- › Dumb and very fertile (6)
- › Drawing tips before oil painting? (9)
- › the surreal life (11)
- › Watercolor Pencil Painting (11)
- › International Call for Online Art C... (1)
- › Imagination Distorts Reality, Myth ... (1)
- › Reach website vs Other websites (4)
- › Digital art from photos (9)
- › New oil painting (16)
- › Any tool for creating artistic bitm... (6)
I completely agree with this. But I don't think it's a flaw in writing- it's a flaw in the writers or the public. They either just don't have the courage to pioneer a new style, or the vast majority of the people doesn't give a f**k enough to try something new. They just tend to want the same thing repackaged over and over and over because it's safe and it's what they like.
That's just my opinion. Take or leave it.
(BTW, poetry CAN rhyme and still be progressive.)
In the old days if you wrote a wildly creative novel it would rarely if ever find its way into the bookstore. This is still true today.
Academia, with its emphasis on the classics and excellence in tradition, is usually hostile to innovation in the literary world.
The publishing conglomerates, with their single-minded pursuit of profit are only concerned about money. And they certainly aren't going to risk money by publishing innovative literature.
My guess is that the greatest and most innovative literary works of mankind ended up in the garbage. My guess is that the celebrated classics of "excellent literature" that are part of the canon are NOT the greatest works ever written. Why did the greatest works of literature probably end up in the garbage? For the same reason that Vincent Van Gogh's paintings would have ended up in the garbage if he didn't have an appreciative brother named Theo who later pushed Vincent's Van Gogh's work after he died.
Today writers do not have to be slaves to academia and the publishing conglomerates. With print-on-demand, the Internet, and Amazon.com Writers do not need the publishing conglomerates or academia or a review in the New York Times or any of that.
In addition, with word processing Writers are also freer to be creative and experiment than ever before.
The time is ripe for a revolution in literature. In this revolution there is no need for isms as in cubism or impressionism. In this literary revolution every Writer will be his own ism - every Writer will be his own literary movement - every Writer will be his own literary revolution.
Who cares about the rules of grammar? Take a baseball bat and SMASH the rules of grammar into pieces! Language must obey the wishes of the Writer. The Writer should take language and mold it and reshape it as he sees fit just like a Sculptor.
People should learn spelling and grammar if they intend to write. Almost nobody can write good english any more, and you have absolutely no idea how fucking stupid and ignorant that makes you appear to those of us who know the difference.
I do not blame people working in the traditional publishing industry for the fact that too many books are too much alike. Even if an editor personally LOVES a manuscript that may not matter, because the book must also be commercial. If that manuscript does not have STRONG commercial potential none of the major conglomerates will publish it.
I do not envy editors and other workers in the traditional publishing industry. They often put in very long hours. Their jobs are very demanding. They are often paid low wages that don't go far in expensive New York City where many of them live.
There is no job security. Employee turnover is high.
I also notice that few traditionally published books bear a "union bug" or union emblem. Perhaps the people printing up the books aren't paid all that well either.
I wonder if workers in the traditional publishing industry are like other workers throughout America - trying to do the jobs of two or three people on half the wages they rightfully deserve.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests