leonard267 Posts
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
high_time wrote...
i can't agree more with the last part, you're one big perv indeed.Alas, I wasn't being serious. I think the final part is a bit misleading of what I truly feel. It is more of the case that I am obsessed over NOT having sex.
That said, back your accusation up. No misrepresentation without retaliation.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
Here is my contribution to the event.
Concerning Morality and (a Case Study of) the Human Life Cycle
Concerning Morality and (a Case Study of) the Human Life Cycle
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
In a (futile) attempt to compete for the top prize for this event, a narrative about the life of a certain John will be written to explore this fascinating topic of morality.
____________________________________________________________________________
When what could be seen of John was a lump in his mother's abdomen, and when his head was splitting open the cervix of his poor mother, and when his body was shoving aside his mother's pelvic bones, and when his poor mother was suffering from other conditions symptomatic of someone in labour, the thoughts of his poor mother went back into the past in search for the answer to these questions: “What did I do to land myself in this situation? What have I done wrong? How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?” Here are her answers to those questions:
What did I do to land myself in this situation?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
What have I done wrong?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?
We should not try for a baby in the future.
These thoughts appear to be simple but have profound consequences. Apart from the obvious ones like John doomed to not having any younger siblings and John being subject to rather nasty physical abuse whenever he asks his mother why he doesn’t have any younger siblings, it had most of all influenced his mother’s beliefs on right and wrong. It was wrong of her to try for a baby and right for her not to try for a baby.
Did the harrowing experience of childbirth change her beliefs concerning morality?
Though it must be said that what John’s mother experienced is quite similar to behaviour conditioning. The process of childbirth was so traumatic that John’s mother was 'conditioned' to treat childbirth as undesirable. One’s sense of morality can be conditioned as well, as John’s life story should show.
His first few years, just like any other infant’s, presented him a steep learning curve he had to surmount. After all, he was not born into this world knowing everything about how to conduct himself in the civilised world. Providence did endow him with the mental faculties needed to learn. In other words, infant John had an inquisitive and easily impressed mind, ever ready to experiment and try new things. However, inquisitive minds do not lead to civilised behaviour, quite the contrary. As it is too unsettling to recount in detail the mischief of a stupid, ill-bred and mindless brat, we will settle for a limerick to detail what John did for most of his first few years.
Infant John made a mess
Of his food on the desk
He crawled up high places, here and there
And gave his mother quite a good scare
This looked bad, so it seemed
But made much worse
With Infant John’s screams
His poor mother was thus in no good mood
And she spanked and spanked and spanked and spanked
Infant John till he was good
It was in these formative years, John learnt (rather painfully) what was right and what was wrong. It all boiled down to this: Do wrong and you will be spanked horribly. Do right and you will not be spanked horribly.
As it was, sense was beaten into him, civility was beaten into him and indeed, morality was beaten to him.
That appeared to be clear cut and easy. Yet, for the next few years of his life, John struggled with issues pertaining to right and wrong. Young John thought that it was easy to conclude that a deed is right or moral after it is done. However that isn’t the case at the point of time before the deed is done. Take for example that episode in John’s childhood when he attempted his very first mural with crayons and colour pencils at his poor mother’s bedroom. John then must have thought that his first masterpiece possessed much aesthetic value. However, his mother (and indeed anyone else who beheld the mess he made on the walls in his mother’s bedroom) was not of that opinion and begun manhandling him with powerful blows to his bottom.
Imagine how perplexed John must have felt then when his masterpiece garnered such a reception from his mother. How was he to know that his mother hated mural paintings especially if it was done in her bedroom? This episode was not without consequence. John †˜knew’ that mural painting is wrong and so is an interest in the fine arts. Refraining from such activities on the other hand was right. Because it is difficult to know if a deed say scrawling on the walls with crayons is wrong before it is carried out, John had a hard time telling right or wrong. Instead, his sense of right and wrong and morality were shaped by a painful process of trial and error.
This continued as he grew older where he was punished for doing bad and not really rewarded for doing good or not doing wrong. There was a difference though. The seriousness of and the number of the decisions he had to make grew along with his age. The outcome of a single decision made when he was in his teenage years like the amount of time he ought to spend in his studies had more profound consequences compared to his first and final attempt at mural painting. Long and tortuous explanations aside, the following briefly lists some of John’s exploits in his prepubescence and pubescence:
1. Imitated what he saw in television to gain attention. It was a cartoon character who like all cartoon characters can’t speak normally. Received unwanted attention and was made fun of and beaten. Learnt that imitating what the television shows is wrong and not imitating television shows is right.
2. Played truant one day because he felt like it. Received a severe tongue lashing from his teacher and was beaten by his poor mother. Learnt that playing truant is wrong and not playing truant is right.
3. Picked up a stray kitten on his way home. Was bitten by the kitten's mother who happened to be nearby. A nasty infection took place. Learnt that picking up stray kittens is wrong and displaying a dislike for kittens, cats and anything feline-shaped is right.
4. Rubbed some part of his own body. Felt very, very good. Learnt that not rubbing that part of his own body is wrong and rubbing it is right.
Although these are all experiences of healthy young males, some, perhaps more advanced in years, would find them juvenile and silly (and creepy). Indeed, if John were made to look back into his past, he would be of the same opinion too. Nonetheless, these life experiences, trivial (and creepy) they may be, shaped John’s views on what is right or wrong.
Then there came a point in his life where that simple formula in determining what is right and is wrong was put into question. It concerns procreation and John’s progeny. John’s experience with courting women went like this:
- Had a relationship with a young woman. The relationship didn’t go well. Learnt that having relationships is wrong and not having relationships is right.
He thought he would remain single for good but for the intervention of his mother. John's experience with his mother intervening in his affairs went like this:
- John went against his mother’s wishes. He almost landed himself in hospital. Learnt that going against his mother is wrong and listening to her is right.
This presents an apparent dilemma but John found it easy to resolve. This was how he did it:
- Having a relationship is wrong because things will not go well.
- Going against my mother’s wishes is worse because I might land myself in hospital.
- Since having a relationship is less ruinous compared to going against my mother’s wishes, I think I am going to have a relationship after all.
And so he found himself betrothed to a rather charming young lady around his age, who under pressure from both their mothers tied the knot, settled down and tried to live happily after. Little did he know at that time that far from having a happy ending, a new chapter of the story of life was beginning to unfold. However, if John’s life were to be a story, that story might be a horror story. It certainly would make a horrible entry to some writing event conducted on a forum of some pornographic website.
