I've written lots of songs and poems for 2 decades. It was always a dream of mine to get published somehow, but I don't want fame though I also feel incomplete without wanting to reach out through art somehow.

cborgman said:i HATE writing synopsis. so... does that make sense? do i need to change anything?

Wow . Interesting . It is amazing that there is so much talent at Prince . org and so many people with knowledge of things that ... well I dont wanna say I didnt know some of you were so smart but i admit - I used to come to Prince.org just for some brief respite to my boring day of working on reports /etc...

This is a very interesting/good read ... but being a amateur with NO KNOWLEDGE of what you are doing (theatre synopsis etc) ... i will bow out on being Roger Ebert (oops he is dead . sorry . by the way who is a good critic these days ... they are all dying it seems ... ).

ColAngus said:

cborgman said:i HATE writing synopsis. so... does that make sense? do i need to change anything?

Wow . Interesting . It is amazing that there is so much talent at Prince . org and so many people with knowledge of things that ... well I dont wanna say I didnt know some of you were so smart but i admit - I used to come to Prince.org just for some brief respite to my boring day of working on reports /etc...

This is a very interesting/good read ... but being a amateur with NO KNOWLEDGE of what you are doing (theatre synopsis etc) ... i will bow out on being Roger Ebert (oops he is dead . sorry . by the way who is a good critic these days ... they are all dying it seems ... ).

the best thing is part 1 (which the synopsis is for) probably isnt even the best part of the cycle... though different people have different favorites.

yes just recently had my book published last august.... that is now out in stores and online worldwide

and now its been entered for the eric hoffer awards by the reviewer

and now awaiting for the ressults of the awards... of my book

wish me luck on tht one...

lm well please with the acheivement of my book

I suppose I used to want to but I realized I'm simply not very creative. If you give me something to write about I'm pretty competent but I don't have stories swirling aroundin my head waiting to get out.

Except when I'm dreaming. I have pretty amazing dreams.

Maybe I'm more creative than I thought...

CarrieMpls said:

I suppose I used to want to but I realized I'm simply not very creative. If you give me something to write about I'm pretty competent but I don't have stories swirling aroundin my head waiting to get out.

Except when I'm dreaming. I have pretty amazing dreams.

Maybe I'm more creative than I thought...

Yes, YOU ARE.

You're smart enough and creative enough to write a full scale novel--and there are great

ebooks out there (and audiobooks) that help you with the process. Ayn Rand has

an excellent book on how to do it.

You're VERY, VERY VERY creative.

I mean, you stated on the other thread that you never had a crush on me,

and THAT takes an ENORMOUS creative and active imagination to conjure

up that kind of bullshit, such that you could write your own WAR AND PEACE

in a matter of months, shoot.

imago said:

CarrieMpls said:

I suppose I used to want to but I realized I'm simply not very creative. If you give me something to write about I'm pretty competent but I don't have stories swirling aroundin my head waiting to get out.

Except when I'm dreaming. I have pretty amazing dreams.

Maybe I'm more creative than I thought...

Yes, YOU ARE.

You're smart enough and creative enough to write a full scale novel--and there are great

ebooks out there (and audiobooks) that help you with the process. Ayn Rand has

an excellent book on how to do it.

You're VERY, VERY VERY creative.

I mean, you stated on the other thread that you never had a crush on me,

and THAT takes an ENORMOUS creative and active imagination to conjure

up that kind of bullshit, such that you could write your own WAR AND PEACE

in a matter of months, shoot.

having read atlas shrugged (though not her book on writing), you can find probably a better instructional book on how to write.

rand was a rather mediocre writer. the only thing that has kept her writing popular is the philosophy behind it. her characters, dialogue, plot, and structure are rather lacking, and she seems to have been really against the concept of editing.

relying on a mediocre writer to teach you how to write is... questionable.

cborgman said:

imago said:

Yes, YOU ARE.

You're smart enough and creative enough to write a full scale novel--and there are great

ebooks out there (and audiobooks) that help you with the process. Ayn Rand has

an excellent book on how to do it.

You're VERY, VERY VERY creative.

I mean, you stated on the other thread that you never had a crush on me,

and THAT takes an ENORMOUS creative and active imagination to conjure

up that kind of bullshit, such that you could write your own WAR AND PEACE

in a matter of months, shoot.

having read atlas shrugged (though not her book on writing), you can find probably a better instructional book on how to write.

rand was a rather mediocre writer. the only thing that has kept her writing popular is the philosophy behind it. her characters, dialogue, plot, and structure are rather lacking, and she seems to have been really against the concept of editing.

relying on a mediocre writer to teach you how to write is... questionable.

