Writing as a career

[xtillyx]

Having not left school yet (I am in English 6th form), I would absolutely love to branch out into writing as a career. Is it as hard as i hear, and would it be as.. stable.. a career as say admin or something equally as boring?

[jon1jt]

Very possible. Just keep writing and whatever you do, don't listen to people who tell you that so-and-so program will open up opportunities.

Become who you are.
--Pindar

[Homyrrh]

Be dually realistic and opportunistic.

[AuntShecky]

Marry somebody rich. (I wish I had!)
No, I kid, I kid.

[Kafka's Crow]

Find yourself a decent job like teaching which allows a bit of time off and holidays, then start writing. I will not advise anybody to start off as a full-time writer. Check this link for a realistic picture of the writing scene. I would start off as someone with a steady income and leisure time and wait for success before becoming a full time writer.

http://www.richardherley.com/FTCebooks.html

[kandaurov]

I'd stick to Kafka's Crow advice. Teacher and writer is the perfect combination. And let's face it: unless you get a deal with big time publishers, it's even possible that you won't get a cent from your first work published if you don't make it to second edition (speaking from personal experience here...). If you see writing as your means of survival rather than a hobby, I don't think you'll get much fun doing it. If you write to survive, you might betray a bit of your integrity by publishing more chaff than weath. The ideal is to write some novels while having another job, and if you do get famous, then live off writing; with fame, one can afford to take one's time to write a novel :)

[chasestalling]

Having not left school yet (I am in English 6th form), I would absolutely love to branch out into writing as a career. Is it as hard as i hear, and would it be as.. stable.. a career as say admin or something equally as boring?

Only one way to find out. Speaking for myself it's a blast.

[blp]

You could try to become a copywriter in advertising, which is the job I do. I fell into it sort of by accident a little later in life, but there are courses you can do straight out of school or university and from there the standard route is a placement, then a job. It pays well - generally better than journalism - and is something you can do freelance once you've got a bit of experience, leaving time for your own work. Advertising didn't actually involve a lot of writing for many years, but the internet's changed that. Every big and little company now needs a website and every page of that will have copy on it, which has to be written by a professional. The subject matter obviously isn't always terribly stimulating, but it's varied at least and you can learn a lot of odd little things along the way and, mainly, if you like writing and care about it, you're always honing your abilities. The novelist Faye Weldon was a copywriter in London in the sixties and Germaine Greer puts Weldon's strong style down to this experience.

You could also consider a career in technical writing. I don't really know what this involves or how you get into it, but I met a woman who does it and she assured me that no prior knowledge, even of technical matters, was required.

[ReynardKitsune]

YES as long as you believe in yourself you can do it.
unlike me who is a long long way becoz my vocab and grammar sucks

[RichardHerley]

xtillyx, it's a hard road to follow if you want to support yourself. As time goes on it's getting harder still. If you're born with the compulsion to write -- to tell stories -- then write you must; otherwise, don't waste your time sitting at a desk when you could be outside, breathing fresh air.

Writing is a craft as well as a vocation. To learn it, you must read, read, and read some more. Read not just for pleasure but with an apprentice's eye. Why has the author done this? How is the plot (if there is one) constructed? If you were telling this story, how would you go about it?

Do you like music? A writer is a musician too. Words are music of a special kind. Study the prose of a genius, like Nabokov, to see that prose and poetry are really the same.

Are you hard-working? If you want to be a good writer you must study grammar and usage. Keep Fowler's Modern English Usage by your bedside. Read it over and over again. If you have the slightest doubt about a word's meaning, look it up before using it.

Are you vain? Be prepared for some body-blows. Be prepared for repeated rejection, insults, unfair criticism, the assumption that your whole career is an ego-trip.

Are you long-suffering? Can you accept that you are likely to be famous, if at all, when you are conveniently dead?

Think about these things very carefully before embarking on a writing career. Writing as a hobby is another thing: it can be absorbing and fun, and even bring in a little cash.

P.S. Kafka's Crow -- thanks for the mention: my server stats brought me here.

[kandaurov]

Thanks for the insight, Richard!

[RichardHerley]

My pleasure, kandaurov, though I'm just one voice. If you've gotta write, you've gotta write!

[jon1jt]

I'd stick to Kafka's Crow advice. Teacher and writer is the perfect combination.

I beg to differ. Teach and you come home exhausted. The #1 job for writers according to "Writing For Dummies" (I think that's where I saw it) is security guard. The job affords you a great deal of down time to write and think, especially if you work the nightshift. What you won't earn in salary you'll earn in time spent doing what you truly love.

If you don't truly love to write, however, then I strongly advise you to teach, be a career man. Have many babies and grandchildren. Go to France, Vienna, many times.

[kandaurov]

Jon1jt, nice idea, and it does make sense, but I don't know a single writer who worked as a security guard, you know what I mean? Sure, to be a teacher is very exausting, but intellectually stimulating. And you get nice vacations like the students do ;) and with those you have time to go to France and Vienna and get inspired and what not

...yeah, security guard would be good to write... and also to read. I might give that idea a try one day, heh

[jon1jt]

Jon1jt, nice idea, and it does make sense, but I don't know a single writer who worked as a security guard, you know what I mean?

Well, no offense to you, perhaps that's because you don't know any real writers. That's not to say they're all doing guard work.


Sure, to be a teacher is very exausting, but intellectually stimulating.

Writing is supposed to be intellectually stimulating.


And you get nice vacations like the students do ;) and with those you have time to go to France and Vienna and get inspired and what not

I think the kind of writer you're talking about is called a recreational writer.

[Dori]

Jon1jt, nice idea, and it does make sense, but I don't know a single writer who worked as a security guard, you know what I mean? Sure, to be a teacher is very exausting, but intellectually stimulating. And you get nice vacations like the students do ;) and with those you have time to go to France and Vienna and get inspired and what not

...yeah, security guard would be good to write... and also to read. I might give that idea a try one day, heh

All of my teachers look forward to summer vacation much more than I do. That statement alone reveals a lot about what it's like to be a teacher (at least at the high-school level).

This is what you need to do: go two miles into the woods, build a cabin, work six weeks out of the year (picking berries and whatnot) and devote the rest of your time to thinking (and writing, of course). It worked for Thoreau, but only for about two years. :p

[jon1jt]

This is what you need to do: go two miles into the woods, build a cabin, work six weeks out of the year (picking berries and whatnot) and devote the rest of your time to thinking (and writing, of course). It worked for Thoreau, but only for about two years. :p


It worked for Thoreau his entire life; Walden was just part of his writing quest. Besides, he had finished A Week On The Merrimac & Concord Rivers and felt it was time to move on to a new experience.

After Walden he moved back into his parents' home, which left him plenty of free time to write his masterpiece.

[ReynardKitsune]

thanks for all the insights but as a security would you even be able to have the capital to publish your work. it will take a long time you know.. i would prefer an office job and writing during all the time i could possibly find.

[blp]

Writers have done all kinds of jobs, from criminal and prostitute (Jean Genet), to insurance company head (Wallace Stevens). Stevens used to write his poems on the train to work.

Joyce sold advertising space, Sei Shonegan, author of The Pillow Book, was a Chinese courtesan, Alan Ginsberg did market research for a baby food company.

A friend of mine wrote a novel about working as a receptionist under the desk while working as a receptionist.

Salman Rushdie was an advertising copywriter and wrote the line 'Naughty, but nice' for cream buns. Fay Weldon wrote 'Go to work on an egg'.

Rabelais, the first ever novelist, was a monk.

Henry Fielding started the first London police force.

Kafka worked in insurance and invented the first civilian hard hat, making a huge contribution to reducing deaths among steel mill workers.

[Logos]

Zane Grey (http://www.online-literature.com/zane-grey/) was a dentist and minor league baseball player; guess which inspired some of his stories :p

[blp]

William Carlos Williams was a general practice doctor. His famous poem, The Red Wheelbarrow, was written while he was on his rounds:

so much depends
upon

a red wheel
barrow

glazed with rain
water

beside the white
chickens.


The story, which for quite a while I couldn't relate without finding it difficult to speak at a certain point, is that it was written at the window in the sick room of a little boy whose life Williams was trying to save.

[DickZ]

A friend of mine wrote a novel about working as a receptionist under the desk while working as a receptionist.
Did your friend write the novel while under the desk, or did your friend write a novel about a receptionist who worked under the desk?

[blp]

Did your friend write the novel while under the desk, or did your friend write a novel about a receptionist who worked under the desk?

She wrote it under the desk. Only her hands, her body from the chest down and her notebook were under the desk at the time. Her head and shoulders were above the desk. The book was about a receptionist writing a novel under the desk while at work.

[DickZ]

She wrote it under the desk. Only her hands, her body from the chest down and her notebook were under the desk at the time. Her head and shoulders were above the desk. The book was about a receptionist writing a novel under the desk while at work.
OK - I guess that's even better than Kramer's coffee table book about coffee tables!

[blp]

OK - I guess that's even better than Kramer's coffee table book about coffee tables!

I don't know - Kramer's idea is just so simple. You call it 'Coffe Table Book' and, like all the best titles, it works on more than one level (three if they followed through on making the book something you could convert into a coffee table). I wonder if anyone ever actually made that book.

The poet George Oppen was a communist party worker and, later, after he was forced by the red witch hunts to flee to Mexico, a carpenter. During the twenty five years he was engaged in these activities, he did no writing.

Fellow objectivist poet Lorine Neidecker worked as a cleaner.

[McDonald]

Just remember those who employ the writers are seldom writers, and often view writers as 'a dime a dozen.' If you love to write, you will write!

[jon1jt]

Writers have done all kinds of jobs, from criminal and prostitute (Jean Genet), to insurance company head (Wallace Stevens). Stevens used to write his poems on the train to work.

True true yeah yeah. It's funny...whenever this subject comes up about jobs and writing, it's almost like clockwork that this schtick is used that starts with dropping the same famous names of writers as a justification that working 9-to-5 doesn't get in the way of a writing life. The fact is that those writers make up an infinitesimal percent of the total writing population. Wallace Stevens? Kafka? Oppen? You're talking about masters, prodigies. I'm talking about the writers with great potential who will never quite get there because they lack the quality time to focus on their craft and lay it all down. They comprise the vast majority. There's a difference.

[Dori]

It worked for Thoreau his entire life; Walden was just part of his writing quest. Besides, he had finished A Week On The Merrimac & Concord Rivers and felt it was time to move on to a new experience.

After Walden he moved back into his parents' home, which left him plenty of free time to write his masterpiece.

I meant the whole living outside of society thing only worked for about two years. Like you said, I think he wanted to move on to a new experience. :)

[blp]

True true yeah yeah. It's funny...whenever this subject comes up about jobs and writing, it's almost like clockwork that this schtick is used that starts with dropping the same famous names of writers as a justification that working 9-to-5 doesn't get in the way of a writing life. The fact is that those writers make up an infinitesimal percent of the total writing population. Wallace Stevens? Kafka? Oppen? You're talking about masters, prodigies. I'm talking about the writers with great potential who will never quite get there because they lack the quality time to focus on their craft and lay it all down. They comprise the vast majority. There's a difference.

I'm not trying to justify anything. I don't want a nine to five job either, though I ****ing loathe advertising, even though it's the only way I've worked out to earn a living wage and have free time in this, the third most expensive city in the world. All I was saying is, there doesn't seem to be any rule about what writers do to get by. And I don't think there is. Those guys were masters? And? They weren't when they started out, were they? I don't think there's any rule about it. I also don't think having loads of free time is necessarily the best thing for a writer. Lay what all down? I'm firmly of the opinion that most work sucks and is meaningless, but it's what most people have to do and, as such, I think it's good material. Not the only material, but I wouldn't want to be a writer who'd never had to do it.

[blazeofglory]

I like add something to all that has been said here. Writing should be taken as a hobby or passtime and if you take it as a career and want to get paid you are likely to be disappointed as a matter of fact. There needs to be some sacrifice. Kafka hardly got published in his life. Ayn Rand got refused a dozen times by publishers.

[jon1jt]

I'm not trying to justify anything. I don't want a nine to five job either, though I ****ing loathe advertising, even though it's the only way I've worked out to earn a living wage and have free time in this, the third most expensive city in the world. All I was saying is, there doesn't seem to be any rule about what writers do to get by. And I don't think there is. Those guys were masters? And? They weren't when they started out, were they? I don't think there's any rule about it. I also don't think having loads of free time is necessarily the best thing for a writer. Lay what all down? I'm firmly of the opinion that most work sucks and is meaningless, but it's what most people have to do and, as such, I think it's good material. Not the only material, but I wouldn't want to be a writer who'd never had to do it.

Oh, okay, I see what you're saying. Yeah, well, I don't see what you're doing in advertising either, you seem to be too creative for that. It goes back to what you said, you live in a very expensive part of the world. But that's precisely my point, blp---we choose our way of life. I recently moved out of the most expensive place in the USA for exactly that reason.

