Do you work too hard?

[gauchecritic]

I've just been discussing Literary merit. Is all the hard work we put in to our stories appreciated?

If we forgot about character development and plots (however little we use) or even conflict and resolution would we get straight 5s or would we still get 4.36 averages?

Would you be able to write a simple straightforward story without including $4 words, perfect structure, spelling and punctuation?

Do you recognise 'immediacy' in your work? Have you ever written something which you know you will ruin if you go back and check it through ten times?

Gauche

 

[Wills]

Gauchy,

Yep, writing shorts is an exercise in getting out in one go, I treat it in a way as training, give it a glance for glaring errors and stick it up. Read it next day and see where you screwed up.

The comments people are receiving for shorts are a reflection of the ability to conjure an image, not in my opinion literary quality, they are entertainment, not philosophy.

It's like when I was at college, writing letters home. The letter to the girlfriend flowed onto the page and went off unchecked before I tore it up and started again. The letter to Mum took all week to write, several times over.

Will's

This was in the days before telephones.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Have you ever written something which you know you will ruin if you go back and check it through ten times?

I don't believe in that concept. Any story has infinite potential for improvement and I do my best to pursue it. Sometimes rewriting and editing can be more fun than writing in the first place.

 

[Guest]

I agree with Lauren. Mostly I come to a point when I know something is basically finished is all. I’ve never felt afraid of ruining my writing, I only always want to make it better and finish it.

Gauche, you began speaking of “literary” merit but then went into Lit. scores so I’m not certain what you ask. I don’t equate literary merit with Lit., though my only intent is to have literary merit and fuck the scores.

Re. your comments on lucrative words and perfect structure, I only use the lucre I have and I cannot not be concerned about form.

“Immediacy” in my work is always there, it’s what compels me to begin writing, and then to try and “finish” a piece.

Perdita

 

[Quasimodem]

. . . Have you ever written something which you know you will ruin if you go back and check it through ten times? Gauche

Never!

I have written short bits that I have gone back over, and found I could not improve.

I have never ruined anything -- no matter the number -- through rechecking.

Nor have I ruined anything by rewriting the original. If the rewrite didn't work, I just go back to the version I saved before I started the rewrite.

On the other hand, I KNOW I could ruin the "immediacy" of a piece by not going back to check it.

(Or, do you believe that spelling errors, typos, and clotted verbiage lends immediacy to a piece.)

I am fairly certain that my work scores low on the Literotica scale for the reason that my plotting gets in the way of the short, direct, path to the pornographic payoff.

That, and I am not especially facile with the flange A into slot B type of descriptions.

Finally, I have little interest in writing certain categories which score high at Literotica.

In that way, I am not 'commercial.'

 

[Guest]

Work Too Hard

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I was thinking about this, and it seems to me that I approach writing very much the same way I approach architecture. I can't simply start doing it and see what happens. First, I need to find and develop a solid, coherent idea, or else it will be a waste of time. Afterward, as Perdita said, it's a matter of finding a balance between the degree of satisfaction with the result and the need to actually finish the project. Otherwise I would go on working on it forever, forever finding small ways of improving something.


I push my art through time,
and shove and thrust and drive
like the ram of the belated,
until exhausted I believe myself content.
(How close are fatigue and satisfaction!)

 

[gauchecritic]

So speaking in terms of creativity then, maybe it's a poor parallel but can the immediacy of a musical 'jam' be captured by writing it down note for note?

Was the creativity of 'rap' subsumed into 'pap' when they decided to record it in a studio?

Can breathless prose be sculpted? Do we not take 'something' away when we change don't to do not? Do you recognize that you are taking something away?

At what point do you say 'enough'? Can it never be as soon as you type 'the end'?

Gauche

 

[Wills]

Anything I am posting for fun - like a 'short' - does not get more than a quick look over. I enjoy the challenge of spontaneity in getting something done quickly, I learn from setting myself that challenge - each time I gain from the excercise.

The short extracts posted under NaNo - entirely different, hard work, many rewrites, then and now. Only one piece posted in haste and that was rightly criticised.

Do I know I will ruin something by going back over it. Well yes, but only with 'shorts', I think the only objective with 'shorts' is to write them hard and fast. Fine tuning would take away aspects of the challenge I set for myself. Later I can read it against other 'shorts' posted and make my personal judgement as to its merit.

I treat 'shorts' purely as an exercise in taking the germ of an idea and turning it as fast as possible into a story, setting or sequence of events. I did one last night following something Perdita mentioned about lovemaking and menstruation. I am treating them as exercises in wordcraft.

If I was posting them for wider consumption, claiming them to be an authored story, then I would work on them at length, editing, fine tuning etc.

