| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| M.Chu |
Posted - 03 Jul 2004 : 19:00:07
For me, from what I've gathered, it's "probably" (in the line of Carlsberg's beer ad) the following:
1. Write.
2. Write some more.
3. Keep on writing.
Over to you, fellow writers.
P.S. Ever heard of the best reading advice for readers? |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ayk |
Posted - 17 Dec 2004 : 22:15:03
Or maybe I am just plain lazy. But I do find the environment here in Singapore, not exactly conducive for writing or expressions as such.
Perseverance, as someone has mentioned, is very important. It is so easy in Singapore to just wanna lead a comfortable life. It is economy talk everywhere. TV, radio, newspaper, everywhere!
I hate to say it, but now, I too would love to have a best-selling book (be it trash or art) that can afford me the comfortable lifestyle which the adverts are selling me. Plus, without the hard work of juggling with a job, a family, and trying to write at night.
And so here I am, still trying to trudge out my 100 words per night, though it is mostly re-writes as my wife says the grammar sucks.
On the talk about talent, I don't think it will be a big issue. Lotsa them in schools right now. The pretty good ones at least. Quite a number of them do write better than what we see in bookstores. But I wonder where they would end up 10 years down the road.
Now I think writing is like making babies. It is a personal choice. And you need to have passion, and lots and lots of perseverance. And it doesn't help when it is also dissected down into an economic issue, just like everything else (but I still want the money to buy that plasma TV!)
Anyway, guess I am just mumbling incoherent thoughts and not giving any practical ideas to solve the world's problem.
But I also guess being impractical, less pragmatic and a little more crazy as Singaporeans might be a pretty good idea to show the world how problems can be solved. Nothing beats having a good mug of well-brewed milo and arguing over art, then killing to stake out a plot of undrinkable oil field.
And i guess again that I should pause my 100-word passionate love making session with my comp for tonight... and reserve it for someone else =) |
| henry123 |
Posted - 15 Dec 2004 : 19:26:46
The best advice to writers is to encourage the learners to do it. Then advice follows. Watch some best writings can also be a good approach to learn writing. |
| weihsin |
Posted - 01 Dec 2004 : 10:34:17
quote:
Originally posted by Nicholas Liu
Don't forget Alvin's Poetry Billboard. Plus, why do you exclude non-local publications? There're tonnes of ezines out there that don't discriminate based on locality.
I'm not saying more can't be done, but I don't see a serious shortage of venues here. If local writing is underexposed, it's due to a failure of knowledge, persistence and talent, not lack of opportunity.
Ah, I see -- no, I wasn't excluding non-local publications at all; I understood our discussion to be about Singapore as a discrete geographical area. If we're looking far & wide, then yes, definitely, writers should submit to print online e-zines & journals everywhere. So let's all let other people know about opportunities elsewhere.
quote:
I think it's not very meaningful to talk about 'success in writing' as if it could ever have anything other than a personal value. People want different things out of writing; that much is self-evident.
Yes, I take your point, because on a personal level we all write creatively or critically for our own reasons & to our own satisfaction.
But even if we drop the whole misnomer of "success" as quantified by awards won, books published, critical accolades, etc., even if we recognize that it's a chimera, we are still left with the question of how can we become *better* writers, no?
So maybe, to rephrase the topic that started this blessed thread in the first place, we may ask:
instead of quantitative indices of "success," (books published, awards won, champagne bottles popped, etc.) how has each one of us found a way of *qualitatively* sensing our improvement or growth or change as writers ("my haikus aren't ad jingles any more!")? In other words, in our various experiences, how do we know when we've succeeded in grasping something new & profound in our craft? Because we know instinctively when something's different about our writing, but can we articulate that shift & share it with others?
Alvin - let me post my thoughts on the academy & poetry a bit later...the academy just ran me down with a 12-hour day & I'm a bit out of words, eh-heh...
|
| alf |
Posted - 01 Dec 2004 : 08:44:46
quote:
quote:
Alvin: Here's another mark of "success" for you to chew on Wei Hsin : to what extent is academic/critical attention a demarcator of literary success? I'm thinking for instance of the L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poets, the dominance of whom, it might be argued, can be attributed wholly to the academic mill...
Bit of a funny issue to bring 'extent' into. How to even begin to answer this question?
