Only 8 hours to go until Script Frenzy 2011 kicks off! And only about an hour before our London Kick-Off Party :)
I don't have much of an outline in mind, although I do have a lot of ideas. I'm writing a crime TV series for which I need to write a good logline, as I've been struggling to explain it concisely to people. I will see how this year goes given a) this is the first time I ever write a completely original script (last year was an adaptation of one of my previous works) and b) I'm ML on my own this year (last year I had a co-ML, but she's quite busy with work at this time of year and she didn't want to Screnzy again).
I've added a page count widget to the sidebar of this site, I have organised my tweetdeck efficiently for MLing purposes, I have a little purple notebook with lyurical poetry by Edgar Allan Poe on the cover, and I've installed the latest beta version of Scrivener.
I'm as ready as I'll ever be, I guess. Bring April on, and let's write the heck out of this premise!
Thursday 31 March 2011
Wednesday 30 March 2011
To laugh or to cry?
The first rule of wannabe writers is 'Don't be a jerk.'
The second rule of wannabe writers is 'Don't be a jerk.'
The funny bit:
Check out the oh-so-classy reaction of this self-published author to a review that she didn't entirely approve of.
Note that the review isn't altogether bad. The reviewer even commends the story as entertaining until the end, but he does mention numerous typos, spelling errors and grammatical mistakes. The comments are where it all goes sour, as the author takes it upon herself to correct the reviewer, with such gems as 'My writing is just fine' or 'My book is great'. If you read further down the comments, you'll find she stands proudly by her terrible grammar and syntax, telling people to f*ck off.
Just scan the review to get the jist of it, and look at the first ten or so comments for that lovely, self-righteous feeling of 'OMG, are people really that unaware?' Comments are closed now, which is just as well, but it did put my stressful morning in perspective.
The serious bit:
What shocked me most in all of this what that the author seemed to imply in her comments that the reviewer didn't understand her sentences because they weren't English? I'm not even sure, as this woman's wording is terrible, but I felt so incensed by her even implying that! I spent so long making sure my English was faultless, for someone who can't even realise their writing is imcomprehensible to come out with such an argument was cringe-worthy.
For the record, I thought the reviewer was definitely too indulgent about her grammar/syntax/general massacre of the English language. I wouldn't even have reviewed the book. I'd probably have asked for a refund. And applied for a job as her editor.
The second rule of wannabe writers is 'Don't be a jerk.'
The funny bit:
Check out the oh-so-classy reaction of this self-published author to a review that she didn't entirely approve of.
Note that the review isn't altogether bad. The reviewer even commends the story as entertaining until the end, but he does mention numerous typos, spelling errors and grammatical mistakes. The comments are where it all goes sour, as the author takes it upon herself to correct the reviewer, with such gems as 'My writing is just fine' or 'My book is great'. If you read further down the comments, you'll find she stands proudly by her terrible grammar and syntax, telling people to f*ck off.
Just scan the review to get the jist of it, and look at the first ten or so comments for that lovely, self-righteous feeling of 'OMG, are people really that unaware?' Comments are closed now, which is just as well, but it did put my stressful morning in perspective.
The serious bit:
What shocked me most in all of this what that the author seemed to imply in her comments that the reviewer didn't understand her sentences because they weren't English? I'm not even sure, as this woman's wording is terrible, but I felt so incensed by her even implying that! I spent so long making sure my English was faultless, for someone who can't even realise their writing is imcomprehensible to come out with such an argument was cringe-worthy.
For the record, I thought the reviewer was definitely too indulgent about her grammar/syntax/general massacre of the English language. I wouldn't even have reviewed the book. I'd probably have asked for a refund. And applied for a job as her editor.
Monday 28 March 2011
Podcasts & Mary Robinette Kowal
I've never really liked listening to music on the radio - never knowing whether I'm going to like the next song really annoys me - but I like listening to shows regularly. I followed a few radio shows when I was younger, but I haven't in ages. I listen to Woman's Hour from time to time (especially when the amazing Kaite Welsh is on), but I get most of my spoken word entertainment from podcasts nowadays.
