Jolly writes a story

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonI did want to write something that needed multiple readings, the first to enjoy, the second and third etc to understand. I'm glad you worked at this, man, and really proud that I wrote something you guys felt was worth the time to analyze! Acapella, I'm gonna pm you my email address, I still want to see how you worked out the Holden Caufield parallel.

Yessir. I'll send it to you later on today. It was a Carl Luce parallel though.

Well, I took the plunge and gave a copy to one of my professors... :o I'm hoping I don't get crushed by the onslaught to come...

is it just me or is your short story growing to an epic ;) vincent+monoaudio=brilliant

Originally Posted by: z0s0_jpis it just me or is your short story growing to an epic ;) vincent+monoaudio=brilliant

Haha, it's still under a thousand words and I hope to keep it so, though I have added a lot on my computer. Maybe I'll edit it into the story...yeah, I think I will.

Haha, glad you liked Mr. VanGogh. I liked better, though, the segue into him, "one ear listening to the starry night."

Also, I love the compliment, but don't say "brilliant," "genius," or any of those synonyms. I'm proud of my writing, but it's not genius.

Some things are made clearer with the new changes, but as it gets longer I'm starting to feel like the story explains itself a bit too much. It's good to understand things and have images, but as I read it this last time I was starting to feel like you were overdoing it with the endless adjectives and endlessadjectives. This is just from my perspective as a reader, and I'm not putting down you or your story, but I just think that if you do something clever too often or too much, it cheapens it. I know this is probably offensive coming from somebody who isn't smart enough to really understand what you're doing, but I don't mean it offensively, that's just how I felt reading it.

Originally Posted by: acapellaSome things are made clearer with the new changes, but as it gets longer I'm starting to feel like the story explains itself a bit too much. It's good to understand things and have images, but as I read it this last time I was starting to feel like you were overdoing it with the endless adjectives and endlessadjectives. This is just from my perspective as a reader, and I'm not putting down you or your story, but I just think that if you do something clever too often or too much, it cheapens it. I know this is probably offensive coming from somebody who isn't smart enough to really understand what you're doing, but I don't mean it offensively, that's just how I felt reading it.

No, I agree with you. That's a good call, I'm going to work out a few of the overdone techniques. Still-listening is in there one too many times, for one.

Yeah, I worked out a few kinks. I especially had put in WAY too much about the curator and Vanessa. It doesn't matter how he found out, the point is that now he knows. I don't know why I felt such a strong need to explain it. Plus I gave the curator way too much description in the Vanessa paragraph. "Curator. Filth-ridden anti-ascetic. Reaper of those fool enough to trust him. Usurping lecher" really only needed "Usurping lecher."

I like it better this time, it doesn't seem as overdone. It seems to flow more naturally, it seems like it was written more naturally and the techniques were less forced. Good job. Well, it was a good job before, so better job. In my opinion, leastways.

Jolly, I have to ask: how do you decide what to put in and what to keep out? Surely a guy who can write as well as you comes up with a lot of different endings, adjectives, meanings, etc. How do you decide whether something is worthy enough to put in your stories?

I only ask because when I try to write songs (or on rarer occasions, stories), I make them up as I go and come up with about 30,000 different ideas, all of which I like, but obviously I can't put them all in.

So....do you have some sort of test your ideas must pass before you put pen to paper?

Originally Posted by: earthman buckJolly, I have to ask: how do you decide what to put in and what to keep out? Surely a guy who can write as well as you comes up with a lot of different endings, adjectives, meanings, etc. How do you decide whether something is worthy enough to put in your stories?

I only ask because when I try to write songs (or on rarer occasions, stories), I make them up as I go and come up with about 30,000 different ideas, all of which I like, but obviously I can't put them all in.

So....do you have some sort of test your ideas must pass before you put pen to paper?

Technically I free-wrote the basics of this story in the literal pen on paper as soon as I got back to my dorm room one day. Much of the content hasn't changed, and the themes are all still the same. How do I decide what phrases to change and what to use etc? Well, I guess it depends on several factors. One, the cadence of the piece, if a word doesn't roll off the last word I hate to use it unless it's specifically designed to halt the reader. Typically I want each word to seem as though it naturally succeeds the last and naturally leads into the next.

