#281
Post rating: ~

Impper posted:

yes i am sitting here eating ahe Doritos wiping dust all over my keyboards, giving this scene a lot of thought, which i have also given it a lot of thought yesterday, and between posting it in this thread and talking about it and all the criticism i'm giving it probably more thought than it's worth, it being such a small part of the manuscript. anyway it's all worth it i guess, it's all >art<, anyway here are my thoughts

one of the things i disagree a lot with Fucker about is , i guess, the very basic aesthetics of literature, that is, this demand for reality and as you say crow, verisimilitude, that is i enjoy VTude as much as the next guy but it should always be sublimated to something else - so take the verisimilitude as far as it will go, but if something else needs to be said, then say it. when i sit down and read, i just don't give a damn, i don't question logic, and stupidity of characters, i.e. if i sat down reading like fucker did, the narrator of hamsun's "Hunger" is a real "Fucker," since he is not logical, he destroys himself at every opportunity, he lies like a fish breathes water and then castigages himself for it, all for no reason, and he never questions why, nor does he embrace his irrationality - now, if you sit down and question him rationally, you can never even read the book - so better to sit down and laugh as you go on this adventure. so for me at a basic level, i don't want to be questioning "irl" even if i want it to be realistic.

well, so if i dont want that, then what do i want? i don't want to claim now that i am being very successful at this, but i want there to be struggle, and clash, and dialectics, and ecstacy, and cool things, funny things to happen, and ideally for the story itself to hijack the narrative so that i, the writer, have little control over what is happening, everything will pull & struggle & fight for itself, as if it is a big ball of metal rolling downhill collecting things as it goes and trying to resolve itself internally at the same time.

i do understand what you mean Fucker about things being more "explicit," though one thing i enjoy a lot when people read my books is the vastly different interpretations and focus people put on certain aspects. somebody will begin telling me about a part that is great, and i forgot i wrote it, simply because it was part of the ball of junk that had rolled downhill, so it had to be there, and it didnt have to be explicit at all. i hope i'm not being defensive or whiny

now as to the problems with the scene - i am actually surprised anybody cared at all about milos' car, which is a big part, and intrinsic to his character, but small at the same time. this is what i'm talking about with things being not explicit, i guess there can be surprises. my thoughts while writing the scene was simply that the car itself was funny, and would serve as a backdrop for this ridiculous monologue, which milos would resist. and yeah i do keep an eye out for verisimilitude to some extent - that is that very simply, milos would be able to understand john's sentiment because he has heard the dumbass stories so many times, whereas emily would not absorb the wall of words, except to hear all of these strange things about apocalypse and siberia and ICBMs, which of course she has no context at all for, so for her it is a lot of wasted words - sort of an attack against the narrator's narcissism and bullying what he takes for granted intellectually.

i will give a lot more thought now to the car, especially at the point that milos will get more attention in the narrative. would you be satisfied if that were to come later, or do you think it is better served in this very chapter?

as far as the narrator, yes, this too is a struggle which i am still trying to resolve. he is very clearly a stand-in for myself, and i'm working very hard to Destroy him



all i want to point out here is that the irrational is not a mystified structure.. even if theories grapple with it incompletely.. well, here we apply theory indeed. what is the ball of junk but a refined theoretical clash? what gives it consistency? its shifting internal support, its gnashing metallic struggle, is a delicate spiral of gravity and economy. in place where it is too dense, the economy moves rapidly towards sparseness; shifting among city traffic necessitates long country stretches.

the ball junk is rapidly moving and logical, if not 'open' to interpretation or even reality. if you can tend the rhythm of the structure towards beautiful spirals and jagged curves that can be approximated by sine waves, then that's great, but of course this little fragment here is all we're working with... prose is symphony, you dont equalize it unless you want to play it on the radio

frankly, i'd rather listen to the most unwanted song. but, i'd even more rather listen to Sviridov



now thats a glorious ball of junk!

