The Most Wonderful Time of the Year

In a previous iteration of my blog, some six or so years ago, I did a post about how Christmas can get all snarly and tangled up, what with all the extra stuff we "have" to do; and the financial, familial, and other stresses that can come with the season; and the expectation to feel joy now, right now, regardless of where you are emotionally otherwise. It was ultimately one of those "concentrate on the bits that actually matter" posts (you know, like, count your blessings and all that stuff). And in yet another iteration of the blog (years and years ago now, back when Livejournal and the like were still really, really popular, a whole bunch of my friends and I all had blogs on one of those platforms and it was like one big verbose interwebby family for a brief, wonderful little while), I did an "advent calendar" series, where I recommended a holiday thing or tradition each day and talked about why they mattered to me. (Alas, that blog is no longer extant, so no linky for you.) 

I feel a pull toward that kind of post again this year. I had a half-formed notion to do a quick post every day in November about something I’m thankful for, but then it was halfway through the month and I hadn’t done it at all. And I like the idea of sharing the things that *do* make me feel nice and warm and fuzzy and blessed at this time of year. So, starting on Friday and going on through Christmas day, I’ll be doing another advent calendar series of sorts. I’m calling it “Gratitude and Joy,” where each day I’ll share one thing I’m thankful for and one thing that brings me joy. In keeping with the season, many, though likely not all, of these things will be related to Christmas in some way. 

I hope that these posts will bring a little light and happiness into this season for you, whether Christmas has meaning for you or not, whether you are tending toward joy yourself or not in these last weeks of 2017.

When You're Afraid to Reread

While I'm not a big rereader, I do have my favorites that I come back to over and over. I seem to be perpetually in the midst of another Harry Potter reread, I come back to half-remembered books from my childhood occasionally, and I do a ritualized reread of A Christmas Carol every year (one stanza each evening from 20th December through Christmas Eve). I reread more often as a child and a teenager, possibly because I had fewer books available to me than I do now but I suspect more because I had less expectation that I "ought" to be reading certain things and just happily re-immersed myself in the stories I liked best. 

So I'm no stranger to the reread, but I have a handful of books I've been avoiding rereading, books that I loved so much at a certain moment in time that I'm afraid to go back to them lest they turn out to be less than wonderful and the memories are tainted. These are the books I would come back to precisely because I wanted to feel the same thing I felt last time but fear that feeling was singular and the memory of it is better than finding out I can't step into that particular textual river ever again.

Here are four books I hesitate to reread:

Number the Stars, Lois Lowry

I first read this World War II middle grade chapter book in fifth grade, and while I suspect I read it repeatedly around that time of my life, I've never reread it as an adult. I loved the story and the friendship between the main characters. It was probably one of my first experiences of enjoying a book while also understanding that it dealt with serious, real topics that were outside of the realm of what was entertaining. Ironically, it is my fear that my fuller, more complete adult understanding of the Holocaust will keep me from enjoying the book at all that keeps me from coming back to it now.

Heir to the Empire, Timothy Zahn

I no longer remember whether this is the first Star Wars book I ever read (I don't think so?), but it was early in my deep dive into Star Wars fandom early in high school. Every summer I spent a week or so with my grandparents, and I remember so clearly lying on a patio chair in their breezeway just inhaling this book. While the book itself was good and certainly helped cement my growing love of Star Wars, it is more the memory of reading it that I do not wish to disturb with a reread. Maybe if I read it again it would be just as fun as the first time and I would just add another layer to my memory of the book. But what if I was bored? Better to let it alone.

Circle of Friends, Maeve Binchy

I loved Maeve Binchy as a teenager and read several of her books. Circle of Friends was always my favorite, though. I loved all the characters, the setting was fascinating to me, and I found the way the book didn’t end with everything all tied up neatly and predictably happily both disturbing and refreshingly realistic. I’ve tried reading some Binchy as an adult, and I always wander away from them, finding them too loosely focused and a little too twee. It’s entirely possible that her writing style changed since Circle of Friends and I would find that one just as grabbing as I did at fifteen, but I’d rather not risk finding out I don’t.

