RAT Grammar

[TravSD@aol.com]

I resubmit: a predilection for the dotting of eyes and the crossing of tees 
is evidence to me that someone is overlooking essentials: talent, passion, a 
point of view and a sensibility that makes the heart sing. My point is not 
that people should not be concerned with the rules of language (they must 
certainly be learnt in order to be broken), but that all too often UNTALENTED 
people DWELL on SUPERFICIAL mistakes and completely MISS THE POINT of fine 
writing. The numerous knee-jerk responses to the previous missive reinforced 
that point in concrete. A famous mixed metaphor from Hamlet: "...take up arms 
against a SEA of troubles, and, by opposing, end them." A sword is not likely 
to do a world of damage against a body of water, but which of you is brave 
enough to correct Shakespeare? Do you actually think you can improve him by 
imposing your grammar on him? I challenge you to take your cherished blue 
pencil and do so. And would you change the spelling of "publick" in Poor 
Richard's Almanac? I kind of like it the old way: it has charm, and the way 
the New York Times spells it does not. If it comes to that, I'll take charm 
over "acceptable to the ironclad dictates of Strunk and White" any day of the 
week. And yes I am a professional writer, I have a piece coming out in 
American Theatre in December and a play going up at HERE in January. Please 
attend, if only to throw dictionaries at the actors.