There appears to be a flurry of writing threads in these parts. I wanted to start something that would bring together these disparate albeit similar parts in a practical manner to form a more coherent group so that we may all learn from one another instead of holding up signs with the dire want of acknowledgment.
This is a discussion thread hosted by Gantic (and the nonexistent Author's Guild). This will not be a discussion about a particular piece of writing by a writer but more generally about writing and the writer. I am hoping to get some productive discussion from writers here on Armor Games.
Discussion will be on various topics and may changed weekly, biweekly, however long a discussion needs. This will mostly (or most likely) be about prose but other forms of writings may also be discussed.
To start off: Why do you write? What do you want from writing?
The question is not "Why do you like to write?" Rather, it is "Why do you write?"
Please keep posts relevant. Posts should be relevant to the current discussion or a previous discussion.
Responses should be constructive. While we'd all like to be frank, there is a line between tactful and blunt. Keep in mind that not everyone is of the same disposition or age.
Also keep in mind that we're all amateurs here unless someone is writing professionally. Nevertheless, each opinion carries the same weight regardless of whether you disagree or not or how much you admire or despise someone. Please consider how something applies to you and not blindly accept or reject advice or opinion. An opinion is never a fact even if everyone thinks the same thing.
If you have any ideas for future discussions, leave a comment on my profile. Meanwhile, consider, discuss, learn!
Agreed. Why oh why did they have to go to Paris of all places!
My jury's still out on Harry Potter, given its significance is largely unprecedented in the literary world. I guess the best I could do would be "not really literary genius"- parts of it were contrived, characters grossly incongruous (Potter's pubertal posturings a case in point) and linguistically challenged and Rowling must certainly have felt the pressure of the expectation of millions in later stages...something I believe to be clearly evident in the big drag of a middle section of the final book. But nonetheless it was somehow effective, whether this be due to the niche of the protagonist or the charm and nature of the setting.
Maybe "effective" writing could be distinguished from one's select tastes as to what makes "good" writing. To establish an objective standard of "good" writing would almost certainly imply a literary canon, a collection of works exemplar to the writing world, and I'm not a fan of that notion, either.
Good writing provokes discussion. so does bad writing that satiates horny teens. After all, 'write' rhymes with 'trite' for a reason!
Now that was trite :P
Besides, I thought story porn was not the stuff so much discussed as read in (near) silence. Usually in the privacy of one's own bedroom. Or maybe the bathroom. Or maybe with a friend or a few, if you're into that kind of thing. But certainly not discussion.
I doubt any "genre" fiction would (or could) be considered literary. Most of the stuff is dismissed by book reviews. The most fantastic literary fiction would glance at is magical realism and dystopia. That is nowhere near the realm of fantasy or science fiction (i.e. you won't find it in that section of the library). (Although no one reads fantasy or science fiction for their excellent prose. I'm sure Asimov is praised for his writing.)
Not literary genius but more likely "acceptably readable", though that sounds like I'm saying it's "good enough" rather than "good but could be better". I'm not entirely sure of what praise it has received. I thought it was better than what it would be though not as good as what it could have been once I knew what it was.
How much would unprecedented or effective weigh though? How good is/was Dune or Lord of the Rings?
Perhaps personal tastes can account for writing that distracts the reader by drawing attention to itself by saying "Look at this unrealistic portrayal." or "Look, I'm so clever!". Perhaps, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the idea that there can be a universally accepted "bad" and a highly subjective "good". We all know what's wrong (relatively) but no one can agree on what's right. It's no surprise I didn't do so well with ethics/morality. :P "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."
Hm. Lord of the Rings practically landscaped fantasy. With an atomic bomb.
When it comes to ethics, my classmates are more likely to think I am either a raving libertarian or plain wishy-washy and in return I am more likely to think they lack moral insight. My lecturers are most likely to call me "a philosopher", lol.
But really it's that universally accepted bad I'm interested in. Particularly when it comes to telling the difference between avant-garde and "esoteric to the point of incomprehensibility". Joyce, anybody? Oh, yeah, and "just plain crap".
I've mentioned a social sci-fi that I'm attempting to write, and I'm having some real misgivings about my choices because of this worry that I'm trying to cram two exclusive worlds of literature into one. I just don't know.
Particularly when it comes to telling the difference between avant-garde and "esoteric to the point of incomprehensibility". Joyce, anybody? Oh, yeah, and "just plain crap".
Haha, yes. I find the interpretations of his works more interesting. I don't see much of a difference between Joyce and, say, Shakespeare? If something is natural it wouldn't be easy to understand. I've seen a few guides to better writing on how to make dialogue more interesting and I'm thinking "That's artificial." It's so fake it's cringeworthy.
I don't think anyone talks like a Shakespearean character (not even in his time) but with Joyce's stream of consciousness, it is impossible to get any more natural (Finnegans Wake notwithstanding).
How would you consider some of Faulkner's works with respect to avant-garde, etc.?