I find the premise or her philosophy questionable. I find her writing extremely tight.

Her stories are all plot driven, every word is used deliberately, and though her

views are relativistic, her words are completely objective.

The dialogue in her books is also believable and her characters always

sond as if they are talking--not the author. I just can't see how she would

be viewed as medicre. I find her writing very strong--I just don't agree

with her philosophy.

That being said, Ayn's philosophies creep into her 'how to write' book in the sense that she is staunchly opposed to 'naturalistic' plotless books (or art--she hates modern abstract art). Ayn's world is one in which your protagonist is in charge of his own destiny and his choices are what determine the outcome (the romantic school of writing). She teaches writing only from that point-of-view and is highly critical of those who write plotless books with the exception of a few works.

I think most of the criticsm people throw at Rand is towards the 'morality' of her writings (she is not opposed to greed, for example ), but I can't see how her stories are at all bad writing.

[Edited 4/9/13 10:48am]

imago said:

cborgman said:

having read atlas shrugged (though not her book on writing), you can find probably a better instructional book on how to write.

rand was a rather mediocre writer. the only thing that has kept her writing popular is the philosophy behind it. her characters, dialogue, plot, and structure are rather lacking, and she seems to have been really against the concept of editing.

relying on a mediocre writer to teach you how to write is... questionable.

I find the premise or her philosophy questionable. I find her writing extremely tight.

Her stories are all plot driven, every word is used deliberately, and though her

views are relativistic, her words are completely objective.

The dialogue in her books is also believable and her characters always

sond as if they are talking--not the author. I just can't see how she would

be viewed as medicre. I find her writing very strong--I just don't agree

with her philosophy.

i dont think her characters talk so much as soapbox preach at one another. galt's 70 page speech at the end of atlas being a chief example. it was the most overlong, redundant, and unrealistic bit of character dialogue (or rather monologue) i have ever read, and it completely abandons the already thin sense of reality to eschew her philosophy.

.

[Edited 4/9/13 10:55am]

i have gotten a lot of critique for having my central character ben (who honestly is about the most randian character in my writing) monologue for a page and a half.

70 pages of monologue is the definition of excessive, and very poor writing.

cborgman said:

imago said:

I find the premise or her philosophy questionable. I find her writing extremely tight.

Her stories are all plot driven, every word is used deliberately, and though her

views are relativistic, her words are completely objective.

The dialogue in her books is also believable and her characters always

sond as if they are talking--not the author. I just can't see how she would

be viewed as medicre. I find her writing very strong--I just don't agree

with her philosophy.

i dont think her characters talk so much as soapbox preach at one another. galt's 70 page speech at the end of atlas being a chief example. it was the most overlong, redundant, and unrealistic bit of character dialogue i have ever read, and it completely abandons the already thin sense of reality to eschew her philospohy.

I find this remarkable, becuase to me it was great as Richard Harris's telling-off scene in Cromwell

Again, I really think she's a strong writer--I just don't agree with her views on life.

Then again, I think Orson Scott Card is a great author and he's often criticized too.

imago said:

cborgman said:

i dont think her characters talk so much as soapbox preach at one another. galt's 70 page speech at the end of atlas being a chief example. it was the most overlong, redundant, and unrealistic bit of character dialogue i have ever read, and it completely abandons the already thin sense of reality to eschew her philospohy.

I find this remarkable, becuase to me it was great as Richard Harris's telling-off scene in Cromwell

Again, I really think she's a strong writer--I just don't agree with her views on life.

Then again, I think Orson Scott Card is a great author and he's often criticized too.

i havent seen cromwell, and all i know about card is his homophobia.

but i do know that 70 pages of monologue works out to more than an hour's worth of talking. not a good model for dialogue.

cborgman said:

imago said:

I find this remarkable, becuase to me it was great as Richard Harris's telling-off scene in Cromwell

Again, I really think she's a strong writer--I just don't agree with her views on life.

Then again, I think Orson Scott Card is a great author and he's often criticized too.

i havent seen cromwell, and all i know about card is his homophobia.

but i do know that 70 pages of monologue works out to more than an hour's worth of talking. not a good model for dialogue.

Card is one of the most brilliant writers in Sci-Fi, and his Ender series beng ignored until

just recently by Hollywood is a crime. He is homophobic, but none of it appears in the

books that I have read.

