Indian Readers discussion
All about writing!
>
What goes in the making of an author?
The thing is, most Indian authors try to localise the scenes in the books. And after reading hard core 'English' books, we find it too plain. Also the little phrases, that have been translated to English in the books seen absurd. However, there are the few who take care to have their own flow of writing. :)
I always feel Indian authors who write in English as artificial. The writing just doesn't seem original. Many authors try to bring originality into their writing by localizing the characters and scenes, as the person before me wrote, but English language cannot be localized.They do not have any right to corrupt a language by adding local phrases translated into English.I lose all my interest when I see these usages.But there are some authors who are really good at their writing.
Lakshmi wrote: "I always feel Indian authors who write in English as artificial. The writing just doesn't seem original. Many authors try to bring originality into their writing by localizing the characters and sc..."Doesn't it reflect the usage of English language in our day-to-day life? Is it such a crime really? What of the American crimes of dropping unnecessary vowels from words then? I don't mean to criticize American English, am all for localization of a certain language if it reaches wider audience and connects better with the local population. R K Narayan also used localized english language sometimes, right?
Aditya wrote: "Lakshmi wrote: "I always feel Indian authors who write in English as artificial. The writing just doesn't seem original. Many authors try to bring originality into their writing by localizing the c..."Yeah he did,as I mentioned he is one of the few Indian English writing authors I adore. Localizing might become popular with the masses...but is that the sole aim of writing books?I feel that we need to protect the integrity of a language. I don't think a language should be written in a way it isn't written, to make a book popular or suit the people reading it.
Moreover we Indians already have our own version of English. I think localizing English would encourage Indians to use Indian English more often(this is just something I felt, need not be true)
"They do not have any right to corrupt a language by adding local phrases translated into English.I lose all my interest when I see these usages..." There are a lot of spanish, German, French, Italian words and phrases in English novels. When we consider them as "English" and enjoy reading it, why cant we accept some Indian words in English novels?
for eg: GodFather, which is considered to be one of the best books of 20th century, has so many Italian phrases in it.. The book introduced Italian criminal terms like consiglieri, caporegime, Cosa Nostra, and omertà to an English-speaking audience. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Godf...)
Also, just posting some of the stuff that i googled in 2 3 minutes:
http://spanish.about.com/od/spanishla...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...
Aditya wrote: "Lakshmi wrote: "I always feel Indian authors who write in English as artificial. The writing just doesn't seem original. Many authors try to bring originality into their writing by localizing the c..."Completely agreed. And one more thing: the "localizing " of English language may not be a conscious and deliberate attempt on the part of the Author. It's the same 'Indian English' he has been accustomed to and he has learnt since long(Though an author is most probably well-versed with the international english) . For me, as long as the content is top notch and style is new, local phrases are not a big thing.
Guys I don't mean the usage of words. Of course Indian words need to be used while writing Indian stories... nobody is denying that.What I meant was The usage of phrases ... many phrases and usages of our regional languages have been translated in English which is what I don't approve.
i think its okay to indianise english. for example when i read a story in, say gujarat, i would feel the nativity if i came across phrase in the regional languages.
even though whatyou say is right, that there is a certain falsehood over idian tales sung in english, it is a boon because one would never be able to learn all indian languages and then appreciate indian literature. in a way, this kind of indian english is a window to the massive indian literature and its beautiful style.
Ok let us consider this..suppose Hindi was a universal language and the foreigners distorted Hindi and wrote it in their own native style...will Hindi be the same Hindi again?? Translating English phrases and proverbs ditto into Hindi... etc will we approve it ?? We may say they are corrupting our language .... which is what we are doing to English.
Lakshmi, You do have a valid point, I have to date read only books written by foreigners, I use the term deliberately since it encompasses authors whose origins are other than from the UK or the US.I recently had the occassion to go on the site of an Indian Publishing House, there several titles were on display, the blurb or the jacket info regarding the book was written in such a stilted and contrived manner that I refrained from buying the book.
I raised the point with the co-founder of the Publishing House. I said, Sir, if this is the quality of books that you print under your banner, then I am afraid, very few discerning, rare and exceptional authors, with Indian origins would be tempted to publish with you.
His answer was a revelation to me!
He said, for your information, some of our newbie authors DO NOT avail of our EDITING services, hence you find the language unacceptable and a complete 'turn off'.
