|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 5:11 pm
The only reason HP is making millions is because UK plugged it oh-so much and we Brits should know, we had to sit through the boring TV shows in the beginning.
But I think I undestand what you are saying. If I paid more attention in my lit. classes I could give you with a bit more detail that some writers have published books that, I guess, in the lowest description, could be said to be fanfic... kinda. One book is based on the wife in 'Jane Erye' and you have some of those parody books that take the mickey out of moives.
If it's not been said yet I'll say it again. It's the writers own way of protraying an idea and plot that makes it an interesting read, even if you've read it ten- twenty times before. I guess you could say you want to hear what this authour has to say about it. -gasp- xp
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:28 am
|
Psychotic Maniacal Sanity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:54 pm
Okay Queeny, I hear where you're coming from and I really agree. But am I the only one who's really tired of opening a book only to find that it's about Angels, Demins, Catpeople, um...princesses in distress. There are sometimes things in stories that are really overused, no matter how well the author portays them, and I must say, most author do it pretty well. I mea, I write laods of stories that when people first hear about it they go "been there, done that" and stuff, but that's why I write it because Iwant to see if my idea is original. Inside my head, it all sounds great, but I have to get it down on paper before I can really see if it's any good. SOmetimes it is, and sometimes it's not.
I can't believe someone wrote a book about the wife in Jane Erye. Wacko, that book was awful in the first place, why continue an already terrible legacy of pathetic attempts at femminism. (ie, Jane Austen and Charolette and Emily Bronte)
Queeny, I had no idea you were Brittish, that is so cool!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 2:42 am
The way I see it, when I walk into the book store and head to the teen section the only books I see are books about witches, werewolves, vamps, sex and love etc and being about street life and gangs. And someone must be buying these books for authours and publishers to accept and produce them.
To be honest my first books are all about demons and angels because it is something I want to explain and explore for myself. When I read most of the stories and ideas in here it is the same. Demons monsters and the like are everwhere. Face it, we love wiriting about these things and although people use the same group of creatures each person has their own way of telling it.
For example vampires only ever go after woman (poor us) yet look at 'blade', a vamp killing vamps - you can't tell me that aint cool and new! My mum has even read books that male vamps are gay and go after fresh young men! eek
Even those we aspiring writers write about these things only a few of those stories will get through. I mean, look at HP his a wizard but he's a nerdy moron who kids can relate to... somehow... The only thing that makes that book a sale out is the fact that so many nerdy kids and nerdy adults could relate to him...some... how. now the problem with a sudden popular subject is that everyone starts banging out stories about kids with glasses who have family problems but soon find out they can change the world when they discrover that their great great great great grandpa was an angel, and their dna has fully developed thoughout the generation so one... so fore
I think what people need to do is read a hell of a lot more books to see what has been done and tackle it in a new way. It only makes a little thing to make a story awesome.
Mind you I too am exhuasted with stories about and angel/vamp/wolf/creature that has to kill other creature/super human but falls in love with that being... but, in saying that, I have a story like that yet the demon falls for the angel and she ain't having it. I like to believe it is differen't... confused
BUT YES even though it may not look like it, I agree that MANY MANY ideas are over used and over used badly. Lets just hope we can get away with it because we are all guilt of it twisted
Yes I am that person on that cold, grey island, it's nice to know you think it's cool! Think I'll go lubricate my throat with some tea. Cheerio<<< truth stereotype!
*breathes xp gonk mad gonk blaugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Psychotic Maniacal Sanity
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 4:46 am
xD Queeny, that IS so true. I say cheerio sometimes too. People think I'm crazy though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 6:21 am
cyberwitch-2006 xD Queeny, that IS so true. I say cheerio sometimes too. People think I'm crazy though... xD Omg. I just thought of something...
D-d'you have a british accent? heart Heh. Don't mind me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 6:22 am
Oh god no. I don't say cheerio I say, "see'ya" Caribbean british. I got a rep to keep up. But I do say 'ta' and I love me tea. Think I'll have another one xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:01 am
Queeny Oh god no. I don't say cheerio I say, "see'ya" Caribbean british. I got a rep to keep up. But I do say 'ta' and I love me tea. Think I'll have another one xd xD Double post. I say 'ta', and I like tea! surprised xD.. Mmm.. Tea...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Psychotic Maniacal Sanity
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:11 am
Amyane Queeny Oh god no. I don't say cheerio I say, "see'ya" Caribbean british. I got a rep to keep up. But I do say 'ta' and I love me tea. Think I'll have another one xd xD Double post. I say 'ta', and I like tea! surprised xD.. Mmm.. Tea...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:45 am
cyberwitch-2006 Tell me about it.. I mean, no offence but Witchcraft and things around that are my specialty and when I found the HP books I was royally pissed.
Not to mention the fact that I think she took many of her 'great ideas' from J.R.R.Tolkien himself... I read LOTR when I was nine and truely enjoyed it, when I picked up Harry Potter and read those books, I was like, 'Oh no, not again! gonk '
Giant Spiders, Trolls, Elves, Dark Lord... See the pattern?
J.K. Rowling never intended for the books to be about WitchCraft; she intended for them to be a fairy tale, and the types of magic and witches she protrays are very true to the genre she's attempting to write in. People need to get off their high horses about this and realize she never once intended to give sort of representation or misrepresentation, and if they're going to spaz about Harry Potter, they'd best start freaking over Mother Goose, the Brothers Grimm, and Hans Christien Anderson for a start.