I've mentioned a social sci-fi that I'm attempting to write, and I'm having some real misgivings about my choices because of this worry that I'm trying to cram two exclusive worlds of literature into one. I just don't know.
That is somewhat like cyberpunk so it wouldn't be too outlandish. However, Science fiction as a genre is unforgiving, or rather, perceptions of science fiction are unforgiving. I was surprised to find out Salman Rushdie's first book is labelled science fiction. If anything I would've thought it only contained magical realism like his other works. (I haven't read it.) I found this slightly enlightening, but its with respect to the British.
You know what drives me crazy? Shows like Reading Rainbow and educational vids that make reading seem like the best thing ever. I like to read- but I don't think having a bunch of scarily childlike old people continuously blasting you with the message of 'books rule!' is good for their message. They make books sound like mescaline almost, lol. ("Books take you to another world, kids!) -----------
I've mentioned a social sci-fi that I'm attempting to write, and I'm having some real misgivings about my choices because of this worry that I'm trying to cram two exclusive worlds of literature into one. I just don't know.
I'd agree with Gantic on this one~ ------ Now, another thing I've noted is that many of the classics have almost fallen out of fashion in the last fifty-or-so years. Books like the Divine Comedy, The Catcher in the Rye, The ABC Murders, Robinson Crusoe, and Treasure Island (I've read all of them! ^_^) are somewhat neglected these days. Me and my mom had to bust our asses to find unabridged copies for me to read. It's sad- they're all great books. (I'm reading the Book Thief [great book!] and the World According to Garp now.)
I concur with thisisnotanalt on this point. Part of the reason, I think, is people having bad cultural literacy (nobody gets Biblical allusions anymore, not even my teachers, to my consternation), and the other is how everyone wants it little and short in substance, but big in glitz.
Or big and sprawling as long as you can devour the book in a night without thinking about it too much. Or even perhaps talk about it endlessly without having to think about it too much. Perhaps there's a parallel to be drawn here with TV culture.
I know many who would blame the decline of the literary age on the advent of TV and visual media as these are passive and therefore more accessible forms of entertainment. Thus it becomes difficult to judge literature when the world of literature has been so displaced from our consciousness.
In fact it's a bit like coming to a circle of sorts- after all novels, before they became credible (i.e. before Jane Austen) was thought of as something ne'er-do-well ladies read, for the reading of such writings were thought to sap them of substance and make them vapid, heh.
---
I like that article. It also helps to reassure me a great deal about what I want to do with my writing.
Hell, it's my writing, why am I worrying so much about how other people are going to view it if I haven't even written it yet!
I know many who would blame the decline of the literary age on the advent of TV and visual media as these are passive and therefore more accessible forms of entertainment. Thus it becomes difficult to judge literature when the world of literature has been so displaced from our consciousness.
I connot agree with you more. The television age has completely depleted the world of it's old literature beginings. I do like watching some T.V. Every now and then but nothing can compare to sitting down a picking up a book.
On another note, I just got Moby Dic.k today and I will Probably start reading it tonight. (Yay!)
Of course, some of those classics I ended up disliking, particularly those from Romantic females, i.e. Jane Austen, Kate Chopin, Emily Bronte.
Has Twilight every struck any of you to be the most misogynist book ever written by a woman and directed into a movie by a woman? Plot: Vapid girl wants to be completely subservient and self-sacrificing to a guy.
Oh man, there's quite a few writers I'd have to acknowledge.
J.D. Salinger: The man is genius at getting you into the shoes of his characters. Dante Aligheri: An expert at describing people's character; this was how he managed to pull off the poetic form of the Divine Comedy. Charles Dickens: Although his characters are overdone and his plots bordering soap opera proportions, the emotion he's able to convey is simply amazing. The end of A Tale of Two Cities had me in tears, to be honest. I'm such a sentimental fool... Shi Nai'an: This Chinese author wrote my favorite of the four Chinese classic novels, Water Margin. The best action epic written. Michael Crichton: Gifted with the ability to give his books an air of authenticity Voltaire: The wittiest of them all, and the author of my personal favorite book, Candide.
Sorry Gantic, just one last rejoinder from the previous topic...which sorta melds into this one.
Has Twilight every struck any of you to be the most misogynist book ever written by a woman and directed into a movie by a woman? Plot: Vapid girl wants to be completely subservient and self-sacrificing to a guy.
That I've been told this panders to the fantasies of many a girl (by girls), hence its success, really does say something for the credibility of chauvinist and misogynist attitudes hm?
J.D. Salinger, because his tone, characters, and general voice in his writing are great. Markus Zusak, because the unique feel of his writing is something I just love. Especially in the Book Thief. Dantew Alghieri: It's pretty amazing how he's able to successfully pull off an undertaking like the Divine Comedy, and do it so well. Edgar Allen Poe: He's pretty chilling in his poems, but his stories are absolutely fantastic in their nervous ambiance. Daniel Defoe: The constant 'viz.s' are really f**king annoyintg, but Crusoe's tale ends up something that I love. . .I can't really put my finger on it, but I just cherish it.
