Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories

Vanilla 1.1.8 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
  1.  

    Ok, umm I just wanted to know something, and that is, is it ok to write to entertain the audience? I mean the other month, I read part of this book on Google Books that kept repeating, “We write to entertain the audience, to captivate them every second.” I was thinking that he was right and that our society, at least the western society ( specificly U.S.A.) lives to be entertained. After I tried styling my writing that way it didn’t seem to click with me anymore, and I started thinking, what if my writing turns out like Smeyer’s or Paolini’s? They seem to entertain their readers, but I don’t want to end up a horrifically bad writer like they are.
    These are the thoughts of a fourteen-year-old so don’t laugh at me, I honestly want to know any comments or thoughts on this.

  2.  

    It’s actually a good question, Creature_NIL, so I’m not laughing.

    In my opinion, I think that a writer will find the most fulfillment writing for their own enjoyment- after all, if you write for someone else, why bother? Especially if you’re not looking to be published…and even if you do aim to be published someday, I think that writing what you feel will make you a better writer, even if you don’t sell millions.

  3.  

    Write for yourself, but do it well enough that others can enjoy it as well.

    •  
      CommentAuthorTakuGifian
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2009
     

    I agree, write for yourself first. My philosophy has always been thus: I’m writing because I love writing, not because I want to be famous or rich.

    Besides, if I wanted to be rich and famous, I would have gone into singing or acting.

    Also, if you write first for yourself, sometimes that comes out in the writing itself, and readers can sense that freshness and excitement—-part of what attracted us at first to Eragon. But then Paolini started writing for an audience, and that’s why it started going downhill, prose-wise.

    Write for yourself, first. Write something that you would want to read.

  4.  

    You write for what you think is right, whether it’s for yourself or for others.

  5.  

    @Taku- haha, singing and acting? Most people who get into that field don’t become rich and famous. Plus, it helps to be goodlooking.

    •  
      CommentAuthorTakuGifian
    • CommentTimeJul 9th 2009
     

    @ Snow White Queen: There’s whole hell of a lot more actors and singers who are rich and famous than there are famous writers. Ergo, if I want to be rich and/or famous, acting/singing and probably sports are better fields for me to have pursued than writing.

  6.  

    I think I’m with CB here. I write because I have a wonderful idea for a story, but what pushes me is both discovering what the characters will do next, and the anticipation of how much people will empathise with or laugh at what I write.

    •  
      CommentAuthorJabrosky
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    I think it’s a question of balance. Obviously you have to enjoy what you’re writing, but at the same time, you also need to keep in mind what your readers will want.

  7.  
    My view is basically: write for yourself, but keep you audience in mind.
    •  
      CommentAuthorCorsair
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     
    If you write for your readers, odds are good you'll write something mediocre to bad. At best, you'll be pulp fiction. Write what's on your heart and your head and you're much more likely to write something actually good.
    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    The key is both head and heart, not one or the other.

  8.  

    Because you write to share what you’ve got with the world, right?

    •  
      CommentAuthorCorsair
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     
    Exactly, and trust me, this world needs all of my prodigious intelligence it can get it's hands on. Not to mention my modesty.
  9.  

    bows down to supreme awsomeness.

    (Corsair: not you!)

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    That sounds sappy so I disagree on principle. A bastardly life is like that.

  10.  

    Whereas deep, deep, deep, deep down, you agree, don’t you.

  11.  

    Whereas you KNOW that deep down you’re just longing to shed your CB exterior and become a beautiful butterfly of love and sharing and goodness.

  12.  
    Because you're beautiful and different, you'll disagree! *throws confetti and sparkly rainbows magically appear*
  13.  

    swoons Oh, Edward!

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    You’re all cunts.

    walks away

  14.  
    *whispers* He just doesn't want to admit he was talked into a corner. *high fives steph*
  15.  

    slaps back thankyou!

    (CB I will ignore that language)

  16.  
    Thank you, steph.
    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    You’re lucky my brain is malfunctioning of late.

