Critical thinking and Creativity: Reading and Writing
Inspired by thread, started by Drek.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4822/what-are-some-good-laymen-books-on-philosophy/p2
Following an exchange on reading and note-taking, I wrote:
----------
' Other than writing essays to show your understanding of what you have read, have you tried to write an article?
I think there comes a time to take head out of books. Use what you have learned or experienced to start thinking/writing for self. I am still working on that one...
This forum might be a good place to start developing writing skills in argument.
Here's an example. It also reconstructs arguments in to logical structure. Premises and Conclusions.
How great is that !?
http://articles.thephilosophyforum.com/the-argument-for-indirect-realism
How interesting would it be to ask the author about the whole philosophical process.
From initial idea, reading, note taking to end product.'
----------
Understanding the whole process would be invaluable.
We have book discussions regarding interpretation and understanding what we have read. The content.
Why not conversations On Writing ?
I would be interested to hear about how we progress from critical reading, thinking to creatively writing.
Including the practical aspects of note-taking. How do writers tackle writing articles such as the above ?
Is there a reason why there aren't more articles ?
Any authors who would care to share the process so that others might try....
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4822/what-are-some-good-laymen-books-on-philosophy/p2
Following an exchange on reading and note-taking, I wrote:
----------
' Other than writing essays to show your understanding of what you have read, have you tried to write an article?
I think there comes a time to take head out of books. Use what you have learned or experienced to start thinking/writing for self. I am still working on that one...
This forum might be a good place to start developing writing skills in argument.
Here's an example. It also reconstructs arguments in to logical structure. Premises and Conclusions.
How great is that !?
http://articles.thephilosophyforum.com/the-argument-for-indirect-realism
How interesting would it be to ask the author about the whole philosophical process.
From initial idea, reading, note taking to end product.'
----------
Understanding the whole process would be invaluable.
We have book discussions regarding interpretation and understanding what we have read. The content.
Why not conversations On Writing ?
I would be interested to hear about how we progress from critical reading, thinking to creatively writing.
Including the practical aspects of note-taking. How do writers tackle writing articles such as the above ?
Is there a reason why there aren't more articles ?
Any authors who would care to share the process so that others might try....
Comments (92)
Good idea.
Quoting Amity
Well, you are an author, of fifty posts. And at its most basic, the process is no different to what you've been doing thus far. It's having something to say on a topic and saying it. It's only that the more you want to say, the more organization comes into play. How you write becomes as important as what you write. So, it becomes more like having (or finding) something to say, deciding how to say it, and saying and resaying it until it satisfies (along with certain recognizable writing conventions) your vision of how it should be said. So, as for writing, you are doing it already, but there are, as you suggested, strategies for approaching the creation of longer texts.
Quoting Amity
Here's one path you could make use of in writing a philosophical article:
1) Formulate a rough thesis
What is it in general that you want to say? What angle do you want to take on what? What would be a one-line summary of your article? (In @jamalrob's (the author of the article you mentioned) case, the basic thesis is argumentative and the argument is "Indirect realism is wrong")
2) Research.
Your rough thesis can direct your research. Look for information on the background and context of the issue you want to discuss in order to further understand the arguments surrounding it. Then focus on the arguments themselves, both for and against, and their key proponents. Make use of highlighting and note-taking on the texts you examine.
3) Finalize your thesis.
Are you able to gather enough information to make the case you want to make? Having read more about the issue, do you even still want to make that particular case? Here's your chance, now that you're more information-rich, to modify your approach and hone in on what you really want to say. Once you are sure of that then write your thesis out in a way that satisfies you and can serve as the fundamental basis of the rest of your work.
4) Plan your article.
The basic structure of most academic articles is going to be along the lines of:
Introduction
Say something about the background/context of your argument, state your thesis, provide an overview of your article etc.
Body
Present your argument paragraph by paragraph (consider subdividing into sub-sections for longer articles).
Conclusion
Sum up the reasons for your argument as you've presented it in the body.
Within that framework, organize your approach. Most of the hard work will be done in the body section where you decide on the major reasons/evidence for your thesis and the counterarguments you'll present and refute.
5) More research.
Take what sources you have and match them up to your plan. The likelihood is that now you've thought more about the details of the overall structure of your essay, you'll need to dive back into the literature to shore up your thesis in places.
6) Write your article.
Write according to your plan, being flexible enough to make changes where necessary while retaining the overall vision of what you want to say (stick to your thesis).
7) Revise.
Edit, proofread and so on.
1) They need to be pretty good to be published.
2) We don't promote the articles section enough.
3) It takes a fair degree of commitment and effort to write a philosophical article.
I would like to see more articles up there though, so let this discussion serve as a call for them. The official editorial team (for whatever that's worth) is me, @jamalrob, @Michael, @Benkei and some dude called @Hansover or @Hanover or something. Anyone wanting to have an article published can PM it to any of us for consideration.
Thanks. I get them every now and again. It's putting them into practice...
So how would that work in this forum ?
I note 'Reading groups' are in the 'Learning Centre' section.
Your excellent advice above could be the starting point for a pathway to write philosophy.
From a beginner's first posts to a more academic article. Some might not want to commit to or have the ability to write the latter. It's pretty ambitious and perhaps more people would be inclined to tackle an essay.
Just as in the 'reading group' where there are those who can lead, comment and contribute to a structured discussion, there could be similar in a 'Writing philosophy' group ?
It would give practice in the whole philosophical process with something to show at the end.
That would be more of a stretch than writing posts...but something to aim for...perhaps...
1. As a matter of interest, how many articles have been submitted ?
If they were not good enough, how good was the feedback and encouragement to resubmit ?
2. Why not ? You editors need to get going. Why not submit ideal examples?
I did find it difficult to find information about articles. It comes under 'article submissions' stuck between 'Feedback' and 'About TPF'. The headline 'ARTICLES' at top of page only takes you to the one and only article ever published ( as far as I can remember ).
3. Yes. It always struck me that even a 2000 word essay didn't adequately reflect the hair-tearingly hard work involved..
1) Reading and questioning what I read
2) Thinking and questioning what I am thinking
3) Discussing and questioning what others are thinking.
_I am an Author, {essays} "On Being and Consciousness" various other essays, vlogs and poems.
When I first started writing I read various articles on how to write better and the book series, "How to write a Damn Good Novel." I wrote two novellas and most of my essays after being armed with that critical thinking arsenal..
Keep doing what you are doing!
Writing is powerful. Poetry is something I never considered until I took a class in college, though it is what lyrics are. There's so so much to explore.
I keep notes when discovering by thinking. I than take those notes and try to get other people to comment on them, so I can think more clearly and develop my thoughts further.
Here is my yahoo (an example of what I do with my ideas): https://answers.yahoo.com/activity/questions?show=D477Q6AXUM2UPV4MDHSY2Y6RKY&t=g
Now if you check out my 1000+ questions on this account alone, you will find that I don't really have much of an regular audience answering me. Which is....too bad? xD But I can always go back there and find my questions and look at any answers and see if they can be added on.