As far as the great masters of literature, it didn't hurt that they were endowed with damn good genes. The fact is most people have to work at it, which leaves many with immense potential going to waste because they no longer believe in the ideal of art for art's sake. The canons of western civilization read that 9-to-5 is the only "way."
And to that I say bull****.

To the point about Ginsberg buying into corporate life, Kerouac eventually convinced him to drop that job, and later grad school, both of which, Ginsberg admitted, had been dissatisfying. How many would have the courage to do something like that today??? Most would be waiting for their summer vacation from teaching to travel five thousand miles (paid on credit) to feed the birds in Vienna or stand at the Eiffel Tower with cell phones plastered to each ear waxing on about how inspired they've become. The problem is, the time they get around to 'laying it all down' it will be time to go back to work.

Gregory Corso once said of Kerouac: "Kerouac writes when he takes a s*hit." How many of you love writing that much? :p

I think I agree with you here, blp, but you lost me some, what do you mean?

I'm firmly of the opinion that most work sucks and is meaningless, but it's what most people have to do and, as such, I think it's good material.


I like add something to all that has been said here. Writing should be taken as a hobby or passtime and if you take it as a career and want to get paid you are likely to be disappointed as a matter of fact. There needs to be some sacrifice. Kafka hardly got published in his life. Ayn Rand got refused a dozen times by publishers.

I"m not saying do it as a career and rely on it for your bread. I'm saying do whatever you have to do to maximize the number of hours in your day that you can spend with it.

This goes back to what Rilke was saying in his letters---write for yourself, F everything else.

[Etienne]

I"m not saying do it as a career and rely on it for your bread. I'm saying do whatever you have to do to maximize the number of hours in your day that you can spend with it.

This goes back to what Rilke was saying in his letters---write for yourself, F everything else.

Some people have even written things knowing that it would cause their life to become a hell.

[blp]

Oh, okay, I see what you're saying. Yeah, well, I don't see what you're doing in advertising either, you seem to be too creative for that. It goes back to what you said, you live in a very expensive part of the world. But that's precisely my point, blp---we choose our way of life. I recently moved out of the most expensive place in the USA for exactly that reason.


I'm beginning to plan my escape. :brow:



I think I agree with you here, blp, but you lost me some, what do you mean?

That Adam's curse is the stuff of life. I think I've done my bit now and if I never had to graft at something meaningless again, I'd say, fine, and, whoo hoo. But, at the risk of sounding a bit Mr. Deasyish ('I paid my way!') I wouldn't want to write from a position of never having done it and no one I've seen who's avoided regular work - by being born into or marrying money - is a very good, er, advert for it. I mean, thanks, I kind of agree that I'm too creative for advertising too, but that's jobs for you. At least in this one I do get to be a little creative. They even call me a creative. (But no, really, I hate it.)

If I lost you a bit, it's because I'm making a complicated proposition that I probably don't have a firm grasp on myself. For me it feels as if it was really necessary to live something like an ordinary life, whatever that is, where I supported myself doing something I didn't love. Maybe it made it easier to clarify what I did love. It also took care of a lot of fear. I didn't want to feel like some fainting violet who could only survive if I was successful at art and could only be around artists. Anyway, it's not like I had much choice.

I guess what I'm driving at is, it feels as if you're skating over a logical flaw. Kafka, Oppen, Stevens et. al. were geniuses so it was OK for them to do ordinary work, but for more ordinary talents it's not? Why should ordinary talents be given any special privileges to release the potential of their only ordinary abilities? Don't forget, Oppen didn't write for 25 years because he was doing jobs and fleeing anti-communist witch hunters.

Ideally, then, you'd have a genius test and give out the arts council/NEA funding to the brilliant but 9 to 5 beleagured Kafkas of the world - except that, until they've released their potential in a fairly sustained way anyway, you don't know who the geniuses are and most of them have to start from the same position of being alone in the world and having to support themselves. Elmore Leonard, another old ad writer, got so bored with what he was doing professionally that he started getting up at 6 every day to write his first novel. As your Kerouac remark suggests, some people are going to write no matter what. In a way, you could argue, somewhat punningly, that Adam's curse is not a bad way of separating the wheat from the chaff (and, by this, I mean, actually, the ones who really want to do it from the less motivated ones).

As far as work actually being material for a writer, well, like I say, it's the stuff of life. Not to argue that every writer should write about work, though, at best (or worst) workplace situations can be like Shakespeare; but I think no matter how you crack it up, whether you do or don't work for a living, it's irreduceably there as part of the conundrum of how we get through life and live it well or otherwise.

[jon1jt]

I'm beginning to plan my escape. :brow:

Yes yes, my leaving corporate involved an awfully drawn out period of procrastination! But the time helped me to believe in the possibility of a second way. That was 1995. The fear of leaving a steady job is that you'll regret it later, the fear that the routine you have won't be there tomorrow. I still have no regrets. You'll know when the time is the right time. Good luck with your great escape.


But, at the risk of sounding a bit Mr. Deasyish ('I paid my way!') I wouldn't want to write from a position of never having done it and no one I've seen who's avoided regular work - by being born into or marrying money -

What a sense of waste that must be, to marry into money for the sake of avoiding work. I agree, I wouldn't have had it any other way.


They even call me a creative. (But no, really, I hate it.)

Such compliments often act as resistance against the decision to leave a job. I think it's a big conspiracy, actually :p


If I lost you a bit, it's because I'm making a complicated proposition that I probably don't have a firm grasp on myself. For me it feels as if it was really necessary to live something like an ordinary life, whatever that is, where I supported myself doing something I didn't love. Maybe it made it easier to clarify what I did love. It also took care of a lot of fear. I didn't want to feel like some fainting violet who could only survive if I was successful at art and could only be around artists. Anyway, it's not like I had much choice.

Or, said another way: Is it possible that the pursuit of an ordinary life produced a sense of urgency in us to create what we believe to be what we truly love? What would our lives be like without the pipe dream? I think Eugene O'Neil was on to something. I read that he once said the drunks in the bar more represented working class folks.


I guess what I'm driving at is, it feels as if you're skating over a logical flaw. Kafka, Oppen, Stevens et. al. were geniuses so it was OK for them to do ordinary work, but for more ordinary talents it's not?Why should ordinary talents be given any special privileges to release the potential of their only ordinary abilities?

Well, they're not to be given special privileges, I am saying they have to run faster. That requires immense sacrifice, especially when your competition's got three laps on you.


Ideally, then, you'd have a genius test and give out the arts council/NEA funding to the brilliant but 9 to 5 beleagured Kafkas of the world - except that, until they've released their potential in a fairly sustained way anyway, you don't know who the geniuses are and most of them have to start from the same position of being alone in the world and having to support themselves.

Well I agree with that to an extent. And that's why I'm saying that the decision to abandon the nine-to-five life "to be" a writer must be a deep personal decision, a decision most are unwilling to make. I actually don't believe that we have the capacity to wake up one day and choose writing as a career; it chooses us.


As far as work actually being material for a writer, well, like I say, it's the stuff of life. Not to argue that every writer should write about work, though, at best (or worst) workplace situations can be like Shakespeare; but I think no matter how you crack it up, whether you do or don't work for a living, it's irreduceably there as part of the conundrum of how we get through life and live it well or otherwise.

I also agree with this to an extent. Life experience is a major source, but Jack London never visited Alaska, and that Call of the Wild is a helluva novel. And as far as insight into the mechanics of life via the workplace, consider that you're dealing with people from quite similar walks of life. A workforce comprised of college graduates who pursued a career and made many mistakes in the process. Most of you want babies and families, a nice retirement package, etc. Nothing wrong with that. This redundancy continues throughout your work life. You get up at the same time, eat at the same time, take vacations---many to the same places; watch the same TV shows, etc etc.

The workplace is like going to see a block buster film. When you've seen one, you've seen them all. ;)

[Sweets America]

Jon said:

Or, said another way: Is it possible that the pursuit of an ordinary life produced a sense of urgency in us to create what we believe to be what we truly love? What would our lives be like without the pipe dream? I think Eugene O'Neil was on to something. I read that he once said the drunks in the bar more represented working class folks.

Not to interfere but I greatly agree with that. It seems like I need to lack the necessary time to do something to want to do it. See what I mean? When I know I cannot create because I've other things to do, I wish I could create, and sometimes I will take time to do so with this feeling of urgency, but sometimes in holidays when I could write or draw or whatever, I cannot do so. :confused:

[blp]

Jon said:


Not to interfere but I greatly agree with that. It seems like I need to lack the necessary time to do something to want to do it. See what I mean? When I know I cannot create because I've other things to do, I wish I could create, and sometimes I will take time to do so with this feeling of urgency, but sometimes in holidays when I could write or draw or whatever, I cannot do so. :confused:

Absolutely normal, Sweets. There's a great episode of Seinfeld where George and Jerry decide they're going to write a sit-com, thinking it'll be easy. Cut to repeated shots of them falling asleep in armchairs. I don't know why this happens, but there's something absolutely stupefying about suddenly having a lot of freedom to be creative. My two-fold prescription, for what it's worth, is 1) work from a source, whether it's a memory, a horizon, a cardboard box, whatever (this is actually the secret of Seinfeld's eventual solution, famously, 'a show about nothing' - actually, one based on stupid day-to-day stuff). I think a lot of the pressure is imagining you have to make stuff up from scratch and 2) take a cue from the really bad poem thread. Don't worry too much about making something good. Give yourself license to be quick, bad and careless. You may be surprised to find that, just as your initial impulse to do something good produced almost nothing, your concerted attempt to be bad has unintended consequences.

The thing is, Jon, I was reading some Kafka last night and even with him being a genius and everything, I don't think the stuff he produced was just a matter of not having to run as fast. I mean, think about it, where do you think he came up with all that beaurocratic absurdist nightmare stuff we now call kafkaesque? I take your point about Jack London, but he did have a lot of experience of out-doorsyness in general, even if not Alaska specifically.

There are always these stories of writers writing about stuff they have no experience of, then being asked how many years they spent in Alaska/working as an insurance adjuster/roping steer etc. and if the writers tell the story themselves, they always seem to be chuckling at the way they've got away with it. Somehow, they always sound like the first person they conned was themself.

The reason I find this debate so interesting is that my feelings about it are so conflicted. I sort of start with the common idea (Rilke expresses it in those letters of his) that nothing is uninteresting, then find it put resoundingly to the test in stultifying environment of the workplace, which not only bores me and frustrates me, but which I object to morally. But the thing is, it's only since I've begun working regularly that I've really felt able to produce my own writing consistently. It started on day one because it seemed like the only way I was going to be able to stand it. Instantly, I had no problem writing. Before that, it was what Sweets describes above - the awful blankness of the blank page. Apparently, going into an office and hating it was more inspiring than sitting at home making pots of coffee and staring at the wall. Weird. The problem is, does this mean I have to give up some of my moral objection to office life? The fact that I seem to have needed it to make things I loved?

[Sweets America]

This is such an interesting matter, eh? I'm glad you see what I mean, blp. Sometimes I wondered if it could just be some kind of laziness, I don't know. But that's true that I really get an anxious feeling when I want to create something and I just cannot. It doesn't work this way, it seems. If I am free to create, I just cannot do anything. I think it must have happened sometimes that I created something when I had all the time in the world, but I mostly have trouble with that.
The blank page, as you say, the infiniteness of possibilities, is very stressful. I often find myself anxious about that. I think your advice about working from a source is an appropriate one.

What I have noticed is that I just cannot plan creation. Generally, it is creation itself which comes to me, I feel that I need to write or draw or paint. And in drawing especially, I really feel that I have no difficulty to draw when the urge to do so was unexpected whereas I would have had trouble to do so if I had tried to go towards creation instead of waiting for it to come to me.
Sometimes I have an idea for something to write or draw but it is just impossible if I am the one consciously deciding when creation has to happen. It is kind of disturbing because I have no control over that and I think that maybe someday creation will just go away from me.

The third problem that I have is that when I want to write, I tend to have this thing which tells me 'you have to write the greatest poem of all times', which is utterly stupid because I'm not even a writer. But there is still this thing on my mind, and in the end I just don't write at all and I feel terrible.

From the advice you gave, I feel that you perfectly understand what I've been saying here. Now that's nice.

[blp]

What I have noticed is that I just cannot plan creation.

This is exactly it, Sweets. I think this must be part of the appeal of doing a regular job for me. Creatively, it's a way of setting up a situation where I can be constantly caught unaware. Maybe trying to be creative is pushing in the wrong direction. There's an interesting paper called 'Ways to intervene in a system' by a systems analyst called Donella Meadows where she says that people faced with a problem regularly do exactly the opposite of what's required to solve it.