Jane Eyre, Charlotte Brontë

Of all the books here, this is the one I’m most likely to reread despite my reservations. I *love* Jane Eyre, and I have since the first time I read it, at sixteen, largely on the bus coming home from school. I was completely caught up in the gothickiness and the moors and the mysterious Mr. Rochester. I loved the way Jane stood up for her sense of what was right and that she didn’t take the safe, secure option. I rejoiced in its happy ending. I have reread Jane Eyre at least once since that first time but not recently. I know so much more about life now, and about the world, and I’m much more aware of the flaws of Jane’s time period. The way I would think about and react to so much of this novel will have changed so much. Bits that were just great story when I was younger will now have troubling things to say about mental health and race and misogyny and colonialism. And all that is good and as it should be. I have just not yet been willing to tramp through my love of this book with my adult, open eyes. That I get to waffle about “ruining” my initial innocent read of this book is, of course, a result of my own privilege, and I doubt that I’ll be able sit around without properly interrogating my memory of this book for much longer.

There you have it! Some of my favorite books I’m hesitant to reread. What are some of yours?

Fitting Podcasts into Your Life

Whenever I talk about podcasts to friends and family, I inevitably hear from someone that they’re interested in checking some out but just don’t know how they could possibly fit them into their lives. Occasionally I suspect that’s just polite speak for “Ug, *again* with this. We’re changing the subject.” But for those who really are interested but aren’t sure how to do yet. another. thing, I am here to help. Read on!

Make 'Em Portable

Many podcasts can be listened to on the web (and therefore through your computer), but if you’re having trouble levering them into your routine, your best bet is to make podcasts as portable as possible. Find you a podcatcher (the app that will let you download, listen, and subscribe to podcasts--Google “podcatcher recs” and find the one that is right for you and your device) for your phone. Great! Now you have access to your podcasts pretty much anywhere. How you get the soundwaves into your earballs is the next step. I honestly just turn the sound up decently high on my phone and put my phone in my back pocket, speaker up. The phone (and the podcast) go with me wherever I go as I’m going about household things, and I can hear perfectly well over everything except the vacuum cleaner. Headphones are also an option (maybe a wireless pair if you could join me in the Impossibly Tangled Up in My Headphone Wires Club), especially if you need to be considerate of other humans sharing your space. Should you just need bigger sound than your phone can produce, there are any number of small, portable, affordable Bluetooth speakers on the market that can help you with that. Bottom line is: make it easy for you to take your podcasts anywhere and hear them wherever you go. Then you can start slotting them into your routine whenever you have the chance.

Make Car Time Fly

If you can connect your phone to your car’s stereo system through Bluetooth, it’s easy to listen to podcasts in the car. Turn your commute into your favorite time of day by catching up with your favorite podcasts while you get all the places you need to be.

Listen Whenever Your Ears Are Free

Remember Mary Poppins’s spoonful of sugar and how it helped the medicine go down? Podcasts are the sugar that helps me get the chores done. Cooking? Dishes? Cleaning? Bill paying? Laundry folding? Organizing books? All a little more fun with the latest episode of my favorite podcast playing in the background. They help the time pass, and if you’re like me, the carrot of the podcast might actually help you get to some chores you’d otherwise let slide. Think outside the box here, too. Maybe listen in the shower. (If I turn the volume up all the way and put the phone down on the shelf just outside the shower, I can hear just fine unless my actual ears are completely under the actual stream of water. Probably there are more high-tech, water proofy ways to accomplish this too.) Listen when you take the dog out. (I listened to the entire backlog of a podcast by turning it on every time I took our new puppy out last summer.) Listen while you get ready for bed. (A nice, soothing podcast helps me wind down as I do the handful of small things that have to happen before lights out—checking the front door is locked, giving the cat fresh water, turning on the dishwasher, brushing my teeth, etc.)