I use whatever question function helps me get from point A (ask what, where, when, why, how, relates?) to point B (I think this about that). First I don't know something, than I get curious about it. Its not like I am trying to be an engineer and understand all things mechanically, I am more prone to metaphysics and introspective revelation.
If you have some background (like we all do) that background will affect how you think.
For some time my intellect has been my own devising. Consciousness moves from one thought to another, entering and exiting, but it is my mind that makes a decision to follow some line of inquiry.
Discovery is different than ordinary thought/self inspection. Discovery comes about through inquiry into something you know that you don't yet know. And if you can ask a question that leads to discovery that no one knows, you may have potential literary pay-off.
I am all about putting effort into becoming a wise old man, and I think I am on the right track, but things could be going much better.
...Good luck on your journey from wherever your from to wherever your going...
If my memory serves me right, I had the Submit an article for publication discussion pinned at the top of the forum for a year or more, and we got almost nothing.
Interesting. So it Isn't that people don't see it. What other reasons could there be for lack of an article submission ?
Perhaps:
1.Those that have the ability to write such simply weigh up the pros and cons and don't think It's worth it. Wouldn't they be looking at publishing in a physical, established magazine like Philosophy Now.
I am not sure about the monetary reward. I think someone once told me that they receive a free annual subscription. Are there copyright issues ?
2. Some might be put off by the wording and don't feel ready to Submit. Encouragement and feedback throughout the writing process might produce more results.
3. An initial stimulus or prod suggesting a theme that members could compete in writing about.
Just a few thoughts. It would be good to hear other points of view.
I think the 'articles submissions' could be positioned alongside heading of 'Writing Philosophy' or 'Writing club'. Writing for January. Theme: Resolution.
Something like that ?
[ BTW this forum is the best one I have found to encourage flow of thoughts and ideas. Lovely mix of threads and interests. Informative and inspirational. Challenging and creative.
Thanks to all involved. Keep up the good work. ]
Writing for March: Madness :smirk:
If poetry (writing) is something you never considered until you took a class in college, how do you feel your thinking/philosophy would improve if there was a Writing Philosophy group or class ?
As you say, writing is powerful. In so many ways.
Have you ever considered writing a philosophy article or essay based on your reading, your studies, your thoughts about a particular subject ?
You are in the right place ! It's good practice to get from self taking note(s) to sharing/comparing with others via writing. Even as you write you think and can change your mind...
Yes. It is all about development and growth - we can only do our best. As you say, with our background materials and ongoing stimulus.
Yeah, I had an article published in Philosophy Now a long long time ago, and I received a year's subscription.
Otherwise I'm not sure. It could simply be that while that discussion was pinned, we didn't have many members. The forum's grown a lot since then.
On a search, this type of feedback is the kind of thing that could be included in a 'Writing Philosophy' section ( or 'Writing groups' beside 'Reading groups' under the 'Learning Centre' ).
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/2364/university-marking-philosophy-essays-harshly
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4691/review-of-my-philosophical-essays
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4408/various-philosophy-essays-critique-me-up
So, a separate space with guidelines, book recommendations - to develop writing skills in philosophy.
What's not to like ?
Thoughts welcome.
Quoting Amity
The technical aspects of writing are important, just like brush techniques are important for an artist. We need to learn these techniques before we can create writing or art, but they aren't sufficient. Creativity is infinitely more than mere technique.
Why not expand this into a "Short Story" writing contest?
Bragging rights are priceless around here. :wink:
Just ask @Benkei whose short story was about a trip to Oslow….EXCELLENT writing in that piece and in general has a very strong grip on story evolution and flow.
@Baden is a hard on grammar but almost always accurate and
@Michael , Michael, is so talented with the English language that I have wanted a pocket version of his knowledge and skills for years.
Oh and once "S" is findable in the search field, I would put his name up as probably the most "critical" thinker here but that might be a biased view. :razz:
:up:
Creativity is huge. And yes it much more than technique.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity
'Creativity is a phenomenon whereby something new and somehow valuable is formed. The created item may be intangible (such as an idea, a scientific theory, a musical composition, or a joke) or a physical object (such as an invention, a literary work, or a painting).'
I am not sure why you chose the quote by Baden ?
'Formulating a rough thesis'. Do you see that as a technical or creative aspect in the writing process ?
Doesn't the provision of a structure aid in creativity ?
Can you explain further what you mean. This interests me.
Why not indeed :cool:
It could well be included in any 'Writing groups' section.
My thoughts weren't initially around creative writing as in fiction. However, whatever sparks sparks :fire:
I agree. I've written four books of fiction. None of which followed those rules because art is a different deal. But you can be creative within the confines of just about any text type to a degree.
I KNEW IT! :starstruck:
What was your pen name?
Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, there lived a little boy named Michael...
I thought that Baden's post offered technical guidance. This doesn't make it wrong, of course, or unhelpful either. Your OP targeted writing, but also specifically referenced creative writing. All the technical help in the world won't make us creative. But, I suspect, creativity can't be learned. We can sharpen up many aspects of our writing with technical stuff, even the most creative of us (?), but they won't enhance our creativity. I think this is why there are so many good writers, but also why so few of them are truly creative. Creative writing is a rare skill. I can think of few who are truly capable. Alan Watts is the best example I can think of, although (perhaps) his greatest skill is in the spoken word. He can explain stuff that others can't seem to, in a spellbinding way. The creative bit is not the explanations, which are exemplary, IMO, but in the spellbinding bit. His words are entrancing, and his use (and choice) of words as good as any poet I have ever read.
If you Google "Paul Baden book" you'll see the names of some of the stuff I self-published. I recently unself-published though, so I could submit my stuff to outlets that don't accept previously published work. So, it's presently unavailable. But I'll happily PM you a copy of my short story collection of you like.
(Unfortunately, if you just Google 'Paul Baden', one of the top results is some guy caught up in a sexual harassment case. That is emphatically not me. :monkey: )
Reviving the short story competition seems a good idea to me as long as admins are allowed to participate. :up:
No. It didn't specifically reference 'creative writing'.
Here it is again:
' I would be interested to hear about how we progress from critical reading, thinking to creatively writing.
Including the practical aspects of note-taking. How do writers tackle writing articles such as the above ?'
I spoke of 'creatively writing'. Do you see the difference ?
Baden also wrote: ' ...you can be creative within the confines of just about any text type to a degree'.
So any philosophers can get creative during the whole writing process.
The guideline of : 'formulate a rough thesis' can be rewritten as 'create a rough thesis' that would require some creative thinking - producing an idea. A thesis is a created item, new to you.
I think the whole concept of 'Creativity' worthy of an essay or story.
How about it ?
Perhaps there could be a competition between creative philosophers and creative storytellers :chin:
Here's a challenge for you.
Write 1. a short philosophical essay on ''Creativity' AND 2. a short story concerning creativity.
Yes, I was giving advice specifically regarding academic writing, which would cover the article in question. As for "creative writing" per se, a different beast altogether. I don't know what I would say to someone about writing a short story or a poem, for example. Maybe, just read a lot in that genre and then write as authentically as possible. I think it's also useful @Pattern-chaser to make a distinction between genre and style. I'd see creative writing and academic writing as being different genres, but style can vary not only across but within genres. Alan Watts is, I guess, someone who writes engagingly and interestingly in his particular genre. Maybe it's just that his style reflects that of creative writing more than drier academic writing.
