Good morning, Maria it's (early) on Friday, and let me just say, after our 1AM writing sprints last night (this morning?), I'm feeling this major resistance (read: kicking and screaming) to any kind of writing, so excuse me if this post is some sorry rambling about things.
So, as you might have gathered from my Growing Pains post, I wasn't a huge fan of the classics, nor did I give myself any motivation to read them until recently. But instantly I realized I was living in some void that was filled by clichéd plot lines and characters that go, "you f***ed my wife? You f***ed my wife?" "I AM your wife!" (yay Eddie Izzard). So pretty quickly, I'm learning the importance of classic literature.
But then again what are the true classics? An interesting point. We have our basics: Shakespeare, Dickens, and obviously Lemony Snicket, but there are plenty of other well known books that aren't yet classics: Harry Potter and The Hunger Games, to name a few. For a few years, I was off bemoaning the fact that a book couldn't be reputable unless you threw a few "thee" and "thous" in there, and if the author had been dead for a few hundred years.
But then, senior year of high school, I took a class called Modern Classics, and I was basically through the roof that I could read a Jodi Picoult novel and call it classic literature. Whether or not anyone else believed me is another story. But only then did I realize that you can't just have "classics" and, for lack of a better word (I'm running on 6 hours of sleep, cut me some slack), "non-classics." Within a certain genre, you can have some books that are better known and more respected than others. Genre classics aren't just a cop-out; they're simply just a result of humans loving to categorize stuff.
It seems like the authors of classics locked themselves into their writing lairs, not letting anyone see a single word until the emerged back into the real world. I'm just basing this off speculation, but most of the great writers seem like very private people. It pays off when their writing is un-touched by any other personality; it's their own heart in the purest form (other than, y'know, their actual heart). Yet modeling your own writing methods is difficult for someone who announces it to the world when her toe itches. Plus, after showing some of my un-finished work with family and friends, I get ideas from them I would never think of on my own. I see awkward sentences I never would have caught on my own, not that I would ever let myself write a run-on, that's just stupid, hey do we have any chocolate left? My writing seems cleaner after showing it to the outside world, and it puts me in a better position to face the rest of my novel (poem, script, screenplay, etc).
So my question is this: Do you think it's better to let your writing simmer and cool (careful, it's hot!) and keep the public eye from it for a while, or can it be helpful to have others edit your work and give suggestions as you go?
Gotta go write a bajillion more words about vampires. Or something.
Peace and Ponies,
Kira
Friday, November 16, 2012
I'm a Cliche & You Can't Judge a Book by It's Cover
Dear Kira,
First off, let me take a moment to address the sad state of my NaNoWriMo affairs. As you know, I am lagging behind by, count them, nearly three thousand words. That's almost a thousand more words than there have been years in the common era! But, I digress.
I think the point you brought up in your last blog is very important because, let's face it, we all have that moment when we're sitting in English class and the teacher is asking us, "what does this sentence mean? What is this a symbol for? Is Gatsby actually a murderer? Aw! The ambiguity". It bothers me that English teachers are all fine and dandy when famous authors write something vague, but if I write something vague or ambiguous in a short story, they're all like "um...I think you need to clarify this..." and I'm all like "but actually, I did that deliberately."
:P
So, to answer your question, I don't think there is any wrong or right way to write a novel. There is only the "write" way. Wow, that was a pun. Anyway, I think it's important to remember that most of the great writers are only great because they took risks and wrote in a way no one expected and no one had ever seen before. Sure, there's certainly bad writing out there (cough, cough Twilight), but I think there's more good writing than people think.
I think it's kind of unfair how some books are designated as "classics", as if they are some how better than other books. I think we already discussed this when I told you that my favorite book was Ivanhoe. To me, Ivanhoe is one of the best books ever written, but to another person it might just be obnoxious (sorry that I made you read it). And, conversely, there are a whole bunch of books I wish I could add to the canon of classics. So, really, what is "good" writing, is all a matter of taste. Don't get me wrong, the "classics" are classics for a reason, but I think there should be a little more wiggle room when deciding the merit or quality of a book. What do you think? Are the classics concrete or is there room to mix and match?
Maria
P.S. I know that was a cop out question, but I had to hurry up and write this so I could work on my NaNoWriMo; heavy sigh.
