How's your novel, everybody?
Also accepted
>chapbook
>short stories collection
>blog
>tfw have lots of ideas but don't have the discipline or experience to execute any of them properly
I'm still blogging, and have a few readers, but there's no sign it's going anywhere. Posting shit to reddit gets me a few thousand hits when I do, but again, I don't see how this is ever going to get bigger than it is. If I don't change, I've peaked.
>>7526350
Have you tried adderall?
>>7526360
Not that guy, but I've seriously considered it. I have a pretty big portfolio of commissioned work, but when it comes to sitting down and really writing something I can't focus for shit. I was always afraid it'd impair my creativity, though.
>>7526339
man i like klosterman
owl city was a decent book
lotta good non-fiction essay type things
my novel
if it is ever written
will come of like somekind of shitty dfw-worship by an edgy tryhard
it is inevitable
novella
50 pages in
it's going ok, i probably won't try to publish it, just post it on my site or whatever
i'm kind of stuck trying to redirect where it ends up because i was told the end sucked balls
I'm doing pretty good so far, writing a novella which is at 40 pages so far and I'm aiming for around 80.
Not ever going to be seen by anyone but me and a close friend or two, it'll just be for me to use to improve my writing.
I've been out of it for a good three years now. How do I get back on track and improve?
25k but i'm thinking of changing some plot points to move the story into action more quickly.
>>7527440
just start writing again. read books on writing.
I have a detailed concept for something similar to Confederacy of Dunces, however i dont have any character development as of yet and cant decide whether i want to write it as a comedy or a kind of absurdist tragi-comedy or whether i want to write it as a play or a novel.
Stagnating currently at 22k. My first novel and I'm worried that it'll either never get finished like so many of my other creative projects or just plain suck and have no depth to it.
Also I can't for the life of me think what direction I want it to go in or what the major conflict(s) should be.
>>7526339
Wrote about 125 pages a few years back. Scrapped the whole thing afterwards. But my collection of poetry is doing well. Might even get published. My talks with a local poetry paper editor looked promising a while back.
>>7526339
not bad desu
>>7527263
the image is from Jeb Lund's take down of Grantland (the sports site)
http://www.mrdestructo.com/2011/05/bill-simmons-and-grantland.html
>>7527278
>'m kind of stuck trying to redirect where it ends up because i was told the end sucked balls
generally the solution to that problem is to cut back before the ending was inevitable. Try from page 30.
>>7529165
One contributor Simmons has brought on who would surely shit on Reilly while wondering if Reilly's ability to be shit on is what unexpectedly actually secretly makes him really really great is Chuck Klosterman, the ultimate avatar of nerdbag beta-male hostile self-aggrandizement clad in a soft disguise of bad hair and crew-neck sweaters. Mark Ames already destroyed Klosterman seven years ago (after a boorish and predictably Exile-esque ad hominem), but it warrants mentioning that his schtick is perfect for the level at which Bill Simmons operates. His methodology is one of torturously stupid analogies propping up a worldview that runs the gamut from socially vampiric to merely narcissistic. To quote General Ze'evi, "He is the Thomas Friedman of pop culture." When he's really throwing down science, when he announces that he's challenging the reader, Klosterman lards meaningless observations about meaningless phenomena with cute paradoxes, trying to rationalize the impossible tension between two strawmen he's invented, before arriving at a conclusion that antagonizes the web-traffic-spiking intelligentsia while validating and comforting the incurious.
His treatment of Billy Joel is a perfect example. In Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs, he oversees a rhetorical tennis match between the false binary that "Billy Joel Is Terrible" and "Billy Joel Is Secretly Great" by kicking around the man's career and eventually making the same evaluations everyone else already has: Billy Joel is a pretty good piano player who writes pretty good (and some great) pop songs about being in love, and usually once an album has a lyrically superior and commercially unviable song like "Vienna." The important points here are that:
1. That last sentence isn't long enough to count as an article or book chapter, and:
2. Writing that single sentence doesn't take you through the intellectual and emotional gravity well at the center of the universe, Chuck Klosterman.
Simmons goes through this same process with almost everything, sometimes spending a whole column on a strident criticism, then another walking it back too far, then reaching a synthesis as if it occasioned some degree of struggle. It's "Baby's First Hegelian Dialectic," only the logical building blocks are huge and can't really fit in his tiny hands. (Worse, like Klosterman, his analysis of sporting events now largely constitutes analyzing how he might come to analyze the sporting events later, and how he has to think about how he will reevaluate the hypothetical in light of outcomes that haven't even happened.)
there's more about him there