#282
Post rating: ~
personally, i prefer the Dolan rhetoric of strong, forward language, with variations in grammatical structure, there flouting it, here weaving lazily, bringing it tight at the rim. but i am a 'pervert and loser' as tommi would say, my artistic intent is power, properly political, so paradoxically i am very hesitant to edit other people's work (especially if i respect their artistic will). this is i think why Fucker rubbed a little wrong in the beginning too.. virtuality is a difficult place to establish a proper mutual give-and-take
#283
Post rating: ~
heheahe thank U both... lots of kool stuff to think about, and inspirations, especially thinking more about the junk ball symphony.... i lovin it (mcdonalds)
#284
Post rating: ~
ya oughta post either the very first chapter or part of it / the chapter right before the one discussed hear. tempted to speak me mind bout the narrator versus hamsuns hunger dude but without the introduction to the guy its well futile
#285
Post rating: ~
ah... to be honest, the structure is extremely convoluted; i was tempted to say complicated but it's not, not exactly. to tell you the truth i'm very much flying blind at this point, though the thing has picked up a ton of momentum with the introduction of the narrator, then emiy, then milos. this book began as a sort of fictional/philosophical biography of kobe bryant, with some hints of the narrator's character here and there. i put up some chapters from it on the old wddp website i believe. it was quite focused when i was sticking to nietzsche, but then i brought in some other guys and it began to spiral out of control, at the same time i had a quite disgusting insomniac episode that lasted about a week, and at that point the whole narrative sort of intruded, and now it is going to some very strange places.

my other two novels have actually had focused structures; myu second in particular is very tight, very deliberate and planned out with an act structure and everything. this one, well, i began writing it on a lark, and now i am about 3 months in and it's just wild.

the next book i write is going to have a nice structure though, it won't be this out of control sort of thing... the only part that makes me feel good is that i am detecting some internal consistency & coherency inside of the narrative, and when i'm breaking from one thing, it's going by a very clear thread that is present, so maybe with a lot of editing it can turn out okay (once i'm finished writing)
#286
Post rating: ~
jeet christ. good luck with all that. sincerely. bein pomo aint e-z. shit'll kill ya
#287
Post rating: ~
the narrative itself is my attempt to resuscitate the "mo" aheh...
#288
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

Impper posted:
yes i am sitting here eating ahe Doritos wiping dust all over my keyboards, giving this scene a lot of thought, which i have also given it a lot of thought yesterday, and between posting it in this thread and talking about it and all the criticism i'm giving it probably more thought than it's worth, it being such a small part of the manuscript. anyway it's all worth it i guess, it's all >art<, anyway here are my thoughts

one of the things i disagree a lot with Fucker about is , i guess, the very basic aesthetics of literature, that is, this demand for reality and as you say crow, verisimilitude, that is i enjoy VTude as much as the next guy but it should always be sublimated to something else - so take the verisimilitude as far as it will go, but if something else needs to be said, then say it. when i sit down and read, i just don't give a damn, i don't question logic, and stupidity of characters, i.e. if i sat down reading like fucker did, the narrator of hamsun's "Hunger" is a real "Fucker," since he is not logical, he destroys himself at every opportunity, he lies like a fish breathes water and then castigages himself for it, all for no reason, and he never questions why, nor does he embrace his irrationality - now, if you sit down and question him rationally, you can never even read the book - so better to sit down and laugh as you go on this adventure. so for me at a basic level, i don't want to be questioning "irl" even if i want it to be realistic.

well, so if i dont want that, then what do i want? i don't want to claim now that i am being very successful at this, but i want there to be struggle, and clash, and dialectics, and ecstacy, and cool things, funny things to happen, and ideally for the story itself to hijack the narrative so that i, the writer, have little control over what is happening, everything will pull & struggle & fight for itself, as if it is a big ball of metal rolling downhill collecting things as it goes and trying to resolve itself internally at the same time.