    •  
      CommentAuthorCorsair
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     
    MALFUNCTIONING!? ABORT JUMP!
  17.  
    We are lucky. Very lucky. It's been a wonderful morale boost, sir.
    lol at Corsair
  18.  

    (@ CB: I don’t think so. If you were more alert you would’ve spared us the language and given us a wonderfully imaginative insult)

    • CommentAuthorLccorp2
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Why can’t it be both?

  19.  

    Why can’t it be both?

    It can be, but you’ll notice that “what is good” and “what sells” are often entirely different things. Case in point: My Immortal. Worst fanfic ever. Also the most popular.

    Between us we could probably come up with an exceedingly long list of bad-but-popular things. It’s like fast food: it appeals to people on the lowest level, it is consumed by millions of people every day, and while some of us know it is bad, that doesn’t stop people from eating it.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    You write for what you think is right, whether it’s for yourself or for others.

    /thread

  20.  

    @SMARTALIENQT

    >It can be, but you’ll notice that “what is good” and “what sells” are often entirely different things. Case in point: My Immortal. Worst fanfic ever. Also the most popular.

    You can’t be serious. People read My Immortal because it’s horrible. For humor. To use the parlance of a /b/tard, for the lulz. Nobody would seriously buy it, except as a conversation piece.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    I dunno, there are some retards out there who might like it.

  21.  

    You write for what you think is right, whether it’s for yourself or for others.

    /thread

    Seconded.

  22.  

    Not thirded. As far as I can tell, that kind of thinking produced Atlas Shrugged.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Who gives a shit, it also produces good literature.

  23.  

    >Who gives a shit, it also produces good literature. occasionally produces a well-written author tract.

    Fixed.

  24.  

    What you think is right may not always be right, but there’s no way to produce the actual good stuff otherwise.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Ezzactly.

  25.  

    I can see it now. Lord of the Rings really was a political commentary on World War II.

  26.  

    Don’t start getting mad over this…

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    I hate political commentary unless it’s brand new and makes me see something I’ve never thought about deeply before.

  27.  

    I’m just saying that a lot of people interpret “write for what you think is right” as “promote your political views”.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    A lot of people don’t have what it takes to be a writer so it works out in the end.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    And then… there’s Kenneth Eng. Who still doesn’t have what it takes to be a writer, but somehow still manages to get people to buy his books.

  28.  

    @Complete Bastard

    A lot of people who don’t have what it takes to be a writer never consider writing for what they think is right, so no.

    @swenson

    And people buy Battlefield Earth on DVD. Because they want a cheap laugh at someone else’s expense. My little brother is buying me Dragons: Lexicon Triumvirate for my birthday, at my insistence.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Let people buy his books. Do you honestly believe in 200 years people will read his books to discover the truth?

  29.  

    A lot of people don’t have what it takes to be a writer so it works out in the end.

    If you mean stamina, I agree. If you mean creativity and ability with words, I disagree wholeheartedly.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    @CB – :headdesk: I just had a vision of the future… where D:LT is the Bible of the new world… and everyone believes it… screams MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!!

  30.  

    Psh, you just read the spork.

    “NW – Thereupon, there is one reality where this book never existed. Conversely, there is one reality where this book outsold the Bible. Let THAT haunt your nightmares.”

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    It’s not stamina but perseverance. And it’s not creativity or being just eloquent. You also have to have an eye for subtle details and experiences. You have to be able to be both involved and detached, two contradictory conditions, at the exact same time.

  31.  

    I swear, it’s got to be something you can learn. You just need somebody to teach you and point you into looking at things in the right way. And people develop this skill at their own paces.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Only after much suffering and introspection. Hence most people will be able to “write” but won’t be able to write until very, very late in their lives.

  32.  

    I wouldn’t say ‘most’ people there. And like I said, one develops the skill at one’s own pace. If you are constantly trying to improve, you will improve.

