|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
I can't upload 2 of my books here because they play with form(at) which makes them unreproduceable within the software defaults here. In places, they undermine words, letters, alphabets, typefaces etc, the very things us writers take for granted as our stock in trade. If you really want a laugh (not), I have uploaded a 2000 word passage from one that gives you an idea about deforming language, through description in the old fashioned stylee, rather than anything visually.
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
chall
|
|
|
|
Hi, just read that – very interesting. I have just also read ‘The God of Small Things’, where the writer does mess around all the time with metaphor and simile, but in a way that really does integrate and work well with the story. So in other words, something positive is added to the mix to make for an enhanced reading experience. But even so, often the use of language (although beautiful) is distracting and also irritating, as you just become interested in what is happening and she lays some clever, clever metaphor down instead, thus leading to alienation. The God of Small Things is not that experimental – and just using it as an example here, but anyway the form of the language (and also the plot) is slightly different and more to the point, does really work. The trouble with experimental writing is that it is often alienating, distracting and too much hard work to bother with. Also there is always the emperor's new clothes syndrome. I thought your sample was interesting, but at the same time, all I could really see was the use of unusual or quirky description. So what I’m trying to say (and not very well) is that unless you can integrate the experimental aspects right in with the story – so that it works on all levels and is still appealing to the reader, then all the reader really sees is someone messing around with form or language, and it doesn’t really work as an integrated piece.
*
|
|
Ais
|
|
|
|
You can always attach your document to a forum post, not sure about size limits, but you can zip it though.
Work as if you live in the early days of a better nation - Alasdair Gray
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Quote: Ais, Friday, 15 May 2009 09:37You can always attach your document to a forum post, not sure about size limits, but you can zip it though. er it's a 70,000 word novel ... That would be on heck of a long post to have to trawl through.
This post was last edited by sulcus, 15 May 2009, 10:24
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your thoughts Chall. This is a piece ripped out of context from the novel. A lot of what has gone before is about how we acquire language and it's poverty as a tool for making ourselves understood clearly. This is done through the developmental relationship of a mother and her burgeoning young child, so it is embedded within a context of character etc and not just randomly thrown at some metaphorical wall and see what sticks ...
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Does anyone else feel that we are in desperate need of some genuinely new metaphors as the gamut of the 20th Century novel pretty much put together every possible word combination and exhausted metaphor to the extent where they now reverberate as cliche when you encounter them... Hence that post of the George Orwell piece in full on another thread.
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
chall
|
|
|
|
Yes! Where is George Orwell piece? Aren't there billions of combinations of words or numbers? So should be easy to put together original metaphors (but of course, it isn't!)
*
|
|
sulcus
|
|
|
|
Quote: chall, Friday, 15 May 2009 13:48Yes! Where is George Orwell piece? http://www.george-orwell.org/Politics_and_the_English_Language/0.html
"A,B&E", "Not In My Name" and "52FF" (flash fiction anthology) all available on Amazon Kindle"How a psychopath makes sweet love. I can get you ringside. Royal box even."
|
|
Ais
|
|
|
|
I had fun a while back (still do) with alien syntax and expressions in a novel - with different cultural references their own sayings would need to be different, yet recognisable in as well as out of context... Another option to explore for your fertile mind sulcus. Unless the whole novel is a visual loop that needs to be seen in its entirely, then attach a 'chapter' or three instead - that's what I meant to say (but got distracted.)
Work as if you live in the early days of a better nation - Alasdair Gray
|
|
joben
|
|
|
|
Quote: sulcus, Friday, 15 May 2009 13:37Does anyone else feel that we are in desperate need of some genuinely new metaphors as the gamut of the 20th Century novel pretty much put together every possible word combination and exhausted metaphor to the extent where they now reverberate as cliche when you encounter them... Hence that post of the George Orwell piece in full on another thread. Each time anything is read it can be seen in a different light can't it? I might read something one day and then read it again a year later and see it in a completely different way. So, as well as the endless ways that things can be written whether it be a metaphor or anything else there are the different ways that each of us can see it at different times, depending on our mood. .....and then there is the endless variety in the way that different individuals read something. I don't think you can say that every possible combination has been used. Heck, I read my own stuff and interpret it differently each time so god knows what others make of it. I think, sometimes, we examine words to the exclusion of the emotions of the reader. We concentrate on the writing, not the reading. It is the emotion of the reader that adds the colour. Not sure I'm making sense here; been cooking; had some wine; feeling at one with the world. So when I read this later I will see it with completely different eyes and, no doubt, wish I could delete it.
This post was last edited by joben, 15 May 2009, 15:05
I also talk bollocks on; awriteblog.com
|