What is JacketFlap

  • JacketFlap connects you to the work of more than 200,000 authors, illustrators, publishers and other creators of books for Children and Young Adults. The site is updated daily with information about every book, author, illustrator, and publisher in the children's / young adult book industry. Members include published authors and illustrators, librarians, agents, editors, publicists, booksellers, publishers and fans.
    Join now (it's free).

Sort Blog Posts

Sort Posts by:

  • in
    from   

Suggest a Blog

Enter a Blog's Feed URL below and click Submit:

Most Commented Posts

In the past 7 days

Recent Posts

(tagged with 'newyorktimes')

Recent Comments

Recently Viewed

JacketFlap Sponsors

Spread the word about books.
Put this Widget on your blog!
  • Powered by JacketFlap.com

Are you a book Publisher?
Learn about Widgets now!

Advertise on JacketFlap

MyJacketFlap Blogs

  • Login or Register for free to create your own customized page of blog posts from your favorite blogs. You can also add blogs by clicking the "Add to MyJacketFlap" links next to the blog name in each post.

Blog Posts by Tag

In the past 7 days

Blog Posts by Date

Click days in this calendar to see posts by day or month
<<June 2024>>
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
      01
02030405060708
09101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      
new posts in all blogs
Viewing: Blog Posts Tagged with: newyorktimes, Most Recent at Top [Help]
Results 1 - 7 of 7
1. Male...apparently.

_
According to my writing style, I am, apparently, male. The Gender Genie---scientifically designed, dontchaknow---said so. I checked several of my published magazine articles and, theoretically, they're all authored by males. The results varied in degree of maleness, but all were solidly on the male side. For one article, the male score was 2.5 times greater than the female score.

How can that be? I'm female. I really am. Having spent the better part of five years either pregnant or breastfeeding, it's pretty hard to argue otherwise. But the Genie is apparently accurate 80% of the time. "Apparently" …gonna get some good mileage out of that word, you wait and see.

Articles in The Guardian and The New York Times explain the analysis in more detail, but basically, the focus is on how the author writes about a subject, not the subject itself. In fact, subject matter is ignored. Interestingly, nouns and verbs aren't part of the algorithm at all. After analyzing hundreds of writing samples written by men and women, the linguists behind the algorithm came up with lists of feminine and masculine key words, and assigned each word a weighted value. The algorithm counts how many times each list word appears and then multiplies it by the word's weighted value, keeping the lists separate. Voila, you end up with a feminine score and a masculine score.

Curious about the lists? Here they are, ordered from most to least weighted:

Feminine Keywords:
with, if, not, where, be, when,
you’re her, we, should, she,
and, me, myself, hers was

Masculine Keywords:
around, what, more, are, as,
who, below, is, these, the, a,
at, it, many, said, above, to

Women are apparently more inclined to talk about people and relationships and therefore use more personal pronouns. Men, on the other hand, are purported to use more determiners (these, the, that, a…), numbers, and quantifiers (more, some…) because they apparently talk about things most of the time.

Well, shoot, as a nonfiction writer, aren't I always talking about things? It's commonly accepted that, generally speaking, males read more nonfiction than females, so maybe this analysis doesn't speak to the gender of the author of the writing, so much as it does to the audience for which the writing is intended. Hmm...

Oh well, Gender Genie predicted that all but one of the female columnists at the Guardian were male, so whatever the reason, I'm in good company, at least.

Apparently.

(Oh, yeah...and this post? Overwhelmingly "male". Go figure.)
_
_

0 Comments on Male...apparently. as of 8/29/2008 8:41:00 PM
Add a Comment
2. A little Friday Word Play

_
While taming e-bookmarks last night---a veritable treasure hunt, indeed, indeed---I came across this cool anagram link I'd forgotten about.

Type in a word or phrase and it'll generate a list of possible anagrams---phrases that can be created using the letters in your word or phrase.

Just for fun, I typed in my name. Lo, it's possible to make 200 words and 2649 anagrams from Fiona Bayrock. Coolio.

A few of my faves:

  • Aback of irony
  • Yo, a cabin fork
  • Ban fairy cook
  • Caio, Frank boy
And since I can make the word "book" out of the letters in my name, I plunked "book" in the advanced anagram search form to get all of the anagrams containing "book".

I can fry a book and A racy fin book both popped up, but my all-time favourite?

Fancy Air Book

Ha! Pretty apropos for someone who's written a book about bubbles, don't you think? Too fun.

For some anagram fun of your own, skip on over to wordsmith.org
_

0 Comments on A little Friday Word Play as of 8/22/2008 11:57:00 AM
Add a Comment
3. Oh, my motherly writerly heart

_
Fabteen#2 and her fabteen friends decided to put on a play this summer. Not ones to shy away from challenge, they chose a Russian comedy by Anton Chekov. It's been a major undertaking, but they pulled it off. My hat's off to them all. Wow.

The first sentence in Fabteen#2's program bio:

[Fabteen#2] sees the world in her favourite colour: poetry.

...pitter-pat, pitter-pat goes this motherly writerly heart.