It is scary, as you say, the idea that it will just go away from you at some point and never come back. It's interesting that this is such a frightening thing to certain people. Very interesting, very tricky. Being creative is apparently something we use to define ourselves, so if it disappears, what then? Do we disappear too? Well, no one, but no one is creative all the time so if we're really hoping to be defined by it, then, in theory, we're constantly losing definition, disappearing. Or if we hate that which is uncreative, constantly turning into what we hate. A Sysyphean task. Everything at stake.

Also the idea that you know you had a few good ideas once, but they were luck, pure luck. You don't know how they happened. You don't know how to make them happen again. And now everyone's going to realise what an utter fraud you are.

Did you say scary? I'm afraid I may be making it worse. But if the fear is of disappearing, the answer seems to me to be to let it happen a little, to let oneself dissolve a bit into the fabric of things, crucially, to have relationships with people, objects, ideas, badness, chaos, emotions, conflicts (especially conflicts) and other art works. And nothingness.

[Sweets America]

Blp, I hear everything you say here, that speaks to me.


Creatively, it's a way of setting up a situation where I can be constantly caught unaware.

Yes, I relate to that. Also, I think that part of the pleasure of creation is the fact that you don't know when it will happen, there is some kind of mystery which I find interesting. I've noticed anyway that trying to be creative didn't really lead me anywhere.
The other day, I thought I had some kind of writer's block because I had not written anything for a long time. And the idea of writing a short story, for instance, seemed to be such a draining task. I wanted to write just to reassure myself, and perhaps to feel again this satisfactory feeling of the accomplished task. But I could not. Then one night I woke up, wrote one page and went back to sleep. I felt better even if I did not do anything with that written page. It was just to say 'it's ok, it's not dead'. Then ther other day I had this feeling that I had to write a poem, and I did, and that greatly reassured me. It worked because it came from somewhere else. I recognized the feeling.

I think that part of my anxiety is due to the fact that next year I will take classes of creative writing and that streses me to a point where I just cannot write anymore. I am thinking of all those students who will write wonderful things and then I see myself, trying to write something in a language which is not even my native one. Well this last point, I think, is a positive one because I couldn't write poems in French anyway.


Being creative is apparently something we use to define ourselves, so if it disappears, what then? Do we disappear too?

That's a tricky question. I think that creativity is not the only thing that describes me anyway, but that is a part that I enjoy, so yes I would be scared to lose it. My creativity (I'm not sure I should call it 'mine') seems to be some other entity which invites itself in my mind. I've noticed that there also seems to be another level in my mind where I think differently.


Also the idea that you know you had a few good ideas once, but they were luck, pure luck. You don't know how they happened. You don't know how to make them happen again. And now everyone's going to realise what an utter fraud you are.

You know, in my previous post, I almost wrote that I was scared of being a 'fake' relative to writing and creativity. I started to write it and erased it. But now you say it. This is so true, this is scary.

Oh, you talk about letting oneself disappear. I like it and I don't, at the same time. Are you saying that we should let ourselves melt into the surrounding world in order to see beyond our own limits and come back to ourselves with new traces and new stories?

[blp]

Oh, you talk about letting oneself disappear. I like it and I don't, at the same time. Are you saying that we should let ourselves melt into the surrounding world in order to see beyond our own limits and come back to ourselves with new traces and new stories?

I guess I'm saying that in letting oneself relate to a lot of other things, one becomes less egotistically central. Rather than feeling that you yourself have to be the font of creativity, you let it come from the world around you and just filter it. There's a great Artforum interview with Kathy Acker where she talks about her interest in plagiarism: 'I realised I didn't want character and I didn't want narrative, but I had this interest in copying.' She goes on to say, 'Writing is always hearing, or seeing or reading or else it's destroying.' The zen version is probably that you transform yourself into an empty vessel. Or recognise your own emptiness.

Best of luck with the creative writing class! If your teacher's good, you'll probably learn quite a lot about generating ideas and find it's something where one can force the issue a bit. I find random notes can work pretty well.

[Sweets America]

I agree with you, I think that what you say here is intelligent. Recognizing our own emptiness, yes, that must be a great relief in way. Moreover this is a nice starting point because as you say, this is a way of opening oneself and filtering what is outside, internalizing it and rendering it through our own perceptions.

Thanks for your encouragements about the creative writing class. :) I don't know my teacher yet. I am in France and the class will be taking place in Oregon. All that I know about my teacher is what a woman from Oregon told me: apparently, the teacher in question arouses all the girls' interest. :p Might be inspiring.

[blp]

apparently, the teacher in question arouses all the girls' interest. :p Might be inspiring.

lol :p Well there's something to relate to!

[jon1jt]

Apparently, going into an office and hating it was more inspiring than sitting at home making pots of coffee and staring at the wall. Weird. The problem is, does this mean I have to give up some of my moral objection to office life? The fact that I seem to have needed it to make things I loved?

I found about five starting points for what I'm about to say---starting with Sweets point about the possibility that the reason she doesn't produce as much as she wants is that she's plain lazy. Blp, and your idea about removing oneself from the center as a way to open the creative channels and working as a way toward that. I imagine many reading this found those ideas very intoxicating, but I have to be honest with you, and this is no direct attack on you in making an honest attempt to locate the source or block, but I sense it all as feel goody talk...idle chatter. That doesn't mean it's uninteresting, or I'm immune from the same criticism. Actually what you say is very interesting, that's why I'm responding to it. And what I say is idle chatter too for the reason that will become evident.
.
The best evidence is myself. I spent seven hours today writing a lot of bull****. I filled a marble notebook today that I started writing in last Thursday. Sweets, you talk about not having anything to write about, but neither do I. The thing that separates you and everybody with the same issue from writing is actually finding the wherewithal to get out the pen and do it.

Jack London wrote 25,000 words a day. His letters attest that much of it was garbage. There was a Times article not long ago on the life and death of Norman Mailer. Mailer was a voracious writer, saying that it was a lame attempt to purge himself of uncreative ideas. Kerouac wrote every day, whether it was writing letters, in his journal or novel. Ginsberg not so. But Ginsy was out there, living in the world, travelling to India, France, living hand to mouth---having ultimate encounters with the people he met on the streets and integrating them into his poems. Look at how his HOWL speaks to that. Do you have this in the workplace under those awful flourescent lights? I think this gets to blp's point about using the workplace as a place to clarify one's thoughts. The problem with it remains: how many real encounters are you having in the workplace that becomes incorporated into your work? I'm not sure we can compare Kafka's notion of beauracracy in Penal Colony or Castle or Trial with his own experience working. If I'm not mistaken he worked in insurance, a very dry and solitary job reading and scoring claims.

And as far as philosophizing about a starting point---well intended no doubt. But if you were so moved to write or paint or draw or whatever it is you say you do...if the words poured from your nostrils, you wouldn't be worrying about this notion of nothingness, or identifying with George and Seinfeld. You would have written a better sitcom by now. Well, maybe. :p

As far as the source of writing being this great and powerful mystery, it's all been said before. At some point, you have to be honest with yourself---you have to hone up to the fact (based on your own inaction) that you're just not serious enough about writing. Admit that you don't love writing. Admit that writing is a very appealing project---it leaves people stupified when you tell them you're a writer. There's the smell of notoriety in that, affectation. It provides you with meaning and talk to impress others, impress yourself. It brings you closer to what moves you, what's most genuine in you, and your motives seem sincere. But other days you're not sure. You wonder. And at the end of the day, you realize you can't seem to pull it together---you can't lay down the lines, find the right words, rhythm. You're too busy trying to construct the masterpiece when all you have are the pieces, pieces that fall with a clanky clunk. Your life consists in mounds of clutter. And someday you're going to have to admit to yourself that you're just not good at it. You're meant to be a wife, a husband, an office worker (Nothing wrong with that, btw) You love the idea of writing and wish you could be a writer, but you don't have it in you to even see whether you've been called or summoned. Admit it, and you will be free.

[blp]

lol. How did I know this was coming? What was that about writing a lot of bull****? :D

No, Jon, it's just a matter of whatever works for you. The best evidence is not yourself, except for yourself. You know, I hope, that I like and respect you 'n' all that, but you're just on an almighty solipsism kick here. Which is fine, because I've been on one too and we can only offer advice from our own perspective. Mine is that I hate all this 'if the words poured from your nostrils/can't sh*t without writing' sh*t because it's bullying mystification. You're the one who sounds like you're going off about a great and powerful mystery – that of identity, specifically, as if there are born or divinely anointed writers. My invocation of a zenny emptiness sounds equally lame when you take it out of context, but it's a coda, framed pretty much as a quotation, albeit a vague one, to a two-point plan of pure pragmatism, which is not much different from yours: have source material and be prepared to write a lot of BS. It's right there in what I wrote. Check back.

Shouting and logorrhea are not proof of caring a lot (for writing or whatever else happens to be on the table), certainly not of some core protean truth, anymore than timidity is proof of not caring. The former could easily just indicate the fear I was talking about earlier. You certainly sound like you're trying to scare us with this 'Admit it! You don't love writing!' schtick. The thing is, it's a crap strategy because it wouldn't scare us if we didn't care. And both Sweets and I have already said we were scared of not being able to write. So yah boo sucks! :D But also, in diammetric opposition to what you're saying here, I think a lot of people are blocked not because they don't care enough, but because they really want to write, but are afraid they're not good enough. Or aren't wildly, burningly passionate enough, which is the main reason I find your position here so unhelpful.

The thing is really, I lost patience with all this fifties stuff you care about a long time ago because its particular, simplistic version of freedom is so self-defeatingly unfree. Why should I feel ashamed if I don't feel like burn burn burning like a Roman Candle every day? There's a list as long as my arm times ten of great artists who didn't either. I barely even know anyone who still subscribes to ideas like this except for, you know, a few advertising people who use it to sell Raybans or jeans. We're at a very different historical moment now, one that's partly defined by the failure of those fifties people's strategies and by their co-option into collusive, bourgeois culture of the stupidest kind. I'd love to have gone traveling the way Ginsberg or Burroughs did, but these days I'd be dodging internet cafe pizza parlours in Kathmandu and painfully aware that all my attempts to engage with other cultures were just reframed imperialism that, more than likely, was contributing to the destruction of those cultures and/or that those cultures, rather than giving me access to primal truths were full of primitive nonsense I'd never stand for at home about the superiority of men over women or the greatness of the godhead or whatever. There are vast oceans of complexity that being a beat poet or a be-bop musician or an abstract expressionist just don't get you anywhere near (with the notable exception of Burroughs).

[Sweets America]

Jon, I like blp's ideas. :p I thought they were very accurate. Now I admit that you are right about the fact that it might be more inspiring to travel the world than to stay at work. But it depends, it depends on what you write about, and maybe you can find feelings in a dull workplace that would make you want to write. I have noticed that I also tend to write when I have a burst of strong feelings, anger or sadness for instance. I need to feel this strength inside that urges me to write. Now maybe I'm not subtle enough to notice inspiring things that do not need me to have strong feelings to discover them.

Of course the mystery of the starting point makes us worry about nothingness, because we feel we have no control over it. So we can be full of an urge to write and some days after we can feel very empty and wonder if the urge to write will come back.

Oh, about your last point 'admit that you don't love writing', yes, as blp said, it's scary but I am actually scared because I think you might be right. You say writing improves the image we have of ourselves, and maybe in my case that is right, and maybe I am searching for some kind of recognition through my writing. I feel that there is definitely some truth in what you said, and maybe this partly explains the feeling that I or blp sometimes have of being a 'fraud'.
I won't stop, though, not now. I have not finished my quest.

Now blp, I also agree with what you wrote, and you reassure me. It's like I thought 'Oh my God, Jon is right!' but then I thought with relief: 'Oh no, it's ok, it's blp who's right'. :p But in the end of the day, I think you're both right and it might just depend on the situation and on the persons.

I have always wondered about those who said 'write everyday, write a lot, force yourself to write'. I wonder if that is really effective. I've written 17 notebooks and I don't feel a change. :p It was a nice experience though, to write those notebooks: I wrote my private thoughts for someone else to read them and in exchange the other person wrote hers, so she wrote 17 notebooks too.

Hey, blp, I love your 'it wouldn't scare us if we didn't care!', that is so true! And I also agree with the following of what you said. If we don't write it is also because we expect too much and maybe we don't see the interest of writing bull**** just for the sake if it. But I wonder, maybe sometimes writing bull**** would feel better than writing nothing. Eh?

[jon1jt]

lShouting and logorrhea are not proof of caring a lot (for writing or whatever else happens to be on the table), certainly not of some core protean truth, anymore than timidity is proof of not caring.

But didn't you advise somewhere above that sometimes when you write crap you may find something worth salvaging? I dunno, I thought you said that. I just don't see the point in sitting around all day theorizing about why writers become blocked, and there's a huge market for it. Or wondering why one is not writing the grand masterpiece. Sure, it can be a healthy exercise to jumpstart the writer. But it's become a way of life. And from what I read on here it's infected many, at which point it's worth asking the questions I ended with in my last post. But let me go back to the Rilke letters---"Where's the love?" I don't care what I'm writing, you see---I care that I'm writing, and with that there's a confidence that it's coming together. Not always, but it's coming together.


