(no subject)
Mar. 10th, 2011 10:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatWatching Raising Hope - and I love this line:
Hi, these are my brother-husbands. We're reverse gender polygamists. (LOL!)
Raising Hope is light satire, with a hint of parody, while Glee is "sharp" satire with a hint of parody.
I think I laugh harder at Raising, except it does admittedly at times...go over the top in the crude department.
Realized something during my two-minute flirtation with another fandom? I can't handle people telling a writer what romance to focus on. It annoys the hell out of me. Don't really mind shipping. That's human. Or speculation. Or folks wanting a character to live happily ever after (not very realistic but I get the desire). But when fans try to persuade the writer to do something. Worries me. I'm a bit of a purist in this - the writer, in my opinion, should write their tale without the audience interacting with them or providing input. I had similar issues with writer's workshops - because 90% of the time the input was not helpful. There's a difference between helping a writer make a story better, a plot tighter, and explaining if it works...and changing the story so that it is one you want to read. That's my problem with fanboards where writer's of the work participate or lurk. The 4th wall crumbles down and you begin to wonder if the writer is writing the tale they see, or one that others see. This may explain why I never hung out at the Bronze Beta or really on Whedonesque. The moment the writer posts on the board, I start backing out. I really don't want that interaction.
It ruins the story for me somehow. I guess I agree with James Joyce who stated when asked what he meant in Ulysses or what his intent was, or to explain his story - that he felt that it was best to let the reader interpret it their own way. The author did his job when he wrote it. Now it's time to let go. He like JD Salinger and Cormac McCarthy did not believe in interacting with fans of their writing - or art, they created it and did not know how it was interpreted. I wonder if that's the better road to go? OTOH - I admit as a writer - I like feedback. I want to know if I accomplished my
aim. But the problem is - reader's often don't interpret the way we want. It's dicey. The internet in some respects has thrown that whole issue into question more than before. Before - writer's only interacted with fans through mail. If at all. Now, fans and writers can interact instantaneously.
Most fantasy/sci-fi, mystery, etc genre writers have blogs, they interact with their fans directly, and keep up contact. It's how they grow their readership. While more literary or mainstream writers don't blog, and don't interact.
There's also the fear of sharing work with people on the blogsphere. Because they are often disappointed. What they think you should write and what you actually write aren't the same thing.
Writing itself isn't that hard, I don't think. I think it's sharing one's writing with others - which is necessary of course. Because that's the whole point of writing - to communicate what is inside our heads and hearts to another. Otherwise why write? Why not just let the story or thought stay inside our heads?
Hi, these are my brother-husbands. We're reverse gender polygamists. (LOL!)
Raising Hope is light satire, with a hint of parody, while Glee is "sharp" satire with a hint of parody.
I think I laugh harder at Raising, except it does admittedly at times...go over the top in the crude department.
Realized something during my two-minute flirtation with another fandom? I can't handle people telling a writer what romance to focus on. It annoys the hell out of me. Don't really mind shipping. That's human. Or speculation. Or folks wanting a character to live happily ever after (not very realistic but I get the desire). But when fans try to persuade the writer to do something. Worries me. I'm a bit of a purist in this - the writer, in my opinion, should write their tale without the audience interacting with them or providing input. I had similar issues with writer's workshops - because 90% of the time the input was not helpful. There's a difference between helping a writer make a story better, a plot tighter, and explaining if it works...and changing the story so that it is one you want to read. That's my problem with fanboards where writer's of the work participate or lurk. The 4th wall crumbles down and you begin to wonder if the writer is writing the tale they see, or one that others see. This may explain why I never hung out at the Bronze Beta or really on Whedonesque. The moment the writer posts on the board, I start backing out. I really don't want that interaction.
It ruins the story for me somehow. I guess I agree with James Joyce who stated when asked what he meant in Ulysses or what his intent was, or to explain his story - that he felt that it was best to let the reader interpret it their own way. The author did his job when he wrote it. Now it's time to let go. He like JD Salinger and Cormac McCarthy did not believe in interacting with fans of their writing - or art, they created it and did not know how it was interpreted. I wonder if that's the better road to go? OTOH - I admit as a writer - I like feedback. I want to know if I accomplished my
aim. But the problem is - reader's often don't interpret the way we want. It's dicey. The internet in some respects has thrown that whole issue into question more than before. Before - writer's only interacted with fans through mail. If at all. Now, fans and writers can interact instantaneously.
Most fantasy/sci-fi, mystery, etc genre writers have blogs, they interact with their fans directly, and keep up contact. It's how they grow their readership. While more literary or mainstream writers don't blog, and don't interact.
There's also the fear of sharing work with people on the blogsphere. Because they are often disappointed. What they think you should write and what you actually write aren't the same thing.
Writing itself isn't that hard, I don't think. I think it's sharing one's writing with others - which is necessary of course. Because that's the whole point of writing - to communicate what is inside our heads and hearts to another. Otherwise why write? Why not just let the story or thought stay inside our heads?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-03-11 03:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-11 05:43 pm (UTC)I think this is true. Just ask Brian Lynch.
Whedon tends to stay away from whedonesque most of the time...and that discussion board does critique the writer's work. But - if you go too far, they'll attack you. And there's an awareness that whedon may or may not be lurking out there. But by and large, it's not an issue.
Possibly because it wasn't set up by Whedon, but by fans of Whedon.
But other writers of Whedon's work - such as say Brian Lynch - get themselves into all sorts of trouble lurking on fan boards.
I can see the temptation, but...I don't know if it is productive. Actors have stated that they avoid fan boards like the plague. Trying it once then never again.
I think it does depend a great deal on the writer and well the fans.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-11 04:34 pm (UTC)And the polygamy song... BWHA!
Ooh! And Burt's brother informing him that Balloon kid guy went to jail. "What did he do?" Burt asked. "Pretty much everything you just did."