Vanity Google+ URLs: A Word of Warning

I've been noticing a proliferation of vanity URLs in place of the awkward polynumeric and totally anonymous URLs G+ is assigning to its users. The vanity URLs look like

http://gplus.to/yourname
or
http://plusya/yourname
or
http://gplus.name/yourname
etc.

I personally would love to see G+ allow vanity URLs, but in the meantime, going with a third party shortening service may cause you problems down the road, and may in fact hinder search results for your profile (it's an SEO thing). There's also the potential for a vanity URL company to stop supporting the link. And I've heard of some shortened URLs leading to the wrong profiles.

If you just want shorten your G+ URL, then Google owns its own URL shortener (http://goo.gl/). What you get is no less anonymous than the polynumeric one, but it's definitely less cumbersome. For example, my assigned G+ URL is:

https://plus.google.com/104693795958410368655

but goo.gl shortened it to:

http://goo.gl/lVqoI

For a more technical explanation,check out this post from Cirruslabs.

I hate when this happens

OK, not a post about writing or even remotely related to writing (although I suppose I could always think of using it as a metaphor of writing someday). I just really liked this sign, which we found in New Zealand on our drive to Franz Josef Glacier.

The Guilt (and Freedom) of Uncircling

I just had to uncircle someone over on Google+. I feel really bad about it, especially since they're someone in my own field and it feels like a betrayal. But I threw him out, blocked his posts and essentially blacklisted him from my life. Why? Because he was flooding my stream with garbage. If I wanted that, I'd read JA Konrath's Twitter stream-- not him, but all the people who follow him. Seriously, do you realy think I want to know your every thought? Do you really think everyone you're sharing with really wants to know the latest breaking back-page news?

Then why are you cluttering my space and time with it?

I've been on Google+ now for almost 2 weeks and I really like it. I mean, I really, realy like it. I love the humor; I love the relevant editorials and advice; I love the snarkiness. But most of all, I love the fact that pretty much everyone there gets it. Sure, I don't mind the occasional photo of the pet, the occasional update on the kids or what you had for dinner (looks good, by the way). These are things that make it worth connecting and sharing with you; they make you more human, not just a bunch of digitized content delivered to me over the ether. And, yes, every once in a while, I'll share such nonsense with you, too. Once in a while. But I'm trying to work here, and if you're constantly getting in my way of doing that, then it's not worth having you around.

What do you think? Am I being too harsh? Or do I have unrealistic expectations for this newest social media platform?

Twitter and Google Plus: Shouting out to (or over) the crowd

As much as I love being on Twitter and the feeling it gives me of being able to connect to others who share my interests, sometimes it feels a bit like an exercise in futility. I don't say much; I'm a man of few words (except on paper, or screen), so when I do have something to say I like it to count. I extend the same courtesy to others, even fretting that I can't see everything being said by the people I follow. I worry when the people who follow me are streaming the tweets of a thousand other tweeps as well. Do my words get heeded when, mere seconds after posting them, they're already lost in the barrage of 140-character quips and quotes?

It makes me wonder if anyone is even listening anymore, if we're all just shouting into the chaos, hoping to be heard above the din. I know I'm not the only one who thinks this. I've been told by many others that to be heard, you have to shout louder and more often.

I've been on Google+ now for a week and so far I like it better, in part because it's still new and there are a lot fewer people on it. Even so, it's a definite improvement over Twitter. I like how you can share more and your followers can comment directly within the stream of the post. It's much more...responsive. I feel like I can actually catch my breath, comment, and people will actually see what I've said. For now. But the "crowd noise" is eventually going to take over like it did on Twitter. Already I can see it happening. We're flooding the world with our thought pollution, saying everything that's on our minds with little consideration to self-censorship.

What's the remedy? I don't know. It's not more shouting, though. It's not more spewage.

I think maybe it's saying something that people want to heed. If you say something of importance, it will find its audience. Your words will cut through the fray.

At least, I hope they will.

Book Review: BETWEEN TWO ENDS, by David Ward

BETWEEN TWO ENDS,
by David Ward


Published by Abrams Books, 5/1/2011
Middle grade fiction, fantasy


ISBN-13: 978-0810997141.

This review courtesy of NetGalley.com.

My rating: 4.0 out of 5 stars.



The aspiration of every storyteller is to make the reader believe that they are part of the story. But what if the story is so real, so wonderful, that the reader forgets and instead believes the fiction? And what if you had to get that reader to remember that it’s not real, because by doing so you might help someone you love? What if by even attempting it, you might also become caught in the story’s grasp and become lost to reality forever?

That’s the dilemma facing twelve-year-old Yeats Trafford, whose father entered the world of the Arabian Nights as a child and almost became trapped. He wished himself back, but the girl he accompanied, Shari, did not. Now, twenty years later, the father’s depression threatens Yeats’s family. Yeats must enter the story and bring Shari (now Shaharazad) back by her own free will and, in doing so, rescue his father.

But the storyworld won’t let her go so easily.

Transported to the shores of the Arabian Peninsula by no less than a recalcitrant pair of magical bookends (naturally), named Skin and Bones, Yeats faces considerable challenges. Things don’t go so well. In fact, we begin to question whether Yeats will even survive the experience long enough to get himself out, much less convince Shari to come with him.

