How to be a good Reader and Writer

Becoming a good reader and writer

One can' be a better author if one is not a good reader. You can read to improve your craft, to strengthen your words, to teach yourself how to communicate your very special story in a meaningful way. You will learn so much about how to write by reading.

I316K -- Bremen

Issues to consider when reading: Nabokov is a pioneering play in our studies of literacy. To get an overall idea of his point, please start by looking at it, then remember the following issues. Which, according to Nabokov, is a good book for the readers. Good author?

Who is Nabokov's author? Among other things, Good Readers and Good WritersMy course is a kind of investigative examination of the secret of literature structure. "As one is a good reader" or "Kindness to the authors" - something like this could be used as a sub-title for these various debates between different writers, because my intention is to handle several European masterpieces with love, love and attention to detail.

" When you read it you should pay attention to detail and stroke it. There' s nothing in the moonlight of generalisation that' s incorrect when it comes after the little things in the sun have been caressed. Starting with a preconceived generalisation, you start at the false end and travel away from the script before you begin to comprehend it.

There is nothing more tedious or dishonest for the writer than reading, we say, Madame Bovary, with the presumed idea that it is a disparagement of the middle classes. Is there anyone who can be so naïve as to think that he or she can learnt something about the past from the lavish bestsellers sold by bookshops under the headline Historic Fiction?

For geniuses (as far as we can and I hope we can guess), the colours of the season, the movement of the mind and the movement of the mind are not just conventional ideas that can be taken from the rotating collection of published truth, but a set of singular miracles that artisans have learnt to articulate in their very own way.

Smaller writers are free to choose the ornaments of the everyday: they do not care about a reinvention of the realm, they only try to get the best out of a given order of things, of folk music. These under-age writers' various possible production variations within these limitations may be very entertaining in a slightly transitory way, as young people like to see their own thoughts in a pleasant outfit.

However, the true novelist, the guy who sent a planet and modelled a sleeping man and stomped around on the sleeper's ridge, this novelist has no predetermined data at his disposal: he has to make it himself. Lettering is a very vain affair, if it does not primarily involve the ability to see the outside as the possibility of destiny.

He is the first person to wipe them and shape the nature in them. A wheezing and joyful readers, and there they hug each other on the spur of the moment and are connected forever when the volume is eternal. In a secluded university in the province, through which I accidentally jogged on an extensive presentation trip, one night I proposed a little quiz with ten definition of a readership, and from those ten the ten pupils had to select four definition that would make a good readership.

Choose four responses to the questions of what a readers should be to be a good reader: Readers should be members of a booksociety. Readers should be able to relate to the character or heroin. Readers should focus on the socio-economic aspect. Readers should choose a storyline with actions and dialog rather than a storyline with none.

Readers should have seen the film. Readers should be a prospective writer. Readers should have fantasy. Readers should have storage. Readers should have a lexicon. Readers should have an artistical meaning. Naturally, as you guess, the good readership is one who has fantasy, memories, a vocabulary and an artistical meaning - whatever meaning I suggest to evolve in myself and in others whenever I have the avenue.

By the way, I use the term readers very slackly. Strangely, you can't just once more open a textbook. The good readership, the great readership, the proactive and imaginative readership is a repeater. If we are reading a work for the first reading, the tedious movement of our eye from line to line, page to page, this complex bodily work on the work, the study of what the work is about in relation to place and place, that is between us and artistry.

If we look at an image, we do not have to move our gaze in a particular way, even if the image, as in a textbook, contains deep and evolving features. Timing does not really come into first touch with an image. When we read a textbook, we must have enough free space to familiarize ourselves with it.

However, at a second, third or forth readings we act in a way towards a picture and a canvas. Regardless of what it isâ "a work of phantasy or a work of art of the sciences (the border between the two is not as clear as is generally assumed) â "a novel of phantasm calls above all to the spirit.

Understanding, the brains, the tip of the sparkling spinal column, is or should be the only tool used on a work. Now that this is so, we should think about how the ghost works when the grumpy readers are faced with the sun-drenched work. At first the grumpy atmosphere disappears and the player steps into the ghost of the series.

It is often hard to make the hard work of starting a work, especially when it is lauded by those whom the young readers surreptitiously consider too old-fashioned or too serious; but once it is done, the reward is varied and plentiful. Consumers use their fantasy to create their books, so it is logical and equitable that they use their fantasy.

However, there are at least two variants of fantasy in the case of the reader. Let's see which one is the right one to read a work. {\a6} (There are several subspecies here, in this first section of emotive reading.) Situations in a textbook are felt intensively because they remind us of something that has occurred to us or to someone we know or knew.

Or the reason why a readership appreciates a textbook is that it evoke a land, a countryside, a way of life that he remembers in a nostalgic way as part of his own past. Or - and this is the worse thing a readership can do - he can identify himself with a person in the text. It is not the kind of imaginativeness I would like to see in people.

What is the real tool for the readers? It' immanent fantasy and enjoyment of art. I think an artistically harmonic equilibrium should be created between the spirit of the readership and that of the author. At the same tasting the inner web of a certain work of art with passion, we should be a little reserved and rejoice in this restraint, while at the same tasting it with sorrow and shudder.

However, what I mean is that the readers need to know when and where to limit their imaginations, and they do so by trying to make the particular environment that the writer provides clear to them. All of us have different tempers, and I can tell you that the best temper that a readership can have or evolve is a mixture of the two.

He is too biased in his approach to a novel, and a cool science of judgement will soften the intuitional heats. However, if a would-be readership is completely free of passions and patience from the passions of an artiste and the patience of a scientist, he will hardly be enjoying great reading.

Literary was not conceived on the date when a weeping beast came out of the Neanderthals, with a big grey bearded beard on his heels: literary was conceived on the date when a young weeping bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded bearded. There is a gleaming mediator between the hunter in the high gras and the hunter in the high history.

No, it'?s not. Any great author is a great fraud, but so is he who cheats upon the outdoors. A fictionalist follows only the example of Mother Earth. When we return for a while to our wolfishly weeping little boy, we can put it this way: The magical power of the arts lay in the shadows of the magical creature that he intentionally made up.

After he finally died, the tale about him received a good lecture in the darkness around the campfire. He can be seen as a narrator, a magician and a schoolteacher. But it is the magician in him who dominates and makes him a great author.

We turn to the story teller for amusement, for the easiest kind of intellectual excitation, for emotive involvement, for the enjoyment of travelling in an isolated area, in place or at times. Slightly different, but not necessarily higher intellect seeks the author as a tutor. Unfortunately, I know a lot of folks whose aim was to read the writers of France and Russia and get to know something about living in homosexual couples or in the sorrowful Russia.

After all, a great author is always a great magician, and here we come to the really thrilling part when we try to capture the personal charm of his brilliant mind and examine the styles, images, patterns of his books or poetry. There are three aspects of the great writerâ "Magic, History, Lessonâ" that are susceptible to merge in an atmosphere of uniform and singularity, since the magical power of the arts can be present in the bone of history, in the pith of thought.

In the long run, it seems to me that a good way of testing the qualities of a novel is a fusion of the accuracy of poetic ism and the intuitive nature of reason. To sunbathe in this magical world, a sage readers does not read the novel of mastermind with his mind, not so much with his mind, but with his vertebra.

It' s there where the treacherous tingling appears, although we have to be a little reserved when we read it, a little distant.

Mehr zum Thema