Make Them an Excuse to Do a Handsy Thing

Do you have a knitting project languishing in your basket? Is your sewing machine gathering dust? Is there a half-assembled model ship in your basement? Podcasts are excellent “background” for any kind of project you do with your hands, especially if you’re like me and the constant changing of focus if you try to watch TV while doing handwork gives you a headache.  

Sweat!

If you’re exercising already, consider listening to a podcast while you do it. Cycle them in with your music or audiobooks. If you aren’t exercising already, use the podcasts as a bribe to get yourself to do it. Walk around the block until you’ve got through a whole episode. Voilà! Thirty minutes or an hour of exercise under your belt!

Listen with a Buddy or a Boo

Pick a podcast that you’d enjoy with a good friend or your significant other and make listening to it a date. Make an event out of it—have a living room picnic or snuggle on the couch or listen on the way to a favorite restaurant and then discuss the ep over your favorite meal together.

Give Yourself Permission to Do Nothing Else for a Few Minutes a Day

You work too hard. (Oh yes you do.) Take fifteen minutes for yourself. Shut the door. Sit down. Put your feet up. Do nothing else but listen. Ahhhh. And remember: you don’t have to listen to a whole podcast episode in one go. Your catcher will remember your place. If you only have fifteen minutes, just listen for fifteen minutes. Catch the rest of it next time.

All right, what are you waiting for? Go forth and listen to your heart’s content!

So You Want to Read a Romance Novel

Recently an article appeared in The New York Times Book Review rounding up romance novels being released this fall, and the romance community reacted with disappointment, disgust, and bewilderment to its tone and stance. (See some of the best reactions pieces from Ron Hogan; Sarah Wendell from Smart Bitches, Trashy Books; and Amanda Diehl at BookRiot.) The editorial director of the books section at NYTBR has responded, and readers are even more annoyed at that tone-deaf, condescending response (see the comments section of that article). I thought about writing about my own reaction to the piece, but it would largely be repeating what so many have already said so well. So, instead, I give you a handful of recommendations for romance reads, selected from among my favorites. While each of these is a particular favorite of mine, they also provide a small sample of the variety of scenarios and issues romance novels examine. Follow the title links to Amazon for plot descriptions and the author links for more about each author. 

For Real, Alexis Hall

Contemporary, m/m

Explores a BDSM relationship between two men with a significant age difference. Exquisite writing and a story that turns stereotypes about BDSM on their head.

Carry the Ocean, Heidi Cullinan

Contemporary, m/m

Centers around two young men navigating mental health issues as well as their budding relationship. Considered representation of depression, anxiety, and autism.

Trade Me, Courtney Milan

Contemporary m/f

Explores class and race issues and spotlights eating disorders in men.

Captive Prince Trilogy, C.S. Pacat

Fantasy, m/m

Lush world building and a slow-burn examination of hatred, loyalty, and love.

A Rogue by Any Other Name, Sarah Maclean

Regency, m/f

Fascinating interactions between hero and heroine within the confines of regency-era society coupled with feminist sensibilities and a lot of wit.

Of course, these recommendations are limited to my own experience with romance and lack the full breadth of what the genre has to offer. For even more variety to explore, check out these lists:

Diverse Historical Romances (Book Riot)

The Best Romance Novels (NPR)

Romance Reviews by Genre, Archetype, and Theme (Smart Bitches, Trashy Books)

Best Lesbian Romance Novels (Jezebel)

Three Authors Discuss Their Favorite Romance Authors Featuring People of Color (Bitchmedia)

Happy reading!