Well, we could certainly do with more philosophy on the imagination and creativity. It's a neglected area. I'm more likely to come up with the short story though.
What would be the equivalent of write a rough thesis?
Perhaps in a creative writing class: Decide what you want to write about ?
But if spontaneously poetic you don't need that as a starter for 10.
Interesting.
How do I sort it out ?
My method has been to write the first lines, which usually just pop into my head, and then pull on that thread and see where it goes. Not much help as advice I guess.
I fixed it. It was just a missing square bracket.
No worries, Amity. And if you do come up with an article, run it by us. :up:
If ever an article runs by me, I will be sure to share. For sure :up:
So where can I find all the short stories and this competition ?
Well, we haven't revived it yet but I'll keep you posted.
Thanks for keeping me posted about any revival.
I had thought I might discover some decomposing compositions deep in an archival vault :mask:
Blogging, with my lack of grammar and hard to follow logic, I think I'd embarrass myself more. Nothing is fixed though. I believe I need more life experience.
It's great to have a community of people. A lot of self-publishers too.
I think that's a good idea, to ask questions online. Have an archive of all your thoughts.
Rome wasn't built in a day. Need to do just 10 minutes a day...Right now I am reading The Laws of Human Nature. I guess it is a self-help book, but it's decent.
Is anyone familiar with the Trivium and Quadrivium and the learning process?
"Reading the Laws of Nature." I just finished that book.last month. I think I would have to buy it to get the best results from it. I didn't take many notes or get much from it. Its a solid book though.
I haven't picked up the Trivium or Quadrivium yet. So I've got nothing to say on those.
I just finished reading "Cosmosapiens." Its thesis is built on the Anthropic principle.I found it in the history section of my local library. Wonders never seize.
Yes, so would I, but I would observe that both are creative. Too many people think creativity comes only with art, so Harry Potter requires creativity to write, but a technical manual on a piece of firmware does not. I disagree. :smile:
There's a danger of getting too caught up in semantics here, I guess. I suppose there's a certain amount of creativity involved in academic writing etc., but there are also a bunch of rules and conventions and practices (e.g. re sourcing) that mitigate, sometimes very specifically, against creativity whereas traditional creative writing has much less of that and is much more driven by the imagination. So, we're probably not really so much in disagreement as using terms in different ways (as another example, technical writing and academic writing, I'd see as distinct too).
Even science hides a kernel of artistic creativity at its core. :smile: [Where else could Quantum Theory have come from? It can't be deduced from the science that preceded it. It was created by a bunch of clever (and creative) scientists.]
I find one of the most important skills in both thought experiements and story writing is not to automatically dismiss that which seems silly. If something seems silly, seize it, double down on it, until it's normalised. It's only one approach, or maybe even only one part of many potential approaches, but it can work. I mean nearly everything seems silly. Imagine woodpeckers don't exist, and someone approaches you with the concept:
I have this idea for a bird. It eats things that live in trees, but it's not patient enough to wait for them to come out, see, so it bangs its beak against the bark again and again and again, and very fast, too, and... What? No, it's not prone to concussions. So, anyway, that's how it makes holes in trees, and... Wait, where are you going?
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/243630
The similarity and differences in academic v non-academic writing:
Quoting Baden
I missed this:
Quoting Dawnstorm
I agree that there is overlap. However, I don't think that short stories are 'encouraged to spin out of control'. TPF's Literary Activity ( previously Short Story Competition) is a case in point. The latest: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15585/literary-activity-dec-2024/p1
Something similar is planned for June 2025. Only it relates to 'Philosophy Essays'.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15596/tpf-philosophy-competitionactivity-2025-/p1
I'm hoping to see a few pieces of philosophical writing venturing beyond the academic essay, important as that is. Still structured and exploring key philosophical ideas. Life issues...
It amuses me to see that, back then, I'd only written 50 posts!
Time and words. My, how they do fly :fire:
Oh my, this was six years ago? I don't remember this post at all, and I had to go back to read this thread for a while to see why I was saying what I was saying and what I could have meant by it. So it was about creativity in academic writing?
I'm quite fond of chaos in literature, and I find that - since I came online in early 2000s - a certain brand of "creative writing" seminar style has taken over writing forums, so that I grew bored of them and abandoned them. I was also a bit of a know-it-all and a prick back then; didn't much like my way of communicating any more...
Basically, I think my main point was that in writing short stories you're allowed to let your mind wander even if it doesn't go along with your original impetus of writing the story. The same process ruins a philosophical thought experiment.
Quoting Amity
Interestingly, I still only have 244 posts (including this one). I'm not the most proficient poster, it seems.
Yeah, I know. Unbelievable, right?! Good to talk with you again :up:
Quoting Dawnstorm
Pretty much. But not only that. The similarities and differences between philosophy and literature. Creativity in general. How we imagine and reflect on what we read and writng.
Looking back, this writing process stands out:
Quoting Josh Alfred
Reading. Asking questions can lead to discovery. Following lines of inquiry or imagination. Objective or subjective. Both intertwining at different levels of awareness or consciousness in reading/writing.
***
Quoting Dawnstorm
Care to say more?
Quoting Dawnstorm
A bit harsh, no? We can all be prick-ish and think we're right. Difficult to let go of own ideas/beliefs when challenged. But wonderful to be surprised by an 'Aha!' moment when reading or listening.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Hmm. I see what you mean. However, the mind will wander/wonder no matter. When it comes to imaginatively creating anything. The creation of a thought experiment may well be more planned. As in a creative 'plotter' v a 'pantser'. But perhaps it can be a bit of both?
And, of course, the reader needs imagination to follow the story of 'what if's' in either scenario.
I don't think this 'ruins' a thought experiment.
I looked up Thought Experiment:
Quoting SEP - Thought Experiment [emphasis added]
Novalis - the name seemed familiar:
Quoting Wiki -Novalis
Wow. This is a new discovery for me. Another writer/philosopher/scientist - like Goethe, a favourite of mine. And then, the mention of 'the blue flower'!!
I had no idea when I uploaded my profile pic (yesterday) of its symbolism. Yet, it's so 'right' for me!
Quoting Wiki - Blue flower
Discovery. Processing something new. Things created or imagined in the mind...analysis, enquiry.
The brain wave for a story. The story creating waves...
I thought that when I saw you changed your profile image. The blue flower belongs to your personality—hope and the pursuit of art. I honestly think it is better now than when you had that soulless 'A' in your profile.
I changed my profile picture a lot of times. Now I have an apple painted by Dali. I will keep this painting for a long time, no doubt about that. I love apples and surrealism.
Salvador Dalí Art Gallery
Good to know I now have a 'soul' :wink:
I only ever saw the 'A' as a the first letter of 'Amity'. For 6yrs I didn't see any reason to change it.
What did it matter?
Recently, I had a shift in attitude. Why?
I realised that, compared to @Moliere's profile pic, 'A' was pretty much invisible.
In June 2025, we will be co-hosting a new and challenging TPF event.