To do justice to how his married life was would require another long entry that ought to be left for another time since it continued till he draw his last breath. Yet, it is still possible to list the highlights of his married life that lead him once more to question if a deed is right or wrong. Here is once more a list:
a. The night when he consummated his marriage. John remembered feeling good. For some reason he never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If it felt good, it must be good or moral!
b. The night when his spouse went into labour in scenes so reminiscent of what his mother had to go through a long time ago. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If childbirth didn’t feel good, it must not be good or moral!
c. The night when he had to put up with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If having to put up with having a daughter didn’t feel good, then it must be not be good or moral!
d. The night when he decided to deal with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming by giving her a good thumping on the bottom. The screaming was replaced by bawling which sounded less inane and not so ear piercing though loud it was. If beating your daughter when she does an inane and eardrum piercing scream feels good, then it must be good or moral. (He never told his spouse what he had done to their daughter by the way.)
Readers at this juncture might find that John’s story was, putting aside the lazy and repetitive writing, indeed filled with repetitions. Another generation underwent the same treatment and with it similar thought processes concerning morality were engendered. In other words, John’s daughter was to become as nutty as John himself. She would never have the (mis)fortune to have siblings younger than her but she would inherit from her father his way of determining right from wrong.
Before bringing John’s story to a close, it would do us good to reflect on the implications of how he lead his life and his sense of morality. To be honest, the logic behind John’s morality was reasonable. Any sensible society rewards good behaviour and punishes bad behaviour. This is a principle that codes of ethics and even something as personal as morality adhere to.
Yet, procreation and sexual pleasure, as seen in this story, defy that principle of rewarding good behaviour and punishing the bad. Allow me to express my frustration towards this fact of life in bolded font:
Why on earth is sex so pleasurable whilst the act of delivering and bringing up offspring is anything but pleasurable? If I were the Creator, I will pay less attention to sex and make childbirth and child rearing so orgasmic that those involved in it would pine for more!
Speaking of morality though, what is the moral of the story?
____________________________________________________________________________
When what could be seen of John was a lump in his mother's abdomen, and when his head was splitting open the cervix of his poor mother, and when his body was shoving aside his mother's pelvic bones, and when his poor mother was suffering from other conditions symptomatic of someone in labour, the thoughts of his poor mother went back into the past in search for the answer to these questions: “What did I do to land myself in this situation? What have I done wrong? How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?” Here are her answers to those questions:
What did I do to land myself in this situation?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
What have I done wrong?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?
We should not try for a baby in the future.
These thoughts appear to be simple but have profound consequences. Apart from the obvious ones like John doomed to not having any younger siblings and John being subject to rather nasty physical abuse whenever he asks his mother why he doesn’t have any younger siblings, it had most of all influenced his mother’s beliefs on right and wrong. It was wrong of her to try for a baby and right for her not to try for a baby.
Did the harrowing experience of childbirth change her beliefs concerning morality?
NOT REALLY! (Insert meretricious smiley)
Though it must be said that what John’s mother experienced is quite similar to behaviour conditioning. The process of childbirth was so traumatic that John’s mother was 'conditioned' to treat childbirth as undesirable. One’s sense of morality can be conditioned as well, as John’s life story should show.
His first few years, just like any other infant’s, presented him a steep learning curve he had to surmount. After all, he was not born into this world knowing everything about how to conduct himself in the civilised world. Providence did endow him with the mental faculties needed to learn. In other words, infant John had an inquisitive and easily impressed mind, ever ready to experiment and try new things. However, inquisitive minds do not lead to civilised behaviour, quite the contrary. As it is too unsettling to recount in detail the mischief of a stupid, ill-bred and mindless brat, we will settle for a limerick to detail what John did for most of his first few years.
Infant John made a mess
Of his food on the desk
He crawled up high places, here and there
And gave his mother quite a good scare
This looked bad, so it seemed
But made much worse
With Infant John’s screams
His poor mother was thus in no good mood
And she spanked and spanked and spanked and spanked
Infant John till he was good
It was in these formative years, John learnt (rather painfully) what was right and what was wrong. It all boiled down to this: Do wrong and you will be spanked horribly. Do right and you will not be spanked horribly.
As it was, sense was beaten into him, civility was beaten into him and indeed, morality was beaten to him.
That appeared to be clear cut and easy. Yet, for the next few years of his life, John struggled with issues pertaining to right and wrong. Young John thought that it was easy to conclude that a deed is right or moral after it is done. However that isn’t the case at the point of time before the deed is done. Take for example that episode in John’s childhood when he attempted his very first mural with crayons and colour pencils at his poor mother’s bedroom. John then must have thought that his first masterpiece possessed much aesthetic value. However, his mother (and indeed anyone else who beheld the mess he made on the walls in his mother’s bedroom) was not of that opinion and begun manhandling him with powerful blows to his bottom.
Imagine how perplexed John must have felt then when his masterpiece garnered such a reception from his mother. How was he to know that his mother hated mural paintings especially if it was done in her bedroom? This episode was not without consequence. John †˜knew’ that mural painting is wrong and so is an interest in the fine arts. Refraining from such activities on the other hand was right. Because it is difficult to know if a deed say scrawling on the walls with crayons is wrong before it is carried out, John had a hard time telling right or wrong. Instead, his sense of right and wrong and morality were shaped by a painful process of trial and error.
This continued as he grew older where he was punished for doing bad and not really rewarded for doing good or not doing wrong. There was a difference though. The seriousness of and the number of the decisions he had to make grew along with his age. The outcome of a single decision made when he was in his teenage years like the amount of time he ought to spend in his studies had more profound consequences compared to his first and final attempt at mural painting. Long and tortuous explanations aside, the following briefly lists some of John’s exploits in his prepubescence and pubescence:
1. Imitated what he saw in television to gain attention. It was a cartoon character who like all cartoon characters can’t speak normally. Received unwanted attention and was made fun of and beaten. Learnt that imitating what the television shows is wrong and not imitating television shows is right.
2. Played truant one day because he felt like it. Received a severe tongue lashing from his teacher and was beaten by his poor mother. Learnt that playing truant is wrong and not playing truant is right.
3. Picked up a stray kitten on his way home. Was bitten by the kitten's mother who happened to be nearby. A nasty infection took place. Learnt that picking up stray kittens is wrong and displaying a dislike for kittens, cats and anything feline-shaped is right.
4. Rubbed some part of his own body. Felt very, very good. Learnt that not rubbing that part of his own body is wrong and rubbing it is right.
Although these are all experiences of healthy young males, some, perhaps more advanced in years, would find them juvenile and silly (and creepy). Indeed, if John were made to look back into his past, he would be of the same opinion too. Nonetheless, these life experiences, trivial (and creepy) they may be, shaped John’s views on what is right or wrong.
Then there came a point in his life where that simple formula in determining what is right and is wrong was put into question. It concerns procreation and John’s progeny. John’s experience with courting women went like this:
- Had a relationship with a young woman. The relationship didn’t go well. Learnt that having relationships is wrong and not having relationships is right.
