The Anti-Guide

How do you try to improve your writing?

I try to avoid old, stupid things.	17.5%	[ 2370 ]
I add new things.	14.7%	[ 1993 ]
A combination of both (if one more than the other, pick it).	67.8%	[ 9169 ]
Total Votes:			[ 13532 ]

[Transcend_Unity]

Go vote on my poetry everyone ^_^

[shayerahol22]

Pretty P Princess

I really wonder about the validity of threads that hold these sentiments.

I am not a literary relativist; however, it seems to me that judging a novel and critiquing a novel are supremely different venues.

What this thread appears to me to host is judging a novel.

Whereas, what I believe to be more constructive and valuable is critiquing.

No one book can be held up over and against another.

That does not make any real sense.

A book can be understood contextually, and perhaps historically and stylistically.

However, to be so crass as to compile a list of 'do's-and-don'ts' is, well, in my opinion, crass.

It's not as helpful as actually reading a novel and critiquing it against itself.

This universalist approach to literature has many of the same effects that literary relativism does.

Firstly, this entire thread sets up a linguistic-ideology that there, perhaps does exist this, "UNIVERSAL NOVEL".

That is simply not so.

Therefore, while I appreciate this thread and its participants, I believe I have substantiated my stance against this with appropriate argumentation.

This is a humorous thread, which parodies books and lists general bad writing cliches. We've mentioned several times that having one or two of these does not detract from or condemn a book to being flat-out bad. Even amazing books have a few of these in them. This thread is more for humor than anything else, so there's really no need to take us seriously or complain about what we're doing. You don't need to read it if you don't like it.

[shayerahol22]

Realistic fiction is always about the same things: romance, high school, or both. Who wants to read about... a family struggling to make ends meet, or someone fighting through cancer? Psh, actually, all emotional trauma is LAME except when it's in your MC's backstory.

[Pretty P Princess]

shayerahol22

This is a humorous thread, which parodies books and lists general bad writing cliches. We've mentioned several times that having one or two of these does not detract from or condemn a book to being flat-out bad. Even amazing books have a few of these in them. This thread is more for humor than anything else, so there's really no need to take us seriously or complain about what we're doing. You don't need to read it if you don't like it.

That's a bit defensive. If you put a thread up, even for humor, I believe it shows a modicum of grace to take all replies to it seriously and not dismiss a good argument. Obviously, I was engaged on some level with this thread, but, alas, it seems if I don't 'take the joke' like everyone else is expected to, I'm not welcome.

Most people think a man opening a door for a woman is a trivial thing.
Most people think that taking a man's last name as one's own is a trivial thing.
Most people think that Band-Aids being the "natural" Caucasian coloring is trivial.

However, the point remains that even the seemingly trivial things have lasting consequences on how we understand our world. I understand that this isn't a "serious" thread. But, apparently you find yourselves serious enough to have a detailed front page and several pages of conversation--so you should be serious enough to hear a willing participant out rather than dismiss her.

I'm saying, joke or not, there's a deep-rooting ideological problem with the theme of this thread. Even the fact that someone was able to think it up, says something about a societal model of thought that involves heavy dichotomies.

But, this doesn't seem to be a welcoming, intellectual environment. It seems you merely want other people to joke around with, rather than truly discuss literature.

So, ciao.

[shayerahol22]

Pretty P Princess

shayerahol22

This is a humorous thread, which parodies books and lists general bad writing cliches. We've mentioned several times that having one or two of these does not detract from or condemn a book to being flat-out bad. Even amazing books have a few of these in them. This thread is more for humor than anything else, so there's really no need to take us seriously or complain about what we're doing. You don't need to read it if you don't like it.

That's a bit defensive. If you put a thread up, even for humor, I believe it shows a modicum of grace to take all replies to it seriously and not dismiss a good argument. Obviously, I was engaged on some level with this thread, but, alas, it seems if I don't 'take the joke' like everyone else is expected to, I'm not welcome.

Most people think a man opening a door for a woman is a trivial thing.
Most people think that taking a man's last name as one's own is a trivial thing.
Most people think that Band-Aids being the "natural" Caucasian coloring is trivial.

However, the point remains that even the seemingly trivial things have lasting consequences on how we understand our world. I understand that this isn't a "serious" thread. But, apparently you find yourselves serious enough to have a detailed front page and several pages of conversation--so you should be serious enough to hear a willing participant out rather than dismiss her.

I'm saying, joke or not, there's a deep-rooting ideological problem with the theme of this thread. Even the fact that someone was able to think it up, says something about a societal model of thought that involves heavy dichotomies.

But, this doesn't seem to be a welcoming, intellectual environment. It seems you merely want other people to joke around with, rather than truly discuss literature.

So, ciao.

It's not like we're actually ripping a specific book. We're mostly just listing things that can detract from the quality of a novel.