This additional message is purely to clarify my original post - written as a 'short'

Will's

 

[Lauren Hynde]

If you're jamming, you're jamming; you're not writing music. You're making it happen for immediate consumption only. If you're rapping, you're not writing poetry. Different media, completely different experiences for the 'addressee' of the message. I wouldn't say never, but I don't think we can apply the same rules.

If by the time you type the end, you're satisfied that you have achieved a balance between quality and the time you're willing to spend, so be it, but that is your choice. The story itself will always be passible of improvement.

Freshness and spontaneity are illusions at best, at worst they're traps.

 

[Guest]

You know, Gauche, whenever I read your serious posts I always feel as if you're not saying what you really mean. Sorry, that's how I read you right now (and above in your first post). I still don't know if you are asking about the creativity involved in writing for Lit., or elsewhere, or one's self.

And then you throw in the corollary to pop music! I don't think of rap or even R&R as art, so I won't address that. Perhaps Beethoven had something special when he began any of a number of his works, but we got the "finished" results and I have no interest in being a musicologist and studying his notebooks to see how they started out or what he "deleted".

"Breathless prose" makes me think of Molly Bloom's soliloquy, god only knows how long Joyce worked to get it sounding breathless. But I think what you meant by it was too literal, perhaps naively? Can't really tell.

To your final, seemingly desperate (but I have no idea really) query, no, I do not feel I'm taking anything away when I work on a story, poem, sentence, phrase. I am making something, assembling, if you will. Creativity can not be destructive, not in the end.

Perdita (who takes you much too seriously perhaps)

 

[Lauren Hynde]

"Breathless prose" makes me think of Molly Bloom's soliloquy, god only knows how long Joyce worked to get it sounding breathless.

Another thing I learnt from architecture. When you look at a finished work, the seemingly effortless was certainly the hardest to achieve.

 

[Wills]

Lauren

There are Architects who 'jam' design, Oscar Niemeyer, Jorn Utzon, even the early Gehry sketches for the Bilbao Guggenheim. Each of them produce simple line sketches, an image of their conception, design sketches produced out of a 'jamming' session or perhaps an inspirational flash. The ability to turn that sketch into a building is an entirely different matter, the Architect has a rule book as a guide, a building must meet a host of demanding criteria. Most fail, result - boring buildings.

A writer, musician, or artist has less fixed parameters, can exploit the fabric of their medium and push the boundaries of creativity almost infinitely. Only they can determine the end point, often a compromise between resources, exhaustion and the need to move forward.

Architects never have that flexibility except in the very rare examples like Gaudi whose clients invariably went bankrupt before Gaudi finished the bloody building - but look what gems he left us. There are modern day equivalents, Sir Colin St John Wilson's British Library, 14 years behind programme £100m over budget and a bankrupt Architect now an employee in another practice, because he spent too much time getting the detail - just perfect.

Will's

 

[Mhari]

Well, I've only written two things for Lit. Both really short, both in one go. I re-read them both, but didn't change anything (AFAICR). Maybe if I'd let them sit for a while and gone back to tinker with them, they'd have turned out better, but I was pretty satisfied with them.

My other stuff - my novel-forever-in-progress - I tinker with and work on, and I will likely never ever be satisfied with it. There are few scenes that I am exceptionally proud of, and one series of scenes that I will never be able to revise because I can't make myself re-read them. The rest I will undoubtedly play with forever, unless I get it published someday. (Har.)

I dunno. I like finding the just-perfect word for a sentence, or writing the just-perfect sentence for a scene. It's satisfying to get it right. Sometimes, it just takes me a while.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Lauren

There are Architects who 'jam' design, Oscar Niemeyer, Jorn Utzon, even the early Gehry sketches for the Bilbao Guggenheim. Each of them produce simple line sketches, an image of their conception, design sketches produced out of a 'jamming' session or perhaps an inspirational flash.

Absolutely. That primordial solid, coherent idea I was talking about can come out of a jam-session. That's the mark of a truly great architect. However, an idea is not final. If you take any of those early sketches to a builder, he won't be able to do anything with it, no matter how much he appreciates the subtleties of the design.

Those sketches must be intensively reworked and redefined before we can be satisfied with the result, no?

That's what I was saying, really. You can't compare the results of a jam-session and the final score of a symphony. They are two completely different things.

 

[Quasimodem]

Gauche,

You have your pick of two recording. You may either have as your only record, a copy of a group of musicians who have never played together before, running through the score of a piece they have never before seen. Alternately, you may have the copy that they recorded, five hours later, after familiarizing themselves with the tune, its timing, each other's playing, and after correcting any unsuspected dissonance that was noted the first time it was actually played.

I don't know about you, but I know which one I would choose.

You can, if you have a facile imagination and a captive audience, sit down and tell your daughters an extemporary bedtime story. Unless they wanted to stay up to watch the World Idol Contest, they may possibly enjoy your story.