He thought he would remain single for good but for the intervention of his mother. John's experience with his mother intervening in his affairs went like this:
- John went against his mother’s wishes. He almost landed himself in hospital. Learnt that going against his mother is wrong and listening to her is right.
This presents an apparent dilemma but John found it easy to resolve. This was how he did it:
- Having a relationship is wrong because things will not go well.
- Going against my mother’s wishes is worse because I might land myself in hospital.
- Since having a relationship is less ruinous compared to going against my mother’s wishes, I think I am going to have a relationship after all.
And so he found himself betrothed to a rather charming young lady around his age, who under pressure from both their mothers tied the knot, settled down and tried to live happily after. Little did he know at that time that far from having a happy ending, a new chapter of the story of life was beginning to unfold. However, if John’s life were to be a story, that story might be a horror story. It certainly would make a horrible entry to some writing event conducted on a forum of some pornographic website.
To do justice to how his married life was would require another long entry that ought to be left for another time since it continued till he draw his last breath. Yet, it is still possible to list the highlights of his married life that lead him once more to question if a deed is right or wrong. Here is once more a list:
a. The night when he consummated his marriage. John remembered feeling good. For some reason he never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If it felt good, it must be good or moral!
b. The night when his spouse went into labour in scenes so reminiscent of what his mother had to go through a long time ago. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If childbirth didn’t feel good, it must not be good or moral!
c. The night when he had to put up with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If having to put up with having a daughter didn’t feel good, then it must be not be good or moral!
d. The night when he decided to deal with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming by giving her a good thumping on the bottom. The screaming was replaced by bawling which sounded less inane and not so ear piercing though loud it was. If beating your daughter when she does an inane and eardrum piercing scream feels good, then it must be good or moral. (He never told his spouse what he had done to their daughter by the way.)
Readers at this juncture might find that John’s story was, putting aside the lazy and repetitive writing, indeed filled with repetitions. Another generation underwent the same treatment and with it similar thought processes concerning morality were engendered. In other words, John’s daughter was to become as nutty as John himself. She would never have the (mis)fortune to have siblings younger than her but she would inherit from her father his way of determining right from wrong.
Before bringing John’s story to a close, it would do us good to reflect on the implications of how he lead his life and his sense of morality. To be honest, the logic behind John’s morality was reasonable. Any sensible society rewards good behaviour and punishes bad behaviour. This is a principle that codes of ethics and even something as personal as morality adhere to.
Yet, procreation and sexual pleasure, as seen in this story, defy that principle of rewarding good behaviour and punishing the bad. Allow me to express my frustration towards this fact of life in bolded font:
Why on earth is sex so pleasurable whilst the act of delivering and bringing up offspring is anything but pleasurable? If I were the Creator, I will pay less attention to sex and make childbirth and child rearing so orgasmic that those involved in it would pine for more!
Speaking of morality though, what is the moral of the story?
Spoiler:
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
When what could be seen of John was a lump in his mother's abdomen, and when his head was splitting open the cervix of his poor mother, and when his body is shoving aside the pelvic bones, and when his poor mother was suffering from conditions symptomatic of someone in labour, John's mother was in incredible pain and agony.
It is in times like these, one’s thoughts go back into the past in search for the answer to these questions: “What did I do to land myself in this situation? What have I done wrong? How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?” The same goes for John’s mother. Here are her answers to those questions:
What did I do to land myself in this situation?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
What have I done wrong?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?
We should not try for a baby in the future.
These thoughts appear to be simple but have profound consequences. Apart from the obvious ones like John doomed to not having any younger brother or sister and John being subject to rather nasty physical abuse when he asked rather innocently to his mother why he doesn’t have a younger brother or sister, it had most of all his mother’s beliefs of what is right and what is wrong. It was wrong of her to try for a baby and right for her not to try for a baby.
Did the harrowing experience of childbirth change her beliefs pertaining to morality?
Though it must be said that what John’s mother experienced is quite similar to behaviour conditioning. (As its name implies, behaviour conditioning is the process where one is made to behave in a certain way.) Childbirth was so traumatic to John’s mother that she swore not to undergo it again. Her behaviour can be said to be conditioned by childbirth. One’s morality is conditioned as well, as John’s life story should show.
His first few years, just like any other infant’s, presented him a steep learning curve he had to surmount. After all, he was not born into this world knowing everything about how to conduct himself in the civilised world. Providence did endow him with the faculties needed to learn, namely am inquisitive and easily impressed mind, ever ready to experiment and try new things. The problem is however, inquisitive minds do not lead to civilised behaviour, quite the contrary. As it is too unsettling to recount in detail the mischief a stupid, ill-bred and mindless brat, we will settle for a limerick to detail what John did for most of his first few years.
Infant John made a mess
Of his food on the desk
He crawled up high places, here and there
And gave his mother quite a good scare
This looked bad, so it seemed
But made much worse
With Infant John’s screams
His poor mother was thus in no good mood
And she spanked and spanked and spanked and spanked
Infant John till he was good
It was in these formative years, John learnt (rather painfully) what was right and what was wrong. It all boiled down to this: Do wrong and you will be spanked horribly. Do right and you will not be spanked horribly. Sense was beaten into him. Civility was beaten into him. Indeed, morality was beaten to him.
That appeared to be clear cut and easy to comprehend. Yet, his struggled in the next few years of his life on issues pertaining to right and wrong. While it is easy to conclude that a deed is right or moral after it is done, it isn’t the case before the deed is performed. Take for example that episode in John’s childhood when he attempted his very first mural with crayons and colour pencils at his poor mother’s bedroom. John then must have thought his first masterpiece possessing much aesthetic value. However, his mother (and indeed anyone else who beheld the mess he made on the walls in his mother’s bedroom) was not of that opinion and begun manhandling him with powerful blows to his bottom.
Imagine how perplexed John must have felt then when his masterpiece garnered such a reception from his mother. How was he to know that his mother hated mural paintings especially if it was done in her bedroom? This episode was not without consequence. John †˜knew’ that mural painting is wrong and so is an interest in the fine arts. Refraining from such activity on the other hand was right. Because it is difficult to know if a deed say scrawling on the walls with crayons is wrong, John’s morality was shaped by a painful process of trial and error.
This continued as he grew older where he was punished for doing bad and not really rewarded for doing good or not doing wrong. There was a difference though. The seriousness of and the number of the decisions he had to make grew along with his age. The outcome of a single decision made when he was in his teenage years like the amount of time he was to spend in his studies had more profound consequences compared to his first and final attempt at mural painting. Long and tortuous explanations aside, the following briefly lists some of John’s exploits in his prepubescence and pubescence:
1. Imitated what he saw in television to gain attention. It was a cartoon character who like all cartoon characters can’t speak normally. Received unwanted attention and was made fun of and beaten. Learnt that imitating what the television shows is wrong and not imitating television shows is right.