[Clare_N]

shayerahol22

Realistic fiction is always about the same things: romance, high school, or both. Who wants to read about... a family struggling to make ends meet, or someone fighting through cancer? Psh, actually, all emotional trauma is LAME except when it's in your MC's backstory.

Talking of backstories, if you write a fanfic which includes an Original Character, a significant portion of the story (preferably a whole chapter) must be taken up with telling that character's backstory. Because everyone needs to know about the events which led to them meeting the "regular gang" and, if you're doing it right, falling in love with your favourite canon character. Bonus points if you get completely sidetracked into telling the story of your OC's (preferably tragic) past and forget what you were supposed to be writing about.

[shayerahol22]

Clare_N

shayerahol22

Realistic fiction is always about the same things: romance, high school, or both. Who wants to read about... a family struggling to make ends meet, or someone fighting through cancer? Psh, actually, all emotional trauma is LAME except when it's in your MC's backstory.

Talking of backstories, if you write a fanfic which includes an Original Character, a significant portion of the story (preferably a whole chapter) must be taken up with telling that character's backstory. Because everyone needs to know about the events which led to them meeting the "regular gang" and, if you're doing it right, falling in love with your favourite canon character. Bonus points if you get completely sidetracked into telling the story of your OC's (preferably tragic) past and forget what you were supposed to be writing about.

Also, OCs always fall in love with and get married to your favorite canon character. They're of a different sexuality? Don't care! Already dating someone? Irrelevant! Not the dating type? Whatever!

[xEiiSaiiGel]

hahaha.. no need for that sense smile )

[GaijinGuy36]

Pretty P Princess

shayerahol22

This is a humorous thread, which parodies books and lists general bad writing cliches. We've mentioned several times that having one or two of these does not detract from or condemn a book to being flat-out bad. Even amazing books have a few of these in them. This thread is more for humor than anything else, so there's really no need to take us seriously or complain about what we're doing. You don't need to read it if you don't like it.

That's a bit defensive. If you put a thread up, even for humor, I believe it shows a modicum of grace to take all replies to it seriously and not dismiss a good argument. Obviously, I was engaged on some level with this thread, but, alas, it seems if I don't 'take the joke' like everyone else is expected to, I'm not welcome.

Most people think a man opening a door for a woman is a trivial thing.
Most people think that taking a man's last name as one's own is a trivial thing.
Most people think that Band-Aids being the "natural" Caucasian coloring is trivial.

However, the point remains that even the seemingly trivial things have lasting consequences on how we understand our world. I understand that this isn't a "serious" thread. But, apparently you find yourselves serious enough to have a detailed front page and several pages of conversation--so you should be serious enough to hear a willing participant out rather than dismiss her.

I'm saying, joke or not, there's a deep-rooting ideological problem with the theme of this thread. Even the fact that someone was able to think it up, says something about a societal model of thought that involves heavy dichotomies.

But, this doesn't seem to be a welcoming, intellectual environment. It seems you merely want other people to joke around with, rather than truly discuss literature.

So, ciao.

And don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out. talk2hand

[shayerahol22]

GaijinGuy36

((I don't know why I love your siggie so much, but I really do.

DAT FACE))

Characters need never have an awkward conversation. Awkward conversations aren't fun. Sex, however, is fun, and should happen always! So just substitute every awkward conversation for sex!

Char1: ... So... um, I- er... um... I- I like you...
Char2: ... I'm gay >>;;
...
-SECKS-

[avearia]

Your main character must always be a hero.

Not just any hero, either--they have to be the rebel leader, or The Chosen One (tm). After all, who wants to hear about the second-in-command? Or the poor sap who's caught in the middle of the fighting? Or the villain who started the whole plot?

[I_Write_Ivre]

avearia

Your main character must always be a hero.

Not just any hero, either--they have to be the rebel leader, or The Chosen One (tm). After all, who wants to hear about the second-in-command? Or the poor sap who's caught in the middle of the fighting? Or the villain who started the whole plot?

Or someone with the problems of being in charge of oversight.

[1upMushroomCloud]

Genres are ironclad and must dictate what you write. Never learn from other works or apply the traits of other genres or styles of literature to your own.

[hyper_awesome_kitty]

dont include lots of action and fantasy and also include a lot of boring parts where people can fall asleep when they lay their eyes on it for 10 seconds. and also never, ever put your own sarcasm and awesome ideas in it. and never include pretend conversations with the other characters.

[hyper_awesome_kitty]

I_Write_Ivre

avearia

Your main character must always be a hero.

Not just any hero, either--they have to be the rebel leader, or The Chosen One (tm). After all, who wants to hear about the second-in-command? Or the poor sap who's caught in the middle of the fighting? Or the villain who started the whole plot?

Or someone with the problems of being in charge of oversight.

not really... what if those 'underdogs' become the most important people who make the most impact on success? it happens!!!