The idea is for one large interview to appear (cut up in pieces like Osiris--to be eventually collected like Osiris as well), sprinkled here and there over the web. To put it another way (without that troublesome Osiris), your question will appear in three ways: on your blog, along with my answer; here, as a question only but pointing to your blog; and lastly as an item in a round-up Table-of-Contents post (also linking to your blog.)
Confused yet?
Along with the piece of an interview, I'll ask you to post some information about the book--an image, some comments, some information. Note: you don't have to be an author or have a blog that focuses primarily on books. In fact, I think the idea of having launch posts on all sorts of blogs is a fun idea.
Write me at smaragdineknot [AT] gmail.com for The Complete Skinny on The Great Blog Pilferage. Or, less sweetly, An Infestation of Blogs. Or Major Palace Annexation. (I hope for major, rather than minor--one never knows with takeovers.) Or whatever it shall be named.
Update, late March 4th: So far I have three visual artists, a novelist, two poets, and one historian signed up. And I've already answered two questions. Come play!
Update, late March 4th: So far I have three visual artists, a novelist, two poets, and one historian signed up. And I've already answered two questions. Come play!
Happy to do an Artlog post to celebrate the publication of the book. I'll review too it once I've read it, if that would be a help.
ReplyDeleteClive, you Saint--
ReplyDeleteIt's funny but I got immediate response at the email address from... painters!
Me, too, it should go without saying...though I still am befuddled. The creation and purpose of the smallish question (mine) will be explained, I assume, after I write to above-referenced gmail?
ReplyDeleteLaura, I shall write you!
ReplyDeleteAnd there I thought I was clear--but what is clear is that I am not marketer! Still, shall do my little best.
Did I remember to say that I love painters and printmakers, my first responders here and via email?
ReplyDeleteI do.
Thank you.
I'm in. When do you want the question by?
ReplyDeleteHi Dale, you kindly soul--
ReplyDeleteWhenever it comes to you is fine, although well before the 30th would be pleasant.
I will think up a better question than the one burning now, which is: where on earth did the second 'l' in camellia come from? The 'e' is long, right? So it ought not to be followed by a double consonant. I've always thought there was one 'l', till looking at this title. Kamel, Camelus, camellia. Hmm. Or does anyone pronounce it with a short 'e'? Did Linnaeus intend a short 'e'?
ReplyDeleteGood question. As it is burning, maybe you will come back and tell me. On the first Mercer copy for the catalogue, it was spelled wrong--so you're not the only one who thinks it looks funny.
ReplyDeletePerhaps it's a result of being a Southern flower--perhaps pronunciation changed.
Go drag out the OED!
Oh, hang on--I think I have found it.
You really can find everything on the web:
ReplyDelete(1) In MIDDLE ENGLISH, final l in monosyllables after a single vowel letter was often single (al, ful, wel) but except in recent coinages like nil, pal it is now doubled (all, bull, cell, fill, gull, hall, mill, pull, will). In long-established COMPOUNDS, however, such forms commonly have one l: almost, also, although, until, welcome BrE wilful. Contrast standard all right and non-standard but common alright. (2) Single l is usual when two vowel letters precede (fail, haul, peel, coal, foul, tool) or when e follows (pale, while, pole, rule). (3) Doubled ll usually signals a preceding short vowel: compare the related vale/valley. The chief exceptions are monosyllables such as roll, the anomalous adverb wholly, tulle (derived from a French placename), and camellia.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/L.aspx
Not that it really digs into why.
ReplyDeleteWell you know I'm in!
ReplyDeleteSusanna
Hurrah for that!
ReplyDeleteLife is always better with Susanna and hats... Just stuck you down as no. 6 on the master list.
Number 6! You know I'm your biggest fan! Who else would wear a hat with sparkers on it.....
ReplyDeleteJust kidding, but I know how you luvs you some hats with sparkers!
Hah.
ReplyDeleteFirst come, first served--you should have rushed in here with your hat on fire! You took the pledge sixth, alas. However, you are always first when it comes to hats, bonfires, and verve.
Because you are a sparkler all on your own, Susanna. And still the subject of my no. 1 blog post. 1,384 visitors have read that interview. Impressive.
I don't have my OED handy, so I'm trying to piece it together... Linnaeus took the name from one Kamel, a contemporary Czech botanist. Kamel often (like Linnaeus, only we still use his) used a Latinization of his name: Camellus. (tho I've also seen Camelus, which is the ordinary Latin spelling for "camel.") I'm guessing that Linnaeus at least thought that Kamel's preferred spelling was Camellus (perhaps to distinguish him from the beast?). But "Kamel" exists in Linnaeus' native Swedish as well, prounced ka-MEEL: hence the long vowel. Maybe.
ReplyDeleteDale,
ReplyDeleteSo glad you put on your etymological hat. It sounds very plausible (and few would want to be a camel!), though of course "maybe" is always in order.
I'll do it if you answer my question in an audio file and I get to post that audio recording on my blog. Youse knows how to reach me.
ReplyDeleteSure! I have some other things to record as well--some fiction and a poem for a magazine. Need to put Audacity on my new computer...
ReplyDeleteIs the Pip question taken? If not, I get first dibs.Because I want to know the answer! This is probably not the place to pose the above question, Miss Marly. Nevertheless.
ReplyDeleteNope. It is not taken! Just got a few more questions this morning, and none ask that one. Although one does ask about the name of the orphanage.
ReplyDeleteI haven't responded to this because I don't have a clue what question to ask; otherwise, you're always more than welcome on my blog or writer's site or wherever. However, if there is anything I can do to help market your books (I seem to have some ideas for marketing mine that others don't, and more than my share of chutzpah), please call on me. Perhaps I am your b-m fairy?
ReplyDeleteYou can count me in. However,two things i must point out:
ReplyDeletea: i have few followers
b: i have not clue (at this point) what i would ask...but i think i could come up with something. Just not sure how helpful i can be...but i will mull it over as best i can.
Robbi, you do have chutzpah! Great in poetry land!
ReplyDeleteI'll send you something...
zephyr,
ReplyDeleteI don't discriminate by numbers! Sure, jump in!
Vicki and Robbi--
ReplyDeleteIf you want to host some info plus a little excerpt, that would work too. Then you don't have to deal with a question...
(For that matter, I guess we could repeat a question.)
That will work fine Marly!
ReplyDeleteTrala, sounds good to me!
ReplyDelete