2. Played truant one day because he felt like it. Received a severe tongue lashing from his teacher and was beaten. Learnt that playing truant is wrong and not playing truant is right.
3. Picked up a stray kitten on his way home. Mauled by the kitten’s mother and was bitten. A nasty infection took place. Learnt that picking up stray kittens is wrong and displaying a dislike for kittens, cats and anything feline-shaped is right.
4. Rubbed some part of his own body. Felt very, very good. Learnt that not rubbing that part of his own body is wrong and rubbing it is right.
Although these are all experiences of a healthy young males and some of us, perhaps more advanced in years would find them juvenile and silly (and creepy). Indeed, if John were made to look back into his past, he would be of the same opinion too. Nonetheless, these life experiences, trivial (and creepy) they may be, shaped John’s views on what is right or wrong.
Then there came a point in his life where that simple formula in determining what is right and is wrong was put into question. It concerns procreation and John’s progeny. John’s experience with courting women went like this:
- Had a relationship with a young woman. The relationship didn’t go well. Learnt that having relationships is wrong and not having relationships is right.
He thought he would remain single for good but for the intervention of his mother. His relationship with can be summed up like this:
- John went against his mother’s wishes. He almost landed himself in hospital. Learnt that going against his mother is wrong and listening to her is right.
This presents an apparent dilemma but John found it easy to resolve. This was how he did it:
- Having a relationship is wrong because things will not go well.
- Going against my mother’s wishes is worse because I might land myself in hospital.
- Since having a relationship is less ruinous compared to going against my mother’s wishes, I think I am going to have a relationship after all.
And so he found himself betrothed to a rather charming young lady around his age, who under pressure from both their mothers tied the knot, settled down and tried to live happily after. Little did he know at that time that far from having a happy ending, a new chapter of the story of life was beginning to unfold. However, John’s life were to be a story, that story might be a horror story. It certainly would make a horrible entry to some writing event conducted on a forum of pornographic website.
To do justice to how his married life was, and it was one that would continue until he drew his last breath, would require another long entry that ought to be left for another time. Yet, it is still possible to list the highlights of his married life that lead him once more to question if a deed is right or wrong and shape his idea on is moral and what isn’t. Here is once more a list:
a. The night when he consummated his marriage. John remembered feeling good. For some reason he never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If it felt good, it must be good or moral!
b. The night when his spouse went into labour in scenes so reminiscent of what his mother had to go through a long time ago. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If childbirth didn’t feel good, it must be not be good or moral!
c. The night when he had to put up with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If having to put up with having a daughter didn’t feel good, then it must be not be good or moral!
d. The night when he decided to deal with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming by giving her a good thumping on the bottom. The screaming was replaced by bawling which sounded less inane and not so ear piercing though it was loud. If beating your daughter when she does an inane and eardrum piercing scream feel good, then it must be good or moral. (He never told his spouse what he had done to their daughter by the way.)
Readers at this juncture might have found that John’s story was, putting aside the lazy and repetitive writing, indeed filled with repetitions. Another generation underwent the same treatment and with it the same thought processes. In other words, John’s daughter was to become as nutty as John himself. Leaving aside the fact that she would never have the (mis)fortune to have siblings younger than her, she would inherit from his father the way to determine right from wrong.
It is in times like these, one’s thoughts go back into the past in search for the answer to these questions: “What did I do to land myself in this situation? What have I done wrong? How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?” The same goes for John’s mother. Here are her answers to those questions:
What did I do to land myself in this situation?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
What have I done wrong?
My husband and I tried for a baby. It worked.
How do I avoid being in such a situation in the future?
We should not try for a baby in the future.
These thoughts appear to be simple but have profound consequences. Apart from the obvious ones like John doomed to not having any younger brother or sister and John being subject to rather nasty physical abuse when he asked rather innocently to his mother why he doesn’t have a younger brother or sister, it had most of all his mother’s beliefs of what is right and what is wrong. It was wrong of her to try for a baby and right for her not to try for a baby.
Did the harrowing experience of childbirth change her beliefs pertaining to morality?
Not really! (Insert meretricious smiley)
Though it must be said that what John’s mother experienced is quite similar to behaviour conditioning. (As its name implies, behaviour conditioning is the process where one is made to behave in a certain way.) Childbirth was so traumatic to John’s mother that she swore not to undergo it again. Her behaviour can be said to be conditioned by childbirth. One’s morality is conditioned as well, as John’s life story should show.
His first few years, just like any other infant’s, presented him a steep learning curve he had to surmount. After all, he was not born into this world knowing everything about how to conduct himself in the civilised world. Providence did endow him with the faculties needed to learn, namely am inquisitive and easily impressed mind, ever ready to experiment and try new things. The problem is however, inquisitive minds do not lead to civilised behaviour, quite the contrary. As it is too unsettling to recount in detail the mischief a stupid, ill-bred and mindless brat, we will settle for a limerick to detail what John did for most of his first few years.
Infant John made a mess
Of his food on the desk
He crawled up high places, here and there
And gave his mother quite a good scare
This looked bad, so it seemed
But made much worse
With Infant John’s screams
His poor mother was thus in no good mood
And she spanked and spanked and spanked and spanked
Infant John till he was good
It was in these formative years, John learnt (rather painfully) what was right and what was wrong. It all boiled down to this: Do wrong and you will be spanked horribly. Do right and you will not be spanked horribly. Sense was beaten into him. Civility was beaten into him. Indeed, morality was beaten to him.
That appeared to be clear cut and easy to comprehend. Yet, his struggled in the next few years of his life on issues pertaining to right and wrong. While it is easy to conclude that a deed is right or moral after it is done, it isn’t the case before the deed is performed. Take for example that episode in John’s childhood when he attempted his very first mural with crayons and colour pencils at his poor mother’s bedroom. John then must have thought his first masterpiece possessing much aesthetic value. However, his mother (and indeed anyone else who beheld the mess he made on the walls in his mother’s bedroom) was not of that opinion and begun manhandling him with powerful blows to his bottom.
Imagine how perplexed John must have felt then when his masterpiece garnered such a reception from his mother. How was he to know that his mother hated mural paintings especially if it was done in her bedroom? This episode was not without consequence. John †˜knew’ that mural painting is wrong and so is an interest in the fine arts. Refraining from such activity on the other hand was right. Because it is difficult to know if a deed say scrawling on the walls with crayons is wrong, John’s morality was shaped by a painful process of trial and error.
