Argh. I’m doing the very first thing Nathan says not to do!
Revenant my WIP starts out like this. My main character wakes up. There’s a very good reason for this, in my opinion. It establishes something important about my main character.
I’ll give it some thought, but I doubt I’ll change it. I’ll just hope it falls into the area that Nathan Bransford’s thinking about when he says: “Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying you can’t use one of these openings or that there aren’t good books that start this way.”
I will do what he says next:
“I am saying that you should think once, twice, and five thousand times about using these.”
I still doubt I’ll change it.
The Basement Office 
Let me tell you what is.
Nathan Bransford does not care whether you write or not. He doesn’t care if you are happy or not. He could not care less whether you are happy writing or not. His blog is for HIM. To talk about how awesome he is. Because in his heart he doubts he is. When he talks about how to write, he is exorcising a demon. This is about him and his demon. It has nothing to do with you. Nothing at all. He is ranting. He is, dare I say it, expressing his insecurity. The only extent to which it matters to him whether you even exist is that he wants the anonymous masses to give him hits, to validate him. This is parasitism.
Were you lucky enough to come onto the scene after Miss Snark? She was even worse, the gold standard of anti-muses. Also an ex literary agent. (And you know what *they* are, right?) She was in a bad mood, so she started a blog, to be a bitchy know-it-all, to attract writers on the pretext of helping them, which she may very well have done in purely mechanical terms of explaining how to properly frame a manuscript, while crushing their spirits. Her name said it all; she was condescending and destructive – always, of *course*, couching her belittling attitude in the cloak of “realism”; she was doing it for those poor helpless writers, for their own good. Balls. She could have been suportive. Instead, she was one of those tiny, tiny people who think that putting others down is going to solve their own self-esteem issues. But, of course, she attracted writers, because when it comes to self-esteem issues, they wrote (ah, shit, I’m about to get into a punny metaphor) – never mind, suffice it so say that writers are so insecure they *applaud* people who make them feel like shit. People like Miss Snark. And they would say *anything* to defend her. I tried to explain what she really is at a party once, and was told “she’s really helpful to people,” which is like saying cell phones provide freedom. Who was in the room when I was told this literary agent was really helpful? Arin Murphy-Hiscock, Ceri Young, Rob St.Martin, and Marc Mackay. All of whom were paid professional published (or having signed the publication contract) writers, three of them in fiction. None of whom had gone through a literary agent.
If you want to feel insecure about your writing for the rest of your life, if you want to question whether you are good or not, and never trust yourself, by all means read the “writing advice” of bloggers, particularly the blogs of writers and literary agents.
I wish you would not do this. You should not. You have everything you need already. How do I know this? I read Revenant. I have the highest standards of everyone you know, and I liked it. A lot.
t!
>Nathan Bransford does not care whether you write or not. He doesn’t care if you are >happy or not.
>He could not care less whether you are happy writing or not.
Of course he doesn’t. He doesn’t KNOW me. I know HIM.
>His blog is for HIM. To talk about how awesome he is. Because in his heart he doubts >he is.
>When he talks about how to write, he is exorcising a demon. This is about him and his >demon.
Perhaps it is. I don’t know why he has a blog.
I don’t think you do either. What you suppose seems a bit strong.
He’s accomplished in the field, he’s got information and experience to pass on. It could be bullshit, or
maybe, just maybe, he knows what the pros do. He might be working from self-doubt, insecurity or
some demon riding his shoulder.
This does not necessarily invalidate what he’s writing.
If I take a class in physics, can you ascribe the same motives to the teacher? Maybe.
Is the information wrong? Not necessarily.
>It has nothing to do with you. Nothing at all.
Of course not.
>He is ranting. He is, dare I say it, expressing his insecurity.
You are really fond of the “insecurity is the root of all bad things” argument. I’m still not convinced.
Strike that, I find you have good points but it’s too absolute for me to agree.
> The only extent to which it matters to him whether you even exist is that he wants
> the anonymous masses to give him hits, to validate him. This is parasitism.
Well that’s true. He wants/needs the hits. Hits to the blog means more eyes on his works, which
means more money in his pocket. Professional artists ARE parasites. This isn’t
necessarily a bad thing.
I aspire to be one. I’d love to live off the residuals of my novels someday.
