In our last episode <oa5iv0toggnl96dnuht1ksannj4jckdbgh@4ax.com>, stoney
lumbered into the room and mumbled:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:36:58 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <hamfv0t9lohaptvlfqasr6npiktbek6a6d@4ax.com>, stoney
lumbered into the room and mumbled:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:07:57 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <tdbdv01n55813e05c9sf2t74tf6e49lqs9@4ax.com>,
stoney lumbered into the room and mumbled:

[]

"Contra position?"
I tried it again last night and set a time limit. The time limit
didn't work but I've broken the old habit of getting stuck on a
word or expression and re-reading every paragraph over and over.
It's less like work now and more like fun :-) It's amazing how
well it works. Geeze...all that wasted time over something so
simple.

Get the story down first and then do the rewrites and polishing.
The characters will 'talk' to you. Its generally a very good idea
to 'listen.'

Yeah but how do you get them to *shut *up????

You don't.

Dunno. Maybe a nice, thorazine cocktail. <G>

I thought you were indicating internal methods... :)

Sigh. Nothing works. I can't get the bastards from the *last novel to
shut during *this one. My main character from last time is being a pain.
All I can think about is his next book. Not the one I'm trying to write
*now...

Sounds like you'd best surrender now and 'download.' Who knows, there
might be something in it which helps you in the current one.

Nope, *very different books. Different style even. Oh and you're too late.
Wrote three chapters already. <g>

And they're *terrible. They're not even real chapters. Very sketchy, too
much happening, pacing's all off. They're synopses apparently. More I
think about it, the more I want to write this one too...

(Throwing all my timing off of course)

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:39:22 GMT,

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 09:14:07 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <s366v0hj50nvhfgnmgp5ksqi024r7h2dsr@4ax.com>, atheist
lumbered into the room and mumbled:

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:27:08 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <fud3v0lqn7nn5qc52ilnrkr6v3qphhcg8i@4ax.com>, atheist
lumbered into the room and mumbled:

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:37:29 -0600, Harry F. Leopold
<hleopold@coxyx.net> wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:07:30 -0600,

Interesting thing I've discovered about myself is I'll write whole
chunks that are "back story" for a character which don't actually
belong *in the novel but needed to be written anyway. That's what
happened to the first couple of drafts of the just finished beast. I
threw two out (some 110,000 words total) and most of the material
ended up being in the "background" of the final version.

Creating the whole character? It makes sense.

Or the whole background for a scene or the entire book. I know that a
number of writers have written entire novels worth of background
material that gets reduced to just a few sentences, yet without working
within that background the entire story would fail. And because the
writer, or writers, have that background in mind while writing the rest
of the story you pick up on that background and are aware of it as
well. (I know that Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle do this quite often
in their collaborations.)

I don't understand why I didn't already know that. It works
surprisingly well.
It also gets the juices flowing and makes it difficult to stop typing.

Tell me about it.

<applies more Icy Hot>

Lol!
I also had to sleep late for two days to recover.

The contra position is worse. I haven't managed any writing since
Thursday. I'm getting mean and difficult to live with...

"Contra position?"
I tried it again last night and set a time limit.
The time limit didn't work but I've broken the old habit of getting
stuck on a word or expression and re-reading every paragraph over and
over.
It's less like work now and more like fun :-)
It's amazing how well it works.
Geeze...all that wasted time over something so simple.

Get the story down first and then do the rewrites and polishing.
The characters will 'talk' to you. Its generally a very good idea to
'listen.'

In our last episode <fud3v0lqn7nn5qc52ilnrkr6v3qphhcg8i@4ax.com>, atheist
lumbered into the room and mumbled:

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:37:29 -0600, Harry F. Leopold <hleopold@coxyx.net>
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 21:07:30 -0600,

Interesting thing I've discovered about myself is I'll write whole
chunks that are "back story" for a character which don't actually
belong *in the novel but needed to be written anyway. That's what
happened to the first couple of drafts of the just finished beast. I
threw two out (some 110,000 words total) and most of the material
ended up being in the "background" of the final version.

Creating the whole character? It makes sense.

Or the whole background for a scene or the entire book. I know that a
number of writers have written entire novels worth of background material
that gets reduced to just a few sentences, yet without working within
that background the entire story would fail. And because the writer, or
writers, have that background in mind while writing the rest of the story
you pick up on that background and are aware of it as well. (I know that
Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle do this quite often in their
collaborations.)