He also has a few very good books on writing, one in particular on character development.

The problem I have with Card is that he does not think you should follow rules of writing

nor take schooling in it seriously--in other words, Card believes that writing is inspired

art---I don't believe that. I think it's a learned skill.

Anyways, the Rand book on writing is one of the best I've read. A great analysis of the process and very detailed.

out of criousity, i went and looked up some bits about rand's book on writing, which is just a transcribed lecture she gave in her basement to her devotees.

all i am going to say is never trust a writer who declares "I think I myself am the best writer today."

especially when she trashes sinclair lewis, james joyce, gertrude stein, and several other writers who are vastly superior to her to do so.

cborgman said:

out of criousity, i went and looked up some bits about rand's book on writing, which is just a transcribed lecture she gave in her basement to her devotees.

all i am going to say is never trust a writer who declares "I think I myself am the best writer today."

especially when she trashes sinclair lewis, james joyce, gertrude stein, and several other writers who are vastly superior to her to do so.

These are exactly why I trust her.

I dislike some of the authors on that list.

And, I don't want an artist to be humble--just honest in their opinions.

Rand is unapologetic about her opinions, making her admirable to me.

THe book is actually a great book ( the how to write book). Like I said,

one of the best I've read on the subject.

imago said:

cborgman said:

i havent seen cromwell, and all i know about card is his homophobia.

but i do know that 70 pages of monologue works out to more than an hour's worth of talking. not a good model for dialogue.

Card is one of the most brilliant writers in Sci-Fi, and his Ender series beng ignored until

just recently by Hollywood is a crime. He is homophobic, but none of it appears in the

books that I have read.

He also has a few very good books on writing, one in particular on character development.

The problem I have with Card is that he does not think you should follow rules of writing

nor take schooling in it seriously--in other words, Card believes that writing is inspired

art---I don't believe that. I think it's a learned skill.

i agree and i dont.

the problem becomes that some writers get so entangled in the supposed rules that they write incredibly formulaic, cookie-cutter things that lack vision or daring. i had a co-writer who studied it quite a bit at NYU, and while he could tell me all the rules near verbatim, he couldnt write for crap.

i do think you can learn technique, but you either have a natural gift for writing, or you do not.

the rules can be very helpful, but they can also be a tremendous hinderence if you become too wrapped up in them. it is essential to KNOW the rules, but you also have to be willing to bend or break them, if you want to be recognized as a strong writer. and much the same thing in reverse, a complete abandonment of the rules is problematic.

it's shades of grey. i respect and for the most part follow the rules in my stuff, but i also can point out several times i have bent the crap out of them and they tend to be the best parts of my writing.

there's a scene in part 1 that i use like a secret litmus test on people reading my stuff. it's one of the best parts of the script, but it drives rules lawyers crazy, because it completely breaks or bends a few rules. i had one table read in which a rules lawyer got into an argument with someone else over that scene. he said it was stopped the script cold because it broke the rules, she pointed out that it was her favorite scene, and several others agreed with her. to this day, it is a scene that most people point to as one of their favorites

imago said:

cborgman said:

out of criousity, i went and looked up some bits about rand's book on writing, which is just a transcribed lecture she gave in her basement to her devotees.

all i am going to say is never trust a writer who declares "I think I myself am the best writer today."

especially when she trashes sinclair lewis, james joyce, gertrude stein, and several other writers who are vastly superior to her to do so.

These are exactly why I trust her.

I dislike some of the authors on that list.

And, I don't want an artist to be humble--just honest in their opinions.

Rand is unapologetic about her opinions, making her admirable to me.

THe book is actually a great book ( the how to write book). Like I said,

one of the best I've read on the subject.

i particularly cringe when she declares herself better than joyce. joyce is a reader's wet dream, though exceedingly difficult. it took me forever to get through portait of the artist as a young man, and i had to use a study guide (never haven gone to college) to unlock it, but... it was insanely rewarding once i did.

there's a reason joyce is studied in depth at numerous colleges and universities, while rand's writing generally is not. (except for all the non-profits that donate copies of rand's books in an attempt to change that, apparently unaware of the incredible irony of it)

.

[Edited 4/9/13 11:35am]

cborgman said:

imago said:

Card is one of the most brilliant writers in Sci-Fi, and his Ender series beng ignored until

just recently by Hollywood is a crime. He is homophobic, but none of it appears in the

books that I have read.

He also has a few very good books on writing, one in particular on character development.