The former could easily just indicate the fear I was talking about earlier. You certainly sound like you're trying to scare us with this 'Admit it! You don't love writing!' schtick.

It's not a schtick, I simply told you what 99.999% of the population of friends, family, lovers, etc. will likely never tell you in a lifetime. Don't take it that I'm being smug---I simply meant it.


And both Sweets and I have already said we were scared of not being able to write. So yah boo sucks! :D But also, in diammetric opposition to what you're saying here, I think a lot of people are blocked not because they don't care enough, but because they really want to write, but are afraid they're not good enough.

But this all reminds me of the high school student who never studied a wink, goes to some low class college, drops out, ends up working in a low-paying job, and suddenly finds himself unappreciated. When the topic of education comes up, he stands there confidently telling everybody how he "could have" studied harder and gone to a good college. I think this sort of thinking is a survival mechanism, it ensures laziness and allows the individual to continue to think highly of oneself, that continues through adult life.


Or aren't wildly, burningly passionate enough, which is the main reason I find your position here so unhelpful.

Well of course. But if I brought in more cheap change theories on how to beat writer's block -- which I could but I won't -- then maybe my viewpoint might be more acceptable here? And your position is obviously the better received, Sweets agreed with you, many times.


The thing is really, I lost patience with all this fifties stuff you care about a long time ago because its particular, simplistic version of freedom is so self-defeatingly unfree.

But your dead wrong here, blp, and you tend to be quite dismissive sometimes, don't you? First of all, every writer has his or her own source of inspiration. I have a friend who loves and is inspired by the Ancient Greeks. I know a writer/poet who is inspired by the New Testament. I know somebody who said she'd be dead today had she not encountered Virginia Woolfe. For me, it's the 50s. And the 50s was not about being unfree---consider that the ideas of being 'Beat' and 'burn burn burn' came about long long after the lives had already been lived. I don't think you see that at all in your thinking. Kerouac wrote On The Road in 1951, it went unpublished for seven years. He had published only one book prior to that in a style he long abandoned. Between 1951 and 1958, NINE books he wrote were rejected by every publishing house out there. But he, Ginsberg, et al, went about their lives creating. And they never much raged against the 1950s morays, neither publicly nor privately---and if there's a culture that had a reason to rage, it was that one. I don't think that's unfree. I think that's living on one's own terms and not worrying about everybody else.


Why should I feel ashamed if I don't feel like burn burn burning like a Roman Candle every day? There's a list as long as my arm times ten of great artists who didn't either. I barely even know anyone who still subscribes to ideas like this except for, you know, a few advertising people who use it to sell Raybans or jeans.

Again, you're looking at the 50s decades after its been polluted and reduced to cliches. We will never be able to grasp what they felt, like we can't imagine what it was like to live like a Greek or Roman. So we reduce it to a Gap commercial: "Kerouac wore Khakis too." Or we create Maximus, sell movies, more quarter pounders--just hold the pickles, yeah yeah. We're living in an age in which the self is under seige. We simplify all complexity by reducing it to its bare elements because we don't have the time. Time! It's unsurprising we don't know how to live anymore. That's not the Beats fault, that's peoples faults, thrown into a nexus they were told to love in. They just don't know what. I'll leave it there.


I'd love to have gone traveling the way Ginsberg or Burroughs did, but these days I'd be dodging internet cafe pizza parlours in Kathmandu and painfully aware that all my attempts to engage with other cultures were just reframed imperialism that, more than likely, was contributing to the destruction of those cultures and/or that those cultures, rather than giving me access to primal truths were full of primitive nonsense I'd never stand for at home about the superiority of men over women or the greatness of the godhead or whatever.

Well, that's true, I'd feel the same. But there are still places out there minimally influenced by McDonaldization. I went camping a couple nights a few weeks ago. I slept under the stars and a full moon. Sounds like you're giving up.


There are vast oceans of complexity that being a beat poet or a be-bop musician or an abstract expressionist just don't get you anywhere near (with the notable exception of Burroughs).

Complexity---a new age-y word. I first heard it in my undergrad international relations course. That and the term, globalization, as if the worlds that have come before this one were not so complex. They were complex in their own ways. Let's resist speaking from the apex of the universe, I know it's hard.

How's about clearing the mantle of our minds and living again, however one wishes to live---starting without the noise of complexity? What's complex? The internet? Information overload? Buying more cars? Going to college? To put your ear again to your instincts, because if complexity has done anything to human life, it's made us less dreamers and more realists. And we know realists drop atom bombs and make Star Wars Systems and call poetry something we do in our spare time.


Now I admit that you are right about the fact that it might be more inspiring to travel the world than to stay at work. But it depends, it depends on what you write about, and maybe you can find feelings in a dull workplace that would make you want to write.

Yeah, and maybe poets are born on the battlefield field in Iraq, but that still doesn't make it a pretty place to be. ;)

[Sweets America]

Yeah, and maybe poets are born on the battlefield field in Iraq, but that still doesn't make it a pretty place to be. ;)

Well done here. ;) The thing is, inspiring things might not always be pleasant, but what counts is the result and what the poet did with these unpleasant feelings.

Oh, and about that:

Jon said:

Well of course. But if I brought in more cheap change theories on how to beat writer's block -- which I could but I won't -- then maybe my viewpoint might be more acceptable here? And your position is obviously the better received, Sweets agreed with you, many times.

I didn't say I only agreed with blp. I think what you say is accurate too. Of course blp's view might be more pleasant to hear :p because he's perhaps more reassuring, but your views are equally interesting to me anyway. This in particular...

Jon again, said:

But this all reminds me of the high school student who never studied a wink, goes to some low class college, drops out, ends up working in a low-paying job, and suddenly finds himself unappreciated. When the topic of education comes up, he stands there confidently telling everybody how he "could have" studied harder and gone to a good college. I think this sort of thinking is a survival mechanism, it ensures laziness and allows the individual to continue to think highly of oneself, that continues through adult life.

...really makes me think of what I told you in my last PM, about laziness at school. I am wondering if perhaps I could be this way regarding writing. Maybe I'm just like those students who complain about a lesson while they just haven't studied enough.

[blp]

I just don't see the point in sitting around all day theorizing about why writers become blocked, and there's a huge market for it.

cheap change theories on how to beat writer's block

Complexity---a new age-y word.


Dismissive? Moi?


For me, it's the 50s. And the 50s was not about being unfree---consider that the ideas of being 'Beat' and 'burn burn burn' came about long long after the lives had already been lived. I don't think you see that at all in your thinking. Kerouac wrote On The Road in 1951, it went unpublished for seven years. He had published only one book prior to that in a style he long abandoned. Between 1951 and 1958, NINE books he wrote were rejected by every publishing house out there. But he, Ginsberg, et al, went about their lives creating. And they never much raged against the 1950s morays, neither publicly nor privately---and if there's a culture that had a reason to rage, it was that one. I don't think that's unfree. I think that's living on one's own terms and not worrying about everybody else.


But the burn like a roman candle thing, along with 'people who never say a commonplace thing' etc. is a quote from On the Road. There's plenty of Beat stuff that I think is great, especially Howl, but there's something in the particular notion of freedom of artists in that era that I find hectoring - and when you go on about words coming out of your nostrils and so on, you seem to me to be echoing it. I'm not going to be bullied into protesting how much I care about writing or telling you when I last went camping. FFS. :p This is what I mean about solipsism. You're just assuming so much about what you're doing right and everyone else isn't.

If you don't see any value in this supposed sitting around theorising about being blocked, the obvious question is, what are you still doing here writing these really long posts in response? The anti-position is still part of the debate it deems valueless. As far as I'm concerned, I'm just talking about something I care about with other people who care about it.



you're looking at the 50s decades after its been polluted and reduced to cliches.

It was Burroughs, decades ago, who first suggested Kerouac was going to have had the unintended consequence of selling millions of pairs of Levis.


Sounds like you're giving up.

Sounds like you're reading what you want to into it!


Complexity---a new age-y word....What's complex? The internet? Information overload? Buying more cars? Going to college? To put your ear again to your instincts, because if complexity has done anything to human life, it's made us less dreamers and more realists. And we know realists drop atom bombs and make Star Wars Systems and call poetry something we do in our spare time.

No, you're spinning it backwards and inside out. It's just what I alluded to before, a bulwark against the simplistic, the prejudiced, despotism, magical thinking. It's the mechanism of doubt. And I just don't find enough of it in the Beats with their proto-hippy melange of mysticism and hopped up hyperbole, a lot of which just came from taking benzedrine anyway.

But, hey, this is dumb. As I said before, we're not really saying very different things. Yes, I did advise writing lots of rubbish. Just like you did. And here we are! :p

[jon1jt]

Dismissive? Moi?

It may be equally the case of the pot calling the kettle black. :lol:


But the burn like a roman candle thing, along with 'people who never say a commonplace thing' etc. is a quote from On the Road. There's plenty of Beat stuff that I think is great, especially Howl, but there's something in the particular notion of freedom of artists in that era that I find hectoring - and when you go on about words coming out of your nostrils and so on, you seem to me to be echoing it.

And I just don't find enough of it in the Beats with their proto-hippy melange of mysticism and hopped up hyperbole, a lot of which just came from taking benzedrine anyway.


Well, that's the thing, if I was echoing the Beats, I did so unintentionally. In some sense, reading them has allowed me to take what I can and be inspired by it while disposing what doesn't particularly pertain to me. It's rather strange how you judge the Beats through a contemporary lens and call it proot-hippy melange of mysticism when writers like Kerouac, Ginsberg, Gary Snyder, and Phillip Whalen devoted tens of thousands of hours meditating and translating the Sutras from the original. Incidentally, Snyder and Whalen are still doing it today. The people who lived through that era believed in their hearts that what they were doing mattered, and they carried forward that thinking into how they lived their own lives. How many times do you read about philosophers not living the philosophy they developed? or religious people not walking the talk? In my opinion the Beats are unique in that sense. Howl, Road, Dharma Bums, Naked Lunch, Go! are tiny insights reflecting the souls of their creators. I think that's pretty interesting stuff.


I'm not going to be bullied into protesting how much I care about writing or telling you when I last went camping. FFS. :p This is what I mean about solipsism. You're just assuming so much about what you're doing right and everyone else isn't.

I start from a very basic proposition: that what it takes to be a writer is the spirit to get down and dirty and just write with the belief (naive faith?) that you have something to say. And not to be so hung up on writing the grand masterpiece, because they only come around once in a hundred years. And if the writer can feel good about what he or she is doing without always having to look to publishing as an affirmation of self (Rilke), then the sky is the limit. If that's solipsism, then so be it.



If you don't see any value in this supposed sitting around theorising about being blocked, the obvious question is, what are you still doing here writing these really long posts in response? The anti-position is still part of the debate it deems valueless. As far as I'm concerned, I'm just talking about something I care about with other people who care about it.

Blp, or you going solipsistic on me now? I think you're ignoring my long posts. In a previous post I said...


but I have to be honest with you, and this is no direct attack on you in making an honest attempt to locate the source or block, but I sense it all as feel goody talk...idle chatter. That doesn't mean it's uninteresting, or I'm immune from the same criticism. Actually what you say is very interesting, that's why I'm responding to it. And what I say is idle chatter too for the reason that will become evident.

You ended with something about rubbish...;)

[PrinceMyshkin]

There have always been those to whom being a writer is more an heroic posture, whether Rimbaud's poetes maudits, Whitman's democratic egotist, Kerouac's free soul or Bukowski's nostalgie pour la boue, rather than a matter of writing, writing, writing. Such persons love to discuss the epic struggle to create, the loneliness of it, &c., and to condemn those who choose to do it in some more quiet, more dedicated way.

[jon1jt]

I didn't say I only agreed with blp. I think what you say is accurate too. Of course blp's view might be more pleasant to hear :p because he's perhaps more reassuring, but your views are equally interesting to me anyway.

Maybe, just maybe, there's a slim chance now that Prince has interjected, that he will take my side---or better said, perhaps my ideas on writing will comport with his---then the sides will be even. Actung baby! :p Go for it, Prince. What's your take on this topic?

[Sweets America]

Maybe, just maybe, there's a slim chance now that Prince has interjected, that he will take my side---or better said, perhaps my ideas on writing will comport with his---then the sides will be even. Actung baby! :p Go for it, Prince. What's your take on this topic?

You're not going to do that, will you? I mean, you're not going to ruin the thread in trying to piss Prince off? ;) This is not like the Jon I know. :p
We all know that if you both start this way, this thread is going to be closed. So please remain CIVIL.
We are here to discuss an interesting subject and we don't care about sides. In case you didn't understand, I agree with some of what you said. SophieLophie agrees.

