Interesting in that a moderator is permitted to post comments that, were anyone else to make them would result in a ban. It's good to be the king." Interesting, too, that while I'm talking about the writing, and what's necessary to please the one you're submitting the work to, you're talking about me, personally. Seems less than a measured literary discussion.
There's that soon to be famous bloom again. You seem to be confused as to the arrangement. I'm unconcerned with your dogma and rhetoric. I have no investment in it either way. I have my own view on this subject and I am uninterested, genuinely, in arguing it with you, or anyone for that matter; hence, I do not engage in these particular threads because such argumentation is pointless. It falls into the same bucket as Catholic v. Protestant, Protestant v. Judaism, Judaism v. Islam, All of the aforementioned v. Atheism. No, no. If pointless prattle is what I seek, Puerto Rico is chockablock with gorgeously restored 17th and 18th century Spanish Colonial plazas wherein men and women gather daily to engage in every flavor of it under the balm and breeze of Caribbean skies. (We've been restoring for some time now as we look to our sister, Cuba, knowing she will soon be giving us stiff competition for the American tourist dollar.) You do not represent an accuracy or a fallacy to me, the argument of which you would seem so eager to engage. You represent a discord in function. That is the paradigm being applied: Function, and that which impedes it. So, I would say to you that what we have here is, in fact, a kind of mixed epistemology, to stretch the meaning of that word just a tad, admittedly. You cannot measure God with a ruler. Vishnu has nothing to say concerning trigonometry or advanced calculus. Neither faith nor mathematics explain in any way that's meaningful the beauty of a Monet. You are trying to engage me in a manner that simply does not apply, and this, and the aforementioned self-promotion, not days after having come back from time-out.
YES! Somebody with a bit of bloody sense....Come across a few of these discussions now. I have never seen so many words before that don't mean anything. It's like white noise bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
I'm sorry, that was my bad; clearly I explained my meaning poorly. What I meant was that I, for instance, spend some time in the Lounge, in its Entertainment section, in the Debate Room etc, i.e. areas where the discussions often revolve around other subjects than writing and, with the exception of the Debate Room, the tone of the conversations is usually very light and the intellectual content of the posts is often on a more conversational level, kinda like two people talking over a pint, i.e. not much to give likes for, hence members who also participate in those threads / conversations / rooms, have lower "like to post -ratios" than someone (might not be you, if you're actually posting mostly in the Lounge, for instance, but do feel free to set that record straight) who posts mostly in writing related threads, specifically offering help and advice to others, i.e. posting messages that have a much higher likelihood of getting likes (since people often give likes to those who offer help / advice). Now, I haven't seen one post of yours in those non-writing -related areas (no, doesn't mean there aren't any, but it does indicate at least that chances are, there aren't many), so here I'm making an educated guess. But guess what? Since I'm making that guess about you, you can actually tell us if I'm right, or if I'm completely wrong, and most of your posts are actually relatively meaningless chitchat that has nothing to do with writing or the publishing industry. So, which is it? Or do you participate in both kinds of threads in equal amounts? Here I'm asking the original source to get as accurate an idea of the truth as possible. I know I should've included these questions in my first post, but my mistake was to assume you'd correct me if I was wrong, but in any case, now that mistake has been rectified, and the questions have been asked so we can finally arrive to a conclusion: are your posts mostly about the writing / publishing industry? Mostly about non-related subjects (e.g. the Lounge -type stuff)? Both in equal amounts? I'm actually aware of that. It's just that most of us post in several rooms in addition to General Writing, some of which aren't even related to writing. Now, I might be wrong again, but I feel it might be a good idea just to make a couple more things a bit clearer: I wasn't saying people have liked your posts because of non-writing -related reasons. I wasn't saying they were wrong to give you likes. In fact, I wasn't talking about your likes at all. I was talking about those people who have far more posts but less likes than you or, alternatively, their "post / like -ratio" (sorry, the quotation marks are there just for clarity) is lower. My point was that that does not necessarily reflect on the level of their abilities, knowhow, professionalism, expertise etc. whereas your earlier post seemed to indicate that a high "like to post -ratio" was some sort of an indicator regarding the "worthiness" of the member in question. Again, correct me if I somehow misinterpreted what you were saying here: Now do you see what I'm getting at?
There's actually a term for it. I'm surprised Ginger hasn't popped in to make mention. Sampling error. If all the examples in a test group of "North Americans" were pulled from, say, Miami, one would come to the conclusion that bilingualism is very common or even the norm in North America. It would be an incorrect conclusion.
@Wreybies, statistics is such a confusing world. To me, it's like going into a maze filled with one-way streets.
Uch, that's how I felt when I first moved to Monterey having never experienced a city with one-way streets before. Making a left against traffic at a stop sign felt like Russian Roulette. Suffice to say that the whole "likes" argument being presented is a textbook example of sampling error; hence, the argument is a complete fallacy. It is to be given no coin.
