to LISTEN to NPR???
I don't approve of the way Juan Williams was fired or even THAT he was fired - taking comments out of context, and then insinuating the man needs to see a psychiatrist, is totally appalling. As I said, the people who made this decision are hypocrites who were obviously looking for an excuse to fire Mr. Williams because he (gasp) does commentary for FOX News. (Which proves FOX News is fair and balanced, because he's extremely liberal in his viewpoints, and they have him on regularly and allow him to have his say, along with other liberals like Bob Bechtel.)
But the NPR network itself is hardly as terrible as the people who seem to want it, not just defunded, but taken completely off the air, would think. Very little of NPR's programming is even political in nature at all. Most of it is "slice of life" stories, "Americana" stories, "everyday lives" stories.
In recent weeks, I have heard - Scott Simon interview Michael Caine on "Weekend Edition" about Caine's life and career - Scott Simon also interviewed Laura Hillenbrand, who wrote the book about Seabiscuit a few years ago, about Zenyatta - A story was done about Mark Twain's autobiography being published this year 100 years after his death, as he had requested - Alan Alda was interviewed about his career and his famous dad Robert Alda - "Storycorps" on Friday mornings is simply Americans talking about their ordinary lives - "Science Friday" has something for anyone who is interested in any form of science, from stories about trying to find a cure for diabetes to stories about the Mars Rover, the Hubble Telescope, etc. - "Car Talk" on the weekends features the always entertaining brothers Tom and Ray giving advice on car repairs with a generous dose of humor - the game show "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" is fun to listen to - "A Prairie Home Companion" features Garrison Keillor's wonderful and humorous tales of "my hometown, Lake Woebegone, where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average."
Yes, some of the programming on NPR is political, and leans left. Diane Rehm on Fridays does her "weekly news roundup", usually with a panel of liberal commentators, and Diane herself is obviously liberal judging from her own comments. But so what? I'm a conservative bordering on libertarianism, but I don't think a radio network should not be allowed to have liberal commentary or liberal talk-show hosts! I listen to Diane Rehm's show, and most of the time her subject matter isn't political at all, and when she DOES have political topics, I'm capable of listening to her liberal point of view, even though I'm a conservative, without thinking she or the network should be taken off the air! There is room on the radio airwaves for BOTH a Rush Limbaugh AND a Diane Rehm.
Point is - NPR's programming is about 90% NOT political in nature. The vast majority of their programming has nothing to do with politics and is, to me at least, very interesting and mentally stimulating to listen to. Should the network be defunded? Well, when we are so deeply in debt as a country, and we need to cut spending wherever possible, the answer is probably "yes." But should NPR be taken off the air because they're "liberal," as some conservatives are angrily demanding? My answer is a resounding "no!" Not any more than FOX should be taken off the air for being conservative!!!
Leave NPR alone! Defund it if we must (if they have to sell commercials to stay on the air, so be it), but stop criticizing it for being something it's not.
I don't approve of the way Juan Williams was fired or even THAT he was fired - taking comments out of context, and then insinuating the man needs to see a psychiatrist, is totally appalling. As I said, the people who made this decision are hypocrites who were obviously looking for an excuse to fire Mr. Williams because he (gasp) does commentary for FOX News. (Which proves FOX News is fair and balanced, because he's extremely liberal in his viewpoints, and they have him on regularly and allow him to have his say, along with other liberals like Bob Bechtel.)
But the NPR network itself is hardly as terrible as the people who seem to want it, not just defunded, but taken completely off the air, would think. Very little of NPR's programming is even political in nature at all. Most of it is "slice of life" stories, "Americana" stories, "everyday lives" stories.
In recent weeks, I have heard - Scott Simon interview Michael Caine on "Weekend Edition" about Caine's life and career - Scott Simon also interviewed Laura Hillenbrand, who wrote the book about Seabiscuit a few years ago, about Zenyatta - A story was done about Mark Twain's autobiography being published this year 100 years after his death, as he had requested - Alan Alda was interviewed about his career and his famous dad Robert Alda - "Storycorps" on Friday mornings is simply Americans talking about their ordinary lives - "Science Friday" has something for anyone who is interested in any form of science, from stories about trying to find a cure for diabetes to stories about the Mars Rover, the Hubble Telescope, etc. - "Car Talk" on the weekends features the always entertaining brothers Tom and Ray giving advice on car repairs with a generous dose of humor - the game show "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" is fun to listen to - "A Prairie Home Companion" features Garrison Keillor's wonderful and humorous tales of "my hometown, Lake Woebegone, where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average."
Yes, some of the programming on NPR is political, and leans left. Diane Rehm on Fridays does her "weekly news roundup", usually with a panel of liberal commentators, and Diane herself is obviously liberal judging from her own comments. But so what? I'm a conservative bordering on libertarianism, but I don't think a radio network should not be allowed to have liberal commentary or liberal talk-show hosts! I listen to Diane Rehm's show, and most of the time her subject matter isn't political at all, and when she DOES have political topics, I'm capable of listening to her liberal point of view, even though I'm a conservative, without thinking she or the network should be taken off the air! There is room on the radio airwaves for BOTH a Rush Limbaugh AND a Diane Rehm.
Point is - NPR's programming is about 90% NOT political in nature. The vast majority of their programming has nothing to do with politics and is, to me at least, very interesting and mentally stimulating to listen to. Should the network be defunded? Well, when we are so deeply in debt as a country, and we need to cut spending wherever possible, the answer is probably "yes." But should NPR be taken off the air because they're "liberal," as some conservatives are angrily demanding? My answer is a resounding "no!" Not any more than FOX should be taken off the air for being conservative!!!
Leave NPR alone! Defund it if we must (if they have to sell commercials to stay on the air, so be it), but stop criticizing it for being something it's not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)