Our philosophy, he continued, is to allow the author to decide whether he wishes to edit or not.Ultimately we publish the book and let the MARKET decide.
On reading the english, I wondered how people could be so silly, dont they realise that their style of writing turns off people? Dont they realise that lack of good editing can make or break their novel?
Interesting insight from the publisher dont you think so?
Lakshmi wrote: "Ok let us consider this..suppose Hindi was a universal language and the foreigners distorted Hindi and wrote it in their own native style...will Hindi be the same Hindi again?? Translating English ..."definitely not, this is smthng that happens all over the world albeit in small measures. Telugu has evolved a lot in the telangana regions under the influence of Hindi n Urdu - to such an extent that coastal andhra ppl cannot understand it at all. the main purpose of language is communication while the main purpose of writers is not to preserve language. I do agree that issues with Indian writers are galore, but bad English or localized English is the least one of them. primary issues are with the kind of ideals the authors have n try to promote thru their college love stories. Amish had a really bad grip on his language n grammar, but still managed to write a decent first book in the trilogy.
in a country with so many languages is it really possible to reach a wider audience without translating certain phrases to English?
I suspect what she is referring to is not the inclusion of Indian words in English as much as the style of English - e.g. 'You'll want to have food then' is Queen's English, rendered as 'You will be wanting to have food then' in the Indian variant - to those who have been raised solely on the staple of diet of 'correct' English (in books and in schools insisting on British English), Indian English is definitely a blasphemy.Technically, the Indian phrase is incorrect on account of grammar (there are rules forbidding use of -ing when you can do away with it) but for those used to it, it is as normal as British English.
Languages are not fixed structures - they are fluid, constantly undergoing change in different ways on micro levels - what is Standard English now will be archaic 400 years later. No harm being a language purist, but the aim of language is communication - as long as it is precise, it is okay. To each one his/her own.
I agree Qube, however, peddlers in 'mediocrity' would eventuall sink without a trace. Also I think these fellows do serve a purpose; they help the readers to apprciate the truly good stuff.By the which Indian authors do you think are at par for the course?
Hello Qube, Im trying to find my way around here, tell me how does one go to your blog and or read your reviews.
protecting english language my ass . localise do anything with it , if you can deliver a quality story and writing. nothing wrong with "localizing" english.
What do you mean precisely by 'localising'?
Rushdie had coined, championed or popularized- I don’t exactly remember the order- a term known as ‘chutneyficiation’ of English. In the same context, Tarun Tejpal once said that English, as a language, is cold and impersonal, and as such, fits into the warmer, helter-skelter Indian milieus, with some natural difficulty. He may have had a point- but only if you were working in those milieus, otherwise, it works- well, it can still be hit and miss, so let’s say it can work. Maybe the dissonance provides an opportunity as well. Nevertheless, one would assume that by his logic, he was justifying the propensity of authors to come up with their own tailor-made concoctions of the language.And then there’s a line of thought that suggests that the Indian authors, for whom English is a first language, tend to do better with it than others.
Now, with the argument here, I agree more with Lakshmi than Aditya: populism can’t be the first or end goal of good writing and I think it is the latter that was being discussed. Having said that, if the distortion is organic, I believe it would be alright. I think many authors are using it too functionally- they’re viewing the language too functionally- as in only through the prism of communication. Personally, I use other languages- and I am using them more liberally than before- based on the aesthetics and rhythm-patterns of those sentences (invariably, the untranslatable ones) in their original, esoteric, colloquial forms. The usage is certainly not for the connotations, embedded in conversational pieces or otherwise, for the sake of realism. So, I guess the question of ‘why one does it’ should be as relevant as ‘what one does’, because it goes to the very core of the writing process.
Kunal wrote: "Rushdie had coined, championed or popularized- I don’t exactly remember the order- a term known as ‘chutneyficiation’ of English. In the same context, Tarun Tejpal once said that English, as a lang..."That was a good point to think upon - the reason behind the chutneyfication does have a serious impact on how or why we can or cannot justify the act - but for many, Rushdie is blasphemy as well - in terms of language distortion. What some may love about the colorful nature of his language is certainly what many others hate him - literally - for. Again, it is often a matter of personal tastes.