    And people who teach you what to look for can act as catalysts for this.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    No one can teach you what to look for as a writer. You can only start looking when you stop listening to everyone and start looking by yourself.

    You’re looking at writing from only a technical perspective here. Anyone can learn the tools of the trade. But mastery can only come through practice. And the ironic part is, even much practice can only produce hackery.

    What writers ask is what makes the world tick. Why do people do what they do? Then with this knowledge they work out true stories but with imaginary stuff inside. It isn’t rhetoric that moves us so much.

  33.  

    I disagree. I’m not talking about technical things. I’m talking about things like noticing people’s facial expressions (movies are great for this), reading as much as you can to influence the way you see the world—Dodie Smith’s I Capture the Castle gave me another perspective, walking a mile in someone else’s shoes, learning to ask the questions that make you think and discovering the character traits that make a character real. And yes, you do need to learn some of these things on your own, but with some of the other things, people can provide valuable insight.

    It’s like a magic eye picture— if you’ve never seen or heard of one before, you won’t understand it and you won’t see it on your own unless by accident, or you try everything you can. And this is the way some people learn it. But most people learn by somebody telling them how to do it, and then they go and try it for themselves, making that last little leap.

    of course, some people just never manage it, but that’s where the analogy breaks down.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    It’s not about people’s facial expressions, mannerisms, or particular shades of colors. It’s about more abstract things than that, less tangible. Sure, you rely on these things to play make believe reality with readers; but that’s not what you are actually writing. You can read countless books, you can study every nook and cranny, but you still will never find satisfaction until you figure out what exactly you want to write about and why.

    One day you’ll just go “aha” and know what I mean here. That thing can’t be taught, but it can be learned.

    •  
      CommentAuthorCorsair
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     
    ^.I can see it now. Lord of the Rings really was a political commentary on World War II.^

    No, it was not.
  34.  

    It’s not about people’s facial expressions, mannerisms, or particular shades of colors.

    it is when you’re creating an atmosphere. No, it’s not the only thing, but it definitely helps. Trust me on this one. I shouldn’t have brought it up, though, because it’s a side issue.

    It’s about people showing you the way to see the world. You only took out one little bit of my post. The rest was this:

    ...reading as much as you can to influence the way you see the world—Dodie Smith’s I Capture the Castle gave me another perspective, walking a mile in someone else’s shoes, learning to ask the questions that make you think and discovering the character traits that make a character real. And yes, you do need to learn some of these things on your own, but with some of the other things, people can provide valuable insight.

    It’s like a magic eye picture— if you’ve never seen or heard of one before, you won’t understand it and you won’t see it on your own unless by accident, or you try everything you can. And this is the way some people learn it. But most people learn by somebody telling them how to do it, and then they go and try it for themselves, making that last little leap.

    of course, some people just never manage a magic eye, but that’s where the analogy breaks down.

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    I never can get Magic Eye puzzles. My mom can get them right off, she barely has to glance at them to know what the picture is, but I never can get them.

  35.  

    I’m getting a little sick of arguing something like this, too. I’d rather pull out because we’re making a mountain out of a molehill. This isn’t an attempt to subvert the argument, but I’m just bored of the thing.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    It’s not about showing people the way this thing I call “I” sees the world though. It’s something hard to explain in words. (lol irony because words are the medium)

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    o ok

  36.  

    It’s not about showing people the way this thing I call “I” sees the world though. It’s something hard to explain in words. (lol irony because words are the medium)

    I’m failing at this for the exact same reason. My point was that anyone can improve… I think… (was that what we were arguing about?)

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Whether writing can be taught or not. I say only the technical aspects can be taught, the rest are learned by yourself.

  37.  

    Oh. I wasn’t meaning to argue that lol! I think people can jumpstart you into learning by yourself. That’s what i think I meant to say.

    Now you know why I hate arguments: I fail lol.

  38.  

    @Corsair (way up there)

    >No, it was not.

    That’s precisely my point. It’s called sarcasm.

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Arguments are fun. Read a lot of arguments and get better at them. Helps you think better.