I don't understand why I didn't already know that. It works surprisingly
well.
It also gets the juices flowing and makes it difficult to stop typing.

Tell me about it.

<applies more Icy Hot>

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:23:10 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <e31ou0dl0bfvfko7dn6h9ofj4oi93hd6e7@4ax.com>, atheist
lept out of the bushes shouting:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:31:20 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

Did you know that the following has been consistently voted the worst
beginning to a story?
"It was a dark and stormy night; the rain fell in torrents--except at
occasional intervals, when it was checked by a violent gust of wind which
swept up the streets (for it is in London that our scene lies), rattling
along the housetops, and fiercely agitating the scanty flame of the lamps
that struggled against the darkness."
--Edward George Bulwer-Lytton, Paul Clifford (1830)
Lol!
Even I can't touch that.

Oh who is it that has the bad story contests? Produces some really
great... awful... stuff that contest. <g>

"It had started off as a prank, but when Major Elyse Livesay
discovered (during her solo space walk, no less!) the tarantula that
the boys in the crew had slipped into her spacesuit, she knew that
while in space no one could hear you scream, it was damn sure not for
lack of trying."
Matthew Chambers

Lol!

Interesting thing I've discovered about myself is I'll write whole chunks
that are "back story" for a character which don't actually belong *in the
novel but needed to be written anyway. That's what happened to the first
couple of drafts of the just finished beast. I threw two out (some 110,000
words total) and most of the material ended up being in the "background"
of the final version.

Creating the whole character?
It makes sense.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:23:10 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <e31ou0dl0bfvfko7dn6h9ofj4oi93hd6e7@4ax.com>, atheist
lept out of the bushes shouting:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:31:20 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

In our last episode <lvkju0h28asievgcm1n5rqsj4pvv5k2h0r@4ax.com>, atheist
lept out of the bushes shouting:

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:

<snip>

I envy you.

Oh, I wouldn't.

Ok, I'll envy the fact that one of your books was made into a movie and
you got rich ;-)

Huh. I doubt there's much a threat of that envy becoming necessary. <g>

That's what Stephen King felt about Carrie. He actually threw it in the
trash but his wife fetched it out and encouraged him to finish it.
Wah la!
Sheesh.
It was a tiny little paperback, hardly bigger than a checkbook.

Lightening can strike sometimes. But it's rare.

He did get lucky.

Frankly, I know of a writer who was one of King's peers who is *far better
a writer. King isn't a bad writer but he's honestly not as good as his
notoriety. I don't think he's written anything truly "new" in *years now.
He really does not have *that many good books. Compared to the writer I
knew who was getting his start about the same time (and was acquainted
with him as they attended the same conferences and such before King had to
quit going because of his fame), he's not that good.

King admits he's not a great writer.
I thought that was sort of refreshing.
I read some of his stuff from curiosity though for the most part I
don't like novels.
One of the interesting things I noted is that his style can change to
the point that it appears someone else wrote something attritbuted to
him.

Which is discouraging in itself. The wrong one became rich and famous. I
don't begrudge King having success. I just don't think the magnitude was
warranted and there were other writers who deserved attention (maybe even
more so).

I agree.
The movies made him I think.
Most of the stuff I've read by him is just silly imo but I really
don't mean that in a mean spirited way.
He appeals to the greater audience and there's something to be said
for that.

That happens with disturbing frequency in "the business." The one who
makes the big splash and gets the big money is quite often *not the "best
in his class."

You mean "Christine" isn't a classic? ;-)
It's incredibly difficult to get published nowadays even for
exceptional writers.
Many, if not most legitimate publishers will no longer read a
manuscript if it doesn't come from a respected agent.
I don't know if it's true now but I read that in the eighties
publishers were still getting the occasional large envelope with parts
of manuscripts written on napkins, pieces of cardboard and various
other disconnected things that the budding author learned some writers
used during moments of inspiration when nothing else was handy.
Apparently they believed that was a sure sign of brilliance and that
publishers would be so impressed they would sort it all out and put it
together in the proper order.
They also got, and I'm sure still do get, absolutely horrible stuff.
There are so many things now that are no longer unique in society as
far as expierences that it's difficult to really find unique people
with unique stories to tell though many writers believe their stories
and perspectives *are* unique.
As a result of a flood of really bad stuff many very good manuscripts
probably never get read by the people who matter.
You gotta get an agent :-)

On the other hand, I'd be *VERY* happy with the success of the writer I
think was the better of the two. He lives quite well and is much less
"trapped" by his own success. He is able to write more what he *wants to
write. King is locked into his past now. He tried escaping years ago and
couldn't pull it off.