But one must remember that there never was a language called English. It has roots in the Celtic language, the Anglo-Saxons, the introduction of French through the Norman conquest, the addition of Latin and now so many words from other languages. English is itself a khichdi of innumerable languages that has melted and was standardized hardly 600 years, which is a very short period of time.
Franky, any language is a communication tool,in the absence of language, drums were also used. We have moved on ages ago from 'drums' off course. But, if you choose to decorate the drums and choose to showcase the drums itself, and then you take a stand that 'my drum is better than yours' then I think the essence of creating the drums in itself is lost- 'communication'. If an author is able to communicate and most importantly 'entertain' his audience,is able to 'connect' with them, then even if he uses a hollowed out log, to my mind, its okay.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on that. If after ages, language still serves only as a communicative tool, then maybe we haven't evolved enough. For me, literature especially, should not be about the sentences, but should be about their shadows, and dialogues should not be about the things they recount but rather, the things they allude to, and it's not only about aesthetic appeals of that, but because I think, it is starting to mirror the way we are, the way we've become- veiled, little islands. Look at the oeuvre of Gary Lutz in light of that argument. Maybe the trajectory is changing for some and doesn't resemble Foster Wallace's malaise anymore. Take an opposite example- even in great works like 'Breakfast at Tiffany's' where language has been used less experimentally, it still serves a purpose that is greater than mere functionality. The rhythm, rendition, phrasing, asides, exclusions- they all make Capote's novella, a masterpiece. See, otherwise, any writer is just joining narrative dots, he's not really 'writing'. I'm sure such an approach works for genre-fiction, where often the plot is everything. It doesn't work like that, always, in literary-fiction, hollowed-out log or otherwise.
Kunal wrote: "I'm sure such an approach works for genre-fiction, where often the plot is everything. It doesn't work like that, always, in literary-fiction, hollowed-out log or otherwise. ..."So no wonder readers of genre fiction feel this way about language and nothing wrong about that - a genre fiction using over-bearing flowery language is just about as tiresome/irritating to read as a literary fiction using functional language!
I wonder which genre are these latest metro read books by CB, Ravinder Singh etc... romance? really??
The way of writing. How someone brings up their characters and give them life. The beauty of writing. The plot is equally important, but it's the way it's written
Hi Kunal,Perfectly in agreement with you, however, when I say communicate,it includes all the nuances of communication, which is what you are referring to. 'Connecting dots', is rudimentary, conveying feelings, emotions and visuals is fleshing out the dots.
Regards
I wonder which genre are these latest metro read books by CB, Ravinder Singh etc... romance? really??I don't think we can pin it down to one genre, especially CB, but yes, Romance can be it, since all their works have it as an important sub-plot, critical to the storyline. Well, who cares? I would rather sit and do absolutely nothing than read them.
Trashy writing is not limited to any country - there are bad writers everywhere, and most 'free books for review' I reviewed were trashy as well - but not all - some were good-novels-gone-little-bad, while some were astonishingly original and well-written. I tend to take more chances now, unless the blurb of the book itself is cheesy romance. I refuse to look at it right away. The blurb itself is often a sample of the author's writing skills, and I find it a reliable way to judge the quality of writing.
Qube [V³] wrote: "Consequently, I would hold publishers more accountable for the current state of affairs than the writers..."Or the readers? We are but a miniscule percent here at goodreads. The majority of the reader base still prefers to consume their books and hence they publish what sells. Publishing industry, i believe, isn't yet at a level to dictate markets like the car industry does!
An author tells a story to the reader. The first and most important job when you tell a story is to keep the reader interested till the end. Now, you can do it two ways. Either come up with a really good, original story or tell your story in a remarkable way. Some authors can accomplish both of these feats very well, most can only accomplish one. As long as you are good at one of them, you have a shot at being a respected author.
Mostly for genre fiction- crime, fantasy, horror, a good imagination is very important. Coming up with a great plot, setting, twist suckers your reader in. Usually the readers of these genres will be paying attention to the story, not so much the language. That's not to say you can compromise on your language, but maybe you don't need to polish it to the same extent as others. You don't need to be as nuanced or poetic. Keep it correct, simple, appropriate to the context of your plot, and you'll have a happy reader.
