Good writing, Bad writing

I’ve  read the key to good writing is bad writing. After thinking about this I remembered WD40. 39 misses then he got it right.
It’s not the writing of 39 bad pieces that make a person  a better writer. I wrote lots of stories, but it wasn’t  until I joined writing.com  and started getting reviews that my work improved.
What happened? I stopped being married to my work. I wrote a story and read the reviews. I made changes. I learned  to cut out the over use of the words as: that, was, were, had and others  like them. I made use of other sentence structures.
No, I’m not perfect. I’m  a work in progress. Practice puts the rules into use. When you read your own  work as well as others you’ll  begin to notice when rules and grammar are broken.
I bought a book that was self published. Within the first pages I found paragraph  after paragraph  where “was” and “were” had been over used.  These two women wrote  a good plot idea, but needed more good critique experience.
I look back  at it and that book came pretty close to being, as Larry Brooks tells us,  “a biography  of a fictional character. ”
A good writer takes instruction.  I found when dealing with my editor, she questioned things I wrote. Most of the time I accepted her expertise. There were times I wrote something  a certain  way for a reason. We discussed it and for the most part she agreed with my reasons. That’s  what a good relationship  with your publisher/editor should be.
There are many writing groups on Facebook. I belong to a couple. I see people putting their work out for review, but can’t accept anything other than being told they’re  great writers. I’ll bet even popular authors  might get counter suggestions to their work if they posted on writing sites.
A writer is like an uncut diamond. If it’s there inside you, the more that’s  cut or smoothed away the better you’ll  become. Resist it and you’re  nothing but a lump of shiny coal.

Advertisements

The Good, Bad and Ugly

Utopia and Dystopia are imagined worlds in which humanity lives in the worst possible or best possible conditions. If you were to write about either, which one would you choose and what would your version of that world look like? 

Good, bad or ugly? Either place could have these characteristics. We all seem to be drawn to the dystopian writing. We like to promote the underdog. Give those less fortunate a chance at survival and maybe even a chance to overcome and win.

Utopia, a desired state is perceived to have less physical conflicts and more character conflicts. When you have it all what more do you want? If you don’t have enough, who are you going to take it from? When you then gain your desire, what lengths will you go to keep it or take from someone else their fortune?  Life is like this now. We don’t have to dream it or make it up. There are those who have achieved great wealth through hard work, tickery, a rich family or a winfall of the lottery. Again, you still have the choice of,  what will you do to keep it?

Either place will need the same things. A city/state or universe with some kind of living space. Be it the Taj Mah Hal or a burned out warehouse, you will need to have a base of operation. We’ve seen on TV and movies dystopian worlds. Not too many movies are made up of Utopia. Jim Carey’s TV Land is one I think of and Stepford Wives. Now I ask, what about Iron Man? Would you say he lived in a Utopian world? How about Gotham? Dystopian? Jurassic Park? What kind of world would that fall into? Untopia is my vote, but you might see it in a different light.

You will need some kind of outside influence. These worlds will need a “take over” mentality group. You’re either in that group or you’re fighting them. Either world has to have this conlict medium. You choose based on the story you’ll write. I mentioned movies in the previous paragraph. These movies all had some kind of outside attack made on their world or those in it. 

At first when I read the prompt I almost skipped it. I’m glad I didn’t. This question has sparked a lot of deep thinking into the worlds we build that aren’t like WALKING DEAD. They aren’t handed to us with the total wipeout of a known existence. What if that didn’t happen? What if you were set into a world of glitter, champaigne and caviar? What if you had to fight just as dirty and underhanded to keep what you had? Or you’re the servants in this world collecting others to do a take over. You probably know more about your bosses weakness’ than they do.

This prompt should trigger a lot of feedback mentally and conversationally with others. I’d love to read them.

A Movie Review

Now You See Me
released 2013

Director: Louis Leterrier
Screenplay: Ed Solomon and Boaz Yakin & Edward Ricourt
Story: Boaz Yakin & Edward Ricourt

Cast:
Michael Caine
Jesse Eisenberg
Mark Ruffalo
Woody Harrelson
Isla Fisher
Dave Franco
Melanie Laurent
Morgan Freeman
The Four Horsemen-create a show where phenomenal acts of illusion are performed for the audience. The first is a bank heist where the stolen money is released to float to the audience. In another city the audience members bank accounts have large amounts of money automatically deposited while they sit there.

Each show becomes more dramatic and THE TURN more indiscernible.

The acts completely flummox the policemen and the Interpol agent who have come to check them out when they involved a French Bank.

The characters are unique and you identify with each one. The realist in you wants the thieves caught, as all stealing is a sin. Yet there is a part in all of us that like the Robin Hood aspect of the shows. The idea that money appears and is given to seemingly average people seems to right all the injustices we see around us. The evening of the odds.

The Four Horsemen are flamboyant and loveable. They claim to be entertainers not criminals. That isn’t how the police see it.

Watch this movie and see if it doesn’t amaze you with its story and intricate weaving of details and a twist you won’t see coming until its revealed at the end.

The following is taken from the internet as an explanation of what a magic act contains. All these elements are portrayed in this movie. Is it real or a slick trick of the movie effects?

The Pledge,The Turn and The Prestige

*Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts. The first part is called The Pledge. The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal, but of course it probably isn’t.

The second act is called The Turn. The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you’re looking for the secret but you won’t find it, because of course you’re not really looking. You don’t really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn’t clap yet. Because making something disappear isn’t enough; you have to bring it back.

That’s why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part called The Prestige. Prestige has also come to be known as the finishing act in a magician’s trick, a finale of sorts, where, for example, the object of the magician’s trick is returned from disappearance or a woman reappears unharmed from a box of swords. It could be the tiger is exchanged for the beautiful assistant. A dress changes color or disappears into a pile of cards.

This movie follows the three acts of a good magic illusion. If you liked this movie you have to then watch “The Prestige.” Another movie with Michael Caine and magic.
*Wikipedia