“Between Two Ends,” a reference to Skin and Bones and an allusion to being within the story itself, satisfies without overcomplicating. Well paced, well plotted and enthralling from first page to last, David Wards achieves the storyteller’s goal on several levels while reintroducing us to a world at once familiar and strange. A perfect read for hesitant readers and well recommended for any boy or girl.



This review is also posted on the Amazon product page here.

View my GoodReads reviews

Stuck in Christchurch, New Zealand

Arrived Christchurch last night. Supposed to fly out this morning at 6:15am. It's 10:30 and still no flights out because of the ash cloud from the Chilian volcano. To make matters worse, we've had for earthquakes since our arrival, two 3.4s, a 3.5 and 4.4. Hoping to get out of town by tomorrow at the latest.

In other news, internet has been spotty around New Zealand. Blog posts will be spotty until we return stateside early July.

Book Review: THE HOMECOMING OF SAMUEL LAKE, by Jenny Wingfield

The Homecoming of Samuel Lake: A Novel by Jenny Wingfield






Hardcover: 336 pages
Publisher: Random House (July 12, 2011)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0385344082
ISBN-13: 978-0385344081

This review courtesy of GoodReads.com.

My rating: 4 of 5 stars



There are books that scream their business at you. Others that throttle you until you give them the attention they so desperately seek, as if to say, "Look at me! Look at me! Pick me up and read me!"



Jenny Wingfield's debut is not one of those books.



Instead, it quietly finds its place in your heart, some tiny little cubbyhole where it can rest. It is one of those books that ever so gently makes itself known to you, and then hangs unobtrusively around, and so becomes a part of your existence. It's tricky that way.



And that's what's so sexy about it: it seduces.



Don't get me wrong. The first line fairly rips your breath away: "John Moses couldn't have chosen a worse day, or a worse way to die, if he'd planned it for a lifetime." But, see, that's the beauty of even that: the book isn't really about John Moses. It isn't even about the eponymous minister, Sam Lake. Not really. It's mostly about defrocked Sam's daughter, Swan (yes, her name is Swan Lake). Not to mention a whole slew of other characters.



See what I mean? Tricky.



The story follows a similarly indirect route to its conclusion. A family reunion turns tragic when the patriarch shoots himself, which lends itself to son-in-law Sam's return to the Moses home, along with his wife and children. Minister Sam, a good man who can't help but butt heads with his superiors, has had his congregation taken from him. The goodness in his heart extends to the thoughts and actions of his family, including Swan, who has her own weaknesses. An abusive neighbor plays a part, as does a police officer who, like his name, is always early. Early harbors a secret about Swan's uncle, Toy. Let's just say it involves a murder. The story, almost epic in scope, at times feels a bit like Gabriel García Márquez' ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SOLITUDE, though certainly on a much smaller scale. Perhaps it's because the cast of characters flow in and out of the story, and the stoylines themselves weave from the background to the fore in intricate ways. Some readers might find this disturbing, but to me it felt genuine.



Wingfield's writing, though not perfect, is overall superb. My favorite line comes in chapter 7, when she describes the stoic Toy from the viewpoint of his unfaithful wife Bernice: "Poor Toy. He couldn't see straight. But when a person loves you so much that he asks for nothing in return, it's only to be expected that that's about what he gets. It's like a Law of Nature." The description gives us as much insight on Bernice as it does Toy.



I did find getting attached to any one character difficult, as many characters had a tendency to appear on stage, snatch the spotlight for a brief moment, then disappear until a later scene change. Because of this, the story felt a bit episodic, which is why I'm giving it 4 instead of 5 stars.



There are also a few minor considerations, which I attribute to this being a first novel. For example, Wingfield gives some of her characters whimsical names: Blade, Toy, Early, Swan. I thought it was a bit self-indulgent, though it didn't detract from the reading, once I got used to them. My only other complaint about the writing itself is her overuse of repetitive words and phrases, as if she lacked the confidence to make her point the first time. It might not have mattered as much if the story were told from a single point of view, rather than the limited alternating 3rd person. Details such as these have a tendency to blend characters' voices together. I mostly noticed this in the first third of the book; whether that means I got used to it later or it was less prevalent afterwards, I can only guess. Otherwise, the writing is both as elegant and utilitarian as necessary, no more, no less.



I do also have to comment on the editing, which I thought could have been tightened up a bit. My biggest complaint is the overuse and misplacement of commas in some places (including the very first sentence!), though this tended to be found only in isolated clusters. Even so, it gave the reading a stilted feel in those sections. Also, I found several instances in which elipses and em-dashes were used in place of one another. I fault the copy-editor for this, which is why I didn't ding the book itself.



The story does contain a few disturbing themes: animal abuse, child and spouse abuse, suicide and murder, alcohol abuse, infidelity. So, though the main character is Swan, this is not a children's book. It doesn't sell itself as such, but I thought I'd make that point. However, like Leif Enger's PEACE LIKE A RIVER, whose main character is a child, I think this has strong crossover potential into the young adult market.



In summary, an excellent debut with very good, though not perfect, writing. The story tends to wend a bit, but it all feels honest and, ultimately, full of hope.



View all my GoodReads reviews