But, how much improved might that story have been, had you sat down to work it out in advance?

Suppose you had plotted the story so events in the beginning foreshadow, but do not reveal, events to happen nearer the end. What if you had removed all self-contradictory details, and made the background reflect the atmosphere of what is happening, and what is still to happen?

Consider all those tricks which a writer has at hand, which can be marshalled by a writer to add to the reader's/listener's enjoyment. Few writers, however, can handle all of those many devices at the same time. Some thought must be made during the preplanning of where these effects should go, and how they are to be employed. Some revision will be required where the failures can be removed, or corrected, and what has worked can be heightened.

I don't know about you, but I am a firm believer in the that old saying: "Stories aren't written. They are rewritten."

 

[The_Fool]

First Thought:

When I was doing technical writing, Operation and Maintenance Manuals, we used to take a newly published manual and do what we called a "drop test." We would drop the manual and where ever it opened to, we would read for grammer, punctuation and spelling errors. Nine times out of ten, we would find something. This is after multiple drafts, writer edit, editor edit, technical edit and supervisor edit. There were typically two iterations of each. So, what I am saying is that there is always improvement in every work. Not just on grammer, punctuation and spelling but also clarity of thought and clarity of wording.

Second Thought:

I tend to work more spontaneously with shorts and poems. I will write, do a quick edit, let sit for a week and reread. I'm done. With poems, I don't always do that, even though I should. With Poems, I find that my imagery that I used as a basis changes even over as short a time as a week. Therefore, I usually go with my first concept and try not to rewrite.

 

[The_Fool]

I push my art through time,
and shove and thrust and drive
like the ram of the belated,
until exhausted I believe myself content.
(How close are fatigue and satisfaction!)

Okay Lauren, which erotic work did this come from?

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Okay Lauren, which erotic work did this come from?

It's from one of my poems. I guess you'll just have to look.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

So speaking in terms of creativity then, maybe it's a poor parallel but can the immediacy of a musical 'jam' be captured by writing it down note for note?

Was the creativity of 'rap' subsumed into 'pap' when they decided to record it in a studio?

Can breathless prose be sculpted? Do we not take 'something' away when we change don't to do not? Do you recognize that you are taking something away?

At what point do you say 'enough'? Can it never be as soon as you type 'the end'?

Gauche

Beat writers, Kerouac especially, espoused writing "bop prosody": prose that you allowed to just flow onto the paper unchecked and then published unchanged, just like improvised music. (In fact, jazz was the model.) Everyone knows the story of his writing "On The Road" in 10 days on one long roll of printer's stock because he couldn't be bothered to stop and interupt the natural flow by changing the paper in his typewriter.

Well, it turns out that Jack didn't quite practice what he preached, and he worked pretty hard to get his prose to sound spontaneous and unrehearsed. He edited and rewrote plenty.

The thing is, writing is a static art like painting, not a dynamic art like music. In music, once the moment is gone, you can't go back and change it. In writing, once you put the words on the page, they can always be changed and almost always be improved upon. Sometimes you'll be on a streak and what you write will be pretty good without much editing, but I don't think I've ever written anything that didn't benefit from a few changes.

Do we work too hard at what we write here? If we just write for Lit, probably yes. The standards here are pretty low, and most readers don't expect much or appreciate the effort that we put into our stories. But if we write for ourselves, then no, we don't. It's impossible to work too hard on something if you care about it, and the more you care, the harder you work.

---dr.M.

 

[mtnman2003]

Stroke versus Content

Gauche:

Time spent thinking about stories and related scores would scare me to death.

I write based on what my mind has rolled over many times. Being relatively new to the process, I find alot of background or basis for the story comes from similar experiences or created scenarios based on similar experience.

The content then comes forth, based on the intent of the story. For example, descriptive scenes of sex tend to direct readers to stroke, with no real requirement for literary content, ie., more than the 8th grade reading level. Direct, well put together, fluent, inspired sex rates high scores.

I have tended to meet this lower level requirement, meeting the masses so to speak. This is totally different that my published finance and accounting texts. Time requirements are substantially different as well. Well thought out, detailed stories would take substantial more thought and planning.

Next on the list.

Mtn

 

[gauchecritic]

I'm trying to solidify what my original intents were with this thread (and failing miserably as the Mexchick* pointed out, hence this post)

Being vague and uncertain don't help because Mtn, Mab, Fool and even Quasi touched on aspects of what I mean. whereas Lauren and Wills just started getting sidetracked about Mackintosh or some other builder.

So, am I possibly talking about prose as opposed to writing? Do we need to write prose for praise or will writing suffice for wanking?

Gauche

*I hope Mexchick isn't some sort of Russian swear word I inadvertantly invented.

