On writing
Mar. 7th, 2006 02:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jhetleyI've noticed that a lot of the other writers' blogs have deep intellectual analysis of the theory and practice of writing. While I, as in my previous post, just note that I have writ.
That's because I don't examine the process. I can't offer you folks any insights, can't talk about layering and story modes and themes and archetypes and voice and structure. My approach is to sit down and type, telling myself a story. That's it and all of it.
I'm not claiming this is a superior, Zen approach to writing, waiting for the arrow to loose itself, 100% natural and free of artificial additives. It's just an explanation of why I don't discuss the process. I don't tell you how I do it because I don't know what I'm doing. And if I _could_ tell you, it probably wouldn't work for you.
This comes up on the RASFC usenet group every now and then -- Kipling's famous bit:
There are nine and sixty ways
Of reciting tribal lays,
And every single one of them is right.
That's because I don't examine the process. I can't offer you folks any insights, can't talk about layering and story modes and themes and archetypes and voice and structure. My approach is to sit down and type, telling myself a story. That's it and all of it.
I'm not claiming this is a superior, Zen approach to writing, waiting for the arrow to loose itself, 100% natural and free of artificial additives. It's just an explanation of why I don't discuss the process. I don't tell you how I do it because I don't know what I'm doing. And if I _could_ tell you, it probably wouldn't work for you.
This comes up on the RASFC usenet group every now and then -- Kipling's famous bit:
There are nine and sixty ways
Of reciting tribal lays,
And every single one of them is right.