And lest you think that Fabteen#2 is all seriousness and literary depth, she also mentioned Optimus Prime in her thank you list. Gotta love that kid.
_

0 Comments on Oh, my motherly writerly heart as of 7/31/2008 5:13:00 PM
Add a Comment
4. No fickle feelings for Fickling

While mining the latest library stack, I came across The London Eye Mystery by Siobhan Dowd [David Fickling Books, 2007]. (Thank you, Betsy at Fuse#8 for bringing that little British gem to my attention.) I'm enjoying it, but am only a couple of chapters in, so won't say much more about it right now, but I just had to share the absolutely brilliant David Fickling Books logo.

Initials used as bookends with the title of the book reflecting the imprint name. Is that not one of the cleverest designs? Like, ever? I sure hope the designer got big bucks. I wonder if logo designers have industry awards.

0 Comments on No fickle feelings for Fickling as of 7/23/2008 2:01:00 PM
Add a Comment
5. Science...a curious separate literature

_
It's Nonfiction Monday!

"Science is not a little thing, a narrow field: it encompasses or confronts all that ever was, is, or shall be, the whole bag of tricks, from a universe 13 billion light years across, to the subatomic world.

How curious then, that the science book remains a sub-genre, occupying a set of shelves somewhere in non-fiction, usually near the back of the shop; and how curious that it remains separate from literature, as if science writing was not the same as good writing; and as if facts about the world were somehow less thrilling than fictions about it. Novelists observe and describe. But so do naturalists. Poets celebrate, but so do physicists. Historians explain, but so do chemists."

--Tim Radford in his 2005 article in The Guardian,
in which he goes on to name ten science books
everyone should own.

Filed under: Things That Make Me Say, "Hmm...'

Anastasia has the Nonfiction Monday roundup of links on her blog. (she'll post it later this afternoon)
_

0 Comments on Science...a curious separate literature as of 1/1/1900
Add a Comment
6. on fame and what’s enduring…

Okay so a few days ago I posted to tell you that I was quoted in the New York Times. This article had the predictable effects. I got some nice email. My family and friends made fun of me: “You’re in the Style section?! LOL!” MetaFilter talked about the article. MetaFilter talked about me.

The article also had many people who were pleased with it, or had mixed feelings about it, and some people who just plain weren’t happy with it.

I thought the article was silly and decent for what it was (a style article) and I usually think that anything that doesn’t flat out call us losers and psychopaths is okay by me. What I found most interesting, besides reading people’s commentary on it, was the generated buzz. As of right now, this article was the most emailed article on nytimes.com today. I had friends who sent it to me before they even knew I was in it. It’s the second most popular article on Technorati. And — and this is odd and I may be looking at cause and effect wrong — a totally unrelated article about librarians from the BBC news home page is their most emailed story despite the fact that the article is 18 months old. This is the long tail in action.

So, I don’t care much what you think about hipsters. I’m personally proud of the braininess of the profession and if it comes with dowdiness I’m all for it. However, a few things should be clear. The author of the article is trying to say something nice about hipsters by associating them with librarians and librarians by associating them with hipsters. Maybe you don’t share her cultural associations, but it’s not a negative piece. Everyone in the article is portrayed in a positive light. How often does that happen in anything but “puppet show a complete success!” articles about the library? The popularity of this article is likely not because people are sharing it saying “Heh, librarians are such total dorks and losers they think they’re cool and they’re not!” it’s because the framing of this story seems to resonate with people in some way.

People are sending it to their friends and family members who are librarians. Librarians are sending it to their friends and family members. People are sending it to their librarians. People who want to get their message out would kill for this sort of attention. If the message you want to send is “Wow, I would have written this differently and pointed out things that this author completely missed about the profession.” then by all means do that. But watch for the “Gee someone tried to say something nice about librarians in a major media outlet and the bitchy librarians bit their head off for it.” attitude. I feel like we as a profession have issues with popularity generally. We’re suspicious of it and frustrated by it. Librarian critiques of Google or Wikipedia often point to their popularity as if we should all see what a negative attribute that is. There is nothing wrong with letting ourselves and our work shine brightly, and we can still try to be gracious if gently correcting when others try to cast some more light in our direction.

, , , , , , ,

35 Comments on on fame and what’s enduring…, last added: 8/30/2007
Display Comments Add a Comment
7. Hello New York Times/Sun readers and other “hip shushers”

The fashion section of the New York Times has an article titled A Hipper Crowd of Shushers which, despite the title is less annoying than the usual “librarians, they’re not as lame as you think!” articles that we see about the profession. I’m quoted in it, there’s a great picture of Peter Welsch DJing, a quote from Sarah Mercure and a bunch of other fun pictures and quips. The New York Sun has its own article on a very similar topic.

Jessamyn West, 38, an editor of “Revolting Librarians Redux: Radical Librarians Speak Out” a book that promotes social responsibility in librarianship, and the librarian behind the Web site librarian.net (its tagline is “putting the rarin’ back in librarian since 1999″) agreed that many new librarians are attracted to what they call the “Library 2.0″ phenomenon. “It’s become a techie profession,” she said. In a typical day, Ms. West might send instant and e-mail messages to patrons, many of who do their research online rather than in the library. She might also check Twitter, MySpace and other social networking sites, post to her various blogs and keep current through MetaFilter and RSS feeds. Some librarians also create Wikis or podcasts.

, , , , ,

11 Comments on Hello New York Times/Sun readers and other “hip shushers”, last added: 7/9/2007
Display Comments Add a Comment