I am confused as to why you think the percentage of people on this forum who are published has a direct correlation to how useful reading is in becoming a successful writer. You have no idea how many people on these forums have taken which methods to furthering their writing knowledge. From what I can tell plenty of people HAVE read some of the books you like to advertise. And only a very small percentage of those people are published. By your own logic that would mean those books don't work either. Except there are other flaws in that way of thinking. You know as well as anyone the percentages of the slush pile that get published are pretty tiny, and when you take into account that the large majority of writers haven't even submitted. It's not surprising that any random group of writers won't have many members who are published. It seems to me the reason for that is there are far more people who want to be writers than the publishing industry can sustain. However good we all get, we'll still be able to say that vast majority of people posting on a writing forum are unpublished. Pointing to percentages of submissions that the publishers see as amateurs seems meaningless too. By the very definition of amateur, most those people the publishing industry can't sustain will be of amateur of standard. If everyone gets better, they'll still be some people who are better than the rest. The rest will still be counted as amateurs. Now I agree we should look to the pros for advice. Seems likely people who've made it know best how to make it. Plenty of them would seem to advise to read lots too. Quite easy to find Googling for: interview author advice writer. Examples of sites I came up with http://www.deadgoodbooks.co.uk/index.php/tips-advice/ http://www.aerogrammestudio.com/2013/07/19/23-tips-from-famous-writers-for-new-and-emerging-authors/ Plenty more I found. Quite a mixture of tips if you look around, but seems clear that many authors consider extensive reading part of the cocktail of experience which lead to their eventual success. There are some in that lot who suggest reading how-to books. I've not cherry picked sites to support a particular method here. The most time consuming part, that nearly everyone agrees on, is that you will need to practice writing a lot. Generally the advice, seems to be to approach the challenge from as many angles as you can. Thus arguments of which way is better seem irrelevant to me. Thus I find myself being skeptical of people who claim certain routes of learning aren't helpful. I'm skeptical of people who say that how-to books aren't useful too. They're trying to stop people going down a route that could potentially be what is needed. But I find myself wanting to debate what you're saying more, precisely because you like to make out that you're just presenting facts - but your own interpretation of those facts doesn't always seem watertight to me.
Thanks, @plothog, for some terrific links. A real thought-provoker is: “Let the writer take up surgery or bricklaying if he is interested in technique. There is no mechanical way to get the writing done, no shortcut. The young writer would be a fool to follow a theory. Teach yourself by your own mistakes; people learn only by error. The good artist believes that nobody is good enough to give him advice. He has supreme vanity. No matter how much he admires the old writer, he wants to beat him.” ― William Faulkner
I'm getting to the point where I want to start a thread of quotes from famous writers about the art and craft of writing. I have books full of them, and it's amazing how some of the most brilliant can contradict each other.
Some nice quotes in that. I particularly like the " write the book you have been trying to find but have not found" ...There's a particular aesthetic and a certain 'vibe' that I crave in books, and sometimes I can't seem to find it. The solution: aim to write it myself
@minstrel, what are you waiting for? Go start that thread already! I have 10 pages of quotes (although they're from all over the place, not just writers / about writing), and I could probably find a few suitable ones too.
I felt like my writing has improved enormously from the advice of the 'amateurs' here. But you need to do research off-site to learn what advice is good and what needs to be thrown out. Like any artist he doesn't take all advice just because someone comes up behind him and says - Hey Picasso - straighten out that face, man, it's all lopsided. Writing for me is an ongoing, ever-learning, life-long goal. For some it's a hobby, for some they want to make money. Is anyone wrong? Nope. The ones who are serious will seek out and study books, authors, language. Others will seek out quick methods and formulas ( and I don't mean themes and or techniques. ) To the OP, get and give feedback it's enormously important - it's like the cook who starting out making his first omelet he needs an unbiased person to taste it. Plus, he always needs to put his taste buds out there. Learn to sift advice - test it all, throw out what's not an improvement. Read aloud, develop your ear. Look to the pros for tips, invest in good writing and grammar improving books. Read with an eye for deconstructing paragraphs and scenes. Look to see what the author is telling you by how he's showing you. Read some of the Paris Review author interviews - they're fun and informative and let you know every writer has their own way of doing things, no method is 'wrong.'
@plothog - Aw, some great stuff there! My personal favourite: “Advice to young writers who want to get ahead without any annoying delays: don’t write about Man, write about a man.” ― E.B. White Mind you, I also like Dorothy Parker's advice to friends who want to be writers: "Shoot them while they're still happy."
I'll do it, but I'm incredibly busy right now. Tons to do today (and the car needs servicing, too, dammit!) but maybe tonight I'll find time.
I think that would be a damn useful thread! The best advices I got are actually just short sentences within long paragraphs. @Andrae Smith I agree with you, these threads and conversations have been goldmines of good advices and books regarding writing!
