6 March 2013

            Feeling optimistic about this novel right now. Have already sent it out to three friends for feedback and it still grows by the day. Interesting how bits of the story which I had not known were going to be in the book a few months, even a week ago, will insert themselves into the story when I start writing. I hope to develop the tenacity approach to writing, to just keep writing and writing as much as possible until a piece gets someone's attention. Figure that, realistically this first one (and maybe the next few) will, by their nature, have to be throw aways. This a mildly difficult feeling but then again...meh. Read an article on Salon about this writer who had been trying to get his novel published for a decade or so but has failed time and again. He begins with a paragraph or two of advice to other people about being a writer. Pretty bleak stuff and very 'hard truth' oriented. I guess the paradox here is 'should one listen to this advice if it comes from someone who can't get heir book published'. The guy sort of sounded like a twat, he talks about how he trashed two other books in a review he wrote and the article functions as his mea culpa. Sort of. Must be terribly bitter about the whole thing (like his life, not the bad review). Not sure how someone can still be so dedicated to writing after (presumably) being rejected over and over. I like to think he is so afraid of rejection he has just never even sent his manuscript out.
               I like the feeling that even when I am reading a wikipedia article, or listening to music or watching people, things that I do naturally, this sort of active observation, I can use these things in my writing  Like how it just seems natural or whatever. Confused about all the backlash around Bret Easton Ellis' comment on Taipei how 'Tao Lin is the most innovative language [something something] but this doesn't mean Taipei isn't still a boring book' (i donno that was just from memory). Everyone came back at him and seemed to focus on the negative comment, dropping these ad hominems at Ellis and 'getting Tao's back' or whatever. But i think THAT"S STILL PRETTY DAMN GOOD PRAISE if you ask me. Reading this made me think about how unqualified positive praise is always a bad thing, like if someone has nothing constructive (or dare we say negative) to say about a work then they must have ulterior motives (they want you to like them, or are getting paid, or have some other agenda) Like someone should be very wary if there is nothing to be gained from a review. I guess in my recent post about Rontel there were no constructive points but then, even if Sam Pink found the review, I doubt he would be interested in reading a critique of his writing.
              Mostly edited today, wrote about 1100 words but then got tired and edited. Really feel like I could use an outside editor (but then this feeling isn't really as strong as a few weeks ago I guess...) Outside perception is not such an agonizing force anymore which I suppose will end up being a bad thing  Not that I was necessarily altering my writing to make it easier for other readers or attempting to make my writing fit a mold (at least any more than I must naturally write that way), but my sort of constant negative feeling that no one will ever want to read this sort of has been dissipating. I'm more focused maybe on juut the act of writing? Maybe?  Also my research into publishers has cooled a little. Just not as interesting to me I guess, or not as pressing as it seemed a little while ago.
I never want to have a job again.
I never want to go to school again.
I just want to keep writing more and more until I hit a singularity and am just...writing faster than I ca nwriter. That would be nice, that is my only goal.