SteveCuno.com
  • Home
  • About Me / My Work
  • Cunoblog
  • Contact / Discuss a project

Expertise in one area ≠ universal expertise

11/17/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Alternate title: “Listen, you arrogant twit ...” Read this post on my marketing blog (click here).

0 Comments

On not wishing Trump well (wherein I dispense with any pretense of virtue)

10/3/2020

1 Comment

 
Picture

I ENJOY STUDYING history, but I wasn’t terribly fond of my high school American history class. Our “teacher’s” method consisted of making us memorize names and dates. He graded us on our ability to regurgitate them on demand. No discussion, no exploration. Just names and dates. 

​A few weeks into the semester, Mr. [Withheld] was hospitalized with a serious illness. The other history teachers had combined and were team teaching their classes, so we joined them. Theirs was a wonderful approach. We discussed not just events, but their context, causes, implications, surrounding issues, and lasting effects. We loved it.

One day during school lunch with my friends Bob and Tim, I said, “I hope Mr. [Withheld] will be okay and return to teach.” Bob said he hoped so, too.

​Tim said, “I hope he dies.” 

We laughed at Tim’s audacity. He was, of course, being hyperbolic, but in that moment I realized I’d not said the honest but the dutiful thing. Although I didn’t wish Mr. [Withheld] dead, I didn’t want him to return, either.

Fast-forward to today. I wish I were the kind of person who could say—and, more important, mean—the dutiful thing, the thing I like to imagine a good humanist would say, e.g., that I hope Trump recovers. But I wouldn’t mean it. I wish Trump out of office by any non-illegal means possible. If COVID removes his office and, yes, even his life, the world will be better off for it.

Even so, the wait will have been too long and the price too high. He will leave in his wake 200,000-plus COVID-related deaths as of this writing, ramped-up racism and sexism, the intrusion of the religious right into the justice system, strengthened white supremacy, policy made from ignorance, climate catastrophe, science denialism, environmental rape, dictators with Trump’s lipstick on their butts, increased income disparity, sabotaged relationships with allies, disenfranchised voters, vigilanteism, diminished human equity and rights, anti-Muslim policy, locked up children, separated families, and cruelty to the LGBTQ and the non-binary. For starters.

If, unlike me, you can honestly wish Trump well, you are more magnanimous than I. Either that, or you actually support Trump and his policies, which is another way of admitting that you are morally and intellectually bankrupt. 

Mr. [Withheld] recovered and dragged us back into drudgery. I hope Mr. Trump does not.
1 Comment

​Phrases to quit putting in characters’ mouths

9/29/2020

3 Comments

 
Picture
Screenwriters and playwrights, please be advised that use of any of the phrases listed below will henceforth be deemed an admission of lack of imagination:

“This isn’t over.”
“Look at me.”
“You don’t have to do this.”
“Let’s split up.”
“Who else knows about this?”
“The evidence points to him, but he swears he didn’t do it.”
“This isn’t you.”
“This isn’t who we are.”
“We’re not so different, you and I.” 
“I’m nothing like you!”
“We are nothing alike.”
“There is no ‘we.’”

Also deemed an admission of lack of imagination:

Walking calmly away with an explosion behind you
Stealing a car thanks to a key stored on the visor
Bringing back the same bad guy death after death
Escaping through a ventilator shaft

Kindly suggest additions by clicking COMMENTS.

3 Comments

How not to sell your writing service

8/28/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Prelude
​​

​​From an email blasted to my inbox:
​“After skimming through your website, I strongly believe that you could greatly benefit from our high-quality blog writing service.”​​​
My thoughts 

​Dear Sender:

Where to begin?

I have no interest in a would-be vendor who skimmed through my website. I want one who pored and emerged with specific, useful recommendations.

