From Something That I Am Writing

[Mark VI]

He lost me at " The style is intended "

[Kelly the Dog]

He lost me at " The style is intended "

535039[/snapback]

Quick, when was the last time you read something where the style of the writing was unintentional? Now that would have grabbed me. "Let me start out by saying this style of the writing was unintentional." I'd be all over that, pure genius.

[KD in CA]

I did answer the !@#$ing question. Just because I din't speak in simple little direct sequences, that you understand, which allow you to sign off on something as legitimate doesn't mean I didn't answer the !@#$ing question, you blowhard.

 

Translation: Choice d, no criticism requested or accepted. His college professors have only taught him how to be smarter and more 'enlightened' than everyone else; they haven't taught him how to be an adult.

 

btw....isn't this the guy who had the whole vast right wing conspiracy working on the SC nominees a month or so ago?

[Wacka]

btw....isn't this the guy who had the whole vast right wing conspiracy working on the SC nominees a month or so ago? 

535902[/snapback]

 

Rats!, They found us out!

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Translation:  Choice d, no criticism requested or accepted.  His college professors have only taught him how to be smarter and more 'enlightened' than everyone else; they haven't taught him how to be an adult.

 

btw....isn't this the guy who had the whole vast right wing conspiracy working on the SC nominees a month or so ago? 

535902[/snapback]

 

Oh yeah...this gem. I'd forgotten about that.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I did answer the !@#$ing question. Just because I din't speak in simple little direct sequences, that you understand, which allow you to sign off on something as legitimate doesn't mean I didn't answer the !@#$ing question, you blowhard.

 

534873[/snapback]

 

WTF is your malfunction? Writing simple sentences isn't some sort of plague to avoid. Vonnegut, who you mentioned in an earlier post, writes in simple sentences, as do most writers. Why? Most writers strive for clarity, and declarative sentences are clear.

 

When you post your stuff on this board, of all places, and invite criticism, don't get all prickly when the criticsm arrives.

[Johnny Coli]

The style is intended. Because the style is intended, it must be pointed out that trying to force the style as a crutch makes you out to be a complete and absolute retard. I repeat, the style is intended.

 

It's written from the point of view of someone named Woodrow Jest in lives in a future where America didn't exist. He's telling (you) why.

 

---

534392[/snapback]

There's a freaking blog section for this stuff. No one reads it, but it's there. Also, never explain your art to someone. It's pretentious. If someone doesn't get where you are coming from, who cares? Furthermore, if you can't take criticism, don't put your "art" out there. If you put something you created into a public forum to satisfy your own need for an "attaboy" and a pat on the back, then you shouldn't be doing it.

[Alexander Hamilton]

He lost me at " The style is intended "

535039[/snapback]

 

Because of the plague of passive verb use, or because of the pretension?

[Kelly the Dog]

WTF is your malfunction? Writing simple sentences isn't some sort of plague to avoid. Vonnegut, who you mentioned in an earlier post, writes in simple sentences, as do most writers. Why? Most writers strive for clarity, and declarative sentences are clear.

 

When you post your stuff on this board, of all places, and invite criticism, don't get all prickly when the criticsm arrives.

536190[/snapback]

Any time some writer writes successfully in seemingly simple, effortless ways and simple, easy to understand sentences, chances are they spent twice as long working on them and rewriting them than someone who writes in complex sentences. Similar to a gymnast that makes his or her movements look so easy and effortless. They likely tried harder than virtually anyone to get that way,

[Bob Lamb]

My comment wasn't meant to be aggressive. I expect that forum members are all too used to most comments being aggressive, and so I can see how you made that mistake. But yeah, no foul.

534874[/snapback]

 

 

Cynical & Agressive ? Sounds like my M-I-L

 

Here's a suggestion - don't start with a premise and try to improve on it

[VABills]

There's a freaking blog section for this stuff.  No one reads it, but it's there.  Also, never explain your art to someone.  It's pretentious.  If someone doesn't get where you are coming from, who cares?  Furthermore, if you can't take criticism, don't put your "art" out there.  If you put something you created into a public forum to satisfy your own need for an "attaboy" and a pat on the back, then you shouldn't be doing it.

536255[/snapback]

Says the master in artsy fartsy bull sh--.

 

Seriously, you need to write more, because well, it's entertaining, enlightening, and not petentious (sp???).

[GG]

Haha!

 

Actually, I am thinking of really how to include more of Woodrow Jest's future world into the story to get it context. Maybe he will be a futuristic coke peddler, or heroine addict, or Bills fan. Or the President. Or something.

534895[/snapback]

 

Why not a policeman, fireman, accountant or an engineer? Maybe in your futurama are coke peddlers & heroin junkies are the bedrocks of society.

[Kelly the Dog]

Why not a policeman, fireman, accountant or an engineer?  Maybe in your futurama are coke peddlers & heroin junkies are the bedrocks of society.

536730[/snapback]

Apparently they will be the Amsterdam Bills since there is no America. And in this future of no America, how come everything the guy said sounded like and was about America?

[X. Benedict]

Apparently they will be the Amsterdam Bills since there is no America. And in this future of no America, how come everything the guy said sounded like and was about America?

536945[/snapback]

Cognitive Dissonance.

[billsfanone]

Looks like a bunch of tripe to me.

[OGTEleven]

It's written from the point of view of someone named Woodrow Jest in lives in a future where America didn't exist. He's telling (you) why.

 

---

In your time it is thought that a young mind can only.......

Because you never know when someone is looking to buy some microwavable inspiration.

534392[/snapback]

For the content;

 

I think the content will have an audience. Personally I will not be part of it (that's ok).

 

Your main character looks down upon everything in "our" time and presupposes it to be slavish in nature. He seems to make a leap from our time, where a tiny percentage of people can live by pursuing their true calling, to his time where an overwhelming percentage can. Assuming the rest of the work explains how this happens (which seems like a tough bridge to cross), he is at the very least underinformed about our time.

 

Not everyone works at Wal-Mart or is an astrophysicist. Some people that work at Wal-Mart are genuinely happy. Some astrophysicists are leading lost lives. People in our time and all times that have preceeded us are not really all that complex. They always pursue their desires (or hobbies, as you call them). They do not always achieve their desires, but they always pursue them. What the character misses IMO, is that there are many desires. Ease is one of the strongest. People all up and down the social ladder pursue it. If you could design a society/species you would make it such that ease might not be high on the species list of desires. We can't do that, nor will he be likely to have that ability (unless you write it in). Things like family, love, safety and entertainment also come into play. Many people do achieve their life's goals without ever becoming rich or having a fancy title. He thinks this is sheep-like, but in reality it is simply not his place to decide. At best the charachter has a lack of understanding of our time and no desire to learn. At worst he is a cynical jealous self absorbed loser. Neither is a desirable set of traits for someone from a superior society.

 

His observations about today's politics and society have some basis in fact but are limited to the US, at least in this snippet. In what seems to be a future global society, he does nothing to deride the societies clearly inferior to our warted one.

 

As for the future, I'm assuming you'll explain how we arrived there. If you do, you should probably also explain how such a superior society evolved without truly understanding its predecessor(s) and while continuing to make snap judgements about it. The inability to take all facets of human nature into account seems to me incompatible with the ability to build a utopian future.