Printable View
A friend once said -
I think one of the hard things is finding what one CAN write about. That's our strength, what we can write about. But it's hard to find our strengths, easy to find our weaknesses. I think we like to keep our strengths covered up, otherwise they accuse us of being unused. Because it's one thing to know our strengths, but it takes real courage to use them.
Without contesting what has been said, can we look into what we CAN write?
I shall give my answer after a few replies.
My greatest strength....my imagination of thinking of things that no one else thinks of...
IMAGINE
The big question should be what do people want to read. The Romantic myth of writing as a personal exercise ignores the reality that art has an implied artist most of the time. Programmed without that tradition, literature loses its appeal.
Once you realize literature becomes a performance, it begins to make sense. The American confessional tradition that took over during and after the Beat generation basically cut itself off from community outside itself.
Just an aside first. I have not seen that little gem from dear old Oscar before, brilliant:
It's incredible, I'm sure he keeps on writing even after his death!Quote:
“It is what you read when you don't have to that determines what you will be when you can't help it.”
― Oscar Wilde
Anyway, should be question not be about how something is written as opposed to what? Other than that I don't really understand the question sorry.
The stuff of nightmares.
Explorations into the dark psyche is the area of which I am most comfortable, the morbid and the macabre. One of the things of which I enjoy doing the most is altering ones perception of something.
About the world around you, about the world inside you, about the world that does not exist - anything except vampires.....don't.
I think JBI's post is very poignant, at least if your aim in writing is to write to be published. There are those who write purely for themselves and in that case, screw what the rest of the world wants. But yes, if you are writing in order to share your work (as most do) then consider what it is the world wants....except vampires.
Don't blame the vampires just because certain individuals have besmirched their reputation and misrepresented them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Darnay
I had a feeling you'd come at me for that.
True, vampires are not to blame for the onslaught of terrible vampire lit, but I think we need to let them rest for a while.
Ha, ha was that an intentional joke?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Darnay
JBI's right - if you want to write for a career. The odd writer will create a market with an idea that is either original or which taps into some trend. But it's mainly about what people want to read. If you wanted to write sci fi, then look at what sells. if it's children's literature, then look at what is on the shelves for the various age groups. It's no mystery - if you want to be able to write and sustain your writing, you have to make money to continue. Once you get into a different career, then it's very difficult.
By the way - a good vampire book is Fevre Dream by George RR Martin.
A good idea only I read that to follow what is in fashion in the publishing world means that you are already one step behind, as by the time you have written it it is then out of fashion. Anyway, there is virtually zero chance of getting published and making any money out of writing, certainly for the unpublished writer, so there is little point in considering such things outside of pure speculation. I also wonder if the OP was just taking in general about things to write about, not necessarily writing to publish, I don't know?Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
Not only to sell. To be read. Some authors and artists create only for themselves. Therefore they can be dismissed. Even authors who do not want money but merely want recognition must realize art is not an onanistic behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
I'm partial to Brian Lumley's Wamphyri from his Necroscope series. They're huge, powerful, violent, and totally evil. On their homeworld, they live in aeries on huge cliffs and have a society of sorts, with self-serving alliances and rivalries. In their homes, each is served by vampire lieutenants, human slaves, and assorted creatures, grown from vampire flesh in vats, that serve more specific purposes (flying steeds, war beasts, etc.) Needless to say, this is about as far from Twilight as you can get.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
As too many authors do, Lumley beat his good ideas into the ground with too many books, but the initial five-book Necroscope series and the initial follow-up Vampire World trilogy are some of the highest quality modern pulp you'll find.
I want to read something that sheds light on the human experience. That's what is important to me and, in my opinion, the only thing really worth writing about.
One problem that I struggle with is just how much of my life to share. There are many things I don't want to write about but I was taught to "write what I know" and I believe this is the correct approach. Otherwise, the writing seems false.
JBI, I agree that the real question is what people want to read. I'm also intrigued by the rest of your statement and still trying to understand what you meant. Do you mean a performance or implied artist in the sense of something like Oedipus or the oral tradition of poetry?Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
I also don't understand what you meant by the confessional tradition used by the Beats. How did they cut themselves off from the community outside themselves? Surely works such as On The Road have had a major impact on modern literature. And where would we be without writers such as Henry Miller, William S Burroughs, or even Bukowski?
It seems to me that this is exactly the kind of thing a modern reader wants to read. Of course literature has changed. Hardly anyone wants to read Chaucer or even Milton or John Donne, etc. anymore. I still enjoy reading 19th century novels but personally, the only poetry I can stand to read is modern poetry. Sure, I studied the classics in school but I feel that literature evolves just as painting has evolved and changed.
I'm sure there was a major reaction to and harsh criticism of movements such as the Impressionists, Post-Impressionism, the Postmodern movement, etc. Surely you are not saying that we must stick to the classics? Just trying to understand what you meant.
If you got an imagination you can write about anything. Provided your vocabulary is up to par. Any and all learning of the world around means squat without a good sense of anything is possible.