But then, I doubt that you even skimmed. I suspect you obtained an email list and clicked SEND with no further thought. Else, you would have known that, right or wrong, I fancy myself a writer. Armed with that information, you might have thought better of “you could greatly benefit from our high-quality blog writing service,” anticipating that it could come across as something of a slap.

If you didn’t skim, then you lied. I loath misleading statements from people trying to sell. Of course, not having skimmed, you couldn’t be expected to know that.

But suppose I’m wrong and you really did skim. In that case, you score abysmally low in the empathy department. That’s a problem for any writer, for good writing begins with knowing your reader.

All of which argues against the alleged high quality of the writing you hope to sell me.

I must reluctantly conclude that I could not benefit in the least, much less greatly, from your high-quality blog writing.

Postlude
​

Note to readers: I didn’t email this reply. If the hapless vendor wishes to read it, he’ll have to skim my website.
0 Comments

Not even Melville was immune.

8/18/2020

0 Comments

 
You don’t have to be a writer to appreciate this wonderful tribute to writer’s block from Gary Larsen. In deference to Larsen’s copyright, I have masked most of the image here, but you can view it au complet on his website by clicking anywhere on the box below or by clicking here. Enjoy.
Picture
0 Comments

If the shoe doesn’t fit, what’s your gripe?

7/29/2020

0 Comments

 
​In his letter to the editor in the August-September 2020 issue of Free Inquiry, one Sheldon F. Gottlieb, PhD, accuses me, along with three other columnists, of unfairly criticizing Trump.

Funny thing, that. Nowhere does “How We Vote,” my alleged offending column, name “Trump.” 

Perhaps Gottlieb was referencing this:
… dangerously incompetent, petulant, uninformed, xenophobic, despotic, anti-human-rights, Dunning-Kruger-Effect-personifying buffoon of a candidate whom only morally bankrupt or utterly misinformed voters would support …
If so, he seems to have overlooked the rest of the sentence:
… please know that I’m speaking hypothetically and that no such person really exists.
This is not the first time readers have accused me of criticizing while not naming ​their hero, at the same time insisting that said criticism in no way applies to said hero.

I am left to wonder why Gottlieb assumed the shoe I described belongs to Trump if, as he seems to allege, the shoe doesn’t fit.

Unless, of course, deep down he thinks it does.
Picture
I have high regard for Benson, Drury, Menendez, and the late Doerr. I’m rather flattered that Gottlieb included me with them in his complaint.
0 Comments

Being born someplace is no accomplishment

7/1/2020

0 Comments

 
My July 4 musings, published three days ago in The Salt Lake Tribune, may be a sure way for me to lose friends, second only to letting them get to know me. You can read the article by clicking here or on the image below.
Picture

0 Comments

Why must there be rhetorical questions?

6/29/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Rhetorical questions aren’t really questions. They are statements in question form. And while they serve a purpose in dramatic literature, when invoked in matters of fact they signal a closed mind.

Shakespeare used the rhetorical question well when he penned for Juliet, ”What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Note that the bard didn’t follow up by having an etymologist, a botanist, a cognitive psychologist, and a taxonomist walk onstage and set her straight. His aim was to express Juliet’s inner turmoil.

But in argumentation, the rhetorical question can be a dishonest device. I can think of no better example than the widely-invoked, would-be refutation of the Theory of Evolution: “If we come from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?” To be sure, some who pose that question really are interested in an answer, and good for them. But those who “ask” with the intent of dismissing the matter might as well say, “I reject evolution, and I’m not interested in being disabused of my ignorance.” If you don’t believe me, watch them tune out or simply await their turn to jump in with “yeah, but ...” as you attempt to explain ancestry, geographic separation, and geologic time.

Some people try to frame a dishonest rhetorical question with, “It’s okay to ask questions, right?” That, too, is rhetorical—and dishonest—in that its goal is justification, not enlightenment. Nevertheless, the answer to “It’s okay to ask questions, right?” is: Not if you have already resolved to reject any answer.