To celebrate Creativity in Philosophy Writing. Imagination in Reading. To come together for some serious enjoyment. :cool: like the Eurovision Song Contest! :party:
The bland 'A' just wouldn't cut it. I needed to attract with a vibrant, new dress. It had to be blue.
'A' for Aesthetics comes into play.
Just like your 'Apple'.
It's not just an apple, though, is it? A butterfly is emerging from it, or through it. From a chrysalis.
Is this about Eve's plucking the forbidden fruit leading to knowledge? The Creation story in the Bible.
Quoting Wiki - Eve
To hell with this story :rage:
And the rotten, worm-infested fruit it still brings forth...
The idea that Woman=Sin. The opposite of 'Good'. The religious importance of birthing a child.
How dare women even think of abortion...they are still seen as being 'owned' by males.
And I'm not going to regurgitate the vile spewings of Musk.
How dare people want to know more? Knowledge is Power. Ignorance is bliss?
'A' for Art. We can create our own stories. Not be stifled by oppression.
Symbolism of the apple:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_(symbolism)
I don't know much about Dali but, like Eve, I want to know. A little:
Quoting Dali paintings - Landscape with Butterflies
***
Quoting javi2541997
Yes, along with a few others. I wonder why some people stick and others move on...
Anyway, I like your latest. And can't even remember what you had before!
Quoting javi2541997
Your tomatoes will be jealous!
How do you interpret the painting?
Yes, I know it is not a big deal, but the profile picture is something curious. Some have a lot of birds on it (Jamal, T Clark, hypericin, etc.) And others have the same picture since I joined the first time (Benkei, creativesoul, Janus, etc.); and then, those who even show their real identity (Jack Cummins or Mikie). I wonder if we are recognised on TPF due to our profile pic or just our username. Hmm... :chin:
Quoting Amity
Exactly. Dali painted life and death in that apple. It is a very clever drawing. The worm and the apple; the first enters the second, and the progress of life goes on. The painting left me reflecting on some deep thoughts the first time I saw it.
Quoting Amity
No, no. The Dali's apple is not Biblical, and I think he never painted something religious. The point was to be surrealist or even dreamy.
Quoting Amity
I wonder exactly the same!
Quoting Amity
I had the cover of a Japanese film—called The Eel.
Both? I recognise your name, first and foremost. I don't really associate you with the pic.
However, it is easier to pick out posts - increased visibility an' all that.
But isn't it what we write, how we can be read/misread that is important. To make clear and question our thoughts - in different ways.
We are associated with the ideas/beliefs we express. The threads and people we respond to.
Even when we might change our minds, along with our profiles. Or not.
First impressions count, no? Hence, the careful, creative choice of a book cover. But you know, you can't always judge a book by its cover...
Thanks for explaining more about Dali. And being a bit of an inspiration :halo: :cool:
Not sure about the 'bird' thing... but does it matter?
Quoting javi2541997
And some people don't even give it a minute's thought...
You can't judge an apple by looking at a tree,
You can't judge honey by looking at the bee,
You can't judge a daughter by looking at the mother,
You can't judge a book by looking at the cover.
Oh can't you see,
Oh you misjudge me,
I look like a farmer,
But I'm a lover,
You can't judge a book by looking at the cover.
[...]
You can't judge a fish by lookin' in the pond,
You can't judge right from looking at the wrong,
You can't judge one by looking at the other,
You can't judge a book by looking at the cover.
Wholeheartedly. :cool:
Quoting Amity
It doesn't matter; I agree. But it is very curious because it makes me wonder whether those members coincide in the bird thumbnail randomly or not.
Look! A thread was even started towards this 'thing' :lol: --
Why do so many people on here have bird thumbnails?
The spooky curiosity remains after three years. :smile:
Wow! Another blast from the past :cool:
Are you sure this was painted by Dali? I clicked on WebSearch and found it here:
https://freshpics.blogspot.com/2007/12/surreal-art-of-vladimir-kush.html
Look at the signature bottom right. That doesn't seem to be Dali's. But Vladimir Kush, yes?
Quoting Wiki - Vladimir Kush
Yet I found websites that refer to the green apple as Dali's.
http://my-photogalore.blogspot.com/2008/12/salvador-dali-paintings_9853.html?m=1
I think it is Dali-ish, but the real author is Kush. I am deeply sorry, because I misunderstood the original work of an artist with other's.
Well, I will keep the apple in the thumbnail, either it is painted by Kush and inspired by Dali. :smile:
Proof that is Kush's --
https://www.jacobgallery.com/vladimir-kush-green-apple
About Kush: His thoughts, writing and videos. Showing and telling his story. His Metaphorical Voyage:
Kush Fine Art - gallery of paintings (6 mins well spent!)
https://kushfineart.com/
The World in the Mirror of Metaphor
https://kushfineart.com/about/
Quoting About the Artist - Vladimir Kush
Neither could I. That's what made me look further...curious as ever.
Quoting javi2541997
Please. Absolutely no need to apologise. It is easy to misunderstand, especially if others - like the blogger think the same. It stimulated thought and questions :fire:
What interests me. Was your interpretation influenced by the belief that it was Dali's?
And so, you viewed the 'insect' as a worm, instead of a chrysalis?
What we associate with a name or brand...see 'Apple', what do you think. The use of a symbol to 'sell'?
Thanks for the link. The painting as a symbol in itself. Showing the ripening of an artist's idea. Brilliant!
From: https://www.jacobgallery.com/vladimir-kush-green-apple
As viewers/readers we don't see the middle stage; the process from beginning to final product.
Also, writers can use silence, or gaps in the text itself, to give us a chance to use our Imagination. Not everything is shown or told. That's what makes a story 'work' for me.
I am so looking forward to the Literary Activity. Reading your story and those of others.
How varied the input...and output...hopefully, not all dark, despairing nightmares :smile:
Yes, because Dali's always loved to play with those metaphors and illusions. The same happens to watches melting in the branches or the trees hanging in the abyss. How he wanted to express the nature with dreams is what it made me interpret that the painting was his.
Quoting Amity
Are you referring to the insect on the down right? I honestly thought it was a worm, but now I understand why it is more technical to say chrysalis because Kush might have been thought on a pupa.
Quoting Amity
I don't like the use of symbolism with the purpose of selling, or even worse, to recruit people. I think symbology should be at our collective thought and behaviour. I don't know how to explain this, but Jung was quite right about the archetypes. It comes to our mind an iPhone device when we see an apple, sadly. It should come to our minds something related to life, health care, fruits, etc.
The problem which I see with philosophy essays on a forum such as this as they are too formal. Having written essays for courses, there is so much of having to go to source material and provide academically acceptable referencing. Some of this is done by links currently, but this comes with risks of online viruses. I am wary of links and use them sparingly (but I won't groan about anxiety about the health of my phone).
There is also the question as to how much people wish to log in and read essays on the forum. There may be a tension between chit chat and formal essays. I am inclined for something in between. I do read essays and books anyway but that is aside from forum. There are many here who take philosophy seriously as a creative endeavour but I am not sure that essay presentation is central to forum interaction. Some might be useful but I see the forum as a general sounding board for ideas rather than the best platform for essays. They would take up so much space and if it all became too academic it might deter from the creative process of exchanging the ideas as the raw materials of philosophy.