First off, let me take a moment to address the sad state of my NaNoWriMo affairs. As you know, I am lagging behind by, count them, nearly three thousand words. That's almost a thousand more words than there have been years in the common era! But, I digress.
I think the point you brought up in your last blog is very important because, let's face it, we all have that moment when we're sitting in English class and the teacher is asking us, "what does this sentence mean? What is this a symbol for? Is Gatsby actually a murderer? Aw! The ambiguity". It bothers me that English teachers are all fine and dandy when famous authors write something vague, but if I write something vague or ambiguous in a short story, they're all like "um...I think you need to clarify this..." and I'm all like "but actually, I did that deliberately."
:PSo, to answer your question, I don't think there is any wrong or right way to write a novel. There is only the "write" way. Wow, that was a pun. Anyway, I think it's important to remember that most of the great writers are only great because they took risks and wrote in a way no one expected and no one had ever seen before. Sure, there's certainly bad writing out there (cough, cough Twilight), but I think there's more good writing than people think.
I think it's kind of unfair how some books are designated as "classics", as if they are some how better than other books. I think we already discussed this when I told you that my favorite book was Ivanhoe. To me, Ivanhoe is one of the best books ever written, but to another person it might just be obnoxious (sorry that I made you read it). And, conversely, there are a whole bunch of books I wish I could add to the canon of classics. So, really, what is "good" writing, is all a matter of taste. Don't get me wrong, the "classics" are classics for a reason, but I think there should be a little more wiggle room when deciding the merit or quality of a book. What do you think? Are the classics concrete or is there room to mix and match?
Maria
P.S. I know that was a cop out question, but I had to hurry up and write this so I could work on my NaNoWriMo; heavy sigh.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
The finish line
Good morning Maria, it's Tuesday, and let me just say...
Happy (almost) two weeks into NanoWriMo!
Sigh.
Maybe it's a human thing to get about a third of the way through something, and just...stop. No more. Halfway through, we can see the light, we can run to the finish line. But a third? Crap, there's two more thirds that haven't even been covered yet. And that's just too much for any human to handle when they have homework, friends, and how much mashed potatoes they're going to stuff in their face to think about. But if you're riding the strugglebus, I'm the driver, and my brain seems to think 16,000 words equals 50,000 or something. Because clearly the act of writing this story is torture, says my mind. It's not like I'm not able to write, and I still want to. I mean, I've been blogging up a storm because I didn't make it my job, my obligation. I blog at free will. Because I have deadline for my Nano story, it's turned into a chore.
That, and I have a really short attention span. I think my display of unfinished stories speaks for itself:
So how am I going to finish? Well, to be honest, if this wasn't NanoWriMo, I probably wouldn't. My story is crap, plain and simple. It has potential to be good, with TONS of revision. But normally, if I start off writing an awful first draft, I usually get frustrated and give up. Out of like, ten stories, I've finished three. 30%. Ugh. But here's the thing: This novel writing has turned from an isolated hobby to do only when I'm feeling inspired (I remember a friend telling his mother that I wrote novels when I was "bored"...not gonna lie, I kinda wanted to punch him in the face at that point), to a competition. And I cannot lose a competition. If there's a finish line, I must reach it, even if I die trying. Death by words...How depressing. But if I can "win" something, I'm gonna do my darndest to get there. I know, not the best motivation for writers; the pride should come internally and you shouldn't compete about something so personal, but still.
Winning.
Winning.
Are you liking the sound of that? It has a warm, fuzzy sound. Not that sounds can be warm or fuzzy, but you know what I mean.
Which brings me to my next question: Do you think writing is something that should be a "competition"? Sure, there are lots of writing contests, but how do you truly judge the merit of someone's novel? There's well written and poorly written, but in the mix of well-written books, there could be a writing style that one judge thinks is new-agey and completely worthless, but that another judge loves. There could be a character that someone finds totally relateable, that another person could find unreliable and flat. Sometimes, judging someone's writing is about personal taste. Within the realm of good, clear writing, there's no "right" or "wrong" way to write a novel. Unique writing is what makes the huge collections of books out there so exciting.
Happy writing! I must go search for some inspiration. Or coffee. Yeah, coffee works too.