Rhetorical question lah. But on the other hand I would like to hear from WH what he thinks about how his chosen profession plugs into the issues raised here. |
| Nicholas Liu |
Posted - 01 Dec 2004 : 01:07:58
Wei Hsin: quote:
A more interesting question is: can we provide new writers "access" to more spaces to publish, or show what they've written to a public? The 2nd Rule, Hetero Poetry Journal, the SubText Reading, & QLRS & its forum, are all such spaces, albeit each with its own criteria and audience.
Don't forget Alvin's Poetry Billboard. Plus, why do you exclude non-local publications? There're tonnes of ezines out there that don't discriminate based on locality.
I'm not saying more can't be done, but I don't see a serious shortage of venues here. If local writing is underexposed, it's due to a failure of knowledge, persistence and talent, not lack of opportunity.
quote:
"Success" then would be how many of the first-time writers who get a piece published then continue to write & contribute more? Continuity & perseverance may count for more than a succesful book deal.
I think it's not very meaningful to talk about 'success in writing' as if it could ever have anything other than a personal value. People want different things out of writing; that much is self-evident.
quote:
On another note, shall we try & avoid the veiled a$$hole-ripping that seems to be surfacing on this thread?
No veils here.
quote:
We're here to discuss things, not to diss & cuss, no? =)
M.Chu's preach-and-run methods are antithetical to useful discussion. Sometimes dissing and cussing, as you put it, is an appropriate response.
Alvin: quote:
Here's another mark of "success" for you to chew on Wei Hsin : to what extent is academic/critical attention a demarcator of literary success? I'm thinking for instance of the L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poets, the dominance of whom, it might be argued, can be attributed wholly to the academic mill...
Bit of a funny issue to bring 'extent' into. How to even begin to answer this question? |
| alf |
Posted - 01 Dec 2004 : 00:29:35
quote:
Originally posted by weihsin
Hmm, this talk of "success" in writing reminds me of the talk of "excellence" in the US academy. An interesting parallel between academic scholarship & creative writing: you're not a successful, "excellent" academic (i.e. you can't get tenure & job security) unless you publish A BOOK, even if you have a dozen articles in respected journals. I suspect the same applies for creative writing in Singapore, no?
Rather than talk about creating "success," why not talk about cultivating "access" instead? I agree, a literary prize or award can stimulate & encourage younger & new writers. But since these are few and far between (the SLP, Ethos/HCJC awards are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head), one way would be to find sponsors for more such competitions specifically inviting submissions from unpublished writers. The prizes don't even have to be a large monetary award, maybe a generous book voucher or something appropriately literary?
But competitions engender competitiveness, which isn't always such a good thing?
A more interesting question is: can we provide new writers "access" to more spaces to publish, or show what they've written to a public? The 2nd Rule, Hetero Poetry Journal, the SubText Reading, & QLRS & its forum, are all such spaces, albeit each with its own criteria and audience. I think cultivating a literary scene where people actively contribute short pieces in periodicals/journals (in print or online) is much healthier than having people aim for a finished book right away.
"Success" then would be how many of the first-time writers who get a piece published then continue to write & contribute more? Continuity & perseverance may count for more than a succesful book deal.
There's the Golden Pt award (open to short unpublished pieces) and the previous incarnation of the SLP (unpublished full manuscripts). Also a whole range of journals and websites, both local and foreign, in which to publish. Publication of any sort is certainly one mark of success for a writer - it implies reception within a particular audience. Book sales is a misleading gauge - it implies equal access to markets, for one, which patently isn't true.
Here's another mark of "success" for you to chew on Wei Hsin : to what extent is academic/critical attention a demarcator of literary success? I'm thinking for instance of the L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poets, the dominance of whom, it might be argued, can be attributed wholly to the academic mill...
|
| weihsin |
Posted - 30 Nov 2004 : 01:38:03
Hmm, this talk of "success" in writing reminds me of the talk of "excellence" in the US academy. An interesting parallel between academic scholarship & creative writing: you're not a successful, "excellent" academic (i.e. you can't get tenure & job security) unless you publish A BOOK, even if you have a dozen articles in respected journals. I suspect the same applies for creative writing in Singapore, no?