Yes. See explanation: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/951076
I didn't think of it as a worm signifying 'death' because worms would be wriggling out of the apple.
The process of decomposition. The apple is juicy and thriving. It is why I thought of Eve in the Garden of Eden. Mother of creation, giving birth. A new life and spirit.
The use and abuse of symbols. Another thread of thought...
Did you read my thread: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15596/tpf-philosophy-competitionactivity-2025-/p1
Quoting Jack Cummins
I agree that the word 'essay' is off-putting. However, the idea is not that they must be of the formal academic type. There are different types of philosophical writing. There is a wide definition of 'essay' - from its original French meaning: essayer - to try. I've written about that in the thread.
Quoting Jack Cummins
Yes. This project will not be as rigid. The aim is to simplify. The quotes used in this 'essay' event will not necessarily follow academic standards - but brief details like author and text page/s.
If you don't mind, I will copy and paste your thoughts to the thread. I don't wish to duplicate here. Thanks.
I did read your other thread and it will be an interesting experiment. My only concern would be about its competitive nature and the war of egos. There has been so much of that in the creative writing competitions/activities.
OK. I agree there are problems related to 'competition'. Been there, like you!
The question of 'competitive elements' is still to be addressed.
To have an 'in-essay' poll or an extra evaluative thread, like @Baden's proposed 'Favourites'
It is to be viewed more as a 'Challenge' than a Competition.
I'm going to move this exchange to the other thread. Thanks.
Sure, but let me address the following first:
Quoting Amity
A bit harsh? Yes and no. It's not that I thought that's how I came across to others. Sometimes maybe, but they can counter; that's fine with me. My problem was that the more I got embroiled in arguments, the more I found myself saying things that... I didn't really mean. I did mean them to some extent, but the matters-of-fact here are... difficult, and the moment you put something into words, you can think of a few ways that could be wrong, and so on and so forth. It became exhausting to argue a position more vehemently than you mean to, but at the same time feeling that if you let go the rebound of the opposing position would smash your right into a wall. In the end, I figured what I have to say isn't all that important, since my core point that underlies all the creative writing stuff is that people have to find their own way. I just retreated.
As for the "chaos" comment, that sort of follows from what I just said: people need to find their own way. Writing seminars can certainly be part of that, but I find that... a lot of the advice I've come to expect works against that. There are those well-meant slogans: "Show, don't tell", "Don't end a sentence with a preposition," "Avoid the passive voice, adverbs, etc.", "a protagonist needs a goal"...
Taken all together these sort of rules converge on a style. More then once I saw authors put up their writing for criticism, get a few predictable remarks (e.g. there are too many adverbs), then edit the excerpt, post it again, and then get better responses. I once asked one of those writers which version they personally liked better; they said they liked the new one better, though they might just be in the high of the moment. The thing is this: I almost always liked the original version better. The edited version might be smoother, but usually they lost voice. What remained is that uni-voice style. Some authors naturally fit into that style (I think David Mitchell of Cloud Atlas is a good example), so it's not that the style can't produce a good voice. I'm not against that style. The thing is, though, that in direct comparison there's something to an authors original voice that gets lost when it's edited down to an industry standard.
Another anecdote: When defending adverbs, my favourite example comes from the final paragraph of James Joyce's short story "The Dead". It's just a beautiful use of adverbs, and it contains sentence structures that would not be possible without adverbs. One time, though, I quoted what I though was an ingenious example of use of adverbs in Salman Rushdie's Midnight's Children. The reply I got was that this was unreadable. Fine. I'm not going to argue against someone's taste. I loved the section, someone else did not. I moved on. Years later, though, I read an interview with Rushdie where he basically said something along the lines of having used to many adverbs in his earlier fiction. I wasn't sure that included Midnight's Children, though it's likely. The book is full of adverbs. Thing is, I really liked the style, and here the author himself aligns himself with the... prevailing tend.
To be sure, it's not a loss. Rushdie's later books are still fun to read, and the older books won't go away. But it's sort of exasperating. It's like there's a set of industry standards slowly forming... taste. It's like these writing rules are slowly becoming true through... taste formation?
And now go back up to the introductory paragraph: I don't actually think any think any of this is true. Real life is more complex, and I think I'm being melodramatic. One other thing that changed, for example, is that with the rise of Amazon, it's become harder to find the books I'd like to read in bookshops, and I don't buy stuff online. So I'm sort of out of touch. For all those reasons, I don't really want to be believed.
But at the same time, these anecdotes really happened. I've seen rough but interesting texts polished into a smeblence of professionality, but losing that initial spark in the progress. More often than I ever wanted to, I've seen texts being polished until they're utterly dull. If I were a slush-pile reader, I probably wouldn't have accepted the original versions, but I'd have remembered them. The edited version I'd have passed over without a second thought. So now, when I read a potentially interesting book that's ultimately not very memorable I wonder if that happened here, too; if somewhere hidden in this version is an interesting original that's been edited out. See, it's entirely possible, likely even, that other people (including the author) really love the result. It's possible that that's just how they write, and that I just don't get it. That would be too bad for me, but all in all it would be all right. However, if there's really an original version out there which - for all its flaws - I'd have liked better - than that'd make me a little sad.
How writing rules can become a style. But people have to find their own way.
Isn't it strange to find people parroting advice wholesale, when advice changes from writer to writer in any given time or space. The 'show don't tell' - has a point but, of course, some telling is necessary.
How it is done, seamlessly, is where creativity enters the picture.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Yes. And that is the beauty of taking time to reflect and edit your thoughts as you write. Others can help by questioning what you mean by X,Y or Z. But many don't ask, they assume.
Thinking and then appreciating how the mind can change, that is what works, for me, in a forum.
Sometimes, we don't always like to admit a change of position. Some see it as a sign of weakness. It would mean being a 'loser' not a 'winner' and they dig deeper...into dogma.
Quoting Dawnstorm
[Edit: deleted quotes from a short story]
Yes. That can happen.
The short story event is fantastic. People give voice to their different interpretations.
I've learned a great deal by participating over the years. About careful listening...
Quoting Dawnstorm
Hmmm. Not sure how true this is. It could work the other way round. Our tastes in fiction change and we demand more choice. New genres arise with experimental ways of writing.
Chacun à son goût, non?
The Literary Activity is a veritable banquet of juicy bites. Some might not hold instant appeal but each story should be listened to. IMO. Yummy times ahead... :party:
"Show, don't tell," is one piece of advice that's... vague. The problem is, since you're in a medium that almost always works with text, the only way to really show something is to tell about something else, so the author might think they're showing, but the reader might be reading one abstraction-level down, and thus read it as telling. So what does that piece of advice mean, in the end?
There's an intuitive space that's almost always telling, and one that's almost always showing, but there's a lot of overlap in the middle. Often, there's no clear difference between showing telling. For example, a simple line like "He picked up the phone," omits a lot of details, and whether you get a showy or telly feeling from it depends on what's going on in the scene, and how important the event is. But that's not always in the text; it can be in the reader-side interpretation. (Of course, a single line occurs in a wider text, and it's that wider text that's showy or telly, and not the line alone. I'm just simplifying because it's easier to make a point.)
