And then I was browsing through the Guardian, and read Mal Peet's review of The Terrible Thing that Happened to Barnaby Brocket, by John Boyne, and found this: "Yet, when reading a book, do you not sometimes wish you had been its editor? Had you been, in this case, you might have redacted solecisms such as the presence of foxes in Zambia or a marble sign "pinned" to a wall."
(At which point I had to look up solecisms--here. I don't think it's quite the right word, but I don't know a better one. Also I vaguely feel that there might be some sort of fox equivalent in Zambia).
However, nothing will erase the jarring shock that happened in a book I read a while back in which an Antiquarian book collector didn't know what "foxed" meant. How can you really look on the book favorably after that? Yet it is a small mistake, not worth mentioning in one's review...even though it had a very real effect.
Have you ever had this small mistake blotting the otherwise clear pages of a book thing happen to you?
(Edited to add: I am not, as readers of my blog might well have noticed, bothered by spelling mistakes, in large part cause I don't see them. My husband has just pointed out that there were three in this post. Sigh.)
0 comments:
Post a Comment