Not sure if I manage any of the advice but try as I will.
Printable View
Not sure if I manage any of the advice but try as I will.
That's all any of us can do, my dear. If you need help, please don't hesitate to ask. You're among friends here.Quote:
Originally Posted by zoolane
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandygang
None of the characters have names in "Cruel and Barbarous Treatment" by Mary McCarthy, and it's an excellent story.Still, few of us have reached Mary McCarthy's level as yet, and far be it from me to make that claim. Still, a recent piece o' fiction by yours fooly doesn't identify the two characters by their proper names either but refers to them by generic nouns.
When I wrote this so-called advice way back when I guess I was fed-up with stories beginning with an amorphous "she" or "he," pronouns without an antecedent. Of course, when other characters enter the fray, confusion ensues as to who is who.
Thank you far as I am aware have greatly improve in most area with my writing from when I join but as always here always room for more improvement.
I only stop reading if I find hard to follow or understand and if to longer boring. I do come to long peices because usual ways have time at percise moment.
I stop reading poetry with stanza breaks between each line. I find it rather annoying.
I'm afraid I don't know what you mean, unless you're referring to the way some newspapers quote poetry with an annoying backslash to indicate the line break. For instance, for these:Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.
the newspaper might retain its column lines by writing it like this: "Whose woods these are I think I know./His house is in the village though;/" and so on.
If you mean the breaks between stanzas, that's dictated by the specific form of the poem itself, such as in a rondeau, for instance this one by Austin Dobson:
YOU bid me try, blue-eyes, to write
A Rondeau. What! -- forthwith? -- tonight?
Reflect. Some skill I have, 'tis true;
But thirteen lines! -- and rimed on two!
"Refrain" as well. Ah, Hapless plight!
Still, there are five lines -- ranged aright.
These Gallic bonds, I feared, would fright
My easy Muse. They did, till you --
You bid me try!
That makes them eight. The port's in sight --
'Tis all because your eyes are bright!
Now just a pair to end in "oo" --
When maids command, what can't we do?
Behold! -- the rondeau, tasteful, light,
You bid me try!
I didn't make myself clear
when I wrote what I did.
I mean when poems are
presented like this, then
I have no wish to read them.
Some advices to consider!:) But every man has his style, isn't it?
[QUOTE=brandygang;1021292]I generally agree with all of this, it's great advice! The only thing I disagree with is that the character has to talk, or have a name even. There are countless ways to characterize a character without dialog, believe it or not. Not only that, you're giving a different perspective on the character when you interpret them through other characters because some sort of chemistry is bound to occur.
QUOTE]
Personal I think story or piece writing do not need names of characters, there always and development of the characters with dialog or with out and the name them as alway work well of the story or piece. But then again it can help bring character or story to life in way capture the reader.
One will possibly stop reading a short story if the overall portrait of it comes off as pretentious or trying way too hard to be 'smart' and 'ambitious' and 'witty'. Oh, and if the dialogue from characters basically explains the whole story without any emotion whatsoever.
And yes, I've seen short stories that have violated that dialogue thing. Scratched my head, or marked things on it and wrote a scathing critique on it.
Great things! True, even though I don't write short stories.
That actually makes sense!Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Sounds like good advice from an editor!!!!!!
I don't like hard-and-fast rules for writing. That's not how art works.
Would you have stopped reading McCarthy's The Road if the manuscript were on your desk just because the characters don't have names? (unless you cant Man and Boy as names)
Stuff like this is why so many great works famously got rejected a bunch of times before getting published.
Art isn't just about sticking to rules or breaking them. Art stands or falls on other merits. But sloppy, badly written prose will never be acceptable whether or not the writer believes he/she is stretching the rules.
'Ulysses' and 'The Sound and the Fury' broke every rule in the book but they are classics because the basic rules of what makes good writing still apply. A lot of aspiring experimental writers who consider themselves 'out there' or 'outside the box' discard rules as the first step to creating their masterpiece. But it takes ability to know how and when to juggle the rules and making rule-breaking the basis for anything is rather naive.
H
It's not controversial for this reader. Up to a certain point, these words are like light along a dark path through strange terrain. Liberation seems to come from knowing these things first and then making a leap of faith after, whether or not it makes sense or breaks rules.
This shouldn't threaten anyone. These tips could really help people get past a certain point in their development.
Just this reader's two cents.
J