The basic question here is (a) when do people interpret details that are in the text vs. (b) when do people imagine details that are not in the text. And what do you, as the author, want? This, too, ties in with point of view in some narrative context: for example, a telly line like "this made him very angry," might be a misinterpretion of unrevealed details by an unreliable narrator.
The problem with standard rules is that they often guide attention in a rather limiting way. When you edit with a rule mindset, there's a danger that you lose the big picture. "Show, don't tell," in my message-board experience, discourages lines like "this made him very angry," and would render situations in which this would work as exceptions. And beginning writers "must know the rules before they can break them."
So at the moment you say "The 'show don't tell' - has a point but, of course, some telling is necessary." you're already caught up in a rhetoric that stigmatizes telling and sets showing as the default, when what you really need is an understanding of how many details to use and when. It's not clear whether "show, don't tell," is helpful or harmful. That depends on (a) how you learn to interpret the line, and (b) what sort of style your intuitive voice tends towards.
For example, when I was still writing, I noticed that my characters were "turning their heads" a lot when something caught their attention. All of them. When I wrote "turned his/her head", that was usually me putting in a short cut. It's a physical detail, a sort of behavior-icon for some recurring type of events. It's not only repetitive, it's also not taking into account the character's body language. So I have this private little rule that says "beware of swivel-head syndrome." So... should I peddle this rule? Should I just assume that many people share the same problem? Should I stigmatize head-turning?
Not really, no. It's a problem I have. I can't just put it out there. However, "swivel-head syndrome" is, as an unintended consequence, encouraged by "show, don't tell," as a rule. It doesn't have to be, but that's been my message-board impression. Don't tell me something caught their attention, show them turn their heads. Out of the frying pan, into the fire. Again, it's not an inevitable consequence of the rule; it's just that people suddenly started put the same few stock movements in place of the same few stock emotions. Like a cultural short hand.
So noticing this trend, I could abstract from my "swivel-head syndrome" personal rule, and say something like "Know the body language of your characters!" But if that caught on (I doubt it would; it doesn't tell you what to do), it would likely be distributed as a slogan, and it's context would eventually be lost, and it would create its own set of problems.
(Aside: One of the reason "know the body-language of your characters!" is useful for me is because I have aphantasia. I have no inner eye. I can't see my characters at all, and often don't even know what they look like until some setting interaction fixes a trait. So making up random body-language in keeping with their personality helps me add some visual touches to stories. My swivel-head syndrome is a side-effect of getting lazy in that process. People with a vivid inner eye are almost certainly not going to profit from that rule, given that they probably just need to visually imagine their characters. It's very involved.)
Well, it can certainly be interpreted, misinterpreted and expounded on at great length.
As a rule, without qualification, it is absolute. 'Don't' is an imperative. This is what you should do if you want to be a good writer.
Quoting Dawnstorm
I don't know that I'm caught up in a stigmatisation of telling. Or that I agree with a default of showing.
I could have phrased it better and I could have expanded...
I was trying to say that both were needed.
A message-board experience in creative writing sounds like my idea of hell. I guess some forums are more helpful than others.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Why did you stop creative writing? Don't you miss it? Have you considered taking part in TPF's Literary Activity - either as a writer or reader, both?
Having an internal rule to remind you to avoid 'bad' writing is helpful, like a bright yellow sticky note on your laptop. I suppose then it becomes intuitive, part of who you are.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Hmm. I'll have to take your word for that.
Quoting Dawnstorm
What do you mean by that? It seemed to have a negative connotation. I checked it out:
https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/language-popular-culture/cultural-shorthand
So, a quick way to connect and evoke. A short-hand without the need for detailed explanations.
Handy, especially when words are limited as in a micro/mini story.
The repetitive use of 'Turned his/her head' isn't the same kind of short-cut. It's just unimaginative.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Well, it's not about something 'catching on' to be repeated parrot-like without engaging brain.
Advice isn't all about catch-phrases to keep in mind. However, some have been re-formed in more helpful ways. This excellent article, along with comments and responses, is in sympathy with your view:
https://emmadarwin.typepad.com/thisitchofwriting/showing-and-telling-the-basics.html
Another one, gives a balanced view with examples:
https://writers.com/show-dont-tell-writing
***
Quoting Dawnstorm
Goodness. That is quite an obstacle for anyone, never mind a creative writer. I can't imagine how difficult that must be. Having no inner eye means not being able to visualise. This is key to imagination and perhaps links to empathy?
Quoting Dawnstorm
Understatement?!
Thank you for your sensitive insight into all the difficulties. Taking the time to explore. :sparkle: :flower:
EDIT: So it comes down to attention to detail, important in realism. "It was a dark and stormy night" is a shorthand and therefore a cliché; it doesn't tell us exactly what is happening.
So it's all just telling. I suppose the reason they say show, don't tell, is when it's for plays and films, where instead of exposition---particularly awkward in this case because it has to take the form of dialogue or voice-over---you can show emotions, motivations and the setting with the acting, action, cinematography and set design, etc.
Yes. There is always a story to tell. It's in the way that we tell it...see it or hear it...all senses on full alert.
I read that Chekhov is the culprit who inspired the concept of 'Show, don't tell'.
"Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass."
Quoting Wiki - Show, don't tell
Quoting Jamal
Yes. But even so, there's something about getting right into it...a sense of familiarity. It doesn't have to be boring. The author can surprise by not following it up with expected horror but delight in candlelight. Or being wonderstruck by thunder and lightning...awesome nature. They stood at the window...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_was_a_dark_and_stormy_night
***
It was a dark and a stormy night
Everyone was at the wing-ding
They weren't the wing-ding type
So they went up on the train bridge
Where the weather was howling
And oh, oh, my my
When that train comes rolling by
No paper thin walls, no folks above
No one else can hear
The crazy cries of love
Looking forward to reading your story, and others, in the dazzling show of creativity that is the Literary Activity: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15585/literary-activity-dec-2024/p1
:cool: :fire: - shorthand for mega cool and hot stuff, baby! :wink:
That's an excellent point.
Quoting Amity
:cool:
Thank you. Sometimes I amaze myself :cool: There must be something in the air. The smoky whiff of TPF in December. Short Stories. Stimulating, sensuous, spectacular. :fire: :heart: :sparkle:
Oh, yeah. Christian, Jewish or Muslim, that's clearly stated in The Book.
Ignorance, coupled with the threat of punishment, is obedience. That was the point. Also, Adam got off lightly, because he said: "The woman tricked me." He rules by Righteousness; she, in league with the Serpent, corrupts him with Guile.
(And you may have given me an essay topic.)
Quoting javi2541997
Those exquisite crucifixions are worth checking out. Also several madonnas, a ghostly last supper and a lot of Christian symbolism. Catholic themes, as far as I recall, not the Old Testament.
There are green apples without butterflies in a couple of the large pictures, though he seems to have preferred pears.
(Dali is my all-time favourite Painter.)
Kush is no slouch, either. Amazing stuff! He likes butterflies and apples. There is one explicitly about the biblical apple.