In literary fiction, and I guess in romance as well, how you write is often more important than what you write. An ordinary story can be elevated greatly by your style. Readers here are getting more invested emotionally, they want pictures painted in words, they want your work to tug at their heartstrings or make them think hard. I personally find this style more difficult, but some are natural at this.
Again, some people decide what they want to write and adapt their style accordingly, but I think it's better if you know your style first and let that decide the kind of work you're going to write. If you can arrange a perfect marriage between the two, good for you. If you are better at one, I'd say work on it more than trying to improve the other style.
Aditya wrote: "Kunal wrote: "I'm sure such an approach works for genre-fiction, where often the plot is everything. It doesn't work like that, always, in literary-fiction, hollowed-out log or otherwise. ..."So ..."
The argument I was responding to, seemed to club all forms of writing together, or so I felt. I was pointing out that the requirements change based on the context and kind.
Hemant, in your example you're still talking about 'conveying' something to the reader. I was talking more in terms of Hemingway's iceberg and instances like when you use absolute or near-absolute asides that seldom have anything to do with the contingent plot-points or even the work's narrative/schema as a whole; and in those instances, nothing actually is conveyed to the readers but a lot is left to their interpretation, so there is no one message, and communication between two (author-reader) by definition, needs to have a message (sender-message-receiver-comprehension). It's not a question of direct/indirect or said/unsaid communication. Yes, in a larger sense, somebody is writing and somebody is reading, so there's an 'exchange'. Agreed, but I wouldn't always call it communication.
Well, when it comes to new authors amongst Indians, I haven't read them - the last was Ravinder Singh's awful first book. Those I referred to were authors from other countries who wrote great stuff - mostly fantasy or SF, but some of them were startlingly good, almost possible to include among first-rate writers.I do, however, doubt if Indian readers wouldn't read books other than the staples you mentioned. Only when the writer screws up, does s/he lose serious readership. Write well, and everything would sell, sooner or later. And platforms like GR coupled with ebook formats ensure a wide readership, if writers are willing to participate in different groups.
I've read first-time authors from Armenia as well, and most of his readership was from outside Armenia. No reason why an Indian cannot sell his/her book.
Thanks Sangita, for putting a hand on the rudder, though I have started this thread, I have been guilty of drifting along the cross currents of the views presented here, which are so absorbing!Coming back to the original theme;
Let me assure you, that there is a plethora of Indian Authors out there who are trying to get their work self published. And believe me their interests would be best served if they run their work past a professional editor. Go on the site of any self publishing book house and sample the stuff due for release. Just read the blurb/review and I can assure you that the discerning reader, some of whom I find here, will not touch it with the end of a barge pole!
Do these people think that their English or Angrezi is
that good? That they can do without?
The challenges of self publishing is in the marketing! Every newbie author (including yours humbly) thinks his/her book is going to be the next bestseller, regardless of the fact that many established Publishers have rejected their manuscripts.
In my opinion, any body aspiring to be an author, must first come and read what readers are expecting from them. A tour of Goodreads and other sites is a MUST.
Raven,Your post has been extremely helpful. This is precisely what I am referring to; that newbie or wannabe new Indian Authors must come and read precisely posts such as yours.
Thanks
@QubeAre you referring to Mainak Dhar by any chance? He published his works as ebooks on Amazon and became a bestselling author. Then, publishing houses came forward to publish his books too. My roommate recently bought "Alice in Deadland" by him.
@HemantThanks. Seeing as I don't write romance or campus novels, getting my work (yet to be finished) published is one of my prime concerns. Ever since CB happened, almost all newly graduated college students are mostly writing with dreams of a Bollywood movie adaptation (Durjoy Datta being the prime culprit here), so it reads more like a popcorn flick rather than anything absorbing.
Though I'm not that big a fan of Amish's work, I admire him for not following the generic path and starting a new trend. Now, more and more people are publishing mythological fantasy. This is exactly what happened in the US once Twilight was published. Teenage paranormal romances became the new craze and more and more bestsellers are still being published.
I'd like to know the process behind getting a book published and edited. Can someone please give some helpful tips? Self publishing is a last resort and I don't wanna go there unless absolutely necessary.
Recently I was talking to a new Indian author Prerna Varma, and she said many authors spend a lot of money to buy numerous copies of their own book to make it appear in a bestseller list. Once it happens, more people get curious and pick it up. Also, the amount of money needed to pay most publishing houses is quite huge and there's never any guarantee you'll earn it back.