This continued as he grew older where he was punished for doing bad and not really rewarded for doing good or not doing wrong. There was a difference though. The seriousness of and the number of the decisions he had to make grew along with his age. The outcome of a single decision made when he was in his teenage years like the amount of time he was to spend in his studies had more profound consequences compared to his first and final attempt at mural painting. Long and tortuous explanations aside, the following briefly lists some of John’s exploits in his prepubescence and pubescence:
1. Imitated what he saw in television to gain attention. It was a cartoon character who like all cartoon characters can’t speak normally. Received unwanted attention and was made fun of and beaten. Learnt that imitating what the television shows is wrong and not imitating television shows is right.
2. Played truant one day because he felt like it. Received a severe tongue lashing from his teacher and was beaten. Learnt that playing truant is wrong and not playing truant is right.
3. Picked up a stray kitten on his way home. Mauled by the kitten’s mother and was bitten. A nasty infection took place. Learnt that picking up stray kittens is wrong and displaying a dislike for kittens, cats and anything feline-shaped is right.
4. Rubbed some part of his own body. Felt very, very good. Learnt that not rubbing that part of his own body is wrong and rubbing it is right.
Although these are all experiences of a healthy young males and some of us, perhaps more advanced in years would find them juvenile and silly (and creepy). Indeed, if John were made to look back into his past, he would be of the same opinion too. Nonetheless, these life experiences, trivial (and creepy) they may be, shaped John’s views on what is right or wrong.
Then there came a point in his life where that simple formula in determining what is right and is wrong was put into question. It concerns procreation and John’s progeny. John’s experience with courting women went like this:
- Had a relationship with a young woman. The relationship didn’t go well. Learnt that having relationships is wrong and not having relationships is right.
He thought he would remain single for good but for the intervention of his mother. His relationship with can be summed up like this:
- John went against his mother’s wishes. He almost landed himself in hospital. Learnt that going against his mother is wrong and listening to her is right.
This presents an apparent dilemma but John found it easy to resolve. This was how he did it:
- Having a relationship is wrong because things will not go well.
- Going against my mother’s wishes is worse because I might land myself in hospital.
- Since having a relationship is less ruinous compared to going against my mother’s wishes, I think I am going to have a relationship after all.
And so he found himself betrothed to a rather charming young lady around his age, who under pressure from both their mothers tied the knot, settled down and tried to live happily after. Little did he know at that time that far from having a happy ending, a new chapter of the story of life was beginning to unfold. However, John’s life were to be a story, that story might be a horror story. It certainly would make a horrible entry to some writing event conducted on a forum of pornographic website.
To do justice to how his married life was, and it was one that would continue until he drew his last breath, would require another long entry that ought to be left for another time. Yet, it is still possible to list the highlights of his married life that lead him once more to question if a deed is right or wrong and shape his idea on is moral and what isn’t. Here is once more a list:
a. The night when he consummated his marriage. John remembered feeling good. For some reason he never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If it felt good, it must be good or moral!
b. The night when his spouse went into labour in scenes so reminiscent of what his mother had to go through a long time ago. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If childbirth didn’t feel good, it must be not be good or moral!
c. The night when he had to put up with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming. John remembered it not feeling good. For some reason, he also never asked his spouse if she felt the same. If having to put up with having a daughter didn’t feel good, then it must be not be good or moral!
d. The night when he decided to deal with his young daughter’s inane and eardrum piercing screaming by giving her a good thumping on the bottom. The screaming was replaced by bawling which sounded less inane and not so ear piercing though it was loud. If beating your daughter when she does an inane and eardrum piercing scream feel good, then it must be good or moral. (He never told his spouse what he had done to their daughter by the way.)
Readers at this juncture might have found that John’s story was, putting aside the lazy and repetitive writing, indeed filled with repetitions. Another generation underwent the same treatment and with it the same thought processes. In other words, John’s daughter was to become as nutty as John himself. Leaving aside the fact that she would never have the (mis)fortune to have siblings younger than her, she would inherit from his father the way to determine right from wrong.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
I haven't checked it out, but if it's meant for all ages, then that means while adults can enjoy it, it's also made accessible for children.
I have to disagree that my prescription for writing a story only appeals to children! I do agree that my prescription for writing makes the story accessible to everyone.
As for Strange Tales, I have to translate it. Really considering setting up a thread of translated stories. Here is the original text of one of its stories. It is about a 16 year old lady who sought revenge for her father who was beaten to death for insulting some powerful landowner. (Not exactly what people would consider suitable for children these days)
Spoiler:
Arguing can be amusing, but most of the fun usually comes from brainwashing your opponent into adopting your views.
Please don't let that happen to you. It isn't fun for me to see you brainwashed. It is however fun for me to counter-argue the points you made in defence of your story. For me the fun ends if you accepted my arguments.
Really? I don't remember that. I guess it has been eight years since I read it though. However, spoiling the story isn't always a bad thing. You may or may not remember me mentioning my love for the anime Baccano in which the first episode pretty much shows you how every major plot thread will end. I already know this guy's gonna end up in the middle of nowhere missing an arm and surrounded by cops. Now how the hell does it happen!?
That can be my suggestion on how your story ought to begin in a nutshell. Here is the prologue to Romeo and Juliet:
Two households, both alike in dignity,
In fair Verona, where we lay our scene,
From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,
Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.
From forth the fatal loins of these two foes
A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their parents' strife.
The fearful passage of their death-mark'd love,
And the continuance of their parents' rage,
Which, but their children's end, nought could remove,
Is now the two hours' traffic of our stage;
The which if you with patient ears attend,
What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend.
This prologue explains everything! It is really a synopsis or a summary of sorts. When I suggest that a prologue should explain things, I am often misunderstood. Some claimed that my prescription of what a prologue should be would result in the writer having to write pages and pages of boring exposition. Not really so as the prologue above shows.
For me, a simple description of the gang Garm works for and what it does would suffice. Modern literature shies away from that it seems.
I do say something early on that hints at the outcome of the story in the draft I sent you a link to but nothing detailed.
Hopefully I will get to read it.
I agree. Game of Thrones is awesome.
Ugh. I know you are somewhat annoyed that I don't share your opinion about that book. Look at it this way, at least you can come up with a thread called "d(^_^)(^_^)d HATES THE LORD OF THE RINGS PROLOGUE" as payback for my rather disparaging review of the prologue of Game of Thrones.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
RavenxSinon wrote...
I can see where you're coming from, however, I'll be sticking to my guns and keep the parentheses brackets ...
Thanks for correcting me. Brackets [] and parentheses () are easy to confuse if you are up late at the night. I might come up with something for this event. Mind if I get to read it should I be done with it.
leonard267 wrote...
Though it would have been nice, it's unlikely for my story to be an unintentional sequel to the comic considering the difference in setting haha
Not really. Salmon are involved in both stories.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
RavenxSinon wrote...
leonard267 wrote...
