Re: 1st half When I was doing my undergrad in creative writing...jeff2001May 4 2007, 15:57:14 UTC
I am always annoyed by smug answers which suggest you should just be a better writer the first time around.
I am always annoyed by bitter responses suggesting a mountain of work because of the implicit assumption first drafts "always" suck.
Not everybody does it your way. The poster probably vomited in fear after seeing your list of demands. "Every writer is different", right? Not everybody does it by intellectualizing it.
And it's not a bad thing to suggest that maybe the default state of all writers is not crap, and that one should try at least to bring one's A game to the first draft. Even if it needs revision, and it often will, it may need less revision than otherwise.
Also, it's not criminal to put writers off, because many of them blow, and are better off being welders. :-)
Re: 1st half When I was doing my undergrad in creative writing...mm511May 4 2007, 19:22:04 UTC
First, I've not vomited in about fourteen years, and I intend to keep it that way. Every writer *is* different, and I'm trying to find where I fit; the whole point of this post was to have people tell me their own ways to revise. This is as valid a version of revision as yours (don't) is.
Second, simply because I (and Anne Lamott) agree that first drafts are often shitty does not mean that we did not put everything we had into those drafts. Regardless of how stupendous something is the first time around, I would bet my life that it can always be made better, and that's what revision is about.
Re: 1st half When I was doing my undergrad in creative writing...jeff2001May 5 2007, 03:06:38 UTC
You don't seem to have a sense of humor, I noticed. ;-)
I'm not a big academia fan. That quote there is just gobbledygook to me, sorry. I don't think they really understand the true scope and range of imagination. We'll probably have to forever diverge on that score.
I feel you, though. I appreciate your work ethic. It's clearly borne fruit. As for me, I write a lot more raw and questions of "potential" and "error" are troublesome. Writers should get over themselves, that much is true, but should also take care that they don't overcorrect too vigorously and wind up thinking their first products are always their worst, when that may not be true.
I just didn't find it funny.evilqueensageMay 6 2007, 01:19:40 UTC
Sorry. Try puns, witty word games or absurd jokes like "What's the difference between a potato?"
Each to their own!
It is nice to have someone with some guts to debate and a strong position.
BTW: Quote is really about suggesting that imagination is shaped by our experiences and environment rather than an innate gift. Imagination and creativity then shows themselves to be a product of our wit, rather than something given to us by a Muse or flowing from some magical internal source.
I really like those ideas because it shows that we can each be better observers of our environment and improve our writing as a result.
No, I got it. The problem is that it does come from a magical source and it is an innate gift. :-)
Which is not to say that it doesn't require education, practice, and yes, revision.
But rejecting the vast and incomprehensible magic of inspiration for the shallow, knowable stratagems of mere wit...is a big mistake. After all, you can be as ingenious as you want in cutting and shaping your work -- but the work must first issue from that strange and unknowable place inside where you hear voices that never spoke and see people who never existed doing things that never happened.
“The fiction writing process can be conceptualized as a series of planes or domains upon which separately the writer works, but which combine in their influence to make product
( ... )
I appreciate your efforts to enlighten in this matter, thank you. But it does issue from a strange, unknowable place. You will never be able to describe the true process by which your mind synthesizes strings of creative writing for you to spill forth from your fingers. It's analogous to "channeling", except that you are channeling your own inner Genius, however imperfectly.
Rest assured that I have arrived at my conclusions after long years of experience, not after the reading of "scholarly" texts. The fact is that we are special, and it's alright if you don't feel it -- just don't let jealousy inspire you to try and destroy what you don't understand.
Don't make judgements about me personally.evilqueensageMay 7 2007, 00:20:46 UTC
I am not saying that creative artists don't offer something unique to the world. I AM saying that it isn't coming from, or not only coming from, an internal, unknowable place. It isn't helpful to writers to suggest that it is and it is not the modern viewpoint on it. It is very condescending for you to suggest I don't understand your position. I think we should perhaps end this debate as I am aware I will not change your position. I am in no way jealous of it.
BTW I have been a a creative writer for over twenty years. I am published as a poet. I have written a multitude of stories and novellas. I am currently writing my first novel. I would suggest the I have come to MY position over a number of years - not just by reading texts by other writers (non academic), academic argument and through my own experience, so please don't be so scornful regarding my position. I ALSO have a right based on experience and do not appreciate you attempting to devalue my opinion by suggesting I have no real world experience.
Re: Don't make judgements about me personally.jeff2001May 7 2007, 00:55:16 UTC
I'm sorry if I ruffled your feathers -- I have passionate feelings on the subject and felt compelled to state them firmly.