 

[wildsweetone]

my thoughts...


I've just been discussing Literary merit. Is all the hard work we put in to our stories appreciated?

Do we need appreciation from others, or should we be content with knowing that the hard work some of us put into our stories is enough?

I think that it depends entirely on the 'market' as to whether our work becomes appreciated or not.

If we forget about character development and plots (however little we use) or even conflict and resolution would we get straight 5s or would we still get 4.36 averages?

I personally think that this site has a majority of readers who want ultimately to read about sex. No amount of plot or character development is going to make a lot of difference to the majority of Literotica readers.

Would you be able to write a simple straightforward story without including $4 words, perfect structure, spelling and punctuation?

I write whatever I write. To write a pure jack off story feels as if it would simply fall off my fingertips, no great deal of effort would be required. How much of a challenge it would become to specifically write such a story is yet to be discovered, for me. My writing intent seems to have evolved past 'worrying' about the jack off element.

Do you recognise 'immediacy' in your work? Have you ever written something which you know you will ruin if you go back and check it through ten times?

I have written some stories with 'immediacy' that you speak of. Mostly flash fiction. Parts of my other writing has that 'immediacy' feel about it, but not enough to stop me from doing a proofread, at the very least.

So, am I possibly talking about prose as opposed to writing? Do we need to write prose for praise or will writing suffice for wanking?

It depends entirely on whether you wish to write for a specific market or not. If your market is going to be this site, or others similar to it, then the way the ego stroke goes, is to write sufficiently well for 'wanking'.

I guess really it all boils down to whether you want to see growth in your writing. Are you willing to put in the slog to improve your skills, to hone your talent? Do you need to have the 'far out I came five times' feedback stroke? Or, can you be happy in knowing that whatever work you put out, you put it out to the very best of your own skills?

If your writing is growing to the point of you knowing you write well, but your readers are lowish voting you, then perhaps it's time to look seriously at your literary merit and choose a 'different' outlet that meets the challenges you are setting for yourself.

I believe writing is ever evolving, ever growing. At least, that's how it seems to be for me.

 

[LadyJane]

My approach is to write erotica quickly, can finish a 9,000 word story in a couple of sittings. I go through it a few times, mostly correcting sentence structures, passive voice, over use of certain words, etc., but I don't spend much time perfecting the story. I don't fool myself here on Lit; the main reason for my scores has nothing to do with my writing ability (although some Feedback does compliment my "well written story" but who knows what that means?) I try to go for the hot, outrageous sex scenes and I do those best by laying them down quickly and not fussing with them too much later.

For my mainstream romance, I write and then re-write, and then re-write again. I don't have an innate story-telling ability and need to work at it.

 

[Guest]

Gauche, I’ve been thinking more on this after your last post above. I know your writing well because I have liked it and appreciated it since I first came to Lit.—as writing—including various shorts and exercises you’ve posted here and there. I suspect you don’t work like most of the authors on the AH, like most of those posting here; definitely not like me. It became evident to me as I thought more on your posts here on this thread, and elsewhere. What seems obvious now is that you most often, and probably purposely, do not “go back and check it through ten times”.

Too, in judging writing on Lit., whether through feedback or votes, it is probably not obvious who has this gift and who doesn’t. I think it is rare that a writer can produce something truly brilliant or first-rate without hard and big rewrites. I’ve read many authors on Lit. who have posted that they write ‘in a flash’ and do minimal editing. Almost always I would have deduced this myself. The best writers I’ve read on Lit. I am certain “work” after the initial first draft, or flash, or whatever. I do.

I know you don’t read poetry, but I think this may mean something anyhow. All of my poems came in flashes, but that was the very minimal beginning. There were always at least a couple dozen (usually more) rewrites over a period of weeks or months (even a year for some). Yet at the end, when I felt a poem was “finished”, the core of my initial “story” was still there, merely refined, tailored, sculpted, lit, tuned, etc.

I daresay your mind goes through this type of process as you write initially, in an immediacy that is rare. If it was all I had to go by I could confidently write something substantive about the way you think merely from a wide selection of your posts. I could actually get quite academic on your arse, but I won't, haha. I am certain others could too. I say this on my own behalf because I know your work and I am an extraordinary reader. I say it without regard for or fear of conceit.

I recall a thread sometime ago wherein I tried to explain how fine your Lit. persona came across and was generally regarded (vs. what you had posted). I recall it now because thinking more, in the past few hours, I think it too bad you are not as appreciated in depth as you could be, as you most likely wish to be. I hope this is not embarrassing to you. I have tried to give a real answer to your confusing questions, which I suspect were so due to a peculiar modesty and seemingly contrary ego. OK?

I am submitting this with minimal editing as I think it worth stating more from the heart than brain. I hope you do too.

The Mexchick