More (Less Bookish) Podcasts for Your Earballs

A few months back (it was five months back; it was in April; the older I get, the less I understand how time works), I recommended some of my favorite bookish podcasts. I've been meaning to do a follow-up post about other podcasts I love, podcasts that might not be so closely tied up in books in reading. *clutches pearls* And here it is! Other podcasts I put in my ears weekly, recommended for your very much listening pleasure:

Dear Hank and John, weekly, Tuesdays 

Hank and John are Hank Green and John Green, that is the VlogBrothers. Also, yes, that John Green, who wrote The Fault in Our Stars and has a new book coming out in a couple of weeks. They describe their show as "a comedy podcast about death where two brothers answer your questions, give you dubious advice, and bring you the week's news from Mars and AFC Wimbledon." Listeners write in with questions, sometimes silly, sometimes quite serious, and Hank and John give answers, often both silly and serious. It's funny, it's sometimes informative, it's often thoughtful, and it's just a great time. Also: news from Mars and AFC Wimbledon. Where else are you going to get that all in one package? 

Pantsuit Politics, varies, ~2x per week

Two women talk about the most pressing national political topics of recent days (and sometimes their local politics), often interviewing expert guests. They do a great job representing both the right and the left, and this is one of my go-to places to get thoughtful, careful discussion of all the news that's carving a hole in my gut. Their tag-line is "Sarah from the left. Beth from the right. No shouting. No insults. Plenty of nuance." No echo chamber here, folks.

From the Front Porch, weekly, Thursdays

Hosted by Annie Jones, the owner of independent bookstore The Bookshelf in Thomasville, Georgia, and Chris Jensen, a Bookshelf staffer, From the Front Porch provides "conversations on books, small business, and life in the South." Episode formats vary, sometimes comprising recaps of the books Annie and Chris have read in the past month, sometimes taking the form of a round-table discussion ("Love It or Loathe It") involving several staffers from the shop about a particular book, and sometimes featuring discussion and recommendations about books on a certain topic. Whatever the format, it's always a thoughtful, delightful half hour of book and bookstore talk. 

Harry Potter and the Sacred Text, weekly, Tuesdays

Hosts Vanessa Zoltan and Casper ter Kuile, both graduates of Harvard Divinity School, discuss the Harry Potter novels as sacred texts, looking at one chapter a week and reading that chapter through a chosen theme and through one of several spiritual practices drawn from various spiritual traditions. The podcast is a perfect blend of fun, serious, and spiritual, with most episodes calling on listeners to examine their lives and choices through the lens of the week's theme. They've gotten through HP3 at this point; I recommend starting at the beginning. I usually listen to this podcast as I'm getting ready for bed, and I find it a lovely way to close out the day.

The West Wing Weekly, weekly, Tuesdays

This is a recap and discussion show about The West Wing, hosted by Hrishikesh Hirway and Joshua Malina (who played Will Bailey on The West Wing from season four on). They go episode by episode, discussing each as viewers and fans, with some behind-the-scenes stuff from Malina, as well. They also frequently interview former cast and crew members. Fascinating stuff.

(Podcast links above take you to a web presence for each show, sometimes a website, sometimes a patreon, whevs, something associated directly with that podcast. Invariably, the best way to listen, however, is to subscribe through your podcatcher of choice. If you're looking for a new (or your first) podcatcher, your Google-fu should snag you some good recommendation lists for Iphone and Android. I use Podcast Addict. It does the thing.)

A Janeite with a million rereads under her bonnet must be in want of a retelling

We've been hovering around various bicentennial moments to do with Jane Austen for a couple of years now (four of her novels were published between 1811 and 1815; she died in July of 1817; the two others of the six of her major works were published posthumously in 1818), so I thought I'd share some of my favorite Austen-related media. *whispers* It's all going to be Pride and Prejudice related, you guys. P&P is my very particular jam. 