> Were you lucky enough to come onto the scene after Miss Snark?
Never heard of her. I might look her up now.
> She was even worse, the gold standard of anti-muses. Also an ex literary agent.
> (And you know what *they* are, right?) She was in a bad mood, so she started a blog,
> to be a bitchy know-it-all, to attract writers on the pretext of helping them,
> which she may very well have done in purely mechanical terms of explaining how to
> properly frame a manuscript,
> while crushing their spirits. Her name said it all; she was condescending and
> destructive – always, of *course*, couching her belittling attitude in the
> cloak of “realism”; she was doing it for those poor helpless writers, for their own good.
I don’t know. That sounds shitty sure, but if a BLOG of all things can discourage you, what kind of
weakling must those writers be? You say she did help them on at least a purely technical level.
That’s gotta count for something. It’s information that needs to be learned…snark can be
left behind.
Personally, I won’t be reading that kind of blog long. I’d double check the info provided as well.
But that’s just me and HOPEFULLY the majority of people who read this site.
> She could have been suportive.
> Instead, she was one of those tiny, tiny people who think that putting others down is
> going to
> solve their own self-esteem issues. But, of course, she attracted writers, because when > it comes
> to self-esteem issues, they wrote (ah, shit, I’m about to get into a punny metaphor) –
She seems to have chosen not to be supportive. Is she still around?
I just googled, and it seems she hasn’t been around since 2007. I’d guess, because people got
fed up and stopped reading. Good for writers no?
> never mind, suffice it so say that writers are so insecure they *applaud* people who
> make them
> feel like shit. People like Miss Snark. And they would say *anything* to defend her. I
> tried
> to explain what she really is at a party once, and was told “she’s really helpful to
> people,”
> which is like saying cell phones provide freedom.
Hold on. That’s a big generalisation there. I’ve browsed a few entries and granted I don’t have
the measure of her, but I don’t really want to defend her. I see nothing so far that couldn’t have
been learned from other places (incidentally, sites like Nathan Bransford’s).
It’s also an triffle insulting to be lumped in with masochist self-abusers. I do not think that
all writers fit this profile. I’ll confess to some doubts and insecurities but not this.
> Who was in the room when I was told
> this literary agent was really helpful? Arin Murphy-Hiscock, Ceri Young, Rob St.Martin, > and Marc Mackay.
> All of whom were paid professional published (or having signed the publication
> contract) writers,
> three of them in fiction. None of whom had gone through a literary agent.
Are you saying they didn’t get help from her? Not everyone responds in the same way to
the same stimulus. Some perhaps took it with a grain of salt and wrote it off as sarcasm or some such. Some people thrive when abused too (I’m not one of them mind you)
Perhaps they are wrong, she is an evil bitch but she was foiled because they DID get
help from her despite rather than because. I can’t say. It’s possible. Even a broken watch is right twice a day.
> If you want to feel insecure about your writing for the rest of your life, if you want to
> question
> whether you are good or not, and never trust yourself, by all means read the
> “writing advice” of bloggers, particularly the blogs of writers and literary agents.
> I wish you would not do this. You should not. You have everything you need already.
I do not feel that I know everything. It would be the height of hubris for me to make that claim.
I read the blogs for many reasons. I like to read about the craft of writing. Crappy or good, it
keeps me focused ON writing. Sometimes the advice resonates, sometimes it makes me decide
to go another way (like the post on “why I write” if I had taken the “advice” I wouldn’t be writing!)
The fact is, there’s lots to learn. Where does one learn how to write?
Here’s my take:
– by writing.
– by reading widely
– by listening to the pros on what works for them and making up your own mind on what works for you
– by discussing writing with others
The 3rd point involves reading blogs. It requires a certain amount of critical thinking skills
but I believe we have them.
> How do I know this? I read Revenant. I have the highest standards of everyone you
> know, and I liked it. A lot.
I know you have the highest standards and I’m VERY flattered, more than you know t!
But Revenant needs work. I just re-read it for the 10th time for revision. It needs a lot of work.
It’s got some great stuff, but it won’t be finished until I put in that work. The more I learn, the better that work will be.
Hopefully when I’m done, it’ll be even better than the version you read and you’ll like it
even more. It’ll be my best argument for my way of learning that I could ever make.