I Think It Began With Sex - Page 2 - Writers Forum

lin · 10-11-2007, 03:18 PM

Quote:

I called it!

This quote refers to his previous moronic outburst that was deleted by the mods. He said that Mike was my "lackey". Now I like the idea of having lackeys, but I think it's funny because I would have expected him to word the other way around since I frequently agree with Mike's judgement on things.

The main reason for that is that I respect what I've seen Mike say and his experience as an actual writer and editor. There are people here like Sean and Mike and SeattleCPA and myself who have actual experience writing and/or editing for pay. Plus an assortment of other geegaws like degrees in English, awards won, books published, etc.

I find that I tend to agree with these guys on things. If I don't I am respectful about disagreeing because I see them as colleagues and there is certainly room to disagree within the realm of writing.

I don't maintain that level of respect for people like WordWeaver or TruthTeller who have no credentials, make idiotic suggestions to beginners, and are only around to toss out insults and muddy the waters.

So, did I call that one, or what?

BTW, Weaver...getting your nasty posts deleted does NOT mean you should move your childish rantings to personal messenger. I don't want to hear from you. If you have something stupid to say, say it in public.
Thanks for your co-operation.

DavidGil · 10-11-2007, 03:19 PM

Alright Lin. But how about just saying there is nothing wrong with it and you disagree rather than saying what you did about my suggestion?

Mermaid on the breakwater · 10-11-2007, 03:36 PM

Lin is right.

And repitition is something you utilised well. I use it at times as well, I do in the opening lines of walking in mametz wood, a short story I posted not that long ago. Honestly, don't tamper with it, repition gives something voice because narrative should come across with a touch of human-being-ness. You don't want to lose those moments.

dankreb · 10-11-2007, 03:37 PM

God damn. This is getting way out of hand.

Crystal,

I definately enjoyed this snippet. I found my favorite lines to be the ones people picked out. The style was unique, and I enjoyed reading it.

Thanks for posting this.

Let me know when there's more.

DavidGil · 10-11-2007, 03:46 PM

Alright I'll accept I'm most likely wrong.

Can't say I'd use it myself but I will accept it like I said above. I mainly just treated it like I do when I see sentences with quite a few 'and' in, I just consciously pretend there's a comma in their place. *shrugs* I mainly didn't understand it, hence why I had a question mark included. And yeah it's off-topic, apologies. Guess I could have took it to tips and advice but at least it is regarding some content in the thread.

Mermaid on the breakwater · 10-11-2007, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidGil

Alright I'll accept I'm most likely wrong.

Can't say I'd use it myself but I will accept it like I said above. I mainly just treated it like I do when I see sentences with quite a few 'and' in, I just consciously pretend there's a comma in their place. *shrugs* I mainly didn't understand it, hence why I had a question mark included. And yeah it's off-topic, apologies. Guess I could have took it to tips and advice but at least it is regarding some content in the thread.

One of the things I have noticed on this board, is that novice writers, I am a novice as well, I suppose, tend to overlook the power of narrative voice. Narrative voices all have their little quirks and their little ways of deliberately slipping on a phrase. I personally love that about writing. It's what makes me go, ye, this person knows how to convey themself, even if it is badly. As most people on this forum are amatuers they will still be finding their style and voice, telling them to cut an imaginative use of repition or any other technique is only going to take away from the person's expression. Which is the most important thing about learning how to write properly.

I can take bad writing but I can't stand wooden writing.

lin · 10-11-2007, 04:46 PM

Quote:

I've no reason to bring any more of the arguement into this thread Lin,

Glad to hear that.

As far as who am I to have an opinion on this piece. Well, same as you or anybody else I guess.

lin · 10-11-2007, 05:04 PM

Very perceptive, Mermaid. I continually tell people that Narrative Voice--little taught or understood--is the most vital component to writing. Unlike so many of the little gizmos discussed, narrative voice is a writer's tool, not a critic's.

If you can identify the narrative voice of a piece-essentially the way the story talks, the way it wants to tell itself--then you find it writing itself. Without it you can spend a long time switching POV, tone, style, etc.

The voice is not POV, it's the overall way the story "sounds". Any successful writer will tell you about sorting out a story then suddenly hitting on it being told in a child's voice, or a guy looking through the window, or a letter or email, or whatever.

The voice in this one is very simple and straight from the shoulder (so to speak).

To try to illustrate what Voice means, try to imagine Sherlock Holmes stories being told by Holmes, rather than Watson. It'd be more than a shift of POV or person. It would radically alter the entire experience of the work.
Or try to imagine Joyce's "Portrait of the Artist" without the advancing voice.