Thanks, Amity; I'd never heard of him.
For the Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025? Yay!
I've an idea for that too. But, ssshh, it's a secret...
Wonderful links to the works of Dali, thanks. Quoting Vera Mont
I really had no idea. My appetite is now well and truly gewhetted. The brilliance of taking the mundane and growing it into something else.
Now that's Creative Genius.
Found a lithograph of Dali's APPLE-EVE’S APPLE.
Part of the Flors Dali (The Fruits) series, Apple-Eve's Apple dep#icts a figure made up of foliage and fruit, placed above a rough sketch of a dragon.
https://www.dtrmodern.com/others/apple-eves-apple
And the full collection of his 14 fruit watercolours.
NB that was written on 18th June 2013.
Complete with warning:
Some of these images are explicit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22948997
Better images, follow the arrows to view more. Love the Hasty Plum!
https://www.bonhams.com/magazine/14463/
***
Good as they are, the religious ones...well, wow! The ghostly last supper.
With a feminised Jesus centre-stage ?
Excellent description and information re history and geometric technique:
'During the late 1940s, Dalí’s return to Christian imagery and traditional values was influenced by three factors: the devastating effects of the Spanish Civil War and World War II, his reawakened interest in classical art, and his reappraisal of Freud’s psychological principles after meeting the aging psychoanalyst in 1938. One classic derivation cited by Dalí in connection with his painting was Zurbarán, a seventeenth-century Spanish old master. The tousled hair of the praying figures, the kneeling postures, and the brilliant whites of their cloaks evoke Zurbarán’s precise, enamel-like handling of paint....
As in the harmonious presentation of Renaissance schemes, Dalí’s composition is clearly divided: foreground action and background scenery. The placement of men around the table is symmetrical, the same figure repeated in perfect mirror image on both sides of Christ. Moreover, the entire nine-foot-long picture is constructed according to complex mathematical ratios devised by Renaissance scientists and such ancient Greek philosophers as Pythagoras.'
From: https://www.nga.gov/collection/art-object-page.46590.html
My point was that Dali was not trying to paint a biblical scene but playing with Abrahamic symbolism. Making them dreamlike or surreal. I hardly believe that Dali was inspired by religious painters of European enlightenment.
For example -- the amazing crucifixion that you shared in your post. No blood, no image of Jesus Christ, the floor is mysterious, the cross looks like cement blocks, the crown of thorns is missing, and the famous nails are substituted for perfect cubes. An amazing painting by Dali, and very clever how he used Abrahamic symbolism.
Well, we can thank @javi2541997 for that!
He, unwittingly, introduced him as 'Dali' in his profile pic :wink:
:smile:
We never know where the gems are hidden. You look for copper and 'pop!' An emerald appears. :up:
Well, I was looking for Dali's apple and Kush appeared.
So, both brilliant gems of creativity. One inspiring the other. Some creatives reach higher levels of polish and sparkle...public acclamation and wealth.
But, yes. It amazes me how one post leads to another and then another jewel is added to the collection. You and Vera both love Dali. I'm getting there :sparkle:
Nothing about Dali was average. He turned things inside-out and merged them with other things. Quoting javi2541997
It's also floating in space. Here's a slightly more traditional one.
Still not Murillo, but a little closer to Vermeer, one of his early influences.
I can't access Facebook. Do you have its title and I can search elsewhere?
Quoting Vera Mont
Just call me impressed by your wealth of knowledge. Do you have a few Dalis hanging in your kitchen?
All over the place. It's Called Christ of Saint John of the Cross.
He was quite mad, you know. Aside from the boundless imagination, he had a reported IQ if 175. That's enough to drive anyone 'round the twist, even without Catholicism and being named after a dead brother.
I need to go see that up close and personal. I hope it's still in the collection.
Quoting Wiki - Christ of Saint John of the Cross
Thank you, Vera. :sparkle:
Imagine floating in Dali's dreams...
I have a couple of books, since about 1970. Anecdote; the second year I was working, I saw a pair of minor Dali prints in a Toronto gallery. #175 of the run, they were little things, about 10"x7" and came as a set for $200. That was two thirds of my monthly pay after deductions. I could have swung it, with some economies in my not-so-lavish lifestyle. But I lived in a small rented room with hardly any wall space and zero security. But I loved them! But... Common sense won. The damn things would be worth about $4000 today.
Quoting Amity
Shudder!
By synchronicity! The daily jigsaw puzzle - which is where I wend from here a minute ago - is a Kandinski. He was also one of Dali's influence, along with Miro, both of whose work I like.
This I find difficult to talk about. First, I did quote what you literally said, but the "you" in the line was supposed to be the generalised you (like "one says"). It's so difficult, because the phrase means different things to different people, and it's not even always clear how the rhetoric relates to the praxis of writing.
There's the rhetoric with its personal impact and its social impact, and then there's the personal meaning of the phrase, which is part of the personal impact but not all of it; there's what the writer actually does, which again relates to both the personal meaning and the personal impact of the phrase, but the show-don't-tell part of writing isn't a thing on its own. Whether you're "showing" or "telling" in a particular section of text depends on how you interpret those terms (part of the personal meaning of the phrase). This then means that the personal meaning of the phrase goes into the praxis potentially twice, once as a generative rule and once as a corrective rule. And it's not clear that the generative rule and corrective rule are the same, even though the phrase of origin is definitely the same.
Then, beyond that, none of these rules are meant to be absolute. Nobody says that. They're meant to be rules of thumb. So figuring out whether an author who favours "show don't tell," in his discourse about writing also favours it while writing isn't easy - you first have to figure out what the line means to the writer, and then you have to figure out how many exceptions are too many.
None of that would matter much. What really matters in the end is the text. But then there's the social level: no matter what the rule means to any specific writer, the phrasings are socially "out there". "Show, don't tell," is a phrase you can google. And the discussions around the phrase cover various predictable meanings. And the time spent on figuring out what this vague line means could be spent writing and developing an intution for what to do (though some people find that hard to do without guidance and thus seek out rules...)
Now once the phrase is out in the open, people who don't yet have an understanding of the line will encounter and hear it, and what they hear is a sentence of "do this, don't do that". So when they approach the problem of what to do when writing they do so with that particular topic framed as one thing to do, and one thing not to do. They'll eventually figure out that something you do have to tell (i.e. the thing you should not do according to the phrasing), but by that time, showing is already the default. You're usually showing, but somtimes you have to tell. However, that's a judgement that doesn't fit all styles equally. To top it off, some people are natural showers (their "native style" tend towards that), but they might still worry they tell too much.
So:
Quoting Amity
Yes, but there's a way to talk about this we all participate in. Me, too. I sort-of vaguely half reject the rule, but that's also participating in the lingo. When I reject the rule, it's no clearer what about I reject than what it is that others like about. One thing you should know about me is that I have a chip on my shoulder when it comes to these righting rules. That doesn't mean I disagree with everything proponents of the rule say, or that I think you can't write well while keeping that rule in mind, or... or... or... If I go online to talk about writing, I'll always go into rule-blaster mode - and it'll never quite come across how I want to (if I even know how I want to come across). I've built up a lot of frustration that way, and that's why I've been bowing out of writing forums.