“I’m not interested in being disabused of my ignorance” is intellectually irresponsible, but at least it’s honest.

0 Comments

Non-sexist language: A brief how-to

6/8/2020

2 Comments

 
I was pleased to see that yesterday’s post on the importance of non-sexist language attracted some attention.

​A good friend commented, “Then there’s the how do I avoid the he/she, his/her slash writing. We need a nice, neutral but polite pronoun without being so non-personal as it/its. And can't do the they/their because most times not plural. As always, man, thanks for your wisdom.”

Setting aside his generous use of “wisdom,” I’ll point out that would-be neutral pronouns are vying for acceptance as we speak—like ze, hir, and zir—but they have yet to catch on. Meanwhile, here’s a slightly edited excerpt from a how-to I posted on my Response Agency blog. To read the original, click here.
Usually (not always), his/her is the lazy writer’s default. You can often do better with a little thought and skill. Here are some suggestions.

The Nix the Possessive Pronoun Technique: Instead of the everyone took his or her seat, how about everyone took a seat.

The Find the Neuter Word Technique: Instead of mankind and womankind use humankind. Instead of workman use worker. Instead of chairman use chair.

The Make It Plural Technique: Instead of the typical customer likes his or her sandwich made fresh you can say customers like their sandwiches made fresh. 

The Break Down and Rewrite Technique: For that matter, you can say the typical customer likes fresh-made sandwiches.

The Let Go of Your Favorite Cliché Technique: I don’t care if you grew up saying old wives’ tale. It is sexist and then some. Try nonsense, untrue, fiddle-faddle, claptrap, questionable, baloney, myth, hogwash, bull...** 

Sexist expressions are good at taking writers unawares. It takes vigilance to recognize them and root them out. When in doubt, find a with-it slightee and ask, “Is this wording sexist?” Don’t argue with the answer.*** 

​Better yet, when in doubt, rewrite. All you need is a little creativity. You’re a writer. Finding better ways to say it is, or should be, what you’re about. Oh, and don’t pout about having to do it. Pouting is unbecoming.

—Steve Cuno

*There is no shortage of ways to brand yourself a sexist dinosaur. A friend asked me to review an early draft of a marketing book he was writing. To illustrate the importance of incentive offers, he attempted a humorous take on the Old Testament story of Saul’s having offered a daughter to David as an incentive to kill Goliath. I advised my friend that joking about women being awarded as property was offensive. He retorted, “I hate that politically correct crap.” Hate it he may, but readers who feel otherwise are free to express their ire by not buying his book or retaining his services.

**When my goal is humor and irony, I render it indeterminate-aged significant others’ tale. 

***Speaking of rewriting, I originally wrote that sentence, Don’t argue when they answer. But that didn’t agree with the preceding “with-it slightee,” which is singular. And the last thing I wanted was Don’t argue when he or she answers.
2 Comments

Non-sexist language: More important than difficult

6/7/2020

3 Comments

 
Wrapping up a recent article, I typed the word middleman. Then I paused, because it’s sexist. But, I wondered, does anyone say middleperson? 

I googled it. Style manuals weren’t of much help, but no shortage of indignant armchair commentators expressed indignation at the very suggestion, assuring the world there’s nothing sexist about -man.

Every one of said armchair commentators was male.

In the end, my reasoned, professional opinion was: Screw it. I’m going with middleperson. We are now well past the article’s publication, and not one reader has protested. 

Getting sexism out of language is more important than it is difficult.
Picture
—Steve Cuno
3 Comments
<<Previous
    Picture

    Welcome to Cunoblog

    ... where I share thoughts about writing. ​I don’t consider myself a writing authority, but that doesn’t keep me from presuming to blog like one. Oh, and I reserve the right to digress when I feel like it.

    Archives

    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    April 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

This site and all items herein © 2021 Steve Cuno
  • Home
  • About Me / My Work
  • Cunoblog
  • Contact / Discuss a project