It's one of the most important things to think about when you're stuck. When you're not stuck, and things just flow right out, DON'T think about it, just go because you've already got it.

lin · 10-11-2007, 05:07 PM

David, I didn't mean to put you down with my comment. As you can see, this has gotten to be a turbulent post and I don't like seeing people being too rough on new writers.
It's a matter of style, not grammar. And I feel that in questions of style, the tie goes to the one who originally wrote it.
Sorry to ruffle you.

Mermaid on the breakwater · 10-11-2007, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lin

Very perceptive, Mermaid. I continually tell people that Narrative Voice--little taught or understood--is the most vital component to writing. Unlike so many of the little gizmos discussed, narrative voice is a writer's tool, not a critic's.

If you can identify the narrative voice of a piece-essentially the way the story talks, the way it wants to tell itself--then you find it writing itself. Without it you can spend a long time switching POV, tone, style, etc.

The voice is not POV, it's the overall way the story "sounds". Any successful writer will tell you about sorting out a story then suddenly hitting on it being told in a child's voice, or a guy looking through the window, or a letter or email, or whatever.

The voice in this one is very simple and straight from the shoulder (so to speak).

To try to illustrate what Voice means, try to imagine Sherlock Holmes stories being told by Holmes, rather than Watson. It'd be more than a shift of POV or person. It would radically alter the entire experience of the work.
Or try to imagine Joyce's "Portrait of the Artist" without the advancing voice.

It's one of the most important things to think about when you're stuck. When you're not stuck, and things just flow right out, DON'T think about it, just go because you've already got it.

I agree 100%. It's the thing which really allows a writer to communicate with emotion. And emotion that is from the heart, not just an attempt at it. Show me a piece of literature that is totally clinical and one that is full of little mistakes, And you're all thinking no contest right? The clinical literature has to be better. But, regard this, in being totally clinical, you are losing the essence of writing: the ability to write as a human for humans.

This is why you will never have a perfect piece of writing in literature. because, like a person, it is the little flaws that makes it what it is.

All I can say, is express yourself even if you write badly sometimes but don't stop expressing yourself. And this piece really expresses itself.

DavidGil · 10-11-2007, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lin

David, I didn't mean to put you down with my comment. As you can see, this has gotten to be a turbulent post and I don't like seeing people being too rough on new writers.
It's a matter of style, not grammar. And I feel that in questions of style, the tie goes to the one who originally wrote it.
Sorry to ruffle you.

That I agree with: And I feel that in questions of style, the tie goes to the one who originally wrote it.

And no worries. I did state it's his work at the end of the day. You didn't put me down either.

Mike C · 10-12-2007, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidGil

...the only way I can see that being kept in personally is if it fits the character/narrator. Otherwise my suggestion would be:

She was getting tired, clumsy and weak.

Much tighter isn't it and loses several words?

Pesonal choice, David, and repetition is a stylistic thing where boiling something down to the fewest words can detract rather than enhance; less isn't always more.

How about:

Jack be nimble, Jack be quick, Jack jump over the candlestick.

or

Jack, get a move on!

Reducing the word count doesn't always work.

crystalsecretin · 10-12-2007, 10:28 AM

I had hoped the Word Weaver would have taken a hint [or a big red flag] and stayed off this thread, but no such luck. At least this time he's mildly better behaved.

Thank you everyone who has offered your opinions. They are only your opinions and when it boils down to it and it comes time to edit, mine are the only ones that matter, but I really do appreciate hearing most of yours. At least, I enjoy hearing the constructive ones.

Thanks again!

lin · 10-12-2007, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Telling somebody their opinion is bullshit is pretty enthrocentristic.

Hilarious. In interests of perhaps educating a little bit here, for future posting. YOU told the OP that certain things she wrote are incorrect. I countered that. You replied with a barrage of invective. If you can't handle criticism, you shouldn't be critiquing.

So I hope you don't go really ballistic and bloody-minded when I point out that there is no such word as "enthrocentristic"

Probably should be, but it doesn't communicate well at the moment.

Mermaid on the breakwater · 10-14-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WordWeaver

Your counter was nothing but sophomoric banter.

It isn't and should be, but I made it into a word because I have that power. It'll catch on.

With that being said, you're utterly useless Lin. You do not intimidate me, nor do I take anything you have to say to heart, as it's nothing but the blather of an incoherent old coot.

I realize that anonymity gives you a sense of security, but it's time to get real. You're nothing but an insignificant font on my monitor, and hold no real power in the publishing world, or over me. Stop pretending that you matter.

Wow, that's the only thing that came across as blathering to me. To be honest, what exactly has Lin done wrong in this thread, other than correct some of your mistakes?

It's funny because it's just not true.

Not looking to pick a fight with you wordweaver but just think a bit harder about the way you weave your words in future.