The sentences in the parenthesis I thought were unnecessary. (If they served a purpose please tell me what it is) Supposedly, the sentences in the parentheses would give the readers an idea of what the main character's thoughts were as what was being narrated happened. Sorry if it was confusing.
leonard267 wrote...
high_time: https://www.fakku.net/manga/wet-tutor-englishThis is the reason behind your deja vu.
This must be one of the most disturbing yet strangely entertaining mangas I've ever read.
I thought the entire entry was narrated by the main character and the main character's thoughts are naturally covered in the narration. Hence I am not rather sure why the parentheses are there in the first place.
Your story reminded me about that comic though. Perhaps it was an unintentional sequel to the events that occurred in that comic.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
You are correct, but writing a story and relating one by word of mouth are two different things. The way people talk is different from the way they write.
You miss the point. It doesn't matter if I had to write a report or verbally communicate what had happened or even write a story about it. I still need to make clear the setting (two cars crashed) before I continue to other details. (like how the driver felt and the mess) I find myself a traditionalist when it comes to writing. I am quite sure the first written stories were putting what can said through word of mouth into words.
Fair tales spoon-feed because they're meant for children. The rules as I know them that apply to adult fiction don't apply to young adult fiction and children's books.
You mean modern adult fiction of which I harbour a growing dislike of. I hated the first Stephen King book I read and I hated George Martin. Rowling's Harry Potter series don't suffer the same problems I pointed out in the Game of Thrones though.
I have to say that Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio not specifically targeted at children. Part of its appeal is that its stories appeal to all ages.
Usually though, it's much more stimulating to read something in which information can be picked up on implicitly as opposed to having it explicitly stated.
It isn't for me regrettably. It is a recipe for confusion and it doesn't draw me in. Essential information like who the main character is must be given at least!
I'm grateful my story sounded interesting enough for you to dedicate a small portion of your day to reading it, and hopefully you liked it.
I'm afraid I enjoyed complaining about it and demanding you to clarify what had happened. Please don't take it the wrong way. If I come up with something for the competition, it will be most likely something you wouldn't like and we can argue all day about it. It is really my love of argument that is driving me here and I feel that it goes somewhere.
Nah, I wouldn't skip it. I'd just take days to finish it. Oddly enough, I don't find the excerpt to be too bad, but by and largely, you're right.
It is very informative though. The prologue to Romeo and Juliet is even worse (even though it is a play). It spoils the story! Again it is quite like my recommendation of what you might considering writing. I suggested a description of Garm getting hold of the arquebus then going into how he laid his hands on it.
Your style of writing appears to be inspired by George Martin. I think it is quite fair to say that Tolkien influenced my writing style.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
Someone won the writing contest writing something like that! Thank goodness it was short. (i.e. DON'T WRITE MORE! IT WILL SPOIL IT!) I was completely lost when I first read it. The sentences in the parenthesis I thought were unnecessary. (If they served a purpose please tell me what it is)
It reads like a riddle. It doesn't make sense at first until the answer to the riddle is given.
high_time: https://www.fakku.net/manga/wet-tutor-english
This is the reason behind your deja vu.
It reads like a riddle. It doesn't make sense at first until the answer to the riddle is given.
high_time: https://www.fakku.net/manga/wet-tutor-english
This is the reason behind your deja vu.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
I picture stories playing out like a movie, scene by scene. I don't approach writing stories with the assumption that the person telling them will succinctly give me all the info I need to know because people are like that in my experience.
I hope we can continue arguing. This is very interesting. You see yourself writing a movie while I see myself writing a speech. Without any visual aids, I thought it is best to do what you call spoonfeeding so the reader has an idea of what I trying to convey. Which leads me to quote this:
Yes, but we're not writing reports to traffic police. If the aftermath of this accident is being experienced firsthand by a character, I'd ask myself what would he notice first? The mangled bodies, the flashing lights of emergency vehicles? How the crash happened would be a distant thought.
To further elaborate what I mean by a storyteller verbally telling me a story, can I use the example of how I would describe a road accident? If I were to describe to someone else what happened, I would have to say that two cars are involved in an accident. If I can't have that established, then how can I bother with how the driver felt? Would my interlocutor bother with what the driver felt? I doubt it. These are the expectations I have towards what others write.
I was taught to write essays that way. In fiction however, people usually don't like being spoon-fed.
Why? A lot of stories require spoonfeeding of who are the characters and what is the setting before going into the details. I can't imagine that I would understand the fairy tales I read when I was young if it were written in the style of more modern work. I once again refer you the Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio or The Hobbit of fiction where the important parts are spelt out.
Yes, and I still can't figure out why, just as I'm sure you can't figure out why I can't figure it out, which is why I wasn't too keen on starting another conversation about this. It's like the western front all over again.
Why not continue to argue? It keeps your thread on top of the page and I might be in a position to better understand your work. That aside, I hope you understood the reasons why I couldn't figure your work out. DatYuriThough and Shikinokami produced work I quite liked. Same with some of high_time's anecdotal accounts of some event in his life.
Btw, you may or may not care to know I plan on reading Lord of the Rings in the future after I get through the ten or so other books I have to read.
You might like the Lord of the Rings prologue as much as I like the Game of Thrones prologue. Let me give you an excerpt. I can just picture dropping the prologue and jumping straight to the "Long Expected Party", the first chapter of the novel. That said, the foreword and preface are interesting. They cover the trouble taken to produce the current edition and Tolkien's thoughts when coming up with his magnum opus.
Spoiler:
You can say that I am inspired by this way of writing. (Concerning XXXX, Xenon might want to take note where my penchant on starting with titles containing the word 'concerning' comes from) We don't know what the Red Book of Westmarch is but at least Bilbo is introduced and it essentially says since you don't have the Red Book of Westmarch, I am going to show you its contents here in the prologue.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
No offense, but I don't really want to go into another conversation about this. I think we both know where we stand. Buuuuuuuut, I'm not saying that your example of how the narration should have gone reveals the whole story at once. What I mean is it just reveals too much information too fast. Now, I don't say that because I think people are stupid, and it's too much for them to handle. The issue I have with it is it's not organic. It kinda goes back to show, don't tell. I'd rather show that a guy has glasses by having him take them off to clean them rather than saying, "That guy has glasses." By introducing information in a more organic matter, it also gives more context to it and gives readers more of a reason to care about it in my opinion.
I don't understand what you mean by 'organic' but I picture a person telling me a story verbally whenever I read a story and this inspired my suggestion of what I would have liked written. (See paragraph of your story written by me) He must at least tell me where the story is set and who the characters are. If by 'organic' you mean 'natural', then I think it is as natural as it can get.