Recommendations

Pride and Prejudice (2005)

I gather this is somewhat of an unpopular opinion, but I like this version of P&P, starring Keira Knightley and Matthew MacFadyen, much more than the 1995 BBC version with Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth (wet shirt scene not withstanding). The BBC version is certainly more accurate, in that it includes much more of the original story and its portrayal of the characters is a fairly direct interpretation of the book. But the Knightley/MacFadyen movie, to me, is a much more enjoyable experience. I also like the interpretations of the characters and the situation the movie provides, making everyone (especially the Bennets) just a bit earthier than the earlier version (and the book). I’m also quite fond of the way the 2005 movie depicts Mr. and Mrs. Bennet’s relationship—Mrs. Bennet is still a meddling, irksome, hard-to-live with irritant and Mr. Bennet is still too little interested and invested in the lives and realities of his daughters, but you can see that there is some affection between them. I cannot stand Mrs. Bennet in the BBC mini-series, like to the degree I kind of don’t ever want to watch it again. *shrug* Just me, perhaps, but I recommend the 2005 movie for a lovely couple of P&P hours.  

Lost in Austen

Lost in Austen is a four-part British television show that follows Amanda Price, a twenty-something who adores Pride and Prejudice and especially Mr. Darcy.  She’s in a relationship with a perfectly all right bloke—no Mr. Darcy, mind—and both her mother and the bloke think it’s about time they got married. Then one day she finds a portal in her bathroom into the attic at Longbourn and stumbles into the world of P&P just as the story is getting started. Elizabeth is missing, having gone through to modern-day London, and Amanda takes the place of a visitor among the Bennet family. And then things ensue. Sounds kooky, right? Oh, it is, in the best possible way. Every time I watch it, I think, “This is just silly.” And then I get completely caught up in the re-imagining of the story and Amanda’s commentary on it. For the most part, it’s just light and frothy and wonderful, but watch out for a short scene in the last episode where Darcy slips into the modern world briefly. If you ever needed a visual for “poleaxed,” you’ll get it. The actor playing Darcy (Elliot Cowan) does an amazing job in that moment, conveying approximately eleventy-billion emotions in Darcy all in one small moment. Also, Amanda’s utter desire to leave the modern world and all the advances she enjoys in it as a woman in favor of the early 19^th century is nicely balanced by the way Elizabeth absolutely *thrives* in the modern world. Watch it. I know you’ll love it.

An Assembly Such as This, Duty and Desire, and These Three Remain, Pamela Aiden

This trilogy of novels retells Pride and Prejudice from Mr. Darcy’s point of view. Aiden follows Darcy throughout the entire time covered in P&P, which means she has a good deal of story to invent from whole cloth, as there are great swathes of P&P during which Darcy is not only not on the page, but we don’t really know what he’s up to. Then there are all the delightful bits of the original where we *do* know what he was doing, but we don’t get to see it (his search for Lydia and the subsequent events, for instance). This is the first straight-up retelling of Pride and Prejudice (rather than something modernizing and/or inspired by it, such as Bridget Jones’s Diary) I ever encountered, and it’s still my favorite.

Pride and Prejudice audiobook, read by Rosamund Pike

Rosamund Pike’s performance of the unabridged Pride and Prejudice on audio is stunningly good. (She played Jane in the 2005 movie, too, if you’re trying to place why that name already seems connected to P&P.) She does an excellent job at the narration and breathes particular and exquisite life into each of the characters. I full-heartedly recommend it.

Illustrated Pride and Prejudice, illustrated by Shiei

Published by Seven Seas Entertainment, this edition of Pride and Prejudice contains manga-style black-and-white illustrations throughout (about two per chapter) and features full-color details of some of those illustrations at the front of the book as well as drafts at the back. It’s just delightfully fun and a neat mash-up of two different media styles.

On My Radar

Heartstone, Elle Katharine White

I haven’t gotten to this one yet, but this fantasy novel has been described to me as “Pride and Prejudice with dragons.” And, I mean, sold. From the back cover: “They say a Rider in possession of a good blade must be in want of a monster to slay—and Meybourne Manor has plenty of monsters.” This one is high on my TBR.

Pride and Prejudice graphic novel, illustrated by Robert Deas, text adapted by Ian Edington

I’ve been getting more and more into graphic novels and some comics over the last couple of years, so I’m excited to get to this graphic novel retelling of Pride and Prejudice. The art looks great, and I look forward to sitting down with the book and getting wrapped up in this interpretation of the world of Elizabeth Bennet. 