About the Tolkein bit: JRR Tolkein was the first author to write modern fantasy. None of his ideas are original: elves, dwarves, giant spiders, and dark lords are all typical motifs in the folklore that he drew upon for his sources and simply wrote in a new way. Before Tolkein, "fantasy" was better known as "fairy tales." So, naturally, any author who's writing in that genre is going to have similar elements. It doesn't mean that they drew upon Tolkein to get them
The concept of over used ideas is a strange one. These "over used" motifs, etc. are what make up a genre, and make it definative from all others. It's simply poor writing that makes them seem over used, as a good author will blend elements in such a way that you won't realize that you've read a similar story a dozen times before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bookwyrm Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Psychotic Maniacal Sanity
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:16 am
Gypsy Blue cyberwitch-2006 Tell me about it.. I mean, no offence but Witchcraft and things around that are my specialty and when I found the HP books I was royally pissed.
Not to mention the fact that I think she took many of her 'great ideas' from J.R.R.Tolkien himself... I read LOTR when I was nine and truely enjoyed it, when I picked up Harry Potter and read those books, I was like, 'Oh no, not again! gonk '
Giant Spiders, Trolls, Elves, Dark Lord... See the pattern?
J.K. Rowling never intended for the books to be about WitchCraft; she intended for them to be a fairy tale, and the types of magic and witches she protrays are very true to the genre she's attempting to write in. People need to get off their high horses about this and realize she never once intended to give sort of representation or misrepresentation, and if they're going to spaz about Harry Potter, they'd best start freaking over Mother Goose, the Brothers Grimm, and Hans Christien Anderson for a start.
About the Tolkein bit: JRR Tolkein was the first author to write modern fantasy. None of his ideas are original: elves, dwarves, giant spiders, and dark lords are all typical motifs in the folklore that he drew upon for his sources and simply wrote in a new way. Before Tolkein, "fantasy" was better known as "fairy tales." So, naturally, any author who's writing in that genre is going to have similar elements. It doesn't mean that they drew upon Tolkein to get them
The concept of over used ideas is a strange one. These "over used" motifs, etc. are what make up a genre, and make it definative from all others. It's simply poor writing that makes them seem over used, as a good author will blend elements in such a way that you won't realize that you've read a similar story a dozen times before.I resent that... I did not spazz! In fact, I am a Harry Potter fan. It was just an example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:31 pm
Being "royally pissed", as you put it, is going a bit beyond making a simple example, and the statement wasn't directed to you solely. It simply happened that your post contained most of the issues I wanted to address with my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bookwyrm Vice Captain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:47 pm
Wow, this thread seems to have become a Harry Potter debate thread eek
One thing I wanted to address was the comment about demons, angels, ect, and why those are used so much. One reason, I think, is that these are topics that are part of our everyday life, whether we believe supernatural beings exist or not. Being something that is difficult to prove (I mean, some people say they have seen vampires, but didn't have a camera or something. Not the first thing on my mind if I got attacker, but still, there's not really solid proof) these topics are open ended and everyone has their own opinion. Many figure they'll throw it into their writings. When I write, I write to make a point, as many do, and these are common points people try to make, thus making them overdone... I really hope that made sense... if it didn't, I'm sorry I wrote this at one in the morning... sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:11 pm
Cereah Wow, this thread seems to have become a Harry Potter debate thread eek One thing I wanted to address was the comment about demons, angels, ect, and why those are used so much. One reason, I think, is that these are topics that are part of our everyday life, whether we believe supernatural beings exist or not. Being something that is difficult to prove (I mean, some people say they have seen vampires, but didn't have a camera or something. Not the first thing on my mind if I got attacker, but still, there's not really solid proof) these topics are open ended and everyone has their own opinion. Many figure they'll throw it into their writings. When I write, I write to make a point, as many do, and these are common points people try to make, thus making them overdone... I really hope that made sense... if it didn't, I'm sorry I wrote this at one in the morning... sweatdrop It made perfect sense to me, dear, don't worry. As for using things that we have in everyday life, that's great, but wouldn't it be fun to try something new. I mean, look at books like ALice in Wonderland, about a gril following a rabbit down its hole. I see little bunnies everyday (and hit them with my car just as often) I think it's really cool when writers can come up with something totally new. Gypsy Blue: You got a new look, cool. Yes, once upon a time I was an avid Harry Potter fan too. Then I read the sixth book, I fell off my chair in shock of how absolutely awful it was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bookwyrm Vice Captain
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:13 am
Curtsy It made perfect sense to me, dear, don't worry. As for using things that we have in everyday life, that's great, but wouldn't it be fun to try something new. I mean, look at books like ALice in Wonderland, about a gril following a rabbit down its hole. I see little bunnies everyday (and hit them with my car just as often) I think it's really cool when writers can come up with something totally new. Gypsy Blue: You got a new look, cool. Yes, once upon a time I was an avid Harry Potter fan too. Then I read the sixth book, I fell off my chair in shock of how absolutely awful it was.
The funny thing about Alice in Wonderland (and The Chronicles of Narnia, for that matter,) is that it was the product of drug use. Hashish, unless I'm much mistaken. A great many of the "outstanding" fantasy books of the time, which seem more than a little far out, were a product of drug use and the resulting halicinations/free-from-the-box thinking. Disturbing to think that most of these books are children's books, ne?
Curtsy: Everyone's entitled to their opinions on the books. I really enjoyed the sixth book, and I've enjoyed seeing JK Rowling develop and mature as a writer as the story progresses. She's moved away from the frivilous, light hearted charm of the first book, and the story's been taking a deliciously darker twist since then. But that's just me. And it's also one of my petpeeves to see people call her down for "misrepresenting" modern WitchCraft, or for being an unoriginal writer, so I appologize if I came off a little harsh. Writing papers for classes make me very detatched, and I typically enter into debates with that "I have to be literary" mind set. whee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