At least I got you to acknowledge that at least some writing comes from a strange unknowable place! ;-) I wrote more on the subject at http://jeff2001.livejournal.com/313895.html, if you're interested. No hard feelings!
Re: Don't make judgements about me personally.mm511May 7 2007, 02:02:36 UTC
Not to be egocentric, but... this post was about me, remember?
I think neither one of you is right. Or I think both of you are right. Pick one and go with it. I think that a true knack for writing comes from both practice AND instinct. Somebody who cannot "channel the muse," so to speak, may be able to write excellently through practice and hard work, but he'll never be Shakespeare, just as the person who ONLY channels the muse, without any revision or work or practice, will most likely do nothing more than become a one-hit wonder, and then only if he's got a lot of luck on his side.
As you are no longer responding to me but rather to a stereotype composed, I can only imagine, of your pet peeves, the "holes" of which you speak are in your own understanding.
Since substantive discourse (what little there was) has now ended, I am going to stop indulging you now. This thread is about mm511, not you and me. And I've said all I need to say, in several different ways now. It's all there, so read it at your leisure. Thanks.
Reply
I am always annoyed by bitter responses suggesting a mountain of work because of the implicit assumption first drafts "always" suck.
Not everybody does it your way. The poster probably vomited in fear after seeing your list of demands. "Every writer is different", right? Not everybody does it by intellectualizing it.
And it's not a bad thing to suggest that maybe the default state of all writers is not crap, and that one should try at least to bring one's A game to the first draft. Even if it needs revision, and it often will, it may need less revision than otherwise.
Also, it's not criminal to put writers off, because many of them blow, and are better off being welders. :-)
Reply
Second, simply because I (and Anne Lamott) agree that first drafts are often shitty does not mean that we did not put everything we had into those drafts. Regardless of how stupendous something is the first time around, I would bet my life that it can always be made better, and that's what revision is about.
Reply
Reply
I'm not a big academia fan. That quote there is just gobbledygook to me, sorry. I don't think they really understand the true scope and range of imagination. We'll probably have to forever diverge on that score.
I feel you, though. I appreciate your work ethic. It's clearly borne fruit. As for me, I write a lot more raw and questions of "potential" and "error" are troublesome. Writers should get over themselves, that much is true, but should also take care that they don't overcorrect too vigorously and wind up thinking their first products are always their worst, when that may not be true.
Reply
Each to their own!
It is nice to have someone with some guts to debate and a strong position.
BTW: Quote is really about suggesting that imagination is shaped by our experiences and environment rather than an innate gift. Imagination and creativity then shows themselves to be a product of our wit, rather than something given to us by a Muse or flowing from some magical internal source.
I really like those ideas because it shows that we can each be better observers of our environment and improve our writing as a result.
Kadea
Reply
Which is not to say that it doesn't require education, practice, and yes, revision.
But rejecting the vast and incomprehensible magic of inspiration for the shallow, knowable stratagems of mere wit...is a big mistake. After all, you can be as ingenious as you want in cutting and shaping your work -- but the work must first issue from that strange and unknowable place inside where you hear voices that never spoke and see people who never existed doing things that never happened.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Rest assured that I have arrived at my conclusions after long years of experience, not after the reading of "scholarly" texts. The fact is that we are special, and it's alright if you don't feel it -- just don't let jealousy inspire you to try and destroy what you don't understand.
Reply
BTW I have been a a creative writer for over twenty years. I am published as a poet. I have written a multitude of stories and novellas. I am currently writing my first novel. I would suggest the I have come to MY position over a number of years - not just by reading texts by other writers (non academic), academic argument and through my own experience, so please don't be so scornful regarding my position. I ALSO have a right based on experience and do not appreciate you attempting to devalue my opinion by suggesting I have no real world experience.
Reply
At least I got you to acknowledge that at least some writing comes from a strange unknowable place! ;-) I wrote more on the subject at http://jeff2001.livejournal.com/313895.html, if you're interested. No hard feelings!
Reply
I think neither one of you is right. Or I think both of you are right. Pick one and go with it. I think that a true knack for writing comes from both practice AND instinct. Somebody who cannot "channel the muse," so to speak, may be able to write excellently through practice and hard work, but he'll never be Shakespeare, just as the person who ONLY channels the muse, without any revision or work or practice, will most likely do nothing more than become a one-hit wonder, and then only if he's got a lot of luck on his side.
That is all.
Reply
Reply
Since substantive discourse (what little there was) has now ended, I am going to stop indulging you now. This thread is about mm511, not you and me. And I've said all I need to say, in several different ways now. It's all there, so read it at your leisure. Thanks.
Reply
Thank you Matt for your comments above.
Kadea
Reply
Leave a comment