Not My Jam But Possibly Yours

Well Played, Katrina Ramos Atienza

This short novel is a modern retelling of Pride and Prejudice set at a university in the Phillipines and features a soccer-playing Lizzie-character and a math nerd Darcy- character. While the premise really appeals to me, I couldn’t get into the swing of the story. YMMV.

Before the Fall  (2016)

I watched this movie retelling of Pride and Prejudice literally within a few hours of finding out it existed. In this modern version set in Virginia, the Elizabeth (Ben) and Darcy (Lee) characters are both men. I love, love, love, this kind of swapping around of genders and/or roles and/or sexualities in retellings. Unfortunately, I thought the film was kind of uneven. So much of the touchstones of the story were changed that I found the whole thing very muddled. In addition to the change in setting and time period (givens, of course, in a modern retelling) and genderswap of Elizabeth and having the love story between two men, the particulars of Ben and Lee’s misunderstandings of one another and their situation bring in two thorny issues I don’t think the film adequately accounts for (domestic abuse and alcoholism), and it class-swaps Jane and Bingley (Bingley is poor; Jane is wealthy). It was just too much to be going on with. But. In my opinion, worth watching to see what they’ve done with the story and to support the film. (I’m still waiting for a movie where Elizabeth is a man (or Darcy is a woman) and not. one. other. thing. (except maybe the pronouns—or not) is changed about the story or the language. No explanations. Just genderswapped. Give it to meeee.)

Because it *&%$$ means "tenth"

If I woke up one morning and found myself living in a society where it was necessary to declare one's position on grammatical usage, I'd call myself a descriptivist. As a rule, I'm much more interested in how people use language and how language changes than I am in adhering to rules about how language "should" be deployed. Except in certain specific instances where demonstrating one's ability to follow the rules is either the point or otherwise very important, I think that if you're understood, you're doing it right.

However. How. stinking. ever. There is such a thing as nuance. There is such a thing as precision. We abandon these to our peril.

The imprecise use of language and the ignoring of nuance, I think, we ought to try to avoid whenever possible, for any "wrong" usage in these cases contributes to the wearing away of the precision and nuance we are trying to preserve. We should take the most care in written, reviewed, published use of language, where erring on the side of precision should reign. One of the precise words I most often see used imprecisely is "decimate," which originally meant to kill one in ten of a group, probably as a punishment for the whole. This meaning has almost entirely been replaced by the usage of to destroy a large part of something. This latter (and later) usage is so common (and the need for the former now so relatively unlikely), that I can't get up too much ire at it. But it does serve as an excellent example of the sort of thing I'm getting at. The original definition was very specific; the currently common one is not. The precision of the original is flattened out by the broader sense of its successor. Now, this change is one of the niftiest things about language, how a word can alter and morph from a meaning we don't have much use for into one we will put to work. But imagine how hard it would be to claw back the original meaning if we needed it. Imagine how much insisting we would have to do that we meant "decimate" literally if we were to need to mean it literally. The issue is not, perhaps, that there is actually anything wrong with the "wrong" meaning, but rather that the repeated use of that "wrong" meaning eventually denies us access to the "right" meaning. I don't have any great fears about losing the earlier meaning of "decimate." Let it go, I guess. And may we never need its literal meaning, actually, 'cause yikes. But what of other words whose meanings are flattening out because of our imprecise use of them?