Ultimately what I decide to leave in or take out depends on stylistic taste, though. I mean, take "Vanessa de Mille," for example. Her name seemed just too obvious a play on the Venus de Milo, it made the whole passage seem cheesy or campy, so I shortened it to simply "Vanessa." The Venessa/Venus parallel is still there, but without the redundant "de Mille." Some things I don't put in because they detract from the point or are completely tangential. For instance, I'd written up a passage explaining exactly how (the mechanics of the situation) Thomas had come upon Vanessa and the curator together, but really it wasn't necessary. The story simply didn't need to say HOW he'd found them out, just that he had. I try to use the sufficient adjectives as well, since you asked. At first the curator was "filth-ridden anti-ascetic. Reaper of those foolish enough to trust him. Usurping lecher." Really, the first two were unnecessary and impeded the progress of the piece itself. Or, another example, armless, assless Venus de Milo used to make Thomas think "can't ****, can't wipe." The phrasing was simply too direct, especially since "shat" was in the sentence just before it, so I changed it to "fertilizer of fallow fields." I needed my words and adjectives also to fit the themes. Stillwatching, for instance, reminding the reader of stasis. In that vein, words like marblelimestonefloorsurface slowly breakdown the illusion of superiority, the thought slowly morphs into something more and more basic. Marblelimestonefloorbreaking, however, is slightly different, because instead of simplifying, it simply gives off the combined feeling of two objects running together at the moment of impact.

As far as some kind of test goes, I usually just write within the themes and story that I had in my head. Later on I go back and tweak the language.

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollyson


Also, I love the compliment, but don't say "brilliant," "genius," or any of those synonyms. I'm proud of my writing, but it's not genius.

just take brilliant from me like i am brittish.....where when a guy scores a goal "brilliant!!" or you get an antique cheap it's "brilliant!!" :D it seems to be the brit equivelent of "awesome" now-a-days

I guess, earthman, the thing is I don't come up with a story first, really. I come up with a subject, topic, theme, whatever, and I construct a story around that. Typically it's more of an epiphany than a slowly thought out story-board, however the epiphany itself usually leads to a basic skeleton around which I make the story. In fact, here, I came to my dorm room one day, sat down, took a pen, and wrote this non-stop until I reached the last period:

"Thomas heard curates and academics lecture endlessly in the museum. Art for art's sake is not art. Art for one's own sake is not art. Art for others is not art. None of this matters; this is not art. Statue of David, balls but no rectum, constipated, I'd bet. Replica anyhow. Hasn't shat for a thousand years--friend and lover to the armless, assless Venus de Milo. Passing by dave, Thomas took his usual seat in the Monet section. Back room of the museum. Curator. Panting. The woman with him breathes heavily. Beating into the wall behind the Monet--virile, victorious, pleased with himself, God what a curator. Call you tomorrow. **** that. You're fired. New secretary, same wall, same Monet rattling on the other side.

Every day he watched, every third it shook--scheduled. Penciled in by the curate; linear time, power, schedule, control, framed painting, bedded down with Procrustes. He's protected--a son of Troy. The plaster ceiling--crumbling, flaking--dusts the marble floor. Crumbling, flaking, these concepts are my own. Who told you the floor was marble? Limestone floor, I will not lie...not intentionally.

He stood, still watching the shaking masterpiece. Masterpiece still suffering sodomy, but not stillsuffering. Nothing immobile. All erodes. Water cutting rocks. Canyons one hundred thousand years in the making.

Still watching and stillwatching Thomas listened, stilllistening, to the sound against the wall. They were about to finish, he could hear it. Ten minutes, what a wanker. Way to ride, cowboy. In the last throes, the painting fell, the frame cracking as it hit the marblelimestonesurface.

Thomas could not control. How could he when. It's perfectly excusable that. I can't be judged if. Why do I have to think about. Done. Art is voyeur; a seed--denied, ignored, suppressed, unleashed--sown into stony ground."

Compare that to what I have now.

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonI mean, take "Vanessa de Mille," for example. Her name seemed just too obvious a play on the Venus de Milo, it made the whole passage seem cheesy or campy, so I shortened it to simply "Vanessa." The Venessa/Venus parallel is still there, but without the redundant "de Mille."

That's a good idea. I had thought before that Vanessa de Mille was too obvious and unrealistic, but not enough to point it out. I'm glad you changed that.

I'm bumping this thread because I just re-read it and damn. The final version is really ****ing good. I'm actually pleased with it.

holy 5,000 Jollyman!!!

Kick.

Ass.

Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonKick.

Ass.

WOW 5000 Posts :eek: :cool:

Originally Posted by: silentmusicWOW 5000 Posts :eek: :cool:

Yeah, and the only one worth reading is at the beginning of this thread.

Sad, in a way.

I call it improvement, progression ;) Thread evolution if you will

1st Post

HA! Man, this story is good.

Not great.

But good.

Love the chimp.

I know I said I wouldn't edit any more, but check it out! Added some stuff, subtracted some stuff, all in all, I think the new lines are fantastic.