In response to your 'that guy has glasses' analogy I won't describe an accident as blood splattered, mangled bodies and wrecked cars. I would say that the driver lost control of his car and crashed into another car. I think the traffic police would be more happy with that in their report.
I was taught to write as if everyone is stupid, strangely enough. Again, I am a reader of non-fiction. The advice of 'writing speeches as if everyone is 15 years old', obviously applies to non-fiction and it is something I subscribe to.
Contrary to what you say, your way of introducing information confuses this reader so much that I am not in a position to care you see? Not to say that your method of presentation is lousy. It only appears that I am the only person who has that problem.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
high_time wrote...
so i take it the author probably didn't really imply anything. maybe kind of, you know, just write anything he wants or seems fun and let the readers interpret it according to their liking.
Of course the narrator had no intention of making things unclear. However if I were part of Garm's audience I would call him a lousy storyteller because he doesn't address clearly the 3 husbands and 1 wife namely who, what, where and how. Instead, he goes into thick of the action which doesn't make sense to this listener. As far as this listener is concerned, Garm is in his own dream world.
I wonder if you have read the comments before reading the story. The person whom I read it with came to the conclusion that Garm was a Hound by inferring from the context of Garm being with Xander, Tara et. al. He called d's story vague at places.
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
Really? I'm just not seeing it.Well, if Garm were part of the Hounds I expect him to use sentences like, "My gang ran the streets with an iron fist..."
Now I remember why I prefer my usual style to yours. To flat out say everything like that in one, simple paragraph makes me die a little on the inside.
The style I prefer is not exactly revealing the entire story but providing what I feel are the necessary details for the reader to understand the story. If you happen to read my remarks about Mibuchiha's story (it is full of criticism of your style, I am sorry), you will find repeating pretty much whatever I stated in this thread.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
It appears I have a long ways to go before mastering this style of yours. I'm also thinking that maybe it isn't that some of the in-story explanations are poor, it's that they just don't match your expectations. Don't get me wrong. That's not me attempting to defend my story or bash you. I just happened to have this thought, and I think it could have some truth to it. Of course, I specifically told you I was gonna try writing like you for a story, thus any expectations you had would be justified, and so the problem is mine. Leonard wrote...
1. Main characters including the narrator himself are not properly introduced. I don't see the entry indicating clearly that he is a member of the Hounds gang.Spoiler:
You will have to ask other people if they could understand what you wrote. If you ask me, I would say that the story provides very poor exposition because it shies away from straightforward explanations. I had no idea that Garm is a Hound until someone else pointed it out to me. Since I did not know what Garm was, I don't know who Xander, Tara, Raven and the rest were too.
The paragraph in the spoiler was an example of what I thought was poor explanation and an attempt to imply rather than to state outright very, very important information i.e. 'Who Garm was'.
It wasn’t until I finally gave in to the destiny that awaits all lowborn worth anything and joined that the Sabers began gathering momentum. That was four years ago.
Joined what exactly? The sentence reads very awkwardly to me. I interpreted that as Garm joining the Sabers because they had gained clout in the city! Garm's identity as a Hound could only be made clear after I some reader who is better at comprehension than me reads through what happened later. Then I went back and read:
When I was growing up, the Hounds ran the streets with an iron fist or as close as anyone ever got to.
That doesn't strike me as the language a member of the Hounds would use. It struck me more as the language a very impressed (and fearful) outsider would use.
Their anonymous leader, who legend has it is known by only two people, sat content on his throne, which had been rigged together from the bones of his enemies.
This sentence made no sense to me. I suppose the leader of the Hounds climbed the greasy pole and ruthlessly persecuted his adversaries to become leader. What does that have to do with the Hounds losing ground to the Sabers this paragraph does not tell (and it does contribute to the story being confusing for me)
I wrote...
"The thug was a member of the Hounds, a powerful group of organised criminals who operated in that God forsaken city. He begun bragging about his exploits against the Sabers, their arch-rivals. He brandished an object for any who would listen to him to see. It appeared to be the spoils from his latest adventures tussling with other thugs just like himself but of different affiliation. The object was allegedly some device that harnesses the powers of the Gods if his words were to be believed."
This is what I think I would have preferred to read. I am not sure if you remember my parody of xninebreaker's Winter Contest entry, "Out Xnining Xninebreaker". It has zero dialogue and a lot of the story was devoted to third person exposition. Characterisation of the main characters was also done in third person which lead to a few people complaining that it sounded like lore.
However, I thought it explained things the best.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
Alas, I tried reading it quickly once and I did not understand it. I tried reading it more slowly but I still did not understand it.
Finally I read it with someone else and he thought that it is roughly about a gangster who belongs to a gang called the "Hounds" trying to lay his hands on some kind of artifact which appeared to be a gun. The rival gang the "Sabers" had their hands on that artifact. You appear to have an aversion to stating the background of the entire story outright, something along these lines:
"The thug was a member of the Hounds, a powerful group of organised criminals who operated in that God forsaken city. He begun bragging about his exploits against the Sabers, their arch-rivals. He brandished an object for any who would listen to him to see. It appeared to be the spoils from his latest adventures tussling with other thugs just like himself but of different affiliation. The object was allegedly some device that harnesses the powers of the Gods if his words were to be believed."
I can point out a few things that frustrated me but it all really boils down to matters not being explained early enough in the story or not at all. Here are a few of my observations:
1. Main characters including the narrator himself are not properly introduced. I don't see the entry indicating clearly that he is a member of the Hounds gang. (That would have made the motivations of the characters a lot more clearer) Who were Tara, Raven et. al? By who I meant what were their roles in this story? They were not made clear either. The reader, as you must have intended, had to guess or deduce who they were and which gang did they belong to. I dislike guessing and deducing intensely.
Some sentences that contained words like "Enforcers" confounded me even further. Was our main character a law enforcer cracking down on the two rival gangs? To make matters worse, he did not seem to associate himself with the Hounds by speaking of how he was in fear or awe of the Hounds when he was young.
2. There were leaps in the narration, most notably the part where the fight between the Saber gang and the main characters were cut short to the scene back at the tavern where our lead shows Raven what you call an arquebus and what I call a gun.
3. While I was furnished some information about the Gods, (They appear to me to be persons with superpowers rather than creators of the earth) they don't really appear in the story. You can leave out any mention of the Gods and the story would be more or less the same.
4. There are also dialogue which I thought were irrelevant to the story. In fact, I saw them as fillers like the banter about Xander's weight. They wouldn't be a problem if not for the word limit for this event.
