Why am I ticked off?
It's not that you criticized the stories. It's that you treated the writers like fifth graders in need of correction regarding their "What I Did Last Summer " essay, and you were the benevolent teacher just trying to bring the best out in them. "Oh, such simple rules. Just a few steps to improvement. Oh, if only you understand narrative structure as I do ..."
I write for a living. I rarely bring this up, but the amount of money I get paid to write for a living is not inconsiderable. I don't know if I have talent, but people I consider talented like my stuff, so I'll at least say I'm in the ballpark.
I would never, NEVER take the tone you took with my fellow writers on this board.
The more rational voices here have kept us from a flame war. But as (I assume) the only professional writer on these boards, I'll do the dirty work. You, papa_laz, are neither as knowledgeable nor insightful as you would like to think you are.
These. Are. Stories.
I'm not going to try to convince you. I'm not going to try to win you over. I'm not going to be reasonable. I don't care if this was only a troll. I'm grabbing you by the intellectual lapels and saying very quietly-- being careful to make sure my spittle lands directly on your trembling corneas-- that ...
... These. Are. Stories.
They're not constructed the way you prefer, but many tell tales of interesting characters doing interesting things. That's a story. Period.
The rather odd structure is a product of the continuing narrative style of a campaign; the variant world-structures often need a quick explanation to avoid whackloads of boring exposition during the tale. You may be correct -- that structure recurs quite frequently, and isn't exactly lemony-fresh.
But no matter how, where or when you choose to begin the narrative, I can find an example from classical literature, film, or my bastard beloved medium television which begins in exactly the same way.
One could even argue that the "opening credits" of television shows are their world-establishing prologues ... "Ahh, there's the blonde girl, she hunts, well I guess vampires, and those are her friends -- wait, he's a vampire, his head went all bumpy, I guess he works with them though ... and there's the gang of them walking together. Okay, start today's story." Annnnd out.
Never mind Apocalypse Now, where they actually march Martin Sheen into the office, tell him what he's going to do for the rest of the movie, and then send him off to do ... exactly that.
Not a story, that? Not a tale well told, that?
The only thing I hate worse than condescending pseudo-intellectuals are condescending pseudo-intellectuals who haven't properly thought out their theses.
I rarely grow angry when reading board posts, but I need to say this: there is nothing harder to do than write. NOTHING. Directing, you have a script to work from, Acting, you have the script as a guideline. Any writer, anyone who offers up their imagination, who takes the leap of faith to forge images and characters in our minds through nothing but cunning combinations of simple words well chosen, that person demands respect.
Some of the writers on these boards are very, very bad. Some of them are very, very good. Some of them make me very glad they're not competing for the same jobs I am.
All of them, from the simple act of actually heaving words and ideas around and slapping them down for others to see, have more of a right to their opinions on how writing works than you do.
I leave you with the secret motto of every writer on the planet:
Type or shut up.
No pseudonyms,
John Rogers
It's not that you criticized the stories. It's that you treated the writers like fifth graders in need of correction regarding their "What I Did Last Summer " essay, and you were the benevolent teacher just trying to bring the best out in them. "Oh, such simple rules. Just a few steps to improvement. Oh, if only you understand narrative structure as I do ..."
I write for a living. I rarely bring this up, but the amount of money I get paid to write for a living is not inconsiderable. I don't know if I have talent, but people I consider talented like my stuff, so I'll at least say I'm in the ballpark.
I would never, NEVER take the tone you took with my fellow writers on this board.
The more rational voices here have kept us from a flame war. But as (I assume) the only professional writer on these boards, I'll do the dirty work. You, papa_laz, are neither as knowledgeable nor insightful as you would like to think you are.
These. Are. Stories.
I'm not going to try to convince you. I'm not going to try to win you over. I'm not going to be reasonable. I don't care if this was only a troll. I'm grabbing you by the intellectual lapels and saying very quietly-- being careful to make sure my spittle lands directly on your trembling corneas-- that ...
... These. Are. Stories.
They're not constructed the way you prefer, but many tell tales of interesting characters doing interesting things. That's a story. Period.
The rather odd structure is a product of the continuing narrative style of a campaign; the variant world-structures often need a quick explanation to avoid whackloads of boring exposition during the tale. You may be correct -- that structure recurs quite frequently, and isn't exactly lemony-fresh.
But no matter how, where or when you choose to begin the narrative, I can find an example from classical literature, film, or my bastard beloved medium television which begins in exactly the same way.
One could even argue that the "opening credits" of television shows are their world-establishing prologues ... "Ahh, there's the blonde girl, she hunts, well I guess vampires, and those are her friends -- wait, he's a vampire, his head went all bumpy, I guess he works with them though ... and there's the gang of them walking together. Okay, start today's story." Annnnd out.
Never mind Apocalypse Now, where they actually march Martin Sheen into the office, tell him what he's going to do for the rest of the movie, and then send him off to do ... exactly that.
Not a story, that? Not a tale well told, that?
The only thing I hate worse than condescending pseudo-intellectuals are condescending pseudo-intellectuals who haven't properly thought out their theses.
I rarely grow angry when reading board posts, but I need to say this: there is nothing harder to do than write. NOTHING. Directing, you have a script to work from, Acting, you have the script as a guideline. Any writer, anyone who offers up their imagination, who takes the leap of faith to forge images and characters in our minds through nothing but cunning combinations of simple words well chosen, that person demands respect.
Some of the writers on these boards are very, very bad. Some of them are very, very good. Some of them make me very glad they're not competing for the same jobs I am.
All of them, from the simple act of actually heaving words and ideas around and slapping them down for others to see, have more of a right to their opinions on how writing works than you do.
I leave you with the secret motto of every writer on the planet:
Type or shut up.
No pseudonyms,
John Rogers
