Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Lauren ([info]ladylauren) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2010-11-15 13:06:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:busy
Entry tags:nanowrimo

AnNaNoWaRe (Annual NaNo Wank Report)
It's been a relatively quiet month. Alan Holman has made his triumphant and frequently suppressed return as the user TrutherWriter, whose novel synopsis includes such gems as:

Tim is real, but Israel is a CIA/MOSSAD creation. Black helecoptors, paranoid dreams ... 9/11 was an inside job -- you know it, you feel it, you pump your fist, you're a champion of the truth! Vaccines cause autism whether Tim's teacher thinks different. Why the hell do the girls that chase Tim so violently get a couch in their bathrooms while non-violent Tim gets a not-chocolate surprise that takes some time to wash out the stink!

His regular posts don't make much more sense either, but sadly I cannot link to any of them as they've all been suppressed for being abusive towards others or using profanity.

But I know what you really want, OTFers; news on the infamous marienbadmylove. What's this? you ask. Surely he was banned last year for plagiarism? Well, apparently being banned twice didn't stop Alan Holman, and being banned a mere once hasn't stopped Mark Leach, whose surname is (almost) quite apropos. Thus far his one and only post is in the Extreme Accomplishments Shoutout thread, as follows:

Success! I just crossed the 500,000-word mark with “A Canadian Marienbad,” my Nano entry and literary tribute to the people of Canada. I created the manuscript over a couple of hours by using a do-it-yourself novel kit I read about in the letters section of the infamous Laura Miller story on Salon.com. Starting with the basic 50,000-word template, I repeatedly pressed the copy and paste button in order to push the manuscript past one million words. Then I used my computer’s find and replace editing functions to customize the text with Canadian concepts and themes, turning it into my own story. By the end of the month I expect to expand my manuscript to five million words. Shouldn’t be too hard. After all, it’s just a matter of repeatedly pressing CTRL-V, then adding in my own ideas. But I will need to be careful not to strain my index finger!

Well, at least we assume it's the same author. He's posting under the name bccomox, also on LiveJournal, and so far this is his only post. Time will tell if there is more wank yet to be mined from this source.

The prize for NaNoWanker of the Year, however, undoubtedly goes to Laura Miller, whose article on Salon.com, Better yet, DON'T write that novel drew the ire of a multitude of NaNo participants, who didn't appreciate being told their work was a waste of time, nor the implication that because they were writers, not readers, they were doing the publishing world a disservice. Word of advice to Ms. Miller: writers fairly often also happen to be readers. They also happen to be capable of reading your ill-informed article and taking umbrage.

It just makes this wanka wonder where Miller thinks professional writers come from. Here's a hint: they do not spring fully formed from the forehead of some fantastic literary deity. They start out small and end up big. And for some of them, that start is NaNoWriMo.



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]seca
2010-11-15 04:15 am UTC (link)
I think my favorite part of that is when Miller shows up in the comments to say that everyone is reading her article from the wrong perspective.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]platedlizard
2010-11-15 04:38 am UTC (link)
I felt like bashing head reading that. "What is the point of writing crap!" She says. What she clearly doesn't understand is that writers generally write a lot of crap at first, it's part of the learning process. It takes practice to write well, just like anything else that requires skill. The only way to practice is to, guess what, write a lot of crap! Happens to everyone.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]come_love_sleep
2010-11-15 05:10 am UTC (link)
"What is the point of writing crap," indeed, madam.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]miss_padfoot
2010-11-15 05:38 am UTC (link)
My favorite writing advice book has a wonderful chapter titled "Shitty First Drafts". I think Ms. Miller needs to read it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]platedlizard
2010-11-15 06:49 am UTC (link)
Oooh, I must know the title for this book!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]miss_padfoot
2010-11-15 06:53 am UTC (link)
Bird by Bird by Anne Lamott. It's a great little book.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]platedlizard
2010-11-15 07:10 am UTC (link)
*adds to The List*

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]northen_light36
2010-11-15 11:34 am UTC (link)
Gotta love that book. I have a copy of it and brought a copy for my mother. It's great reading AND full of good advice.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]librarianmouse
2010-11-15 03:58 pm UTC (link)
I meet a lot of authors in my job, and almost every one of them has told me that it doesn't matter how long you've been writing or how many weeks you've been on the best seller lists; all first drafts are crap. Every published author in the world writes crap, and then sits down and figures out a way to make it less crappy. That's just how it works.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]cmdr_zoom
2010-11-15 04:58 pm UTC (link)
Thiiiiiiiis.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]ekaterinv
2010-11-15 09:47 pm UTC (link)
Yes! I think being willing to eviscerate your first draft -- and second, and third -- is one thing that separates good authors from bad.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]platedlizard
2010-11-16 03:22 am UTC (link)
I know... one writer who can turn out a rough draft that is almost publishable. But A. He has written many, many books, B. He teaches writing workshops and seminares frequently and writes a lot about writing online, and C. He tells you right front that he's extremely unusual that way, and that it took him many years of experience to get that way.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]xero_sky
2010-11-15 07:04 am UTC (link)
Christ, she's spectacularly dense, isn't she?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]bukowski
2010-11-16 07:13 pm UTC (link)
I love how she was like, "I didn't tell anyone not to do NaNoWriMo!" Did she even read her own article?

But my absolute favorite comment on that is the one by "E. Miller" on the first page, which is full of nonsensical analogies like this one:

12. Literary culture isn't a temple, it's an ecosystem. Writers can be readers, readers can be critics, critics can be writers, audiences can have a voice.

Yes, and predators can be omnivores, but you can't have more predation than prey in a sustainable ecosystem. Literary culture requires more readers than writers. That's the ecology of it. Miller is right. You're wrong, and helping NaNoWriMo undermine the literary ecology.


Writers are... predators? They eat their readers? HOW ON EARTH DOES ANYONE THINK THAT MAKES SENSE

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]seca
2010-11-16 07:17 pm UTC (link)
If you let go of all Earth Logic I'm sure it'll make sense. Maybe.

Of course it also brings up the question that if a writer is also a reader then does that mean they eat themselves?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]librarianmouse
2010-11-17 02:28 am UTC (link)
Does that make most authors cannibals?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map