[jon1jt]

You're not going to do that, will you? I mean, you're not going to ruin the thread in trying to piss Prince off? ;) This is not like the Jon I know. :p
We all know that if you both start this way, this thread is going to be closed. So please remain CIVIL.
We are here to discuss an interesting subject and we don't care about sides. In case you didn't understand, I agree with some of what you said. SophieLophie agrees.

Whoo, I'm not trying to piss off anybody, least of all Prince. I just said it's two against one in here and that since Prince joined in maybe I could get a little help. I don't like sides either. But you and BLP are darn tough! :p

[SleepyWitch]

Absolutely normal, Sweets. There's a great episode of Seinfeld where George and Jerry decide they're going to write a sit-com, thinking it'll be easy. Cut to repeated shots of them falling asleep in armchairs. I don't know why this happens, but there's something absolutely stupefying about suddenly having a lot of freedom to be creative.
hehehe, I so know what you mean. when I have to study for exams 24, I could bash out 5 poems and 2 stories a day (leaving aside the question of quality), but when I've got absolutely nothing to do it takes me half a day to wake up and the other half to go to sleep again and it's a good day if I even notice that my brain's totally numb.

Sweets, how long did it take you to fill these 17 notebooks? I did something similar with a friend once (swapping notebooks), but we only wrote a handful each... it actually did improve my writing, seeing as my writing is usually at its best when I'm writing something I really want to talk about. but then, the subject matter of these journals was so insipid that nobody but my friend and me could possibly be interested in it :( I could probably ramble on an on about my sorry little excuse for a life, and write passably well about it, but who'd want to read that sort of thing???

which takes me on to a much more pressing question: whether you're a professional or recreational writer: what to write about?????
it seems like everything that can be done has been done (nope, I'm not talking about the death of the novel etc, or am I?)... or at least all the things that you can write about from the relative safety of your desk have been written about (and the ones where you need to travel to Afghanistan and have a grandfather from Karachi or some place are out of the question for me, for lack of funds and a grandfather who fits the description).
anyway, we've got a postmodern novel with 3 endings (The French Lieutenant's Woman), we've got a novel from the perspective of a hermaphrodite written by someone who is (presumably) not a hermaphrodite himself (Middlesex), as well as one from the perspective of an autistic child by someone who's not an autistic child himself,either (The curious incident of the dog in the nighttime)...
so it looks like after all imaginable subjects (love, coming of age, adultery, war, campus life, the conscience of middle aged academics', sci-fi, and whatnot) were exploited, writers turned to exploring new voices.. is there a novel written from the perspective of an alien which is not written by an actual alien? I'm sure there must be :alien:

sorry... I've totally lost the thread now...
anyway, on the whole, I think it's a good idea to find a 9-5 job first and get some experience and you can still become a writer when you're 40. that way you've got more time to meet interesting ppl and experience interesting situations that you can write about. unless one is a genius with a very lively imagination, it's probably a good idea not to spend too much time lazing around or on one's own, because what should one write about if one doesn't know anybody and spends all day at home???

[PrinceMyshkin]

Maybe, just maybe, there's a slim chance now that Prince has interjected, that he will take my side---or better said, perhaps my ideas on writing will comport with his---then the sides will be even. Actung baby! :p Go for it, Prince. What's your take on this topic?

And then there are those who write according to the Norman Mailer hairy-chested posture, according to which it's a testosterone-fired combat. We see examples of that in the poetry forum where some responders plead "honesty" when they're being abusive, or envious.

But to return to the question that began this thread: I would strongly advise against writing as a career, unless by that you intend to be a free-lance magazine writer. But if it is your intention to write fiction or poetry, if you stay at home and do nothing but that you are likely either to become mannered or precious or to end up writing about the lint in your belly-button.

[SleepyWitch]

Prince, does that mean I have to grow chest hair because I'm often abusive and envious? ;)

[jon1jt]

And then there are those who write according to the Norman Mailer hairy-chested posture, according to which it's a testosterone-fired combat. We see examples of that in the poetry forum where some responders plead "honesty" when they're being abusive, or envious.

now what the gluck does this have to do with the topic at hand? :lol:

Hey, Norman Mailer backed up his big mouth with some pretty darn fiery prose, eh? Consider you left out the possibility that the "honesty" you read in the forums may be just that, Honest. And that the only battle those responders wage is one with beauty and love.

May that force be with you, my brother.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Prince, does that mean I have to grow chest hair because I'm often abusive and envious? ;)

No, it will suffice if you have enough coming out of your ears or your nostrils.

[Il Penseroso]

Well, I'd rather not (actually really can't) take sides here, so I'll try to pick out the ideas from above that I do agree with to piece together a response.

First off, I began reading this thread basically in full accordance (from my interpretation) with blp's statements. I believe that there are too many varying characteristics to an individual for anyone to say what is best for them on how to spend time, whether participating in the rat race or scavenging a livelihood across America. I've been reading Kafka myself lately and, though I'm sure his working conditions were not as described in say the Trial, surely we wouldn't have the same works we have today without his experiences in the dry tedium of his insurance agency. As a creative individual he made of his environment works of art that communicate on a universal (I hate that word) level. I think most anyone can do this, not just those masterful geniuses we study in college seminars.

Basically I think one just has to trust his/her instincts and ability to explore the human predicament from an assortment of angles, also thinking that the works we write should be as diverse as the perspectives we take in living life.

So I guess my final statement would be that if the decision on whether to work your average 9-5 job or devote all your energies to the best of your ability to writing is not immediately apparent, I think you should try both out, for experimentation's sake, to find a personal groove that you can use for creative purposes.

[jon1jt]

Well, I'd rather not (actually really can't) take sides here, so I'll try to pick out the ideas from above that I do agree with to piece together a response.

First off, I began reading this thread basically in full accordance (from my interpretation) with blp's statements. I believe that there are too many varying characteristics to an individual for anyone to say what is best for them on how to spend time, whether participating in the rat race or scavenging a livelihood across America. I've been reading Kafka myself lately and, though I'm sure his working conditions were not as described in say the Trial, surely we wouldn't have the same works we have today without his experiences in the dry tedium of his insurance agency. As a creative individual he made of his environment works of art that communicate on a universal (I hate that word) level. I think most anyone can do this, not just those masterful geniuses we study in college seminars.

Basically I think one just has to trust his/her instincts and ability to explore the human predicament from an assortment of angles, also thinking that the works we write should be as diverse as the perspectives we take in living life.

So I guess my final statement would be that if the decision on whether to work your average 9-5 job or devote all your energies to the best of your ability to writing is not immediately apparent, I think you should try both out, for experimentation's sake, to find a personal groove that you can use for creative purposes.


A man writes to throw off the poison which he has accumulated because of his false way of life. He is trying to recapture his innocence, yet all he succeeds in doing (by writing) is to inoculate the world with a virus of his disillusionment. No man would set a word down on paper if he had the courage to live out what he believed in. ---Henry Miller

It's four to one with IP's vote now in. Boy o boy, so I'm really losing this one. Ouch, please, I give up, c'mon guys.

[Il Penseroso]

Well, I didn't initially plan on taking blp's side, and really I don't in fact disagree with you, I'm just more in agreement with blp. I think. For now anyway.


but anyhow, I'd probably better get to selling my soul for the sake of future haiku writers (I've got a lesson plan to write :))

[Sweets America]

It's four to one with IP's vote now in. Boy o boy, so I'm really losing this one. Ouch, please, I give up, c'mon guys.

Who said you should give up because no one agrees with you? This is too easy. :p
Plus, it is not true that no one agrees with you, but I think you might like thinking that you're engaged in a desperate struggle against the world. :p

[jon1jt]

Who said you should give up because no one agrees with you? This is too easy. :p
Plus, it is not true that no one agrees with you, but I think you might like thinking that you're engaged in a desperate struggle against the world. :p

Oh no, absolutely not, sweets, don't you know, I loath war. As you may clearly see from ol IPs follow-up, I have been thoroughly defeated---I am a child kicking rocks down a country road, full of boo-boos.

Please, stop, ouch, I give up...

Come to think of it, who am I kidding...I am in a desperate struggle against the world. :p

[PrinceMyshkin]

Well, I'd rather not (actually really can't) take sides here, so I'll try to pick out the ideas from above that I do agree with to piece together a response.

I don't believe that the majority of those who have posted here see this as a matter of "sides"! Most of us, I think, are more interested in the free and open expression of points of view.

And the rest of your post is a temperate, reasonable statement of the diversity of how and why writers write.

[jon1jt]

Since some of you have been speaking of Kafka as the super-hero of writers with a full-time job, it made me wonder about his background---that is, what class he was born into, whether his parents were strict or liberal, whether he was a religious man, etc. I knew a little about his Jewish roots, but here I'd like to share with you this biographical sliver from Kafka's life to consider whether or to what extent Kafka may have been a victim of an autocratic family and had to play the role of dutiful son his whole life as a cog in a wheel of some insurance company nobody knows the name of today. I wonder what duties and obligations---moral, religious, and otherwise, other famous authors had who tucked themselves away in some corporate tank.

I will not be stoned into taking a view that writers...ARTISTS....ought to be free to choose a life working nine-to-five in Corporate while pursuing their art. Anyone who does so, in my mind, is a sell out. At the end of the day, you have to live with yourself, I don't. But I'm not going to nod in agreement with your decision to be a corporate cog just because you said so. I have a social responsibility.

Imagine Kafka's father had instilled a radical view in his son, the kind of view that liberated Henry Miller, Thoreau, Kerouac, Ginsberg, etc. etc. etc. God only knows the volumes Franz Kafka might have written then.


Kafka’s deep sense of need, both financial and emotional, was often complicated by feelings of hatred – or at the very least, by the desire to escape. Indeed, most of his feelings towards his family were mixed and contradictory, and this conflict took root deep within his psyche, emerging in unexpected ways throughout his life. His father, who could certainly be overwhelming, held young Franz to higher standards than he set for himself; as a result, his son’s feelings of love and awe were tangled up with the profound sense of being a disappointment. Because his mother often took his father’s side over his, the affection he had for her was tempered by the rancor of an abandoned child. The one person in the family with whom he truly connected was his youngest sister Ottla, who was free-spirited and rebellious. He would later compare his relationship with Ottla to a “conspiracy” against their autocratic father.

[Etienne]

I'm not sure about saying X way or Y is the best for a writer, or any artist in general. Some artists can write great pieces while being in a locked room and having lived not much else than a bland interior. Some works have been favored by good material situation, where others have been favored by bad material situations. Some have been favored by a life of debauchery and adventures, others by a pious and almost ascetic life. I don't think one can define or put boundaries to artistic inspiration, and it seems as it would be better let flowed naturally. One can win a million at lottery and have his artistic life ruined, while another can go bankrupt or work in an office 50 hours a week and have his artistic life enriched by it.

My point is: who knows? Go your way and do your best, that does not mean closing yourself to advices, but it does mean that advices are advices and nothing more.

[pbmn]

My point is: who knows? Go your way and do your best, that does not mean closing yourself to advices, but it does mean that advices are advices and nothing more.


Couldn't have put it better myself.

[jon1jt]

My point is: who knows? Go your way and do your best, that does not mean closing yourself to advices, but it does mean that advices are advices and nothing more.

Yeah, but imagine if the United States took that position through WWII,(which it did, early on). "Well, who knows...should we attack now or wait for Hitler to attack us. I realize Churchill needs a hand, but we'll just lend him a hand, give him some naval ships, let him pay later. Maybe we shouldn't. I'm not sure." :rolleyes:

Do we have no opinions against anything anymore?? Can we all be that programmed? You too, pbmn.

[pbmn]

Opinions are great, what would life be without them? (pretty bland if you ask me). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it will work for everyone. What Etienne is saying is to "follow your heart" (pretty fruity way to put it) and do what's right for you. I am not saying that opinions shouldn't be given, because I too am expressing my opinion.

[jon1jt]

Opinions are great, what would life be without them? (pretty bland if you ask me). But just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it will work for everyone. What Etienne is saying is to "follow your heart" (pretty fruity way to put it) and do what's right for you. I am not saying that opinions shouldn't be given, because I too am expressing my opinion.

Oh, is that what you call that relativist babble? :rolleyes: Your opinion from what I can see is: "I have an opinion on this subject of writing and work. Let writers decide for themselves. Live and let live. To each their own. Yea."

[pbmn]

Laissez faire literature, huh? Yeah, that is my opinion.

And don't make fun of it, it's a REAL argument!:rage: Take the job of a financial advisor. What ever advice you give, your client has a 50-50 chance. In the long-run, you are either seen as a saint, or, well, let's put it that you should "hang low" for a while.:D You were better off without the gamble, or, in other words, "let them be".

[jon1jt]

Laissez faire literature, huh? Yeah, that is my opinion.

