posted by ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
elanya at 02:13am on 20/02/2003
elanya at 02:13am on 20/02/2003I've been referring to my 'old' story by it's 'old' title. It was called 'The Entrepreneur', but now it is called 'Breaking Into The Market'. I'd forgotten that I'd changed it, but hey, I do like that title better, and also that's what's on the header of every page of the copy I'd printed out ;D. Good thing I noticed so I could change it in my accompanying letter :o
I often think about my writing style. I can be pretty analytical of my writing, even if I can't necessarily proof read my own stuff. Actually, I can if I let it sit. I have weird issues about my writing. I can't read it at all right after I've finished it, but I have to make everyone else look at it ;D (Partly because of the proof reading thing. Some of you may have noticed in past dealings with me that I'm not the most accurate of typists ;D) I get all antsy. I haven't read my 3-day novel contest entry since I finished editing it, for example. There is just something... I don't know. I was going to try and describe it, but I can't. So maybe this is kind of a pointless entry. But I can't read it immediately after it's been typed.
Anyway, as for being analytical... I don't mean *critical*. I'm crap at being critical, and I get can get pretty defensive when people pick at things that I really like. I still maintain to this day, in fact, that it is perfectly reasonable for eyes to be inscribed with terror. Arr. But I can be *analytical*. You know, like they make you do in English classes. Where you look at themes and symbolism and style and crap. I used to wonder how aware authors were when writing that these things were happening in their books, but I guess I can say that yes, sometimes we really do put them in on purpose. (I say 'we' so that I can pretentiously assume that I am a Real Writer, and that other authors think like me, see? ;). But I meant to talk about style. I have felt lately that my style and my writing in general have been heavily influenced Patricia Highsmith. The way I use voice, for example, to an extent the kinds of characters that crop up, the way the look at things, the things that happen to them. I felt the ghost of her stories sneaking in. Which is fine, I could accept that. I really like PH. She is one of my top favourite authors, if not *the* top. (In fact, in my unanswered 'first lines' thing, the one about Tom being followed is the first line of The Talented Mr. Ripley). But looking back at Market, I find that actually, my voice has been like that for a while. And my stories, characters, etc. So, is my lust for PH just some veiled form of narcissism then? Or am I just not as good at analysis as I think I am? Hmmm....
Addendum (I'm just adding stuff to a notepad window atm, 'cause LJ is being especially cunty): I just watched Dog Soldiers with Joel and Scott. I had wanted to see it when it came out in theatres in Sheffield, but I couldn't find anyone to go with me :/ I missed out. That was a good Werewolf movie. Basically everyone does the 'smart' thing. There werewolves look cool (partly because you don't get any very long shots of them, or they are moving around a lot). There is some crazy shit going on, too. The plot is fairly basic (I mean, it's a werewolf movie, not The Usual Suspects), and I won't give it away here, but it is suspenseful enough. British Army vs. Werewolves. Like it should be. Arr! or is that... arrroooooooooo!
*hides*
I often think about my writing style. I can be pretty analytical of my writing, even if I can't necessarily proof read my own stuff. Actually, I can if I let it sit. I have weird issues about my writing. I can't read it at all right after I've finished it, but I have to make everyone else look at it ;D (Partly because of the proof reading thing. Some of you may have noticed in past dealings with me that I'm not the most accurate of typists ;D) I get all antsy. I haven't read my 3-day novel contest entry since I finished editing it, for example. There is just something... I don't know. I was going to try and describe it, but I can't. So maybe this is kind of a pointless entry. But I can't read it immediately after it's been typed.
Anyway, as for being analytical... I don't mean *critical*. I'm crap at being critical, and I get can get pretty defensive when people pick at things that I really like. I still maintain to this day, in fact, that it is perfectly reasonable for eyes to be inscribed with terror. Arr. But I can be *analytical*. You know, like they make you do in English classes. Where you look at themes and symbolism and style and crap. I used to wonder how aware authors were when writing that these things were happening in their books, but I guess I can say that yes, sometimes we really do put them in on purpose. (I say 'we' so that I can pretentiously assume that I am a Real Writer, and that other authors think like me, see? ;). But I meant to talk about style. I have felt lately that my style and my writing in general have been heavily influenced Patricia Highsmith. The way I use voice, for example, to an extent the kinds of characters that crop up, the way the look at things, the things that happen to them. I felt the ghost of her stories sneaking in. Which is fine, I could accept that. I really like PH. She is one of my top favourite authors, if not *the* top. (In fact, in my unanswered 'first lines' thing, the one about Tom being followed is the first line of The Talented Mr. Ripley). But looking back at Market, I find that actually, my voice has been like that for a while. And my stories, characters, etc. So, is my lust for PH just some veiled form of narcissism then? Or am I just not as good at analysis as I think I am? Hmmm....
Addendum (I'm just adding stuff to a notepad window atm, 'cause LJ is being especially cunty): I just watched Dog Soldiers with Joel and Scott. I had wanted to see it when it came out in theatres in Sheffield, but I couldn't find anyone to go with me :/ I missed out. That was a good Werewolf movie. Basically everyone does the 'smart' thing. There werewolves look cool (partly because you don't get any very long shots of them, or they are moving around a lot). There is some crazy shit going on, too. The plot is fairly basic (I mean, it's a werewolf movie, not The Usual Suspects), and I won't give it away here, but it is suspenseful enough. British Army vs. Werewolves. Like it should be. Arr! or is that... arrroooooooooo!
*hides*
(no subject)
I can't write very well if someone is in the room - that's my particular hang-up. I can read things I've written, but it took me a long time to get used to other people reading them. I'm pretty okay with that these day, it would seem.
I do think about symbolism and theme and such when I write. Even when I write my Changeling stories, which are basically just off the top of my head and suffer only minimal editing, I think about things like that.
And we learn to write my imitating other authors we like. Nothing wrong with that, any more than there is with a painter copying a great master. We have to learn somehow, and as we get better, we do develop our own voices. Have you read Stephen King's "On Writing"? Good book...
(no subject)
I don't know if I can write with people *watching* me, though. No one ever does. :o
As for imitating style and stuff, I agree... I usualy notice that if I have just been reading a lot of a particular author, their 'voice' tends to try and sneak in, but with Highsmith, it is just kind of always there in the background. Though as I said, apparently I was doing that before I read anything of hers.
...I'm really only writing a reply to this because I don't have anything better to do :D Just for the record.
And no, I haven't read SK's book. I haven't read any book on writing. I'm stubborn that way. I realize that what it woudl actually be is a responsible, sensible, way to learn from people who have already become successful, but on the other hand, I also think.... How many people have actually become successful by reading that kind of stuff? I'm cynical. I may be wrong, but... Meh. I guess I'd rather muddle through on my own. I don't really have any huge aspirations towards becoming a widely renowned author anyway.
(no subject)
(no subject)
It meant I could do creative writing for credit.
It meant that I would be able to/have to do more writing.
I was guaranteed an audience and to get feedback on my work, which I could chose to ignore or incorporate into my stuff as I saw fit.
Ego boosting. Ego-stroking circle in some cases. meh.
I might have been hoping for more at the time, but I don't know. Getting feedback on my work is really important to me, and I tend to rely on reviewers comments a lot. I forget where I was going with this. Arr.