Writer or author?

Oh, you evil, diabolical little...

That was a particularly vicious thing to do to me alongside my first caffeine jolt of the day. :mad:

Well, since I'm the sort who can't resist studying the inside of my navel and any other relevant sources when these little philosophical conundrums come up, I took refuge first in my own mind and then in Google and finally fell back on three real (and really heavy) books. And this is what I came up with.

An author for all practical purposes is a creator. This can be a written work, but it can also be of other matters such as theories and/or plans. As a synonym for this particular word, "originator" is generally the most widely accepted.

A writer is usually one who engages in scratching out visible sound symbols in some medium. While one potential meaning of the term shares an intersection with "author", for the most part this shared meaning is generally accepted to relate only to writing a story of some sort initially conceived by the one doing the writing and does not expand to include such concepts as theories and/or plans. Alternatively, one who scratches out something in sound syllables that are originally conceived by someone else, or something as innocuous as a grocery list, or something as inane as this philosophical rambling can be said to be a writer merely through the action of placing sound syllables into a visual format to convey an idea.

A story teller is typically one who tells a falsehood. While this may be to an end of entertainment for the audience, it could also be for their own aggrandizement or escapism. A story teller can work in any medium, whether it be written, verbal, or even song or other artistic media so long as a conceptual falsehood is shared with an audience. It actually took the most time to wrap my mind around this concept as some stories are based on, or at least pretend to be based in, factual accountings. As nearly as I can determine, the act of sharing the work from a singular perspective is what delineates it as a potential falsehood to meet the criteria since it does not account for other, potentially conflicting, viewpoints of the same events. A work that does utilize multiple viewpoint and credits them becomes something else.

Finally, I came to the conclusion that earlier postings in this thread are entirely correct and the adoption of one term or another for ones self is a matter of choice of the individual as they are all potentially equally correct and incorrect. And that polite etiquette would demand the use of the term an individual used for him or herself if the desire is to remain on cordial terms and to do otherwise would be seen as issuing a challenge to their self image and would not be a polite or cordial interaction.

As a result, I have decided to use none of these terms to describe myself and instead fall back on an older term of "gentlemanly warrior/scholar/poet". However, I will accept "supreme pontificator" as well so long as the anchovies are held.

Good God. I'm going to get another cup of coffee. And in return for your evilness, I am going to ask you whether the first man and woman had a navel and support your hypothesis with something other than "'cause I think they did", you little existentialist. *yawn* Have fun.

Step away from the Keurig. Now. :cool:
 
What about Scribe?

That's a pretty good word too. Sounds totally classic in the medieval meaning of the word....

6a00d8345157d269e200e54f44ee798834-640wi.jpg
 
What about Scribe?

That's a pretty good word too. Sounds totally classic in the medieval meaning of the word....

6a00d8345157d269e200e54f44ee798834-640wi.jpg

Hah! I looked that one up to while I was dealing with the others.

Typically a scribe was a copyist who was generally an illiterate artist. More often than not, they didn't even know how to read what it was that they were writing and just drew lines in as precise a reproduction as possible of what was handed to them by the secretary who wrote down the author's idea. Interestingly, since they did not know how to actually read, we can often find spilled drops of ink that are not actually part of any letter just as faithfully reproduced on old manuscripts (i.e., those before even mimeograph machines)

Now, considering that quite often I find myself turned in nothing more than a pair of hands trying to jot down what is told to me by that bitch muse that won't leave me alone "sec't'y/tudor 1 ea, damaged in transit" or just "secretary" has some possibilities. ;)
 
Yeah, a scribe really is just cataloging someone else's creative work.
 
Imho

One is a writer during the moments one is writing.
One is an author during the time one is authorizing.
I am now writing this response, thus I am a writer now.
In ten minutes I shall be masturbating, not writing.
I haven't authorized anything lately. Shame on me.

And:

An author has their name listed after a work's title, whether or not they wrote anything.
In a ghostwritten 'autobiography', the subject is the author, no matter how illiterate.

An author may also create a fictional universe and allow peons to actually do the writing.
Case in point: TOM CLANCY'S (whatever) series. Naming Clancy is just a marketing trick.

An author needn't own their work. They may have signed away their rights.
Case in point: Lightnin' Hopkins 'authored' many songs but was paid in beer.

Author. Writer. Ghostwriter. Hack writer. Storyteller. Scribe. Reporter. Preacher. Channeler. Poet. Liar. Propagandist. Fantasist. Whatever. One must sort through great piles of blather, hey?
 
An author may also create a fictional universe and allow peons to actually do the writing.
Case in point: TOM CLANCY'S (whatever) series. Naming Clancy is just a marketing trick.

Yes Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos has kept many people writing. There are entire small press publishers whose entire line is Lovecraft spinoff anthologies
 
Typically a scribe was a copyist who was generally an illiterate artist. More often than not, they didn't even know how to read what it was that they were writing and just drew lines in as precise a reproduction as possible of what was handed to them by the secretary who wrote down the author's idea. Interestingly, since they did not know how to actually read, we can often find spilled drops of ink that are not actually part of any letter just as faithfully reproduced on old manuscripts (i.e., those before even mimeograph machines)


Go right ahead and spoil my dreams, will ya? :(


ME_283_KillingScribes-640x199.png



;)
 
Last edited:
An author has their name listed after a work's title, whether or not they wrote anything.
In a ghostwritten 'autobiography', the subject is the author, no matter how illiterate.

Yep, this speaks directly to my post that ownership determines being an author. A ghostwriter doesn't own the material, by definition.
 
...
Author. Writer. Ghostwriter. Hack writer. Storyteller. Scribe. Reporter. Preacher. Channeler. Poet. Liar. Propagandist. Fantasist. Whatever. One must sort through great piles of blather, hey?