And don't make fun of it, it's a REAL argument!:rage: Take the job of a financial advisor. What ever advice you give, your client has a 50-50 chance. In the long-run, you are either seen as a saint, or, well, let's put it that you should "hang low" for a while.:D You were better off without the gamble, or, in other words, "let them be".

Why does it not surprise me that you'd invoke that hegemonic republican babble? :rolleyes:

[pbmn]

Why does it not surprise me that you'd invoke that hegemonic republican babble?

Cause I make you laugh. :lol:

But back to the topic! Anyways, is xtillyx still even listening? We are fighting over something that the creator of the question has stopped looking to for advice! Seems like a little paradox. Like God creating people, getting bored by them, and leaving them alone, while they try to impress Him. Makes you think doesn't it?

[jon1jt]

Cause I make you laugh. :lol:

But back to the topic!

You don't know who I am or what I mean.

[pbmn]

Wait a second!


Very possible. Just keep writing and whatever you do, don't listen to people who tell you that so-and-so program will open up opportunities.

Become who you are.


You posted this, and are making fun of me for saying something analogous to it?!?!?!

[jon1jt]

Wait a second!



You posted this, and are making fun of me for saying something analogous to it?!?!?!

That was in a completely different spirit. I was speaking about college writing programs. I never meant to say to sell your soul to some corporation to put food on your table to write 1.5 hours a night at best. Give me more credit, Mr. Carnegie.

[pbmn]

Touché. Misinterpretted what you were saying there. But, according to what you are saying, that if you want to be a true "writer" you need to suffer from poverty? Or are you saying that they should get a different job, less demanding at that?:)

[Captain Pike]

This has been an exciting match! I wanted to jump in at various points along the way but my arguments were invariably made, extra-humously. Looking back over the few writers I know anything about, doesn't seem there is a clear trend in either direction.
I know one thing though, I worked for many years as a software engineer and then, through an interesting chain of events and a stint of unemployment lasting several years, I returned to the workforce, this time, as a mechanic. But then, did the feelings ever flow! I had been taken down a peg. And while I had always maintained a meager journal, it seemed writing was the only salve for my wounded ego. The only thing missing here is: I've never been published! But I have been driven to write as never before. I suspect an individual with real talent might be similarly driven and thus prolific, if they too suffered a nearly resurrecting life change. A veritable phoenix rising from the ashes of a modern-day crack pipe, perhaps.

[jon1jt]

Touché. Misinterpretted what you were saying there. But, according to what you are saying, that if you want to be a true "writer" you need to suffer from poverty? Or are you saying that they should get a different job?:)

You told me you're 16 in the PM, yes? Well, you still have a chance, my friend. Know this: you don't have to suffer from poverty to be a true writer. There are many creative jobs out there, and for a good cause, from which you can earn your keep, that you'll be glad later that you did, esp. when you learn about how the world is so screwed because of multinational corporations, from Haliburton to MSNBC. I advise you to kick in your TV set, grab your pen and pad, paints, whatever---and find a big tree in a park under which you can write. Cut school Monday and head to that park. Buy a marble notebook on the way to write in. When your parents find out, tell them I told you to do so. Refer them right here, to litnet. I'd love to talk to them. Listen to what I'm telling you, it's a matter of life or death.

[pbmn]

I don't want to sound like a "broken record", and your idea is definitely flawless, although to a certain extent. Every person will write better at a specific point of his life compared to another. I could be better at writing from the pits of Hell, while another could be a better writer at the pearly gates of Heaven, it all depends on one's lifestyle, upbringing, perspective, etc. I can tell you this, were I to fall from a good job to a worse position, my writing style would definitely change, catastropically even. But, I think that if this were to happen to me in real life, my writing would altogether cease to exist. I write better at a comfortable spot, where I can clear myself of all outside emotions and write a fresh, unheard-of story. Who wants to hear the same story on pain and suffering over and over again?


When your parents find out, tell them I told you to do so. Refer them right here, to litnet. I'd love to talk to them

If I were to do as you said, my parents would never hear from whom I got this advice, as I would be dead too fast to tell. That's true fear (in terms of a teenager) right there .

Alright, I think we struck common grounds right there. I could never get a corporate type job, unless it was only temporary to boost me up to my dreams (and even then, that would be a big, fat "IF"). I know how our world is completely flawed, from grades all the way up to the "real world". I just think that, if you were to write, and you needed the pay, a temporary job wouldn't hurt too much. Just don't stay in it for too long.

Can I venture a guess that you are an anarchist/ antiglobalizationalist?

[jon1jt]

I don't want to sound like a "broken record", and your idea is definitely flawless, although to a certain extent. Every person will write better at a specific point of his life compared to another. I could be better at writing from the pits of Hell, while another could be a better writer at the pearly gates of Heaven, it all depends on one's lifestyle, upbringing, perspective, etc. I can tell you this, were I to fall from a good job to a worse position, my writing style would definitely change, catastropically even. But, I think that if this were to happen to me in real life, my writing would altogether cease to exist. I write better at a comfortable spot, where I can clear myself of all outside emotions and write a fresh, unheard-of story. Who wants to hear the same story on pain and suffering over and over again?

Hmmm. This conversation reminds me of that movie, Back To School, when the student speaks his mind and the history professor says to Rodney Dangerfield, who plays his student: "Mmm, I like the way you think. I'll be keeping my eye on you." ;)




Alright, I think we struck common grounds right there. I could never get a corporate type job, unless it was only temporary to boost me up to me dreams (and even then, that would be a big, fat "IF"). I know how our world is completely flawed, from grades all the way up to the "real world". I just think that, if you were to write, and you needed the pay, a temporary job wouldn't hurt too much. Just don't stay in it for too long.

No no, no 'temporary,' please no!!! It has a sucking capacity and can reel you in!! :lol:

Yeah yeah, 'flawed' is the word, and you say from grades to the real world, yes yes yes!!!

[pbmn]

I know, one always says temporary, and it turns into tomorrow, then the next day, and the next day, and so-on and so-on until they end up at retiring age, to old to do anything. I meant that if one needs a "quick-fix", then any job is better than no money, right?

I have to call it a night soon, have some routine homework to do. Hope somebody else comes on and we resolve this argument soon, although it is fun.


Yeah yeah, 'flawed' is the word, and you say from grades to the real world, yes yes yes!!!

You honestly sounded like my English teacher right there. We even had a talk on grades and how seriously flawed they were in class, and had to write a paper on our views of the discussion. It was pretty interesting. Strangely, it was all started by a Boston Legal episode where a girl dies from the overload from her school because of grades. Weird.

[jon1jt]

I know, one always says temporary, and it turns into tomorrow, then the next day, and the next day, and so-on and so-on until they end up at retiring age, to old to do anything. I meant that if one needs a "quick-fix", then any job is better than no money, right?


Ahhh, such young knowledge in bloom, yes yes yes!!! I see what you're saying, yes of course.



You honestly sounded like my English teacher right there. We even had a talk on grades and how seriously flawed they were in class, and had to write a paper on our views of the discussion. It was pretty interesting. Strangely, it was all started by a Boston Legal episode where a girl dies from the overload from her school because of grades. Weird.

Yeah, I was one of them once. Sounds like your English teacher's got a unique perspective there. You're listening, that's good. Good night, my little brother. May the stars be with you.

[Captain Pike]

This reminds me of the story of the two kids that heard "Polly" and thought that gave them license to gang rape some girl. Like it or not, Kurt had some influence. Maybe you should (JT) let lead-molybdenum get mad at society before he (or she) practices rebelling against it.
-just a ruling from corporate America

[jon1jt]

This reminds me of the story of the two kids that heard "Polly" and thought that gave them license to gang rape some girl. Like it or not, Kurt had some influence. Maybe you should (JT) let lead-molybdenum get mad at society before he (or she) practices rebelling against it.
-just a ruling from corporate America


No no, no gang raping permitted, I agree. I'm just trying to save the kid, he's my little brother.

[blp]

*blinks* Is it over? Did I win?

I'm switching to jon's side.

I do like the Beats, jon. I told you that already. Naked Lunch even more than Howl. Seems we may both have been reading one another selectively or sloppily.


I've spent a very enjoyable evening watching the film Zizek! in 7 installments on youtube. There's a good bit where he says something along the lines that the thing we are most passionate about, the thing we really want to say to the world is us, is the act. He says he keeps talking to distract people from the fact that he's really nothing.

[jon1jt]

*blinks* Is it over? Did I win?

I'm switching to jon's side.

I do like the Beats, jon. I told you that already. Naked Lunch even more than Howl. Seems we may both have been reading one another selectively or sloppily.


I've spent a very enjoyable evening watching the film Zizek! in 7 installments on youtube. There's a good bit where he says something along the lines that the thing we are most passionate about, the thing we really want to say to the world is us, is the act. He says he keeps talking to distract people from the fact that he's really nothing.


:lol: :lol: Oh that's great, the team captain switches sides the last quarter! :lol: Yeah man, I'll take it! Glad you stopped back. I was reading about Zizek in the Times---is that the Slovene philosopher?? I'll check it out, hell yeah.

So...wait, you're telling me that you do like the Beats??? :eek: After all that invidious criticism you laid on me this morning? No ****?!! I haven't delved into Burroughs yet, just the excerpts. He's amazing, huh? I'm reading John Clellon Holmes' novel Go right now. I have all Burroughs stuff here, looking forward to it. To think how late Burroughs started writing, and how Kerouac was actually the one who put the fire under his butt to get him writing. I'd still love to read that short piece they co-authored---And The Hippos Were Boiled In Their Tanks. Gotta love it.

Yeah, I've been reading you selectively, it seems. Maybe I (we) was chuckling in the little drama of it, but I'd like to think we're on the same page, though I still don't know what the hell you're doing in that job, man. Eh, who am I to criticize you, at least you're making money. Looks like I'll be working in a museum in a couple weeks on top of my other little gigs. But I ain't selling out, I swear I won't!

[Etienne]

Yeah, but imagine if the United States took that position through WWII,(which it did, early on). "Well, who knows...should we attack now or wait for Hitler to attack us. I realize Churchill needs a hand, but we'll just lend him a hand, give him some naval ships, let him pay later. Maybe we shouldn't. I'm not sure." :rolleyes:

Do we have no opinions against anything anymore?? Can we all be that programmed? You too, pbmn.

Hmm? You've got it completly wrong, I really don't see how your objection follows my post, really.

[jon1jt]

Hmm? I really don't see how your objection follows my post, really.

Hey Etienne man, do you know that you are one of the maybe three guys on this whole site I'd actually go out to a pub with? To hell with that WWII line I gave you---I think you're a smart guy, and you know your philosophy too. You and me will sit on a cloud someday dropping water balloons on cows. What we've got to learn is our own minds, churning like a revolution inside nature.

[Captain Pike]

Exterminate all rational thought

[jon1jt]

Exterminate all rational thought


hell yeah. And you're sitting on that cloud too, Captain. I haven't forgotten you and those gracious comments you left for my short story set in Vermont. My half-buddha bow to you.

[Etienne]

Hey Etienne man, do you know that you are one of the maybe three guys on this whole site I'd actually go out to a pub with? To hell with that WWII line I gave you---I think you're a smart guy, and you know your philosophy too. You and me will sit on a cloud someday dropping water balloons on cows. What we've got to learn is our own minds, churning like a revolution inside nature.

Sitting on a cloud? Balloons on cows? That's a nice program man, I'm in. :lol:

[Sweets America]

I must say I like your ideas, Jon, but I already told you that. I like the freedom of them. I'm just not sure it is always possible and this is what is scary. I think you would need to talk to my parents as well because they always say that you have to accept any job, even the worst one, and that's life, and the workplace is a crappy place and you will spend all your life there and that's how it is and you have to stop dreaming and you cannot do what you like doing in life because life is unfair. Hugh?!

I have always said that I would not end up doing a dull job, you see, I am a dreamer and I have no idea where my studies will lead me, but I am enjoying the day and all that counts is the fact that I love what I am doing right now, and this is what some people have trouble to understand.

Anyway, i am far from being against you on that question, and I would give the same advice as you if someone asked me if he could write as a career. I guess I would tell the person to put their energy in fulfilling their dreams and not to care about the conventions of society. I have always thought this way but I am surrounded with persons who stopped dreaming. Everyday I am asked why the hell I am at university instead of having a job, and they say I am wasting my time. (now I know your opinion on universities but that's another debate:p ). Of course they also wonder why I don't have boyfriends or why I don't get drunk or why I don't want to have kids. I am the strange person in my family, you see. Well, perhaps, but I am just doing what pleases me, that's all. Now maybe I'll have a crappy job someday but at least I would have tried to enjoy myself.