He should write a book about it :-)
In all honesty if I could make a decent living writing meaningless
trash I'd write it all day long.
I don't think I would want to be famous.
I would however like the money.
On the other hand, just one well written book that was praised by
other writers would feel pretty good.

If you saw "Stand by Me" (which story it's based on escapes me now, was it
by the same title?) represented an attempt on his part to move toward the
mainstream and away from horror (before he'd mined it totally out and
turned into a parody of himself). He couldn't. Now he essentially recycles
the same stories endlessly.

I don't recall seeing the movie but frankly now that he's wealthy I
don't understand why he would bother writing anything else.
Again, I think maybe that's the thing I'm missing.
The passion to write.
That's not exactly accurate though.
I do have a sort of passion to write humerous pieces that make people
laugh.
That sort of fills me up if it works.

A fate worse than death I think.

I suppose so.
A few years ago a local bookstore had King's collected works in
hardcover I believe and the things sold like hotcakes.
Funny thing, not long ago a friend loaned me a copy of "Hannibal."
I read it but wasn't at all impressed, very bored actually, and I
offered to loan her some of my books on real serial killers.
<Fictional books and movies about serial killers can't hold a candle
to the real thing>
She declined saying that she didn't like to read things that scared
her.
Now that puzzled me.
I can't figure out what she was looking for by reading the book.
There may be a lesson of sorts in that for an author.
I also thought the original Lector in the movie Manhunter was a scary
guy because he didn't try so hard to be scary but imo Hopkins <One of
my favorite actors> was a silly caricature and rather laughable.
Yet he scared the hell out of many people.
King knew what worked and to his credit used it well.
He writes to his audience rather than himself and doesn't try to write
down or even worse try to impress with overly complicated language
that his audience doesn't recognize without effort.
In other words he uses common, every day language for the most part.
I'm reading a non fiction book now about two murders by teens in the
same small town within a week of one another.
That flow in language that you mentioned is missing and the language,
while not pretentious seems rather labored in an attempt to be
expressive but fails in the attempt.
It's not a fun book to read but the writer has done his research and
the ideas he is trying to express are things I am familiar with so I
understand the meaning.
I will finish it but it is taking a bit more effort than a well
written book would take.

Considering what happened to King, I'd be leery if Hollyweird came after
me. It's something of a horrific fate in itself. <g>

A lot of authors have been very unhappy with Hollywood.
Wambaugh reached a point that he wouldn't let them touch anything he
wrote.
A Beautiful Mind was imo an excellent movie though the character of
Nash bears little if any resemblance to the real Nash described in the
book.
For years after seeing the movie Midnight Express I thought Billy
Hayes had been treated terribly by Turkish authorities after being
arrested on drug charges.
Here's the blurb on the movie:
"True story of a man who is caught smuggling drugs out of Turkey and
thrown into a barbaric prison."
It did make the Turks appear to be barbarians in this particular case.
Then I read the book written by Hayes.
The only similarities as I recall were the name, location and charge.
<Except for the location of the escape, it wasn't prison in a real
sense>
Still, King got the money, Wambaugh got the money and so did Hayes.
So I say to them; "shut up already, take the freaking money and buy a
really nice house and boat." ;-)
But then Hollywood hasn't screwed up *my* book.

<snip>

It would be interesting.
I did a similar thing a while back.
I had an idea for a story in which people and things were phasing in
and out of time.
It begins at a modern street intersection where a late model vehicle
collides with a 1960s auto pretty much destroying it. There were a
number of witnesses but two minutes after the accident the only vehicle
left is the modern one and the only debris in the intersection is from
that one. Meanwhile back in the 1960s the earlier auto and it's debris
with a dead driver are the only things left in the intersection. I was
going to include momentary battles over Great Britain being fought by
WWII era planes that disappeared almost as quickly as they appeared and
maybe an American Civil war battle at Shiloh in which tourists were
wounded by minnie balls. I got as far as "It was a dark and stormy
night" but couldn't seem to get any further ;-)

I like it. You should be careful mentioning ideas around me. I am a
sponge. <G>

I'll never write it.