Rather than talk about creating "success," why not talk about cultivating "access" instead? I agree, a literary prize or award can stimulate & encourage younger & new writers. But since these are few and far between (the SLP, Ethos/HCJC awards are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head), one way would be to find sponsors for more such competitions specifically inviting submissions from unpublished writers. The prizes don't even have to be a large monetary award, maybe a generous book voucher or something appropriately literary?
But competitions engender competitiveness, which isn't always such a good thing?
A more interesting question is: can we provide new writers "access" to more spaces to publish, or show what they've written to a public? The 2nd Rule, Hetero Poetry Journal, the SubText Reading, & QLRS & its forum, are all such spaces, albeit each with its own criteria and audience. I think cultivating a literary scene where people actively contribute short pieces in periodicals/journals (in print or online) is much healthier than having people aim for a finished book right away.
"Success" then would be how many of the first-time writers who get a piece published then continue to write & contribute more? Continuity & perseverance may count for more than a succesful book deal.
On another note, shall we try & avoid the veiled a$$hole-ripping that seems to be surfacing on this thread? We're here to discuss things, not to diss & cuss, no? =) |
| Nicholas Liu |
Posted - 29 Nov 2004 : 18:54:22
I point out that your opinion as presented is self-contradictory and your response to this is to ask for other people's opinions? Obviously you aren't worth discussing anything with. |
| M.Chu |
Posted - 29 Nov 2004 : 00:56:25
quote:
Originally posted by Nicholas Liu
1) ... Is winning prizes the definition of success in writing or not?
Perhaps others would like to chip in with their answers or thoughts. |
| M.Chu |
Posted - 28 Nov 2004 : 23:54:00
quote:
Originally posted by alf
quote:
Originally posted by M.Chu
.... although competition tends to draw many entries from aspirants and, well, published writers get nominated for Literature prizes.
I'm still curious -- is this necessarily a good thing?
Does it also follow that unpublished writers (a) don't get nominated for Lit. prizes; or (b) are not "successful"?
Does it then also follow that any published writer is must be more successful or a better writer than any unpublished one?
I do not claim to have the answer. My thoughts on this are as follows:
The organizer/promoter would probably view it to be a good thing when a competition draws numerous contestants. From a writer's perspective, I would think it to be a good thing if I can keep on writing ('win', in a general sense, the battles of life to find the time to write)and improve on my writing.
Success in writing will have to be defined by each individual writer. For me, to 'win', in a more specific sense, a prize would be the icing to the cake whilst I keep on writing and improving on my writing.
Yes, for a Lit. Prize such as the Singapore Literature Prize 2004 unpublished writers will simply not stand a chance as only "books written by Singaporeans and permanent residents published between January 2001 and last December (2003)" were shortlisted.
Whether a published writer is more successful or a better writer than any unpublished one would depend on whether we have a common yardstick of measurement and who the judges are.
|
| Nicholas Liu |
Posted - 26 Nov 2004 : 13:29:19
1) You mentioned prizes and competitions as a response to Alvin's question 'what does it mean exactly to "win" as a writer?' Now you seem to have changed your tune. Is winning prizes the definition of success in writing or not?
2) In that case, a little less of that 'I know what's what and I'm going to tell you all about it' tone might be appropriate.
|
| alf |
Posted - 26 Nov 2004 : 09:22:15
quote:
Originally posted by M.Chu
.... although competition tends to draw many entries from aspirants and, well, published writers get nominated for Literature prizes.
I'm still curious -- is this necessarily a good thing?
Does it also follow that unpublished writers (a) don't get nominated for Lit. prizes; or (b) are not "successful"?
Does it then also follow that any published writer is must be more successful or a better writer than any unpublished one?
|
| M.Chu |
Posted - 25 Nov 2004 : 22:34:16
1. As explained, I don't think it's a really good reason to write primarily for the sake of winning a prize although competition tends to draw many entries from aspirants and, well, published writers get nominated for Literature prizes.
2. Was just sharing my thoughts on the matter.
|
| Nicholas Liu |
Posted - 25 Nov 2004 : 20:58:39
1) You contradict yourself.
2) You use a very lecturing tone. Who precisely are you lecturing? |
| M.Chu |
Posted - 22 Nov 2004 : 22:42:14
No, although competition tends to draw many entries from aspirants and, well, published writers get nominated for Literature prizes.
Endeavour to be a writer primarily rather than write only because of the prizes. Prizes and/or print publication would be the icing to the cake should they come by. |
|
|
