"The pictures had photographed her...."
What? Does that many any sense at all? What the hell does it mean?
Pictures don't photograph people. That kind of nonsense bothers me. It's bad writing. And it bothers me that a major publishing house spent good money to publish it, and a lot of readers are spending good money to buy it.
It should have said, "The photographs showed her..."
An easy fix.
I can't believe such gobbledygook got published. Don't they have copy editors? At least for the first page? And it's from HarperCollins, a major publishing house.
Unfortunately, this is fairly typical of major publishing houses these days.
This qualifies as Unbearable Crap.
(For those who want to know, here is the full Hangman line:
"The pictures had photographed her swollen, battered, and bruised--a puffy lip, two black eyes, a bloated and bright face."
So the rest of the sentence makes sense. And it distracts you from the nonsensical beginning.
BTW, the book is by Faye Kellerman.)
Copyright 2011 by Roger R. Angle
4 comments:
Roger, I love your new "concept!"
For the sake of good writing, ethical journalism, and intelligent readers, YOU MUST WRITE SOMETHING EVERY DAY!
Just a few sentences or short paragraphs to break down the crap.
Please!
Many editors don't edit, as they don't have time. When my book was published, my agent told me how lucky I was to get a close line edit.
Pray tell, what was the rest of that sentence?
Post a Comment