  39.  

    Fun? You raised my blood pressure by about 50 lol before I realised it was stupid to get worked up over this.
    And not at 12:37 at night they don’t. But thanks for the tip :)

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    lol

    •  
      CommentAuthorJabrosky
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Would Mary Sue fics be an example of writing from the heart without considering what the audience wants?

    • CommentAuthorCodeWizard
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    Sure why not

    •  
      CommentAuthorCorsair
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     
    No, I'm inclined to think a Mary Sue fic is writing what you think the audience wants when you really have no idea.
  40.  

    Well, if it’s a self-insert Mary Sue fic where you’re writing to fulfill your wildest fantasies that will never happen in real life, yes, it’s for you. Sometimes they’re even successful, especially if other people happen to have the same weird fantasies that you do.

  41.  

    Or if they really, really like dragons and single tears.

  42.  

    L.

    O.

    L.

  43.  

    T

    H

    A

    N

    K

    S

    F

    O

    R

    T

    H

    E

    C

    O

    M

    P

    L

    I

    M

    E

    N

    T

    .

    •  
      CommentAuthorswenson
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     

    S
    O
    R
    R
    Y

    F
    O
    R

    T
    H
    E

    I
    N
    C
    O
    N
    V
    E
    N
    I
    E
    N
    C
    E
    .

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009 edited
     

    A
    P
    O
    L
    O
    G
    Y
    _ACCEPTED.

    •  
      CommentAuthorCorsair
    • CommentTimeJul 10th 2009
     
    STOP THAT.
  44.  

    ?
    R
    E
    T
    T
    E
    B

    S
    I
    H
    T

    S
    I

  45.  

    Was that palindrome pun word that means different things when spelled backwards and forwards intentional, Devin?

  46.  

    Since when is “siht” a word?

  47.  

    No, SMART. Just writing upside down.

    •  
      CommentAuthorSMARTALIENQT
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2009 edited
     

    Since when is “siht” a word?

    Since I had a dyslexic moment.

  48.  

    That would explain a lot. Poor swenson. Who else can’t get Magic Eyes?

    •  
      CommentAuthorPuppet
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2009
     

    I just got them a few months ago. ^^

    IT“S SO COOL =O

  49.  

    I never can.

  50.  

    I sort of can. My dad can’t do them at all, but I can do a lot of tricks with my eyes. I’m like Daredevil. Since I have glasses, my life makes it up to me by letting me wiggle, cross, and unfocus my eyes at will.

  51.  

    Glasses are a bit annoying, especially when they get smudged.

  52.  

    It’s funny because I was wiping mine.

    This is where contacts come in.

    •  
      CommentAuthorMoldorm
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2009
     

    I’ll stick with glasses. Contacts are icky.
    Although a monocle could be fun.

  53.  

    My eyesight is horrendous, the lenses cost too much, especially if I don’t want them thick as bricks, and they distort the image when someone looks at me while wearing them. Contacts are a way better option.

  54.  

    My eyesight is also horrendous, but my lenses don’t have to me too thick. I like my glasses. Contacts would bother me.

  55.  

    You get used to contacts after a while, but it takes time to master putting them in and taking them out.

  56.  

    I’m sure I would, but since I have no real issues with my glasses, I’ll probably stick with them.

  57.  

    How did this turn into a contacts Vs. glasses argument?

    •  
      CommentAuthorSMARTALIENQT
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2009 edited
     

    I can’t wear contacts. I’d have to take them out every time I read, and I have a tendency to fall asleep with my glasses on – not good with contacts.

    I want surgery!

    EDIT: @Creature_NIL

    Um, when I brought up glasses after Steph brought up Magic Eye puzzles?

  58.  

    I prefer glasses. I wore contacts to my year ten formal and they made me look all dopey in every single photo. Plus nobody noticed I was wearing them.

    •  
      CommentAuthorJeni
    • CommentTimeJul 13th 2009
     

    Since not now. Come on guys, back on topic. For once. ;)