The problem I have with Card is that he does not think you should follow rules of writing

nor take schooling in it seriously--in other words, Card believes that writing is inspired

art---I don't believe that. I think it's a learned skill.

i agree and i dont.

the problem becomes that some writers get so entangled in the supposed rules that they write incredibly formulaic, cookie-cutter things that lack vision or daring. i had a co-writer who studied it quite a bit at NYU, and while he could tell me all the rules near verbatim, he couldnt write for crap.

i do think you can learn technique, but you either have a natural gift for writing, or you do not.

the rules can be very helpful, but they can also be a tremendous hinderence if you become too wrapped up in them. it is essential to KNOW the rules, but you also have to be willing to bend or break them, if you want to be recognized as a strong writer. and much the same thing in reverse, a complete abandonment of the rules is problematic.

it's shades of grey. i respect and for the most part follow the rules in my stuff, but i also can point out several times i have bent the crap out of them and they tend to be the best parts of my writing.

there's a scene in part 1 that i use like a secret litmus test on people reading my stuff. it's one of the best parts of the script, but it drives rules lawyers crazy, because it completely breaks or bends a few rules. i had one table read in which a rules lawyer got into an argument with someone else over that scene. he said it was stopped the script cold because it broke the rules, she pointed out that it was her favorite scene, and several others agreed with her. to this day, it is a scene that most people point to as one of their favorites

I think I'm the same way with painting or drawing.

I'm a capable painter, and pretty good at drawing.

And I believe art must be objective--a woman needs to look like

a woman and not some abstract 'blob' with tits.

But, I break rules of 'objective' art all the time, mostly trying to

experiement with feeling, and partly out of laziness.

And, I do think paint-by-numbers techniques can get boring.

One of my issues with Michael Chricton's stuff was that it

was so methodical and predictable. But, Card was like that in

places too.

Ultimately, though--I prefer the establihment snobs over the innovators.

I like the classical painters who were so offended by Impressionism

more than I like the impressionists. Likewise, I prefer Rand and

romantics over Gertrude Stein. Obviously there are shades in between

and some art is just not meant to be torn apart--but my first gut reaction

when I read something or view a painting is, "could I do this? If the answer

is 'yes', I tend to not be too enamoured by it."

and i point to rand's 70 page monologue as an example of bending or breaking the rules, though i also think it was not a good example of how it can be done

cborgman said:

and i point to rand's 70 page monologue as an example of bending or breaking the rules, though i also think it was not a good example of how it can be done

Her book on how to write is one of the best I've read.

imago said:

cborgman said:

i agree and i dont.

the problem becomes that some writers get so entangled in the supposed rules that they write incredibly formulaic, cookie-cutter things that lack vision or daring. i had a co-writer who studied it quite a bit at NYU, and while he could tell me all the rules near verbatim, he couldnt write for crap.

i do think you can learn technique, but you either have a natural gift for writing, or you do not.

the rules can be very helpful, but they can also be a tremendous hinderence if you become too wrapped up in them. it is essential to KNOW the rules, but you also have to be willing to bend or break them, if you want to be recognized as a strong writer. and much the same thing in reverse, a complete abandonment of the rules is problematic.

it's shades of grey. i respect and for the most part follow the rules in my stuff, but i also can point out several times i have bent the crap out of them and they tend to be the best parts of my writing.

there's a scene in part 1 that i use like a secret litmus test on people reading my stuff. it's one of the best parts of the script, but it drives rules lawyers crazy, because it completely breaks or bends a few rules. i had one table read in which a rules lawyer got into an argument with someone else over that scene. he said it was stopped the script cold because it broke the rules, she pointed out that it was her favorite scene, and several others agreed with her. to this day, it is a scene that most people point to as one of their favorites

I think I'm the same way with painting or drawing.

I'm a capable painter, and pretty good at drawing.

And I believe art must be objective--a woman needs to look like

a woman and not some abstract 'blob' with tits.

But, I break rules of 'objective' art all the time, mostly trying to

experiement with feeling, and partly out of laziness.

And, I do think paint-by-numbers techniques can get boring.

One of my issues with Michael Chricton's stuff was that it

was so methodical and predictable. But, Card was like that in

places too.

Ultimately, though--I prefer the establihment snobs over the innovators.

