I want to Write a Story OnlineI' d like to write a story online
So if you want to make money with your writing soon, short stories can be the right way. Have a look at the same reaction I would like to make with writing scripts for project teachers.
Chronicle: Tweeters and Posting
Recently I was in the archive of Time and researched my J. D. Salinger bio when I raised a pigeonhole and found a small case with a pile of scrapped I. B. M. Selectric typewriters' typewriters' heads on it - the most advanced typewriting technique of my time. I' d started my first tales or tried to tell them while I sat in front of this ominous growling maschine.
Then it seemed like a revolutionary change, but now I see it as part of a single group that encompasses everything from pen and text processing to the early shapes of P.C..
So I put her back in her stall and took a photo that I twittered with a hash tag that seemed to suggest the charm of ancient technology: Although Twitter is not exactly a new write technique, it is a technique that affects many authors. In the past it was a radically different cry of hearts to say: "We are living in the open.
" As with many mantrams of the cyber-nineties, this proves to be mostly the case, but fails to reveal an even greater truth: we think more and more in outcry. This is a particularly curious trend for authors. Sometimes I wonder how the great authors of the past would deal with the Twitter dilemma.
Had Henry James, whose Barbaric phrases could never be reduced to a hundred and forty signs, despised Twitter? Oates' issue touched on a number of big issues for authors on Twitter: Is there a font at all that is not seen by anyone other than the writer?
Maybe you put it in a twist and made the notice publicly. However, does the fact that it is open to the general population reduce the odds that it will become something stable and enduring? Is a thought frozen in the open, so that it is not part of a thought-procedure, but a small ready-made work?
Tweets are by nature an invasion of the personal sphere - in the meaning of ideas of the general publics that would otherwise be personal - and Salinger has been violently personal for much of his lifetime and seemed to want only the kind of clap of approval that is applauded by one palm. However, for him the act of creation was profoundly interwoven with the nurturing state of intimacy, even covert.
It seems that his writings are directly addressed to the readers in trust, unique. Salinger's defence of his personal sphere finally seemed as ridiculous as the assaults on it, but at the roots of that defence was not some horrible mystery he had to conceal, but an notion to write as a personal celebration.
Twitter typing adds the power of a debut to every single sentence. One could say that it gives the letter a feeling of achievement, although it has always meant achievement in the meaning of fear of achievement. For the author who leaves several pages on the ground - literal or figurative - for whom is this line or section unsatisfying?
Its recipe is summarized in its title: a few familiar parts with which a author will have a dialog - sometimes verbatim, sometimes not more often. This is an ambiguous equation: Dealing with the fear of composing is an integral part of the letter. You have to control the privately-owned sheep farming processes in the general view.
However, these ephemeras - memos, diaries, sketches - are all set in a kind of psychological anteroom, whose primary characteristic is a feeling of loneliness. Some of me think that these shreds, these wrong beginnings, these singular rhetoric, would have found their way into the open when they were penned, reduced the impulse of, say, Sylvia Plath or John Cheever to do the work that made so much of her epiphany alluring.
Nearly everyone who is a novelist today will eventually get a talk about the need to be "on" Facebook and Tweet. It' s, for authors of all age groups and stadiums, not so much a matter of literacy as of typing. But, could Tweeters possibly be prolific, beyond the fundamental act of publishing what you have posted and/or prove that you still do?
That' s not what I thought until I wrote a brief play, something between a diary note and a one-on-one essays, in a row of stories. While I wanted to tell an account of an experiment, I wasn't sure what I thought about it, and all of a sudden the thought of posting in the open seemed to compel me to further understand.
I' ve written it at nights when I write most of the time. Or in other words, like the letter. About a year later I compose another song in the same way. That new play was longer. As the few gathered gossiped about their fifty-three pieces, I took a bow and hastened out.
"Don't talkto it out" was one of the best advices I ever got as an author. But on the other side, I like to hang out and tickle with other authors, not just as a procrastinating or just a pleasurable experience, but as part of a trial. Do you tweet before you start writing it, or is it part of a trial?
What if tweeting a play is regarded as a release? If his Twitter performance is synonymous with the release, do I still have the right to it? Thought Twitter was a good place to work out ideas: a place to rethink things in front of the general audience, and a way to document a thought to make it more likely that I would recall it.
Is it like a talk or is it "pronouncing"? Sometimes I wonder if I've ever been charged with having stolen my own ideas. It is no longer clear on the monitor who is responsible for the words, or at what point they transcend the line between a liquid, transformable thing in your head and a provable message in the open that you may have to respond to one time.
What kind of room do we have for personal thoughts? Not only do some folks need to know what they think to put it down or say it, but some need to talk or type to know what they think. Also, the line between speaking and speaking is blurry, and we can see the line between speaking and thought becoming blurry at some point.
I am returning to Salinger and his wit as a mystical celebration whose mysteries must not be revealed. Ultimately, this would change into the thought that the letter is a mystical ritual that becomes obscene through the act of publication.