The Wolf-Leader, and changing writing styles

Earlier, I cited a passage from Beauty and the Beast as an example of how writing style has changed from then to now. I’m reading Alexandre Dumas’ The Wolf-Leader from 1857, and the following passage struck me in much the same way:

At times, when I have been loving and caressing my grandmother, Monsieur Thibault, and she takes me on her lap and clasps me in her poor weak trembling arms, and puts her dear old wrinkled face against mine, and I feel my cheek wet with the loving tears she sheds, I begin to cry myself, and, I tell you, Monsieur Thibault, so soft and sweet are my tears, that there is no woman or girl, be she queen or princess, who has ever, I am sure, known such a real joy as mine.

– Alexandre Dumas, The Wolf-Leader

Again, as with Beauty and the Beast, the above is… one sentence.

Cats vs elves

‪I think cats are tough on elves. Ever since I’ve had cats, I’ve never once woke up to find a writing work-in-progress conpleted by elves during the night.‬

Language challenges

‪Sometimes I write a sentence like (speaking of a white leather sofa) “Did it have transparent vinyl covers on it, or was its pristine albinism sufficient ward against the incursion of the mundane?” and I think, TOO ABSTRUSE. NOBODY’S GOING TO UNDERSTAND THAT.‬

‪And then I think, no one’s gonna understand ‘abstruse.’‬

Verisimilitude

“It”s gonna be a nice fall-like afternoon today,” the guy on the radio says.

Yup. Nothing gets more fall-like than a day in October with typical temperatures. When it’s, you know, FALL.

The sacrifices we make…

Dinner at Rudy’s, Friday, October 4, 2019

Sometimes I’m in Oswego during the Rudy’s season, and I’m in a little bit of a hurry, and I think, do I want to go to Rudy’s? And more often than not, I do, because I realize, I CAN DO THIS FOR THE ONES WHO DON’T HAVE THE OPTION. It’s the sacrifice I make, willingly.

No need to thank me. The food is reward enough.

Accuracy in media

I question the accuracy of media reporting sometimes. Case in point: the recent news story about whether eating red meat is OK for you or not. Here’s an article I saw about it – the top story returned to me by Google News:

ScienceAlert.com – Here’s The Real Truth About That Confusing Red Meat Study

From the story:

“These findings have led to many guidelines recommending people eat a bit less red meat to improve their health.”

Let’s look at one of those “many guidelines” – this one from the U.S. government. Their recommendation for a healthy diet: twenty six ounces/ounce-equivalents PER WEEK, combined, of meat/poultry/eggs. That means: less than four ounces A DAY. Of meat, poultry, or eggs on a 2000 calorie a day diet. Not something as extravagant as four ounces of each. No. Four ounces a day, TOTAL, combined, breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

Appendix 3. USDA Food Patterns: Healthy U.S.-Style Eating Pattern

Is THAT “a bit less” than what you eat now?

But wait. It goes on.

“A controversial new study has proven that actually there’s no evidence that eating red meat is bad for us, and that we can go ahead and gorge on steak and burgers once again.”

Um. No. I don’t think the new study gives the green light to “gorging on steak and burgers.”

But I’m supposed to take this story seriously? When it starts to break down the instant you take a hard look at its foundations?

By the way, the actual recommendation from the study itself was this:

“The panel suggests that adults continue current unprocessed red meat consumption (weak recommendation, low-certainty evidence). Similarly, the panel suggests adults continue current processed meat consumption (weak recommendation, low-certainty evidence).”

You’ll note the absence of the word “gorging” in the actual study.

Unprocessed Red Meat and Processed Meat Consumption: Dietary Guideline Recommendations From the Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) Consortium

(To this story’s credit, it DID provide links to the stories that ultimately undercut its own credibility.)