Don't know clearly. Just what she told. About Mainak Dhar, yeah, I tried reading the first few pages of Alice in Deadland. Not good.
Oh you meant Kevan. I didn't know he was Indian? I have yet to buy "The Lost Shinmahs", hope to do it soon.
Kunal wrote: "The argument I was responding to, seemed to club all forms of writing together, or so I felt. I was pointing out that the requirements change based on the context and kind...."My post was meant for both the original argument as well as ur response - wanted to just delineate the issue of language as a means of communication across genres.
hemant wrote: "In my opinion, any body aspiring to be an author, must first come and read what readers are expecting from them. A tour of Goodreads and other sites is a MUST. ..."
Again doesn't that depend on what kind of author u want to be? Some literary fic authors don't really think much abt what readers want from them, they hardly ever scout such forums i guess for they are least interested in it and still end up writing better stuff. Many brilliant authors in the past never had an opportunity to talk to their readers, right? Once u start hearing to readers, u might end up trying hard to please them, rather than be the real u. For authors of genre fiction - does it help to visit these discussion forums? Maybe. But maybe it is much more helpful to read other popular (and non-popular) works in the same genre? Not sure.
Qube [V³] wrote: @Aditya: Personally, I would not hold readers responsible. Each one of us is what we are. There is run-of-the-mill Bollywood stuff, and there are good movies. Similarly in novels, the majority will be trash. But if publishers support trash to the exclusion of better writing, it's sad. Besides, it encourages mediocrity and discourages good writing."
I was talking of the majority here - the so called trend, as long as there are a majority of ppl out there lapping up Indian campus love stories, there is nothing that publishers can do to stop themselves from lusting behind those profits. The remaining readers are just left with the tough job of separating gold from the trash heap. Perhaps there would just be as many kinds of publishers as there are of writers and readers.
Hello RavenFrom reliable industry sources, I have been told that the publishing market (fiction) is becoming more 'Author driven'.
Today you can get profits up to 70%! This is what is offered by self publishing houses!
In reality the maths is as follows;
Suppose you get a book published through one of the SP Houses, then assuming the mrp is Rs 400/-;
50% of the mrp goes to the distributor, which is Rs 200/-
If the cost of printing the book is Rs 100/- then the net revenue is Rs 400.0 - Rs 200.00 - Rs 100.0 = Rs 100/- OFF which you as an author receive Rs 70/- and Rs 30/- goes to the Publishing house.
If your publisher converts it into an ebook, then the maths is as follows;
MRP $2.99 deduct 99 cents for bandwith, the balance is $2/- OFF which you receive $1.4 and the publisher gets $ 0.6
There are several packages offered by different Self Publishing houses, this includes Partridge, the lowest starts at Rs 14999/- the higher end packages are more than a lakh. Just google to find out.
Now people who get their books self published for whatever delusions they may be suffering from; usually end up marketing the book, which I can assure you can drive anybody up a wall. Little wonder the publishing market is 'Author driven'!
A writer who doesn't write in order to be famous or rich or well-regarded usually writes as s/he pleases - s/he has a distinct writing style and preferred subject matter, irrespective of readers' tastes or popular trends. It is that distinct signature style of one's own that they will not be willing to trade and settle for a cliched or expected plot/treatment.For such authors, virtual platforms or reader-feedback is less important than the opinion of those literary circles they hold in high regard, for whatever reason. They are more interested in what their like-minded counterparts think about, rather than readers.
Not saying they don't listen to readers, but that they don't trade their integrity for what readers demand. I doubt if Rushdie or Seth will write chick-lit if they realize it sells more than what they are currently writing. They will take reader-feedback, work upon it, of course, but won't scour for feedback on GR or overnight change their plot to campus stories.
Even if they do, ultimately, their distinct styles and ideological contexts will separate them from CB/Ravinder Singh kinds - simply because they cannot write that shallowly.
Ultimately, it is not even the genre that matters - it is the basic plot, character delineation, complexity of themes/ideologies, plot detailing and linguistic abilities/narration that will decide.
e.g. Plot-wise, there is nothing deep or remarkable about Wuthering Heights or The Portrait of a Lady - both are love-stories involving triangles/conflicts - perhaps easy to fit into a romantic novel of a girl torn between her lover and husband spurred by jealousy or passion. And yet these are unparalleled classics.