Oh, given that I am the little cloud in question, I am not sure I want to have all those guys sitting on me. :D

[TheFifthElement]

See, but you're all missing the point, I have it here:


to what extent Kafka may have been a victim of an autocratic family and had to play the role of dutiful son his whole life as a cog in a wheel of some insurance company nobody knows the name of today.


to insurance company head (Wallace Stevens). Stevens used to write his poems on the train to work.

you want to be a great writer? Get a job in insurance. Want to be an even greater writer, get the train to your job in insurance.

[jon1jt]

I must say I like your ideas, Jon, but I already told you that. I like the freedom of them.

blp told me he's on my side now, he likes some of the Beat poets too. :p


I'm just not sure it is always possible and this is what is scary. I think you would need to talk to my parents as well because they always say that you have to accept any job, even the worst one, and that's life, and the workplace is a crappy place and you will spend all your life there and that's how it is and you have to stop dreaming and you cannot do what you like doing in life because life is unfair. Hugh?!

It's very possible, actually. It just requires a change in perspective in terms of what we're not willing to settle for. Corporations need cronies, hacks, yes-men and -women who employ corporate speak and dress. And don't forget hierarchy models and the rules of manipulating people. Business school classrooms packed for courses like Business Ethics. Just put another dime in your jukebox of commercialism and FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) ohhh, ahhh.. :rolleyes:



I would tell the person to put their energy in fulfilling their dreams and not to care about the conventions of society.

Yeah, you can dream, just don't tell people you refuse to work in corporate or public schools, unless you're hiding behind a computer screen. :p


I have always thought this way but I am surrounded with persons who stopped dreaming. Everyday I am asked why the hell I am at university instead of having a job, and they say I am wasting my time.

Well, of course they would, that's because they start from the premise that they're normal and you're not. I used to tell everybody the truth---
I went to college because I didn't want to be trapped in some cubicle. Meanwhile, I was figuring things out.

Enrolling in college is a wonderful form of nondestructive escapism. :p

[Sweets America]

First, there is a mystery here. I could have sworn that blp had replied to this yerterday and now his post has disappeared.

Well, Jon, seems like you are winning people on your side. Let's say I am half on your side because you know how I refuse to choose sides. ;)
But yes I admire the freedom of what you said. This is rare to see people who have not given up.


It's very possible, actually. It just requires a change in perspective in terms of what we're not willing to settle for. Corporations need cronies, hacks, yes-men and -women who employ corporate speak and dress. And don't forget hierarchy models and the rules of manipulating people. Business school classrooms packed for courses like Business Ethics. Just put another dime in your jukebox of commercialism and FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) ohhh, ahhh..

I always said I would not do this kind of work. I think that what I really dislike is the mentality of the workplaces, I have really seen that when I had summer-jobs. As I told Shalot on her blog, once I was doing my job and when i had finished, the woman there told me:
'Oh, you made an error at the very beginning but I didn't tell you (little laugh) and now the whole thing must be done again'. :sick: Ok. At the same time, this woman was doing everything to make her co-workers believe she was crazy because she wanted to take a sick-leave.
I've also seen in my internship how the workers can be all against one person and that's scary, and how the bosses sometimes love making people cry. Jesus. Oh, and my mother's boss had learnt those rules to manipulate people.


Yeah, you can dream, just don't tell people you refuse to work in corporate or public schools, unless you're hiding behind a computer screen.

I'm afraid that's too late, I am always telling that. I am scared that sometimes people say they will work here or there for some time and in the end they find themselves at 50 and they're still at the same place that they hate. I am scared that sometimes they just don't have the choice.
The other day I met a guy who works for a company I would like to work in next summer to get money for the States. Well this guy was talking gossip about people and I found it so stupid I told him that was kind of stupid to talk this way because he didn't know other people's lives at all. I hope this guy has nothing to do with the ones who select people for summer jobs. :p


Well, of course they would, that's because they start from the premise that they're normal and you're not. I used to tell everybody the truth---
I went to college because I didn't want to be trapped in some cubicle. Meanwhile, I was figuring things out.

Enrolling in college is a wonderful form of nondestructive escapism.

Yes you're right, they think they're normal and I'm not. I am used to it in my family even if i love them very much. I think we're just different, that does not mean that one of us is better than the other.

Ahah, nondestructive escapism, nice. :)

[blp]

Well, of course they would, that's because they start from the premise that they're normal and you're not.

Civilisation and its discontents.


I always said I would not do this kind of work. I think that what I really dislike is the mentality of the workplaces, I have really seen that when I had summer-jobs. As I told Shalot on her blog, once I was doing my job and when i had finished, the woman there told me:
'Oh, you made an error at the very beginning but I didn't tell you (little laugh) and now the whole thing must be done again'. Ok. At the same time, this woman was doing everything to make her co-workers believe she was crazy because she wanted to take a sick-leave.
I've also seen in my internship how the workers can be all against one person and that's scary, and how the bosses sometimes love making people cry. Jesus. Oh, and my mother's boss had learnt those rules to manipulate people.
Like I said, it's like Shakespeare. Or Pinter.

Yes, my post has disappeared. It's strange.


what to write about?????
it seems like everything that can be done has been done (nope, I'm not talking about the death of the novel etc, or am I?)... or at least all the things that you can write about from the relative safety of your desk have been written about (and the ones where you need to travel to Afghanistan and have a grandfather from Karachi or some place are out of the question for me, for lack of funds and a grandfather who fits the description).
anyway, we've got a postmodern novel with 3 endings (The French Lieutenant's Woman), we've got a novel from the perspective of a hermaphrodite written by someone who is (presumably) not a hermaphrodite himself (Middlesex), as well as one from the perspective of an autistic child by someone who's not an autistic child himself,either (The curious incident of the dog in the nighttime)...
so it looks like after all imaginable subjects (love, coming of age, adultery, war, campus life, the conscience of middle aged academics', sci-fi, and whatnot) were exploited, writers turned to exploring new voices.. is there a novel written from the perspective of an alien which is not written by an actual alien? I'm sure there must be :alien:

sorry... I've totally lost the thread now...
anyway, on the whole, I think it's a good idea to find a 9-5 job first and get some experience and you can still become a writer when you're 40. that way you've got more time to meet interesting ppl and experience interesting situations that you can write about. unless one is a genius with a very lively imagination, it's probably a good idea not to spend too much time lazing around or on one's own, because what should one write about if one doesn't know anybody and spends all day at home???

Hi, Sleepy, I skated over this without reading most of it before, so caught up was I in the no-holds-barred literary death match.

In my view, the answer to your conundrum is DeKooning's formulation: 'Content is small.' Wary as I am of sentences that begin, We live in an age... in this instance, I'm confident in sticking my neck out: We live in an age, after conceptual art, during advertising, when ideas are thought to be all. Got a new book? What's the elevator pitch. Sell it to me in 20 words or, ideally, less. Um, well, it's about these three brothers see, and, no, only, there might be four because the dad might have impregnated a mentally handicapped woman on a drunken bet, but anyway, one of them is trying to become a priest and...Next! OK, OK, there's this one where this young guy wants to be a soldier and he is one for a while, but then he ends up back in Italy and has some problems with his family and, I must admit, the story doesn't really have much shape, but it's really good, he ends up a priest giving these really moving sermons all because he can't have the woman he loves and...Next!

Ideas are not all. They're wee little things that are desperately easy to screw up because, depending on whether you believe Mies van der Rohe or not, God or the devil are in the details. I learned this the mildly hard way by reviewing theatre (unpaid, for local papers) after I left college. The editor would phone up and say, 'It's about a lesbian incest bondage murder at an arms fair, so, you know, probably quite interesting.' And it would turn out to be some ludicrously am dram rubbish full of terrible dialogue. The absolute best things I saw had, as relational artist Phillip Parreno might put it, 'no ideas': The Woods by David Mamet - a couple arguing at a cabin in the woods; something by Stig Laarsen I can't remember the name of - just a bunch of people having dinner, acting loopy; another thing I can't remember the name of by Mike Leigh - a young girl getting drunk in her bedsit with a couple and a single guy.

A tutor I had at art school used to say that if he asked all of us to draw a black square, we'd all do a different drawing. Execution is the thing. Even in advertising, where ideas are thought to be king, a lot of the best work is down to good execution, whether in the writing or the direction. Conceptual art comes closest to being a pure art of ideas and, not surprisingly, a lot of its strategies now feel used up.

Subject matter doesn't run out until problems stop. A bit of double-edged reassurance there.

[Sweets America]

Yes, I think that's accurate, what you said, blp: I agree on the fact that an idea itself is not all because two persons can do very different things with it and it's easy to do something horrible with a good idea.
But, well, I still think that ideas are important too, but it depends because sometimes something which starts with a banal idea can turn better than something which seems more original at first sight. I don't know. But I think it's all in the writer.

Oh, to answer Sleepy's previous question: I think it took me something like 3 years to write the 17 notebooks. They were not all of the same size. Now I would really like to burn them all because they really belong to a past which pisses me off, but something in me reisists and doesn't want to do that. So I just let them rot somewhere.

[blp]

I'd say, don't burn them. I threw my teenage diary into the Thammes in embarrassment once. Now there's a night in NY and London called Cringe where people read their teenage diaries aloud and it's hilarious.

Ideas can mean a lot of things. All I'm really arguing against is the too neat, over-arching concept.

[Sweets America]

If I burnt them it would be more out of anger than embarrassment, because they represent a bad part of my life and are associated to a person that I loathe today. I finally got rid of the person, but the notebooks are still there. They keep memories that my mind has forgotten. It is strange how my mind works. The past is the past, and I tend to forget it all. For instance I have practically no memory of my childhood and I know I lived in a certain house when I was around 12 but I have not one damn memory of it, not even my bedroom of the time. I tend to forget everything that's unpleasant and concentrate on the future I guess.

I cannot imagine reading my diaries out loud. :p Now that's funny because in a way that's what I do in my blog :p but I guess the notebooks really belong to a different category.

Sorry for the digression. Back to the subject? :)

[blp]

I tend to forget everything that's unpleasant and concentrate on the future I guess.


Crikey, Sweets. This is known by psychology types as repression, I believe.

[Sweets America]

Crikey, Sweets. This is known by psychology types as repression, I believe.

Yes, it is the concept of resistance or denial. I know, I've studied psychology for 4 damn years during those years when I was not free to be myself. I have real trouble with psychology, they are always thinking that they have the answers for everything, and once again, when I studied that, I realized how horrible it felt to enclose myself in their theories.
I saw 2 psychologists who really did not help me at all. I had seen one in my childhood who had said there was nothing wrong with me instead of doing her job at the time. I was so glad to see her again years after to tell her how wrong she had been. Psychologists can really go to hell for me, I'm done with them.

Oh, what does crikey mean? :p

[blp]

It's sort of just an exclamation, but, like a lot of English exclamations, derives from religious profanities that were once considered beyond the pale. In other words, in this instance, 'Christ!'

Others include 'Blimey' which comes from 'Gor blimey' which comes from 'God blind me.' and 'Struth!' which comes from 'God's truth!'

[Sweets America]

It's sort of just an exclamation, but, like a lot of English exclamations, derives from religious profanities that were once considered beyond the pale. In other words, in this instance, 'Christ!'

Others include 'Blimey' which comes from 'Gor blimey' which comes from 'God blind me.' and 'Struth!' which comes from 'God's truth!'

Ah thanks, that's cool. :) I didn't know 'beyond the pale' either. :p

[jon1jt]

So I have to say that I'm still interested in this thread and all, but I'm thoroughly disappointed with the fact that blp won the steel cage match. I'll have to live with it...it's okay, I can deal. The fact is, blp, Sylvia Plath is all mine and you can't have her...You can have Edith Wharton, or Virginia Woolf! :sick: :p

For those of you unaware, blp and I have been duking it out lately for Sylvia Plath's heart. :p

[blp]

That's funny because I just spoke to Plath (or Plathy, as she likes me to call her) and she suggested you marry a waterproof, shatterproof suit – black and stiff, but not a bad fit.

[jon1jt]

That's funny because I just spoke to Plath (or Plathy, as she likes me to call her) and she suggested you marry a waterproof, shatterproof suit – black and stiff, but not a bad fit.


Oh, "Plathy," is that it?? I call her "my tulip" she likes that better. You're leaving me to settle for Wharton or Woolf, I get it. You always win! :bawling:

[blp]

You always win! :bawling:

I dunno. She could be playing us both. I'm thinking of asking Marguerite Duras out. I'm not sure I can be the fascist Plath's looking for. All Duras wants is for men to be children. Or is that the same thing?

[jon1jt]

I dunno. She could be playing us both. I'm thinking of asking Marguerite Duras out. I'm not sure I can be the fascist Plath's looking for. All Duras wants is for men to be children. Or is that the same thing?

Regarding the fascism, are you referring to Ted Hughes?? I'm unfamiliar with this.