i do understand what you mean Fucker about things being more "explicit," though one thing i enjoy a lot when people read my books is the vastly different interpretations and focus people put on certain aspects. somebody will begin telling me about a part that is great, and i forgot i wrote it, simply because it was part of the ball of junk that had rolled downhill, so it had to be there, and it didnt have to be explicit at all. i hope i'm not being defensive or whiny

now as to the problems with the scene - i am actually surprised anybody cared at all about milos' car, which is a big part, and intrinsic to his character, but small at the same time. this is what i'm talking about with things being not explicit, i guess there can be surprises. my thoughts while writing the scene was simply that the car itself was funny, and would serve as a backdrop for this ridiculous monologue, which milos would resist. and yeah i do keep an eye out for verisimilitude to some extent - that is that very simply, milos would be able to understand john's sentiment because he has heard the dumbass stories so many times, whereas emily would not absorb the wall of words, except to hear all of these strange things about apocalypse and siberia and ICBMs, which of course she has no context at all for, so for her it is a lot of wasted words - sort of an attack against the narrator's narcissism and bullying what he takes for granted intellectually.

i will give a lot more thought now to the car, especially at the point that milos will get more attention in the narrative. would you be satisfied if that were to come later, or do you think it is better served in this very chapter?

as far as the narrator, yes, this too is a struggle which i am still trying to resolve. he is very clearly a stand-in for myself, and i'm working very hard to Destroy him



you need fully formed characters. more than one. focusing on style at this point is superficial

#289
Post rating: ~
wow thank you for that amazing advice i hadnt thought of that
#290
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
if you knew that why are you talking about irrelevant things like structure. you shouldnt write fiction if you cant produce more than a single character. if thats what you want to do then you should just write essays.
#291
Post rating: ~
what the hell makes you think there is a "single character?" and since when is structure irrelevant to the novel? the structure is pretty much what makes the novel a form at all
#292
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
your novel is just you engaging in rape fantasies impper. if you want to write fiction you need to populate it with characters. more than one. otherwise its just a vehicle for content that is better suited to the essay.
#293
Post rating: ~
sure, if you say so. i still also have no idea what you're talking about with there being "one character"
#294
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
Heh who needs a solid foundation in the basic elements of the craft im just gonna play dollies with Limonov's aesthetic
#295
Post rating: ~
these "criticisms" are completely nonsensical btw
#296
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
the only substantial character you employ is yourself. if you dont find a need to generate more than one autobiographical character in your work then i don't really see why you would choose to write novels. of course everyone basically just uses themselves and their own lives as the elements to form characters and narratives but the basic idea of the novel is that there is at least two different characters interacting in a relationship more complex than that of the parrot and its mirror
#297
Post rating: ~
what is this in reference to? surely not the passage i posted in this thread, where the discussion has mostly centered on another character that is not myself, and of which a large portion of the rest is dedicated to the female character?
#298
Post rating: ~
also i do not and have never written like limonov
#299
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
Emily is pretty much non-existent in that excerpt bro. It reads like a Socratic dialogue

Edited by babyfinland ()

#300
Post rating: ~
Wow dude amazing, and in other places she is the focus or has much more attention. Pretty crazy I know.
#301
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
uh well you just said the passage you posted contained variety of character so what are you trying to do here impper

dont get mad, im the one who wasted my precious time reading your thing
#302
Post rating: ~
where did i say that? you said the only character i employ is myself when the discussion in this thread has focused on milos, who is not "myself"
#303
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
"what is this in reference to? surely not the passage i posted in this thread, where the discussion has mostly centered on another character that is not myself, and of which a large portion of the rest is dedicated to the female character?"

it doesn't matter if milos is you or not

i'm not goign to argue with you about this. you have a shitty attitude and you'll never be a competent writer if you act like this
#304
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
in any case, even if the rest of the novel is a stupendously complex drama of many different characters, the thing you posted didn't represent that at all. it was absolutely one-sided so if you want this to work in your otherwise brilliant novel you ought to include another living thing for milos to interact with
#305
Post rating: ~
what the hell is your point?
#306
Post rating: ~
no, it has nothing to do with my attitude since you're not making criticisms but posting garbage about limonov aesthetic dollie, characters, structure being irrelevant, there being only one character, when none of this is the case.
#307
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
the other characters feel like cardboard cutouts thats all. i dont understand how much more clear i can be about this.