It is the technique with which a story is treated and the ensuing emotional complexity coupled with an appropriate narration that decides the genre.
A genre is decided on the basis of the themes it tackles as well as its stylistic techniques - plots do not ALWAYS decide genre.
A simple love story or mythological spin-off rendered fantastically with complex themes or emotions can be a classic too. But it is much more difficult to write, and most people write not only because they feel an urge to write, but they also itch to be famous and well-sold, whatever the price in terms of writing quality.
Lit BugYou just proved my point! An aspiring author may well heed your comment;
"It is the technique with which a story is treated....
This is what an aspiring author SHOULD read and understand. This is what I mean when they should read GR and other similar forum comments.
I will tell you how I have benefited;
My brain turned to curds, when I reread my manuscript 12 to 13 times, (actually I lost count!) To check for typos, spelling mistakes and gremlins. Why? Because discerning readers the 'top end of the pyramid' have stereotyped Indian authors and publishing houses. We generally 'expect' mistakes leading to 'trashing' a book, which otherwise has a good theme.
To write well, to ensure that it is free of errors is in the hand of the author. The rest is is up to the reading public.
We stopped the press in the midst of printing the book, when we saw a few mistakes in the manuscript. The printing has now resumed! Only after a week of scouring the manuscript for any more corrections.
Coming back to the original theme.Any aspiring author, has to have loads and loads of 'motivation' to write a book. Believe me its not that one decides to write a book and lo and behold! The book is ready.
Motivation comes from various sources - but mostly it comes from within, when one has ideas brimming over one's brains and a clear idea of how to arrange them. Sometimes, having clarity on what genre of book one intends to write has an immensely positive impact both on the book and the morale of the writer. In that case, there is a clear direction not only in terms of writing style, but also the contents one wishes to take/discard. A breezy sunny romantic moment hardly feels right in a gothic story, and it helps not messing up if the author knows well the direction s/he intends to take.I believe clarity of mind and a keen belief in the quality of one's own work are bigger motivators than any kind words or positive market trends of popularity and/or monetary reimbursement.
Besides typesetting they do provide many services which an aspiring author has no clue to;1. Converting the manuscript into an ebook.
2. Getting the ebook online.
3. Designing the book cover.
4. The inside of the book.
These are besides the standard services of getting the paperback actually published and distributed.
Actually one only knows how motivated one can be only after launching into actually writing a book. Writing a book of 80,000 words to 1,20,000 words is not a joke!Forget the eventual result, merely getting oneself to diligently type 2000 words a day, every day takes some doing.
I can assure you, even if one is brimming with ideas, getting stuck in a dead end is just as easy.
Believe me, like most of you, I have been reading since a very early age. I could never fathom the difficulties till i myself got down to putting pen to paper.
hemant wrote: "Coming back to the original theme.Any aspiring author, has to have loads and loads of 'motivation' to write a book. Believe me its not that one decides to write a book and lo and behold! The book ..."
I totally agree ...I used to think ideas, imagination and language would be enough to write book. Writing a book is no easy task.My problem is, I find myself brimming with ideas and when I write them down...I am never satisfied. I always find new mistakes each time I read and I get fed up correcting them. Seriously, never realized writing is so difficult.
I can relate with that as well, I only meant that when one is overflowing with seemingly wonderful ideas, motivation comes from that feeling itself, often more stronger than anybody else's motivation during a low-time. Maybe, it varies individually - each person has different sources of effective motivation. :)
Lit BugYes a beautiful idea is motivating indeed and does take you that extra mile. But whew! It does get exhausting, when as Lakshmi pointed out potential ideas rattle around your skull like a particle collider!
That is probably why a 'in the Flow' type of writer should adopt the 'structured' writing format.
Indian Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
Wuthering Heights (other topics)The Portrait of a Lady (other topics)
Like most of you out there, when I see a newbie author, I first read the jacket to find what the story is all about. If it fails to catch my interest there obviously the book is passed.
Talking about newbie Indian Authors, I have yet to pick one, trusting to stick to my old time favorites. But I guess the time has come to pick one of the books written by one of the upcoming fellows.
Wonder what you all have to say....