I like the classical painters who were so offended by Impressionism

more than I like the impressionists. Likewise, I prefer Rand and

romantics over Gertrude Stein. Obviously there are shades in between

and some art is just not meant to be torn apart--but my first gut reaction

when I read something or view a painting is, "could I do this? If the answer

is 'yes', I tend to not be too enamoured by it."

my art knowledge is somewhat limited, as it's not a field i have a lot of ability in. i have a strong eye for it, but i have rather average ability to do it, which is why i turned to photography instead.

i do find chricton somewhat formulaic as well, though i have only read a few of them. i think chricton's strength was dynamic story, and strong compelling characters. he also had a good ear for dialogue. i think michael chabon is the same, but is much more daring and innovative.

as far as writing goes, i do see a lot of plays (3 in the last 4 days) and read many as well, and "could i have written this" is always a question i ask. if the answer is yes, i dont necessarily think less of it, nor do i think more of it if the answer is no. i have seen (or read) some scripts that i dont even begin to have the ability to write, but some of them have still been turds.

i saw a really bizarre play 2 years ago called jerusalem that, while magnificently well-written in terms of dialogue, made almost no damn sense in terms of story, and had one incredible character, and 10 half-baked characters. the dialogue was exceptionally well-written and lyrical, but it also made fuck-all sense.

afterwards, my friend who is somewhat of a rules lawyer raved and raved about how brilliant it was... but couldnt even explain the plot or theme to me when asked.

.

[Edited 4/9/13 11:57am]

ADONIA said:

yes just recently had my book published last august.... that is now out in stores and online worldwide

and now its been entered for the eric hoffer awards by the reviewer

and now awaiting for the ressults of the awards... of my book

wish me luck on tht one...

lm well please with the acheivement of my book

Best of luck!

imago said:

CarrieMpls said:

I suppose I used to want to but I realized I'm simply not very creative. If you give me something to write about I'm pretty competent but I don't have stories swirling aroundin my head waiting to get out.

Except when I'm dreaming. I have pretty amazing dreams.

Maybe I'm more creative than I thought...

Yes, YOU ARE.

You're smart enough and creative enough to write a full scale novel--and there are great

ebooks out there (and audiobooks) that help you with the process. Ayn Rand has

an excellent book on how to do it.

You're VERY, VERY VERY creative.

I mean, you stated on the other thread that you never had a crush on me,

and THAT takes an ENORMOUS creative and active imagination to conjure

up that kind of bullshit, such that you could write your own WAR AND PEACE

in a matter of months, shoot.

Carrie: I'm a firm believer that pretty much everyone has a story in them. And you're a great writer! I say give it a go! What about your amazing transformation from smoking couch-potato to inspiring health fanatic?

Ace said:

ADONIA said:

yes just recently had my book published last august.... that is now out in stores and online worldwide

and now its been entered for the eric hoffer awards by the reviewer

and now awaiting for the ressults of the awards... of my book

wish me luck on tht one...

lm well please with the acheivement of my book

Best of luck!

Co-sign

I would love to write a novel, but I don't think I have the attention span to do it. It would read like bad Henry Miller. But I would like to write science fiction or possibly a memoir.

I also think it would be fun to write an episode of something like The Simpsons.

Sticking to songs is more manageable for me, though. However, with song lyrics, you have to try to perfect each syllable, and with prose it seems to flow a little easier without such nit-picking. I get some of my prose fill here. With 20,000 posts, I am working on my memoir every day.

Ace said:

imago said:

Yes, YOU ARE.

You're smart enough and creative enough to write a full scale novel--and there are great

ebooks out there (and audiobooks) that help you with the process. Ayn Rand has

an excellent book on how to do it.

You're VERY, VERY VERY creative.

I mean, you stated on the other thread that you never had a crush on me,

and THAT takes an ENORMOUS creative and active imagination to conjure

up that kind of bullshit, such that you could write your own WAR AND PEACE

in a matter of months, shoot.

Carrie: I'm a firm believer that pretty much everyone has a story in them. And you're a great writer! I say give it a go! What about your amazing transformation from smoking couch-potato to inspiring health fanatic?

Thanks, Ace! That might be something to write about, sure.

NDRU said:

I would love to write a novel, but I don't think I have the attention span to do it.

I find the thought of writing a novel overwhelming and the prospect of it underwhelming.

I get some of my prose fill here. With 20,000 posts, I am working on my memoir every day.

CarrieMpls said:

Ace said:

Carrie: I'm a firm believer that pretty much everyone has a story in them. And you're a great writer! I say give it a go! What about your amazing transformation from smoking couch-potato to inspiring health fanatic?

Thanks, Ace! That might be something to write about, sure.

And/or what about the subsequent meeting of your boyfriend and the ups-and-downs of his health struggles?