anyway do you guys want to do a fun exercise rather than compare jizzrags? it goes like this: we pick a color and then go for a walk and narrow our attention to that color alone. you dont even have to do any writing, its just a good way to train your mind to work the way a writer's should. then u can post Trip Reports or something i guess
#308
Post rating: ~
which characters? i don't understand what you're saying, i literally don't, because first you came in here talking about my novel being rape fantasies, then there being one character, then the one "formed" character being a stand-in for myself, and now you're saying the other characters except milos are cardboard. so you've told me several separate things. i don't care if you supported it or not because it could just be your feeling, your "feeling" is you don't like what i wrote, and that's fine, but how am i supposed to respond when you are telling me shifting nonsense?
#309
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
in regards to referencing your work, ive been talking about the thing you posted, the comment about your novel was offhand. primarily though i was actually just responding to your general comments about style in that big post you made. it is a general reccomendations based on your general statements
#310
Post rating: ~
which comments about style? you're free to say whatever you want, but you get so incredibly cryptic when you talk about writing that it is utterly ridiculous, i have to say. in any case, i'm not even sure that i agree that there needs to be more than one character for something to be "fiction"
#311
penitent
Post rating: ~
great novels are never really character-based imo, every great literary character has been a stand-in for some general idea or principle
#312
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

Impper posted:
which comments about style? you're free to say whatever you want, but you get so incredibly cryptic when you talk about writing that it is utterly ridiculous, i have to say. in any case, i'm not even sure that i agree that there needs to be more than one character for something to be "fiction"



i quoted the post.

anyway if you want to excuse yourself from basic competency and craftsmanship with pomo bullshit about Definitions Maaan then go right ahead i dont really care. im just tellign you whats up

#313
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

deadken posted:
great novels are never really character-based imo, every great literary character has been a stand-in for some general idea or principle



that very well might be but the point of the novel is the interplay of characters, whatever those characters actually represent is besides the point.

#314
Post rating: ~
pomo
#315
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~
dead ken btw your thing would be a lot better if you didnt have that introduction in the apartment with the hangover and fried eggs and stuff that somehow made me cringe like five times. i would just start frmo "After breakfast". its pretty obvious everything leading up to that was just you warming up and its really a bad idea to present that to your reader

i stopped reading shortly thereafter because i didnt like the subject matter but thats just a little Pro Tip
#316
Post rating: ~

babyfinland posted:
Impper posted:
which comments about style? you're free to say whatever you want, but you get so incredibly cryptic when you talk about writing that it is utterly ridiculous, i have to say. in any case, i'm not even sure that i agree that there needs to be more than one character for something to be "fiction"


i quoted the post.

anyway if you want to excuse yourself from basic competency and craftsmanship with pomo bullshit about Definitions Maaan then go right ahead i dont really care. im just tellign you whats up

certum est quia impossibile


no you're not, you're posting nonsense that is so unspecific that i honestly can't tell which character you find problematic. i'm sorry man but it's Bullshit, and this is you acting superior instead of trying to help somebody out or whatever. your comments don't make sense in the context of the post you quoted either

#317
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

Impper posted:

babyfinland posted:
Impper posted:
which comments about style? you're free to say whatever you want, but you get so incredibly cryptic when you talk about writing that it is utterly ridiculous, i have to say. in any case, i'm not even sure that i agree that there needs to be more than one character for something to be "fiction"


i quoted the post.

anyway if you want to excuse yourself from basic competency and craftsmanship with pomo bullshit about Definitions Maaan then go right ahead i dont really care. im just tellign you whats up

certum est quia impossibile

no you're not, you're posting nonsense that is so unspecific that i honestly can't tell which character you find problematic. i'm sorry man but it's Bullshit, and this is you acting superior instead of trying to help somebody out or whatever. your comments don't make sense in the context of the post you quoted either



fine whatever

#318
penitent
Post rating: ~
yeah u might have a point.... the big thing im working on starts w/ a dude on a flight thinking bout some things and i know ima have to lop it off in the second draft
#319
tardy on these heaters
Post rating: ~

deadken posted:
yeah u might have a point.... the big thing im working on starts w/ a dude on a flight thinking bout some things and i know ima have to lop it off in the second draft



I usually cut at least 1/3 from first to final draft. Faulkner said writing is "killing your children"

#320
penitent
Post rating: ~
leaner. meaner. colder. excise every conjunction.writing as icy fury.