Re: Rushing

"Euripides Pants \(the other pair\)" <looking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"boots" <no@xxxxx> wrote in message
news:4c94935kbmrkjdg7m463e9mmh25mv170od@xxxxxxxxxx

If you want your scurrilous comments to have impact, you must (a)
allow the reader to remain awake until the punch line has been
delivered, and (b) actually deliver it.

Zzzzzzzzz.......................

I'm drinking double-strength coffee this morning so I have a chance of
staying awake through your wittering for long enough to reply to some
of it.

Well once again mr boots you have imparted to me a particularly incisive bit
of writing advice that you have evidently learned in your long career of
talking about being a writer in usenet

Izzat it? Funny, I thought that I'd had a (brief) career actually
being a writer... you know, someone paid to write books? Or perhaps
only freelance novelists qualify as writers. Anyway I was a paid
writer for a few years, and enjoyed as much of that as I could
stomach. One of these days I may have enough time to try my hand at
the novel, but I'm not ready for that just yet, I need to suffer more
brain damage first and that comes slowly at best.

before you chucked it all and moved
out to the wilderness because you have too much self respect to be working
for the man

Dang, you got it wrong again. It's not a matter of self-respect at
all. It's a matter of patience, of being rebellious to the core, of
being constitutionally incapable of taking orders to do stupid things
without saying "*** you, do it yourself". And of realizing that
situation, and of having all the kids out the door on their own, of
having the freedom to crash and burn without taking dependents with
me.

and now live off the land like Jeremiah Johnson or Robertson
Caruso except with a computer

Nope, wrong agin! I'm still dependent on a lot of stuff. The water
dude has to come with his truck or there's no water. The price of
gasoline affects how often I can go to town for stuff. There may be
places you can "live off the land" but there aren't enough edible
things here to quite get there, at least not without spending every
waking minute chasing after something.

and Dean Koonce novels. I must agree with you
regarding Dean Koonce by the way he really is an under regarded genius whose
writings and characterizations of giant monster vampires who eat the brains
of their victims and grotesqueries and lummoxes who rape and pillage their
victims and big mean awful scary things that hurt and maim and destroy their
victims is really good not to mention his dialogues and plots and I can see
why you'd probably want to relax from your long day of writing important
stuffs by reading Dark Rivers of the Heart or The Face

I've never said Koontz was the greatest. He writes well imo, and he
tells a story well. His choice of stories may suck, and he may be a
prig, but he tells them well imo. I attempted to engage Hope in a
discussion of what's wrong with Koontz's writing, but Hope is too
lofty for that ***... only his favoured writers qualify for
discussion.

rather than Vanity
Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray because who ever heard of anyone called
Makepeace that's probably not a real name, besides which there's not even a
fair in it or an arcade, not to mention a brain eating vampire monster or
lummox.

The coolest thing about Thackeray is his name. Vanity Fair was a long
boring witter about things that are now obvious in modern society.
Maybe when it was written it seemed like a startling revelation but it
doesn't now. Thackeray writes good sentences and good paragraphs, his
character development is unusually good, the presentation was good,
but the story he chose to tell in Vanity Fair was, simply put, boring.

Anyway regarding your important writing advice which you have imparted to me
without first remitting your address so that I could send you a check for
your troubles or my recipe for honey vinegar roasting stuff (PS Dean Koonts
can be reached at P.O. Box 9529 Newport Beach, CA 92658 if you wanted to
write him a fan mails of some sort to tell him how relaxing you find his
writings about fiends and monsters and perhaps even invite him to join you
and your writer friends here in MW where you relax from your writing labors
that'd be quite a coup)

Koontz would last here for about 3 days before he slunk away with the
remnants of his tail between his legs.

I hesitate to bring this up but it seems to me that
you might have left a step out of your important writing where you adviced
me and allow me to paraphrase to (1) keep the reader awake and (2) make a
funny. It might be that it also requires (3) that the reader be smart enough
to understand the joke, because for example if you're making fun of
something or soemone and the reader is so colossally fucking stupid that he
doesn't know it's or he's being made fun of then the joke won't work.
Obviously I'm not talking a reader of obvious discernment such as yourself
who has chucked it all because he got tired working for the man and now
lives on a mountain where he has the liberty to read Dean Koontzs novels but
other readers who do not have the obvious taste and discernment and
liberties of one such as yourself, for example an unemployed person who
lives on a hill who posts in alt.fan.jello.biafra and reads Judith Krantz
novels or an underemployed poster from alt.fat.smelly.hippie who lives on a
gentle rolling mesa and reads Lawrence Sanders novels, you know how those
people are, they're mostly all cunts.

Mostly is a pretty sloppy word innit, I guess that takes them from
"mostly all cunts" to "sloppy cunts".

Which brings me back to an awareness of just how sloppy you are, mr
***. And, pointless. Are you one of the Wittering Thackerays?

--
The sane answer to insanity is madness.
.