Ooh! I like that. Henceforth I shall refer to myself as a "blatherer". :cool:
 
I like Ghostwriter.

Writing erotic stories that are so hot that my head bursts into flames... :)
 
Hah! I looked that one up to while I was dealing with the others.

Typically a scribe was a copyist who was generally an illiterate artist. More often than not, they didn't even know how to read what it was that they were writing and just drew lines in as precise a reproduction as possible of what was handed to them by the secretary who wrote down the author's idea. Interestingly, since they did not know how to actually read, we can often find spilled drops of ink that are not actually part of any letter just as faithfully reproduced on old manuscripts (i.e., those before even mimeograph machines)

;)

Some of my paternal ancestors were scrivenors - public writers. Not only did they have to know how to read and write, but they had to be able to compose letters for their customers.

They were late changing after Caxton started printing in England. They remained scrivenors for about 100 years after Caxton, possibly because what they were writing were one-off letters.

Even if I claim nothing else from my ancestry, someone in my family has been able to read and write for 600 years. Not many families can claim that.

After being scrivenors, they became printers. My grandfather was the last. Now one of my sons-in-law is a printer.

P.S. Some of the scrivenors and printers in the family were women, fully qualified in their trade and freemen (sic) of the City of London.
 
Some of my paternal ancestors were scrivenors - public writers. Not only did they have to know how to read and write, but they had to be able to compose letters for their customers.
Scriveners still exist. I have witnessed them at work in Central American towns. Illiterate itinerant campesinos come to scriveners, to have letters written to send home, or to have their own received letters read to them. It may be awhile before all those poor laborers own cellphones; until then, the scriveners' trade will flourish.
 
Some of my paternal ancestors were scrivenors - public writers. Not only did they have to know how to read and write, but they had to be able to compose letters for their customers.


Scrivenor - sounds pretty awesome too :)


A Crazy Cancun Gangbang With Ten Horny Hung Black Studs

StrangeLife, scrivenor


... but I would fear a potential lawsuit by Litterature & Latte.


invention_of_question_mark_cartoon_chris_madden.jpg
 
And in return for your evilness, I am going to ask you whether the first man and woman had a navel and support your hypothesis with something other than "'cause I think they did", you little existentialist. *yawn* Have fun.

o-o Well. By evolutionary standards, yes. For we would of been born out of whatever birthed us, perhaps our far distant ancestors were hatched or simply spawned, but the first man and woman were most definitely with navel.

Religious speaking? No. The navel can be one of two things.
1) Due to countless eons of incest, we have become corrupted, among becoming Asian, Black, White and such, we have also gained bellybuttons. A hereditary defect that would of healed differently or been unneeded if not for such rampant incest.
2) It is the mark of our sins, the final bite from the snake u.u

In other words. They are creepy little holes that cannot be fucked and have an awful tendency to be drunk out of. Odd little things.
 
Religious speaking? No. The navel can be one of two things.
1) Due to countless eons of incest, we have become corrupted, among becoming Asian, Black, White and such, we have also gained bellybuttons. A hereditary defect that would of healed differently or been unneeded if not for such rampant incest.
2) It is the mark of our sins, the final bite from the snake u.u

In other words. They are creepy little holes that cannot be fucked and have an awful tendency to be drunk out of. Odd little things.
With a deep enough navel and a short enough dick-let, penetration can be achieved. Without peritonitis.
 
With a deep enough navel and a short enough dick-let, penetration can be achieved. Without peritonitis.
Well, how I would adore a smart response to such a statement, but all I can really achieve is a bemused smile. True or not, that is a rather odd mental image.
Although granted, I have had similar ones before. But they involved fat people, and the act of boinking a husky persons navel is more the act of using their fat in a similar way one uses breasts for a 'tit-job', rather than the natural hole. That is my belief anyway, but I believe many things that are incorrect.
 
Well, how I would adore a smart response to such a statement, but all I can really achieve is a bemused smile. True or not, that is a rather odd mental image.
Although granted, I have had similar ones before. But they involved fat people, and the act of boinking a husky persons navel is more the act of using their fat in a similar way one uses breasts for a 'tit-job', rather than the natural hole. That is my belief anyway, but I believe many things that are incorrect.

One of these days, I shall finish my trephination fetish tale LIKE A HOLE IN THE HEAD which involves (among other things) penile penetration of an empty eye socket, and an ear (the recipients have survived brain surgery). I suppose I should add a side story with a good navel fuck. Hmmm, I wonder if there's any navel-fuck fetish action online?
 
One of these days, I shall finish my trephination fetish tale LIKE A HOLE IN THE HEAD which involves (among other things) penile penetration of an empty eye socket, and an ear (the recipients have survived brain surgery). I suppose I should add a side story with a good navel fuck. Hmmm, I wonder if there's any navel-fuck fetish action online?

I'm unsure why I'm putting such with a quote, I'm just rather fond of doing so.
All I wished to say was that I sorely hope so, for without such pointless erotica I would have nothing to read over, put down, read again and simply go, "what the fuck." With a broad grin, and a small shake of my head. Before placing it carefully in a hidden file in the brighter recesses of my mind.
 
I'd rather be a troubadour *wistful*


But then you would have to write your stories in verse form so you can sing them :)

The day when I came home from work
and found my wifey banging the jerk
I didn't hang around to lurk
I shouted loud and went berserk

"Oh how, oh how could you betray me so"
Where did our marriage awry go?"

She looked at me with a fearful smile
her eyes filled with lusty guile
"Oh husband mine, love you I do"
"But he has two more inches than you"




alan_a_dale_by_tyrannus-d3cv2dz.jpg
 
Back
Top