I don't give a rooti-toot about many of the much bally-hooed grammatical errors of grade school and the self-appointed grammar mavens of the internet comments section. Split an infinitive? Sure, do the thing that sounds most agreeable. End a sentence with a preposition? That is something up with which I am willing to put. The most important thing is making yourself understood. Sometimes diction and conforming to a particular kind of discourse are also important, but for most of us, most of the time, meaning is what matters. But that is why I will always stump for maintaining our precision and nuance. Splitting an infinitive (or not) rarely changes the meaning of what one is trying to say. Same with ending a sentence with a preposition. Or starting a sentence with a conjunction. But please don't confuse "their," "they're," and "there" because they don't mean the same thing. Many of us, even if we sometimes use the wrong "there," know that we've made the mistake, or at least know there's a mistake to be made around the use of that word. It probably sticks with us because it looks like a spelling error, the kind of error that is definitive and easy to understand. The kinds of "errors" around meaning that bother me most are the ones that most of us don't realize are occurring, because our language is, as it does, changing. It’s one of my small, nerdy pleasures to watch that happen. Gives me a little tingle just there on the back of my neck. But I have a handful of words I’m fighting a one-woman battle to preserve, because I want to be able to say what they say. Maybe you have your own little list. Maybe we can put our lists together and they’ll call it a movement. Won’t you please join me in championing these lovelies:

Ambivalent. It doesn’t mean you don’t care. It means you can’t decide. “Do you want to go out for dinner or order in?” “Whichever you like.” ß Doesn’t care. “I’m not sure. A nice sit-down dinner would be lovely, but there’s an appeal to not having to put on pants.” ßAmbivalent.

Discomfit. To embarrass. Distinct from “discomfort.” (“Discomfit” is another one of those words that used to have a specific battle-related meaning, by the way.) The conflation of these two words is almost certainly down to language’s tendency to drift toward less complicated pronunciation. “Discomfort” sounds like “discomfit” when said quickly or in certain accents. Nifty! But, Save the Words! (I’m gonna get T-shirts made up.)

Discreet. Judicious. Done with care, especially in regards to privacy.

Discrete. Separate. Distinct. Detached. It looks like a spelling mistake, but it’s really *important scary voice* the Murder of Meaning. *pets words*

Disinterested. Not influenced by the potential outcome; having no personal stake in the result.

Uninterested. Not interested; doesn’t care about the thing. “Disinterested” originally was used to mean “uninterested,” but since we’ve got the distinction now, I think we ought to keep it. (So handy.)

Niggardly. Stingy.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with that other word that starts with “n.” Noooothiiiing. Even their etymologies are completely unrelated. “Niggardly” comes from a Middle English word that meant, well, stingy. And the other word comes from a Latin word for black. The only thing they have in common is an unfortunate similarity in pronunciation. (And a resemblance on the page.) I’m resigned to losing this one, honestly, and I’m okay with it. I’d rather lose a smidgen of nuance by using one of the many close synonyms for “niggardly” than barrel around using a word that can be mistaken for a terrible offense, especially when I know the potential for that offense is there. But I would like us to collectively remember that they aren’t related. Because I like to remember things like that, sure, but also because some people are still using “niggardly,” and if we can keep people from being genuinely hurt by a misunderstanding, I call that good.

Nonplussed. Who the codex even knows what this hecking word means at this point? Honestly. The original definition is: surprised or confused to the point of not knowing what to do. But in the US (and maybe Canada? I dunno, Canadians, have you succumbed to this madness?) it has come to mean pretty much exactly the opposite: unperturbed; like, cool as a cucumber. And all right, sure. Words flip their meanings like that sometimes. (Nifty!) But not all English speakers use this word in the same way. Oh, JimJim is nonplussed. But is JimJim written by a Brit or an US? And not all Americans use the word the same way, because some of us are Save the Words nutjobs (T-shirts at the back) and insist on using the “correct” definition. And the thing is, sometimes it’s hard to tell from the context which meaning the author meant. *holds head* Oh my ears and whiskers. If you gotta use “nonplussed,” I’m honestly for the original definition because it’s such a great word used that way. I mean, characters in a tither, how grand. But mostly when I see this word (especially in a novel), Brain just says, “Dunno. Maybe bears. Wouldn’t risk it.”

There you have it, folks: Laura’s pretty good conglomerate of endangered wordlets. (Aren’t they cute?)

What’s yours?