Peace and ponies,
Kira
Happy (almost) two weeks into NanoWriMo!
Sigh.
Maybe it's a human thing to get about a third of the way through something, and just...stop. No more. Halfway through, we can see the light, we can run to the finish line. But a third? Crap, there's two more thirds that haven't even been covered yet. And that's just too much for any human to handle when they have homework, friends, and how much mashed potatoes they're going to stuff in their face to think about. But if you're riding the strugglebus, I'm the driver, and my brain seems to think 16,000 words equals 50,000 or something. Because clearly the act of writing this story is torture, says my mind. It's not like I'm not able to write, and I still want to. I mean, I've been blogging up a storm because I didn't make it my job, my obligation. I blog at free will. Because I have deadline for my Nano story, it's turned into a chore.
That, and I have a really short attention span. I think my display of unfinished stories speaks for itself:
 | ||
| I had a whole outline for this thing. Gosh darnit. |
So how am I going to finish? Well, to be honest, if this wasn't NanoWriMo, I probably wouldn't. My story is crap, plain and simple. It has potential to be good, with TONS of revision. But normally, if I start off writing an awful first draft, I usually get frustrated and give up. Out of like, ten stories, I've finished three. 30%. Ugh. But here's the thing: This novel writing has turned from an isolated hobby to do only when I'm feeling inspired (I remember a friend telling his mother that I wrote novels when I was "bored"...not gonna lie, I kinda wanted to punch him in the face at that point), to a competition. And I cannot lose a competition. If there's a finish line, I must reach it, even if I die trying. Death by words...How depressing. But if I can "win" something, I'm gonna do my darndest to get there. I know, not the best motivation for writers; the pride should come internally and you shouldn't compete about something so personal, but still.
Winning.
Winning.
Are you liking the sound of that? It has a warm, fuzzy sound. Not that sounds can be warm or fuzzy, but you know what I mean.
Which brings me to my next question: Do you think writing is something that should be a "competition"? Sure, there are lots of writing contests, but how do you truly judge the merit of someone's novel? There's well written and poorly written, but in the mix of well-written books, there could be a writing style that one judge thinks is new-agey and completely worthless, but that another judge loves. There could be a character that someone finds totally relateable, that another person could find unreliable and flat. Sometimes, judging someone's writing is about personal taste. Within the realm of good, clear writing, there's no "right" or "wrong" way to write a novel. Unique writing is what makes the huge collections of books out there so exciting.
Happy writing! I must go search for some inspiration. Or coffee. Yeah, coffee works too.
Peace and ponies,
Kira
The Trouble with NaNoWriMo
Dear Kira,
So, as you know I've been doing NaNoWriMo (national novel writing month) for the past thirteen days, and let me tell you, its a strugglebus. As it stands, I'm almost six thousand words and I'm not projected to finish until December 9th. The trouble, I suppose, is that it's really hard to write a novel in a month. This is, of course, coming from someone who has finished multiple manuscripts (let's disregard quality of said manuscripts). So, I know I can complete a long document if I have enough opportunity and the inclination to do so.
The trouble is, right now I don't really have the inclination. I'm running out of material for my story, I've started to resort to personal drama to stretch the word requirement (gasp!). And even so, I just don't feel like working on my NaNoWriMo. I know that you sometimes I have some trouble finishing stories as well, so I wonder what you are doing to insure you finish your NaNoWriMo. While I have every intention of finishing this project, it seems I have just reached a standstill.
Maria
So, as you know I've been doing NaNoWriMo (national novel writing month) for the past thirteen days, and let me tell you, its a strugglebus. As it stands, I'm almost six thousand words and I'm not projected to finish until December 9th. The trouble, I suppose, is that it's really hard to write a novel in a month. This is, of course, coming from someone who has finished multiple manuscripts (let's disregard quality of said manuscripts). So, I know I can complete a long document if I have enough opportunity and the inclination to do so.
The trouble is, right now I don't really have the inclination. I'm running out of material for my story, I've started to resort to personal drama to stretch the word requirement (gasp!). And even so, I just don't feel like working on my NaNoWriMo. I know that you sometimes I have some trouble finishing stories as well, so I wonder what you are doing to insure you finish your NaNoWriMo. While I have every intention of finishing this project, it seems I have just reached a standstill.
Maria
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)