Ever since I discovered podcasts, about six or seven years ago (can't believe it's been that long!), I've been addicted to them. I used to listen to Harry Potter podcasts, as soon as they were out every week for several years when I was at uni. I couldn't watch any English-speaking TV, although I wouldn't go near French-dubbed movies with a barge-long pole, so these casts were my main source of authentic spoken English reference. I believe they're a huge part of why I have a bit of an American-ish accent when I speak.
Now though, I listen to writing podcasts, my favourites being Mur Lafferty's I Should Be Writing, which I've probably mentioned before, and the amazing, award-winning Writing Excuses. As I've a bit of an obsessive nerd, I've gone back in the archive and listened to every episode since both shows began. One of my favourite Writing Excuses episode ever is from back in 2009: Guest speaker Mary Robinette Kowal, Campbell-winning author and professional puppeteer (seriously, how cool is that?) talks about the four principles of puppetry and how to apply them to writing. Apart from being a fascinating insight into puppet theatre theory, it's a great discussion of what writing is about (mind-controlling the reader, among other things) and just a really fun talk to listen to.
So I think you should go listen to it here - Writing Excuses Season 3 Episode 14 - The Four Principles of Puppetry with Mary Robinette Kowal - and if you're as intrigued by Kowal's cool writing theories as I was, you should also read her Hugo-nominated novel, Shades of Milk and Honey (Tor Books, 2010, ISBN 978-0765325563 - order it from your local bookstore). I listened to the audiobook (read by Kowal, which was a lovely bonus) this week-end and I thoroughly enjoyed it. The story is basically Jane Austen with magic. Need I say more? Probably not, but in case you're not convinced, here's the boing-boing review.
Thursday 24 March 2011
As you may have noticed...
I'm not very consistent. Heck, I think it's even fair to say I'm quite inconsistent.
I consider this particular quirk of mine to be one of my more annoying character traits. Whenever I try to do something even remotely long term, like make a really fancy costume, exercise regularly, practise drawing, diet, write a book or, say, a blog... I tend to just stop after a while. It's why I like Nanowrimo and Script Frenzy so much: I find it much easier to focus on one month and rush something out, even if it's more difficult, than to do it slowly over a long period of time.
I am well aware there are no magic secret and I know I won't get better at writing without doing a large amount of writing. So I am trying to be more consistent, to do things in a less hectic way, a little bit at a time. I'm breaking my big goals into smaller ones, detailing the process on notecards, giving myself a time-frame to finish each small goal. To make sure I make good on these, I got myself a nifty corkboard that fits right next to my desk. I've divided it into three categories (To Do, Doing and Done). I add new goals to the To Do column, then move them into Doing and eventually Done, as I make progress. Right now, in Doing, I have:
- Create main characters, both protagonists and antagonists
- Figure out conflicts
- Plot story arc and character arcs
- Do worldbuilding/research
- Plot scenes
I got the idea from a Holly Lisle article. What I like most about her courses is that she's so incredibly well-organised. It's been helpful, although it hasn't revolutionised the way I write yet. At least, my writing space looks pretty cool:
I consider this particular quirk of mine to be one of my more annoying character traits. Whenever I try to do something even remotely long term, like make a really fancy costume, exercise regularly, practise drawing, diet, write a book or, say, a blog... I tend to just stop after a while. It's why I like Nanowrimo and Script Frenzy so much: I find it much easier to focus on one month and rush something out, even if it's more difficult, than to do it slowly over a long period of time.
I am well aware there are no magic secret and I know I won't get better at writing without doing a large amount of writing. So I am trying to be more consistent, to do things in a less hectic way, a little bit at a time. I'm breaking my big goals into smaller ones, detailing the process on notecards, giving myself a time-frame to finish each small goal. To make sure I make good on these, I got myself a nifty corkboard that fits right next to my desk. I've divided it into three categories (To Do, Doing and Done). I add new goals to the To Do column, then move them into Doing and eventually Done, as I make progress. Right now, in Doing, I have:
- Create main characters, both protagonists and antagonists
- Figure out conflicts
- Plot story arc and character arcs
- Do worldbuilding/research
- Plot scenes
I got the idea from a Holly Lisle article. What I like most about her courses is that she's so incredibly well-organised. It's been helpful, although it hasn't revolutionised the way I write yet. At least, my writing space looks pretty cool:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)