Marguerite Duras?? Marguerite Duras?!?? Hmm. Well, I checked her out and must tell you that she doesn't come close to my tulip. :p But what's not to like about a female writer/filmmaker with a bibliography like this:



Bibliography
Les Impudents, Plon, 1943
La Vie tranquille, Gallimard, 1944.
Un barrage contre le Pacifique, Gallimard, 1950 (tr. The Sea Wall, 1967)
Le Marin de Gibraltar, Galimard, 1952 (tr. The Sailor from Gibraltar, 1966)
Les petits chevaux de Tarquinia, Gallimard, 1953 (tr. The Little Horses of Tarquinia, 1960)
Des journées entières dans les arbres, "Le Boa", "Madame Dodin", "Les Chantiers", Gallimard, 1954 (tr. Whole Days in the Trees, 1984)
Le Square, Gallimard, 1955 (tr. The Square, 1959)
Moderato Cantabile, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1958 (tr. Moderato Cantabile, 1977)
Les Viaducs de la Seine et Oise, Gallimard, 1959.
Hiroshima mon amour, Gallimard, 1960 (tr. Hiroshima mon amour, 1961)
L'après-midi de M. Andesmas, Gallimard, 1960 (tr. The Afternoon of Mr. Andesmas, 1964)
Le Ravissement de Lol V. Stein, Gallimard, 1964, (tr. The Ravishing of Lol Stein, 1964)
Théâtre I : les Eaux et Forêts-le Square-La Musica, Gallimard, 1965 (tr. The Rivers and the Forests, 1964; The Square; La Musica, 1975)
Le Vice-Consul, Gallimard, 1965 (tr. The Vice-Consul, 1968)
L'Amante Anglaise, Gallimard, 1967 (tr. L'Amante Anglaise, 1968)
Théâtre II : Suzanna Andler-Des journées entières dans les arbres-Yes, peut-être-Le Shaga-Un homme est venu me voir, Gallimard, 1968.
Détruire, dit-elle, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1969 (tr. Destroy, She Said)
Abahn Sabana David, Gallimard, 1970.
L'Amour (Love), Gallimard, 1971.
Ah! Ernesto, Hatlin Quist, 1971.
India Song, Gallimard, 1973 (tr. India Song, 1976)
Nathalie Granger, suivi de "La Femme du Gange", Gallimard, 1973.
Le Camion, suivi de "Entretien avec Michelle Porte", Les Éditions de Minuit, 1977.
L'Eden Cinéma, Mercure de France, 1977 (tr. Eden Cinema, 1992)
Le Navire Night, suivi de Cesarée, les Mains négatives, Aurélia Steiner, Mercure de France, 1979.
Vera Baxter ou les Plages de l'Atlantique, Albatros, 1980.
L'Homme assis dans le couloir, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1980 (tr. The Man Sitting in the Corridor)
L'Été 80, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1980.
Les Yeux verts, Cahiers du cinéma, n.312-313, juin 1980 et nouvelle édition, 1987 (tr. Green Eyes)
Agatha, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1981 (tr. Agatha)
Outside, Albin Michel, 1981 (tr. Outside)
L'Homme atlantique, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1982.
Savannah Bay, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1982, 2ème edition augmentée, 1983 (tr. Savannah Bay, 1992)
La Maladie de la mort, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1982 (tr. The Malady of Death)
Théâtre III : -La Bête dans la jungle, d'après H. James, adaptation de J. Lord et M. Duras,-Les Papiers d'Aspern,d'après H. James, adaptation de M. Duras et R. Antelme,-La Danse de mort, d'après A. Strindberg, adaptation de M. Duras, Gallimard, 1984.
L'Amant, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1984. Was awarded the 1984 Prix Goncourt (tr. The Lover)
La Douleur, POL, 1985 (tr. The War)
La Musica deuxième, Gallimard, 1985.
Les Yeux bleus Cheveux noirs, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1986 (tr. Blue Eyes, Black Hair)
La Pute de la côte normande, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1986.
La Vie matérielle, POL, 1987 (tr. Practicalities)
Emily L., Les Éditions de Minuit, 1987 (tr. Emily L.)
La Pluie d'été, POL, 1990 (tr. Summer Rain)
L'Amant de la Chine du Nord, Gallimard, 1991 (tr. The North China Lover, 1992)
Yann Andréa Steiner, Gallimard, 1992 (tr. Yann Andrea Steiner)
C'est tout, POL, 1995 (tr. No More)

[edit] Filmography as director
Les Enfants (1984)
Il Dialogo di Roma (1982)
L'Homme atlantique (1981)
Agatha et les lectures illimitées (1981)
Aurelia Steiner (Melbourne) (1979)
Aurélia Steiner (Vancouver) (1979)
Le Navire Night (1979)
Cesarée (1978)
Les Mains négatives (1978)
Baxter, Vera Baxter (1977)
Le Camion (1977)
Des journées entières dans les arbres (1976)
Son nom de Venise dans Calcutta désert (1976)
India Song (1975)
La Femme du Gange (1974)
Nathalie Granger (1972)
Jeune le soleil (1972)
Détruire, dit-elle (1969)
La Musica (1967)

[blp]

You'll kick yourself...



Every woman adores a Fascist,
The boot in the face, the brute
Brute heart of a brute like you.

[SleepyWitch]

The past is the past, and I tend to forget it all. For instance I have practically no memory of my childhood and I know I lived in a certain house when I was around 12 but I have not one damn memory of it, not even my bedroom of the time. I tend to forget everything that's unpleasant and concentrate on the future I guess.


don't worry, it'll all come back to you when you're old and senile. then your childhood and the present will be the only thing you can remember and you'll have forgotten everything in between. :D
I'm the same, up to a point, but, seriously, I think it's normal that we forget most of our past, otherwise our brains would be on overload. didn't they teach you that in your psychology classes?
don't burn your notebooks, even if you don't like the person who wrote them. I know a guy who's in denial about his teenage years (although he didn't really do anything 'criminal', except that he had an awful haircut and the usual teenage stuff) and he's the most arrogant, unlikable person in the world. I'm pretty sure if he faced up to his 'past' he'd be a nice enough guy, or at least faintly resemble a human being.

thanks for your replies, Sweets and blp. sorry I didn't read them earlier, I was sick and slept for 36 hours :sick:

[Sweets America]

don't worry, it'll all come back to you when you're old and senile. then your childhood and the present will be the only thing you can remember and you'll have forgotten everything in between. :D

wow, I would prefer not recovering memory of my childhood and keeping memory of 'everything in between'.


I'm the same, up to a point, but, seriously, I think it's normal that we forget most of our past, otherwise our brains would be on overload. didn't they teach you that in your psychology classes?

My problem here is that I don't remember that much of my psychology classes. :lol:


don't burn your notebooks, even if you don't like the person who wrote them. I know a guy who's in denial about his teenage years (although he didn't really do anything 'criminal', except that he had an awful haircut and the usual teenage stuff) and he's the most arrogant, unlikable person in the world. I'm pretty sure if he faced up to his 'past' he'd be a nice enough guy, or at least faintly resemble a human being.

Oh, i don't dislike the Sophie who wrote the notebooks, I just dislike everything that was around her, smothering her.

[SleepyWitch]

Oh, i don't dislike the Sophie who wrote the notebooks, I just dislike everything that was around her, smothering her.
oh, ok, I see.
so, should I forget that my mother beat me (and would do it till I'm 100 y/o if I still lived with them) or is she the one who should do the forgetting?

hey, jon (or whoever knows the answer), I've been thinking, how old was this guy (Thoreau?? Emmerson? you know which one I mean) when he took his gap year in the woods?

[jon1jt]

You'll kick yourself...

Wow, that's messed up. From her Daddy poem, huh? I have the recording of her reading that and Lady Lazarus. I never picked up on the reference, shame on me.

I've read most of her Ariel and Colossus poems and don't recall anything like that. I wonder what the hell she was thinking. ??

I was reading an article that says there's a growing school of thought that believes she may have suffered from manic depression. I'm not even sure whether there was treatment for it then. From her unabridged journal I'm reading now it seems very likely that that was the case.

O tulip. :p

[Il Penseroso]

what have you guys got against Virginia Woolf?

[jon1jt]

hey, jon (or whoever knows the answer), I've been thinking, how old was this guy (Thoreau?? Emmerson? you know which one I mean) when he took his gap year in the woods?


Thoreau stayed in his shanty on the shore of Walden Pond for two years, two months, two days (I think that's right).

He was in his early 30s, maybe 32? He died at 44 of tuberculosis.

I visited Walden a couple summers ago---the train from Boston, Massachusetts, drops you off in the center of the town of Concord. We walked aimlessly for a bit, then ended up on Thoreau Street, at which point I knew I was heading in the right direction. Two mile walk from town, the pond will be on your right. I encourage all to pilgrimage there once in their lifetime to check it out.

Most fascinating about Walden is that you will find a sign direct you to place a rock on a big pile to make your mark that you were there.

I read somewhere that Concord is home to the largest population of writers in the world.


what have you guys got against Virginia Woolf?

Um...Woolf's not sexy, whereas Plath is a goddess. :p

[Il Penseroso]

isn't it also important to remember that Thoreau had Emerson as a benefactor? (wasn't it Emerson's cabin?)

I still am a big fan of Walden as a piece of literature (I also respect the man), and I would very much like to spend a few years at a lake cabin assuming as the birds assume, but I myself have no rich friends on whom to call for aid.

actually I believe even Thoreau's stay in jail was incredibly short-lived due to Emerson's interference (admittedly, I believe, against Thoreau's will)


Um...Woolf's not sexy, whereas Plath is a goddess. :p

Oh, I see. She does have some damn elegant prose though

[jon1jt]

isn't it also important to remember that Thoreau had Emerson as a benefactor? (wasn't it Emerson's cabin?)

I still am a big fan of Walden as a piece of literature (I also respect the man), and I would very much like to spend a few years at a lake cabin assuming as the birds assume, but I myself have no rich friends on whom to call for aid.

actually I believe even Thoreau's stay in jail was incredibly short-lived due to Emerson's interference (admittedly, I believe, against Thoreau's will)

Well, Emerson owned the Walden property which has since been declared a wildlife preservation. Thoreau bought all the materials and built it himself. It's true that Thoreau worked as a handyman around the Emerson home and kept an eye on his kids when he was away.

I think Thoreau's aunt paid the taxes he had refused to pay on the following morning against his protest. Civil Disobedience went on to inspire Martin Luther King who references the piece in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Mohatma Ghandi, too.

[motherhubbard]

Why did he leave Walded?

[jon1jt]

Why did he leave Walden?


He said he had left Walden for as good a reason as he had gone there. In other words, our lives evolve and we must evolve with them.

[blp]

Um...Woolf's not sexy, whereas Plath is a goddess. :p

Actually, for the record I couldn't disagree with the first half of this statement more.

[xtianfriborg13]

Wow. I'm overloaded with information! Thanks for the insights here everyone!

[krishna_lit]

xtillyx, it's a hard road to follow if you want to support yourself. As time goes on it's getting harder still. If you're born with the compulsion to write -- to tell stories -- then write you must; otherwise, don't waste your time sitting at a desk when you could be outside, breathing fresh air.

Writing is a craft as well as a vocation. To learn it, you must read, read, and read some more. Read not just for pleasure but with an apprentice's eye. Why has the author done this? How is the plot (if there is one) constructed? If you were telling this story, how would you go about it?

Do you like music? A writer is a musician too. Words are music of a special kind. Study the prose of a genius, like Nabokov, to see that prose and poetry are really the same.

Are you hard-working? If you want to be a good writer you must study grammar and usage. Keep Fowler's Modern English Usage by your bedside. Read it over and over again. If you have the slightest doubt about a word's meaning, look it up before using it.

Are you vain? Be prepared for some body-blows. Be prepared for repeated rejection, insults, unfair criticism, the assumption that your whole career is an ego-trip.

Are you long-suffering? Can you accept that you are likely to be famous, if at all, when you are conveniently dead?

Think about these things very carefully before embarking on a writing career. Writing as a hobby is another thing: it can be absorbing and fun, and even bring in a little cash.

P.S. Kafka's Crow -- thanks for the mention: my server stats brought me here.

Very good advice.... and A writer is a musician too. Words are music of a special kind. this line of yours is very insightful for a writer. Thank you :)


Find yourself a decent job like teaching
That's a good advice.
J.K.Rowling in fact was an English teacher before she started off writing HARRY POTTER but she always believed that her life's sole purpose was to only Write. That's very inspirational, not the teaching part, but believing in the purpose of one's life, no matter what you prefer to do for a living.

[cacian]

Iwrite only as a hobby making a career of it will just assume I am another writer amongst others thousands writers who write for a living.
It is not worth the stress and to think writing as a monotony routine rather then pleasure will make me feel unimagined and frightefull for future literature.
Books carry a stigma as well as an anxiety of wanting to write to 'get there' and not write to 'be there'.
Inspirations do not work under stress and dos and don'ts of a society much pressed with time and not ideas.