Discussion: What's Your Favorite Word Processing Program?

Photo credit: vkotis on Flickr

I am writing this post in Pages. This is normal for me, as I transitioned from writing posts in Word to writing posts in Pages sometime last fall. At the time it was mostly out of necessity—my new computer didn’t have Word and it was less expensive to buy Pages than to buy the whole of Microsoft Office.

After I was gifted with a copy of Office, however, I’d expected that I’d go back to my Word-using days and that would be the end of it.

Except it wasn’t.

I can’t fully explain why I still use Pages to write my blog posts. I tried switching back to Word, but it felt weird—the format was different, the posts looked different and I found I was more comfortable writing my posts in Pages, as I’d become accustomed to. However, while Pages has become my blog post writing go-to software, I don’t use it for novel writing or editing.

I’ve written a post on why Scrivener is awesome in the past, so I won’t reiterate the whole thing, but basically I’ve found that Scrivener is my favorite software for first draft writing and major plot structure changes, largely because of the cork board and daily writing goal features. As I start to get into critiques and more detailed edits, however, I switch over to Word.

Maybe there’s a commenting feature in Scrivener and I just haven’t found it, but Word is a pretty universal program and I have yet to find software to beat it’s commenting system. I love that I can color code my comments by CP and perhaps the habit-forming part of me doesn’t want to let go of Word after using it for years as my novel-writing software. I still translate all of my changes back to Scrivener (copy and paste is a beautiful thing), but for final edits, at least so far, I like to use Word.

So I’m weird and I switch around between Pages, Scrivener and Word, but now I want to hear from you: what word processing programs do you use, and which is your favorite? 

Discussion: Do You Like Book-to-Screen Adaptations?

Photo credit: *-mika-* on Flickr

Confession time: as well as being a book and word lover, I am a major movie fan. Particularly movies with stunning visual effects that transport you into a world where the impossible is possible and leave you wondering how those clearly impossible things on the screen looked so real.

As a fan of both books and movies, you would think that I would be a fan of book-to-screen adaptations, as they are the crossover of two things that I love, and you would be right. I’m one of those people that sees an awesome movie trailer and digs up the book before watching the movie because to me there’s something special about watching the book world I created in my mind while reading come alive on the big screen.

However, while I usually enjoy book-to-screen adaptations, I’m more than well aware that there are plenty out there who don’t share my enthusiasm for that particular category of movies.

Now let me take a moment to clarify something: there have certainly been some particularly horrific adaptations that completely massacred their book parent, like this disaster. Of those, I am not fan, and I complain about them just as loudly as the other horrified readers.

I think the reason, however, that I tend to enjoy book-to-screen adaptations for the most part, is that I don’t go in expecting the movie to be exactly like the book. I understand that elements are going to be cut, and that sometimes elements that I really enjoyed or thought were particularly special are going to be altered or removed altogether. That’s the way it is, and to expect anything otherwise would be setting myself up for a massive disappointment.

The difference, is that unless there are enormous, plot-altering, character-destroying changes, I don’t let it destroy the rest of the movie for me.

For example, I just recently saw Warm Bodies, and I have to say that I enjoyed it. Was it exactly like the book? Hardly—in fact, they altered the ending in a way that I can’t say I was too fond of, however, the spirit of the book was still there. R’s witty internal commentary and the zombie-love awkwardness and the dry humor was reflected in the movie, and I loved watching a book that I enjoyed unfold before my very eyes.

Had I been counting scenes that they cut and changes that they made, however, I would have walked out of that theater as a rather unhappy person. If you nitpick at a book-to-screen adaptation, chances are you’ll never be happy with the result.

Now that’s not to say that I don’t understand why some people don’t like the adaptations—I definitely get wanting to see something that maintains the integrity of the novel, which is why book-to-screen disasters don’t sit well with me. But I suppose my love of movies combined with my love of books makes me a little soft when I watch adaptations because I want to enjoy the movie. I don’t go looking for reasons to dislike it and I even let changes and cuts slide as long as I feel the book is still well reflected. But some people are pickier than me, and I get that, too.

So now I want to hear from you: do you enjoy book-to-screen adaptations, or do you tend to avoid them? Somewhere in the middle? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

On Reading "Bad" Books

Photo credit: Wiertz Sébastien on Flickr

So there's been this belief going around for some time now that the quality of books—especially popular books—has been decreasing over time. It's this idea that the books people enjoy reading today are somehow lesser than the novels that were popular twenty, fifty, even a hundred years ago. 

And it bothers me. 

It bothers me that people look at Twilight and The Hunger Games and Harry Potter and even Fifty Shades of Grey and say things like, the garbage that people read nowadays, and this book will never stand up to x-classic, and it bothers me that there's this belief that the books people enjoy reading now are somehow worth less than what people used to read. 

I'm not going to try to tell you that Twilight was written with the same literary finesse as Great Expectations or Brave New World—that's obviously not the case—but I truly don't believe that makes it a lesser book, and furthermore, I don't think that makes anyone who read Twilight and loved it a lesser reader for enjoying it. 

Regardless of what you think about these massively popular books, they accomplished something that shouldn't be overlooked—they got people reading. I've heard people say, I don't usually like reading, but I read Twilight (or Hunger Games or Harry Potter) and loved it. I know people who rarely read, who picked up novels that others like to call "garbage" and guess what? Not only did they enjoy it, but they realized reading isn't so bad after all. They realized the right book can actually make the reading experience—*gasp*—enjoyable. 

I picked up the Twilight series in 2010, long after the crazy fandom had already stated and the first two movies had already been released, and I realized as I was reading in public that I felt self-conscious. I was getting looks and I felt the need to defend myself and say, "What? I haven't read the series yet," and people seemed relieved when they found out I wasn't re-reading the series, as if that would be something horrific. And even then, the insinuation that I should be somehow embarrassed about reading the series in public bugged me, because no one should feel that way reading a book.

And now it's happening again, except this time it's with Fifty Shades of Grey. And I'll admit—I was tempted, especially at first, to think, why in the world are people reading that? How did that get popular? But the fact of the matter is, people who don't normally read very often are reading—and enjoying—the series, and even if I won't be picking up the book next time I head to the bookstore, maybe it'll remind people that reading isn't so bad after all. Maybe it'll make people who don't often read pause before they dismiss the idea of picking up another book. 

I'm not saying that you have to enjoy every popular series that is released—or even that you have to read every massively successful book out there—I know I haven't, and I have no plans to do so. All I'm saying is that this idea floating around that so-called "garbage" books are somehow damaging our culture or aren't worth the time spent to read them needs to stop. All I'm saying is that we should celebrate the fact that people are reading, even if we don't necessarily agree with what they're reading.

All I'm saying is a book is a book, and if it gets people reading, that's good enough for me. 

 
What do you think about reading so-called "bad" books? Do you agree with the stigma? Why or why not?