In truth, I can't think of anything to do with it myself. But it's a
*great idea. <g>

I'm working real hard at not doing anything with it :-)

(Very Waldrop. He could come up with such *wonderful ideas but never
seemed to get that "plot" thing together. But at least his failures were
interesting. Often very interesting. Which is in some ways better than
being a mediocre success.)

I'm not familiar with him.

Did you know that the following has been consistently voted the worst
beginning to a story?
"It was a dark and stormy night; the rain fell in torrents--except at
occasional intervals, when it was checked by a violent gust of wind which
swept up the streets (for it is in London that our scene lies), rattling
along the housetops, and fiercely agitating the scanty flame of the lamps
that struggled against the darkness."
--Edward George Bulwer-Lytton, Paul Clifford (1830)
Lol!
Even I can't touch that.

Oh who is it that has the bad story contests? Produces some really
great... awful... stuff that contest. <g>

"It was a warm, rank odor that hit Detective Swatworth's nostrils,
breaking into components that seemed hauntingly familiar, reminiscent
of dangerous deeds past, lighting up every wary fiber in his torso,
warning him to be wary of what lay ahead, on guard, finger on the
trigger, then relaxed again as he realized it was coming from his own
armpit."
Duke Smith

"It had started off as a prank, but when Major Elyse Livesay
discovered (during her solo space walk, no less!) the tarantula that
the boys in the crew had slipped into her spacesuit, she knew that
while in space no one could hear you scream, it was damn sure not for
lack of trying."
Matthew Chambers

Lol!
Beautiful stuff :-)
We should have a contest in a.a.
I imagine it would be funny as hell.

(I did get an idea from the ng here for a book using the same characters
of the one I just finished. It was just too funny to leave it alone. <g>)

Don't tell anybody ;-)

I'll just say this much, what gay male author could resist the idea of a
"gay bomb?" <G>

Gay bomb?

<snip>

I've had ideas that I've tried for days to begin without success. I think
that's where I got discouraged. Other things, short stories can come in a
flash and be finished in a matter of hours.

I've mostly given up on short stories. I've done a few that people liked
but there's so little "room" in them. They're almost totally plot driven
and I'm almost totally character driven.

I just *love the novel form.

I think I'm going to try it.
I'm going to write for at least an hour tommorrow.
Whatever comes to mind.
Or maybe not :-)

My big problem is getting so "into" the characters and the writing
itself, I can wander off in directions that can derail the whole plot.
I'm forever having to back up.

Lol!
Frustrating isn't it?
I've known so many strange and sometimes wonderfully eccentric characters
that I usually want to write about them. Again I can usually come up with
a plot but have trouble coming up with a really good hook except in the
case of religious satire. I did start something the other day which I
think is a rather unique idea.
It's about a serial killer with the story taking place in medieval
England.
I got as far as: "T'was a dark and stormy knight with an insatiable lust
for warm, wet rivers of really red blood" but couldn't seem to get any
further ;-)

<snork>

Snoopy is your muse maybe? <G>

("Suddenly, a clang rang out!")

Wow!
Great first line.
Can I use it?

<snip>

Go for the money is what I say :-)

I knew a writer once who, discussing becoming "rich and famuous," quipped:
"Screw the fame, give me the rich part." <G>

I'm with him :-)

<snip>

I've read that a lot of writers just write like hell, don't worry so
much about it on the front end and go back later for the re-write.

I do that. I just keep going, hoping to get as much of the material down
and figure I can always go back and throw things out.

I'm also going to practice that.
I don't know if I've ever made a real effort at it.

Interesting thing I've discovered about myself is I'll write whole chunks
that are "back story" for a character which don't actually belong *in the
novel but needed to be written anyway. That's what happened to the first
couple of drafts of the just finished beast. I threw two out (some 110,000
words total) and most of the material ended up being in the "background"
of the final version.

Creating the whole character?
It makes sense.

<snip>

Passionate? Dunno. My "muse" is more a slave driving *****. <g>

(Then loves to leave me the plot mess to clean up)

Lol!

She's just *mean she is!

Brutal :-)

atheist@home#1554

After four drafts and 120,000 words thrown in the trash. He's 59 chapters
long and weighs 82,300 words.

Now if I can just con a publisher into buying this sucker...