Welcome to my first series review. Westworld. I wasn't aware starting out that it was going to have another season, but that's now heartbreaking. It got me off on a whole new tangent as to what ideal writers do, if the writers of this world are writing great shit but their way of doing it is unaesthetic. Writers are stopping work on creations they have half published; they're telling us new things about the book after it has been published for years, making us change our cognitions on the basis of what they believed. So unaesthetic. Shouldn't they know where it's going...have some semblance of comprehension if not completion. You don't just start writing and then publish it part by part...like Wattpad? Or film it part by part. Think Gangs of Wasseypur...it was in two parts, but they were filmed consistently and released separately. That's whole. Doesn't give a differentiated outlook. Result.
When I put up my story on Wattpad I had the whole thing written out and I just put up every part after editing. Others start putting it up as soon as they have an idea, and the more disciplined writers finish it. Which makes me think of whether writers should be disciplined. The two streams, we come back to that. Art and Logic. Rationality. Principle.
Impetuous publishing results in those other writers letting more people look at their actual work, while most of my work sits in "Trash" folders, hated and loved by me and only me. Is that good or bad, that I don't let people see work that I know is bad, that I'm not proud of it, that I desire to be perfect, my work to be perfect?
And then are those people who say, oh, just let someone look at it, doesn't matter if it's crap, they'll guide you to write better. But it does matter, especially to someone who doesn't even know if you should write crap at all. There have been so many writers who thought to themselves, I won't write anything if it is shit. I'll wait till I have something of value to write about. I'm not there yet, but I'm thinking about it, and I definitely can't let people read the shit that I write. So why do others? Are they wrong? Aren't they real writers? How do I know?
If we come to the conclusion that they are actually not real writers, we still can't deny that what they have written is some fucking great shit. So they are really good story-tellers, that's a fact. What they have done is ground-breaking. So is writing more than story-telling? Yes. The latter is an art. I thought the former is an art, too. Is it a discipline? What is it?
And back to where I started, there's another season coming. It's so heartbreaking to have incomplete fandoms swirling in your brain. And then there are my own stories with nowhere to go and they keep mixing and matching and lost connections, refusing to condense. There is more substance and they're incomplete, I think it's really belitting to be kept waiting.
Which, again, brings us to the author-reader relationship. Speaking of which, the difference in those who call themselves authors and writers. Who call themselves readers first, and I write a little bit. Who pride themselves on reading only. Who say they don't have time to read anymore, after they started writing.
When I put up my story on Wattpad I had the whole thing written out and I just put up every part after editing. Others start putting it up as soon as they have an idea, and the more disciplined writers finish it. Which makes me think of whether writers should be disciplined. The two streams, we come back to that. Art and Logic. Rationality. Principle.
Impetuous publishing results in those other writers letting more people look at their actual work, while most of my work sits in "Trash" folders, hated and loved by me and only me. Is that good or bad, that I don't let people see work that I know is bad, that I'm not proud of it, that I desire to be perfect, my work to be perfect?
And then are those people who say, oh, just let someone look at it, doesn't matter if it's crap, they'll guide you to write better. But it does matter, especially to someone who doesn't even know if you should write crap at all. There have been so many writers who thought to themselves, I won't write anything if it is shit. I'll wait till I have something of value to write about. I'm not there yet, but I'm thinking about it, and I definitely can't let people read the shit that I write. So why do others? Are they wrong? Aren't they real writers? How do I know?
If we come to the conclusion that they are actually not real writers, we still can't deny that what they have written is some fucking great shit. So they are really good story-tellers, that's a fact. What they have done is ground-breaking. So is writing more than story-telling? Yes. The latter is an art. I thought the former is an art, too. Is it a discipline? What is it?
And back to where I started, there's another season coming. It's so heartbreaking to have incomplete fandoms swirling in your brain. And then there are my own stories with nowhere to go and they keep mixing and matching and lost connections, refusing to condense. There is more substance and they're incomplete, I think it's really belitting to be kept waiting.
Which, again, brings us to the author-reader relationship. Speaking of which, the difference in those who call themselves authors and writers. Who call themselves readers first, and I write a little bit. Who pride themselves on reading only. Who say they don't have time to read anymore, after they started writing.
Novelist = one who writes novels. Writer = one who expresses ideas in writing. One engaged in literary work. Author = a person who writes a novel, poem, essay etc, the composer of a literary work. But I'll address this in another post. And the author-reader relationship, interdependence. Submission, the wait, and the desperation. And the expectations. I mean, damn.
So in a circle, my first series review. I'll be doing it in parts, of which this was the first. Stay tuned for the second!
No comments:
Post a Comment