Finally I read it with someone else and he thought that it is roughly about a gangster who belongs to a gang called the "Hounds" trying to lay his hands on some kind of artifact which appeared to be a gun. The rival gang the "Sabers" had their hands on that artifact. You appear to have an aversion to stating the background of the entire story outright, something along these lines:
"The thug was a member of the Hounds, a powerful group of organised criminals who operated in that God forsaken city. He begun bragging about his exploits against the Sabers, their arch-rivals. He brandished an object for any who would listen to him to see. It appeared to be the spoils from his latest adventures tussling with other thugs just like himself but of different affiliation. The object was allegedly some device that harnesses the powers of the Gods if his words were to be believed."
I can point out a few things that frustrated me but it all really boils down to matters not being explained early enough in the story or not at all. Here are a few of my observations:
1. Main characters including the narrator himself are not properly introduced. I don't see the entry indicating clearly that he is a member of the Hounds gang. (That would have made the motivations of the characters a lot more clearer) Who were Tara, Raven et. al? By who I meant what were their roles in this story? They were not made clear either. The reader, as you must have intended, had to guess or deduce who they were and which gang did they belong to. I dislike guessing and deducing intensely.
Some sentences that contained words like "Enforcers" confounded me even further. Was our main character a law enforcer cracking down on the two rival gangs? To make matters worse, he did not seem to associate himself with the Hounds by speaking of how he was in fear or awe of the Hounds when he was young.
2. There were leaps in the narration, most notably the part where the fight between the Saber gang and the main characters were cut short to the scene back at the tavern where our lead shows Raven what you call an arquebus and what I call a gun.
3. While I was furnished some information about the Gods, (They appear to me to be persons with superpowers rather than creators of the earth) they don't really appear in the story. You can leave out any mention of the Gods and the story would be more or less the same.
4. There are also dialogue which I thought were irrelevant to the story. In fact, I saw them as fillers like the banter about Xander's weight. They wouldn't be a problem if not for the word limit for this event.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
xninebreaker wrote...
leonard267 wrote...
If the writing site you discussed is all about encouraging people to write instead of expecting quality novels then I have nothing to say.That's pretty much what Nanowrimo is. It's just a little push that gets a lot of writers started.
ED: You can say assignments have time limits and you might have a point. However, I would not give writers a time limit of a few months to pen a 100000 word story if I am expecting quality.
No one should expect to create a masterful novel in a month. It's more like a rough draft.
That explains everything. I detest the word floor to tell you the truth. Many stories are short but very enjoyable. Take Aesop's and Han Fei's fables for starters.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
DatYuriThough wrote...
asaforever wrote...
*pokes the goddess of nature back*Anythign planned for today, like additional stabbing?
Eek!
Yeah I'm going to film with some friends for a school project in a couple of hours.
Filming sounds difficult. Editing is even worse. How do you manage?
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
FGRaptor wrote...
leonard267 wrote...
I have argued with high_time about this before, but I really wonder what is the merit in being forced to complete a novel within a few months? He did say that it poses a challenge to him. As for me if I were to write a novel, I'd imagine most of my time would be about having to do research and a lot of preparation before putting words to paper. All of it very time consuming I would imagine and might take more than a few months. There is something improper about tasking me to come up with a novel within a few months. I can't help but to feel that the work produced would not be of quality.
PS: Feel free to point out that I don't write novels. Also feel free to point out that my entry for CoffeePrince's event was completed within a few hours.
The problem is that you are looking at it from the wrong angle. It's not about writing a novel within a month, even if that's what it's called.
The purpose of NaNoWriMo is to give you a time frame and a platform with like-minded people to *start* writing a novel.
If you never start, you will never write a novel. The point is to start and get a rough draft done that you can then hone into a proper novel. Nothing should ever be considered "finished" or "final" directly after first writing it.
Writing is a process that takes time.
The problem in your thinking is obvious when you consider what you wrote here:
[...] I'd imagine most of my time would be about having to do research and a lot of preparation before putting words to paper.
Now I know this myself and I know of other people who want to write, but they haven't actually written a single word of the story. Why is that?
Because they spend all their time planning.
That is not to say planning is not important, but you don't write a novel through planning - you write it through writing.
No, no. We have different perspectives on how people write then. It is not really a problem. I always thought novel writing like writing a textbook is just like any other job. You don't do any assignment or project by doing it and hope everything goes all right, you have to plan in advance. If the writing site you discussed is all about encouraging people to write instead of expecting quality novels then I have nothing to say.
ED: You can say assignments have time limits and you might have a point. However, I would not give writers a time limit of a few months to pen a 100000 word story if I am expecting quality.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
xninebreaker wrote...
FGRaptor wrote...
Getting started is half the fight!I had a late start as well, but I think I can catch up this weekend to the target word count.
Just keep on writing. As long as you put words down, you've already won (in our hearts).
Keep us posted about your progress!
I actually agree. Nanowrimo has always been more about simply writing or giving an extra incentive to write more than it is about 'winning' or anything else for me.
I'll see what I can do. First off, I would need to write enough for an update... lol
I have argued with high_time about this before, but I really wonder what is the merit in being forced to complete a novel within a few months? He did say that it poses a challenge to him. As for me if I were to write a novel, I'd imagine most of my time would be about having to do research and a lot of preparation before putting words to paper. All of it very time consuming I would imagine and might take more than a few months.
There is something improper about tasking me to come up with a novel within a few months. I can't help but to feel that the work produced would not be of quality.
PS: Feel free to point out that I don't write novels. Also feel free to point out that my entry for CoffeePrince's event was completed within a few hours.
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
May I ask the above user two questions? What happened to Kiraneko? What happened to your username?
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
Fakku_Username wrote...
What can you use to write? Plenty actually. Below is a few suggestions on some of the tools I have used, others are welcome to share their own tools.(The list is based on what comes up on my memory first, not based on superiority)
1. A blank book and pencil/pen : Not recommended, as you can get hand cramps (in my experience) after ten or more pages. Nothing kills imagination faster than having to seek out medicine for the pain (not to mention reminding me of primary school where we had to copy what the teacher writes on the blackboard). Some of you might have more luck with it.
2. M$ Word / Libre Office / Open Office / Wordstar : My most preferred tool to write. Mostly because of familiarity. Only causing cramps after fifty pages or so. If you're hurting for cash, Libre Office and Open Office is free. The negative part is when you had to rearrange scenes (it's practically a nightmare).
3. yWriter or Twine or Plume Creator : Free software story-writing tools. The reason why I use this is because the ease in chapter and scene organizing. But still lacking many features that it more comfortable to use. I mainly use it to organize my story, but for writing I'm still using Libre Office (it's free and I don't need to look back to see if there's any M$ assassin lurking around).
If anybody has any more suggestion, please don't hesistate to post. The more the better.
Very interesting. I have a question to ask you personally. Do you think that what you use to write would affect the quality of work?
As for me, anything that can get the words to paper, anything that allows me to change font size, font colour and allows me to input other languages, would suffice.