Quoting Amity
Oh, it was lots of fun. I'm more of a short story writer, but I did finish a very rough draft of novel, which I doubt I'd have finished on my own. I had some excellent feedback.
Quoting Amity
Nah, don't take my word for it. That's precisely the kind of nonsense I catch myself saying when I go into rant mode. Here's again what I wrote: "it's just that people suddenly started put the same few stock movements in place of the same few stock emotions." This is mostly based on a subjective impression by a biased mind, and it's now all around a decade ago, so on top of that it's a memory. First, I'd edit out the "suddenly". I'm fairly certain nothing about it was sudden. Second the body-movement/stock-emotions part is more of an excerpt example (to be sure, I could probably find examples, but that doesn't say anything). See, when talking about why I don't like those rules, I find myself doing the same sort of thing I don't like about the rhetoric that surrounds them. I'm vague, I'm inaccurate, I make mistakes (I don't think I made one in this post, so no example for the time being), and so on. I demonstrably do know a lot about writing, but I'm hardly the only one, and on a message board I tend not to be as careful as I should be. I end up saying stuff that I find embarrassing (like that line, for example). So, no, don't take my word for it. Never take my word for it.
Quoting Amity
To be sure, I called "putting the same few body movements in place of the same few stock emotions" a cultural-shorthand. This what we're comparing to "turned his/her head". The head-turning I'd call just a bad habit. It's between me and my writing. But if you see many people make the same type of edits for a variety of texts, when different texts would need different approaches, that's a different problem. Do they edit their own texts the same way? Is this sort of behaviour triggered by the message board environment? I don't know any of that, so I can't classify it on a personal level. I don't know if it's even a habit, and if so, if it's a writing habit, an editing habit, a critiquing habit, all of it? Whatever it is on the personal level, it's a cultural shorthand on the social level.
So the differences: Mine: personal level, about writing. "Theirs": social level, about critiquing (and sometimes editing). And in terms of judgement: Mine: flag for a re-write. "Theirs": Do it like this to improve your text.
In the process of laying out this difference, I've noticed another aspect about my line above that's nonsense: "same body movements for the same stock emotions" is not only judgemental, it unintentionally judging the writing I meant to defend (the "stock emotions" are what occur in the original writing, as opposed to the "body movements" which occur in the edit). Really, it's good not to trust me too much.
Quoting Amity
It's not that bad. In fact, for most of my life, I never noticed that I didn't have an inner eye. I thought when people talked about that it was more of a metaphor than it actually seems to be. I can visualise to a minimal degree: if I close my eyes and concentrate very hard I can create a micro-second flash of an image. Research about aphantasia indicates that the "inner eye" can be trained. It's not particularly difficult to engage in creative writing with aphantasia. In descriptions, I tend to focus on a few key properties when writing; extended descriptions in fiction I read tend to bore me if they exceed my capacity for detail-retention. I sort of space out, then. If I want to see stunning scenery, for example, narrative is never going to cut it for me; I prefer the visual arts - where I actually have something to look at. I used to just put it down to taste - which it still might be, who knows?
Quoting Amity
I stopped creative writing when I got a job I didn't particularly like. I just felt too drained to actually write. I don't particularly miss it. I figure I'll pick it up again when I retire. I've still occasionally generated story ideas, for example. I just don't feel like actually writing. Even when I was writing, I usually didn't share what I was writing (and what I shared on writing forums was usually written specifically for community activities). I've considered taking part in the Literary Activity here, but I think participation would overwhelm me - too much time and energy (I mean, just look at the size of this post, and it's not even about a particular piece of writing). Also, one thing I've noticed is that I don't like reading fiction on a computer screen. No problem with academic articles, blog posts, forum posts etc. No problem with poetry. But fiction? For some reason it doesn't quite work for me, on a screen. Weird.
Quoting Amity
I've heard that. It's such a beautiful way to put it. It's so very much like Chekhov that the reflecting glass is broken. I bought a book of his short stories which I really enjoyed. A lot of those rules go back to something authors said. I find those examples really interesting in that sort of context.
Quoting Jamal
Yes, and all that description takes time, which means you'll get into the meat of the story later. Or maybe the style's more exposition heavy (e.g. Marquez)? Can you lead in with that sentence, if you still give all those description afterwards? On message boards, blogs, etc. these "rules" tend to mean sort-of-but-not-quite the same thing. Nearly everything you can dislike has a name:
Exposition? Falls under "Show, don't tell," for sure, but more specifically "info-dump". Conveying information through unnatural dialogue? Google "As you know, Bob" (the Bob is optional, but if a name's there that's usually the one). And so on... Actually, the admonition against As-you-know-Bob dialogue is one of the few I've heard I find very hard to dismiss: it's very specific, and exceptions would have to be very deliberately crafted (I'm sure they exist).
Thank you for trying. Your detailed explanation clarifies but I will focus only on bits.
Quoting Dawnstorm
What matters is the story. And how the writer moves it along - its flow affecting the reader.
The sometimes difficult authorial decision to create a story, as intriguing as it is beautiful in the eyes of the beholder. How to end it. Knowing how best to write and read to benefit all...
Quoting Dawnstorm
Your frustration is well expressed. I understand why you give writing forums a break.
But as long as you can write when you feel like it. And not just for critical appraisal. To have finished the first draft of a novel is an achievement. A short story should be a walk in the park :wink:
Quoting Dawnstorm
I trust you to tell it like it is for you. As well as anyone is able to. Showing insight, knowledge and experience.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Yes, narrative has its limitations. It is what it is. Just like a photograph can never encapsulate the feel of being in nature or even half its beauty.
Interesting that you mention the visual arts. I've been thinking of how @javi2541997 inspired me to look again at his profile pic to interpret its meaning. We not only read text but paintings.
My reading was different from his, due to personal history and background - with no awareness of Dali. Javi knew Dali and yet did not agree with my 'religious' interpretation.
[and, of course, it turned out not to be Dali but Kush]
Quoting javi2541997
I thank @Vera Mont for carefully drawing attention to Dali's works.
Quoting Vera Mont
There was a time when the very word 'religion' would have me turn away. My Christian faith had vanished and I despised anything to do with it. I would not have been attracted to Dali's religious paintings. Fortunately, things change.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Yes. It is all down to aesthetics. "As you know, Bob!" :sparkle:
Once you put a little distance between your present self and the experience that turned you against a particular religion, you can begin to think about why it was there in the first place, and why so many people still subscribe to it. (No, not because they needed to explain where lightning comes from!) I find Christian literature and art fascinating. Much of it is also beautiful, and I value beauty for its own sake. We look at a cathedral, my SO says, "What a colossal waste of stone and manpower!" Yes, I agree, but admire it anyway.
Notre Dame Cathedral. Malta's Cathedrals. Who pays for the gold?
I know why religion is there and why people pray.
And then they bomb.
Dali's painting is extraordinary. I want to know his story.
Easily done; his life was very public. Lots of acting out before an audience. Here's one source There should be a few quality picture books in the library, as well.
Now I'm off to find out how many roles Ron Masak has played in the tv series Murder She Wrote.
Love trivia.