Language & Literature (The Great Illustrated Classics)

From a company called Waldman Publishing comes a series of books with one purpose in mind: rewrite the classic novels of our modern world into books geared toward young readers. 66 classics ranging from Aesop's Fables to The Invisible Man re-tell masterpieces in abridged versions that are easy enough for children to read. Almost everyone has come across one of these books at some point or another, yet not everyone appreciates the value of these books. The Great Illustrated Classics give young readers the first taste of great literature. They allow them to be exposed to the stories that had the most lasting impressions on readers for ages while still being able to read on a level suitable for them. Another factor that is helpful in the series is that on every other page there is a full-page drawing that corresponds with the text. This helps young readers grasp the content more easily and be able to truly visualize the story. What these stories lack is the presence of the original author's artistic writing and use of literary devices. This, however does not take away from the stories because the purpose of the books is to introduce young scholars to the classics. If they read an abridged story which focuses mainly on the action of the story, they will have a much greater hunger to read the classics in their unabridged forms when these children get older. I have had this personal experience and it has greatly effected me. I own 38 of the 66 books and have read at least half of the ones I own. They have shown me that reading the classics actually does serve a purpose in gaining knowledge. A great facet of the series is that despite the revision of the works, the details remain the same. I proved this to myself when I read The Great Illustrated Classic version of The Picture of Dorian Gray for my summer reading assignment heading into 11th grade. When I was asked to write a detailed essay on the book, I received the highest grade in the class: 100%. I hope to pass my collection onto my children someday in order to educate them in the classic works of literature.

Literature (Apostrophes & Contractions)

In my somewhat-experienced opinion, I believe that many, if not all of the rules of the English language should be investigated and questioned. The questioning shouldnt be done for the purpose of disputing a rule, but for making sure that the rules still relevant and holds merit in the use of the English language. For instance, one shouldnt say "that rule was made by some old dudes who thought they knew everything like 200 years ago. Its probably obsolete." Instead, one should say "there is probably a reason why no one has gotten rid of this rule for a long, long time. Lets see if we can figure out why its necessary." Then if it is found that the rule doesnt serve a clear and necessary purpose, one could begin to question it. I have taken a stab at this myself in an amateur way. Without conducting formal research and basing all of my information on prior knowledge of the language, I have begun to question the necessity of the apostrophe in contractions.
From what i have gathered, the apostrophe is used to denote the fact that a word or words in a contraction have been shortened. It is sometimes used to interrupt diphthongs that would be created in contractions like "shouldnt." From looking at a list of English contractions I have concluded that in all contractions, the pronunciation is normal, i.e. "it sounds the way it looks." The apostrophe is ignored when pronouncing and is therefore, useless in the pronunciation of a contraction.
The idea behind using a contraction is often that the combining of two words makes for easier and quicker writing. While this is not the case for all contractions, some contractions only differ in length from the two words being combined by one or two letters. By combining these two words, then writing (or typing) the apostrophe, the same number of characters is being used. For example, "that is" in contracted to make "that's." Excluding the space between the words "that is" and "that's" contain the same number of characters: 6. How then, does one save time or effort by using this contraction? Answer: one doesnt.
When typing in Microsoft Word, or even the program in which Im currently typing, contractions without apostrophes come up as being spelled incorrectly. While they may technically be spelled incorrectly, how would leaving out the little tick mark trip up a reader? It cant. This point cant be proven very well in any other way than this: go back and look through this blog. In all contractions Ive written in this post, Ive left out the apostrophe. Was it noticeable? Did it change meaning? Throw off the main points of the post? Does anyone even care? No! The use of the apostrophe in contractions is unnecessary and even defeats the whole purpose of contracting two words. Despite my personal beliefs on this topic, I will continue writing with apostrophes on paper in order to avoid losing points from someone who believes that the absence of a simple apostrophe could throw off the Earth's gravitational pull and send us all flying into the sky. (Why, you ask, did i use an apostrophe in "Earth's" if Im writing this whole post against apostrophes? Its possessive.) So consider this post when writing and hopefully decide that you arent going to adhere to a rule that may not be necessary.

P.S. I heard of a famous author who didnt use apostrophes in contractions in his writings. I believe it may have been the author of Pygmalion, but I am not sure. Id like to find out.

P.P.S. I am also brainstorming about the need for capitalization in the beginning of the sentence. Proper nouns of course will be an exception, but its something i would like to look into. Also, is it completely imperative to capitalize "I" all of the time? i dont know...