Literature

[Saru Inc]

Yep. I can sit still for a few, but I think it's because... Eh. I don't know why it's so hard to stay still when I'm reading, I think because my eyes have to stay in relatively one area. While when I'm typing I don't look, so I can roam my eyes. idk =\

 

And yea I talked to my mom and she agreed with you guys lol. Writers should be very proficient in grammar. fml. Oh well, thats what school is for.

[Serpent Eye]

There are always copy editors. :twss:

[Harakiri]

I was never taught proper grammar as well. My school's English program was crap. So when I started writing, you should see the crap that came out. But if you keep writing and reading, you can teach yourself decent grammatical skills. Not that mine are as good as they would be if I could actually take some classes, but at least I've improved. If you are a writer, or in my case, a developing writer, than you can learn a lot of skills through it and it also exposes you to a lot of writing styles which also helps improve your own. Sometimes when I read something like a long Stephen King book, I kind of write exactly like him until I move into the next book, and sometimes it's like that. But reading and writing go hand in hand, reading can truly improve your writing if you read a lot.

 

Anyway I bought the first four books in the "Malazan Book Of The Fallen" series by Steven Erikson. I'm enjoying the first one a lot.

[Kalphite]

 

Anyway I bought the first four books in the "Malazan Book Of The Fallen" series by Steven Erikson. I'm enjoying the first one a lot.

I really liked the first book, so I bought the next two. I sort of got bored halfway through Deadhouse Gates though. I'm apparently weird for that as most people think that's one of the better ones in the series. Gardens of the Moon was great though.

[Zilla]

I have just finished reading the book "A Year in Provence" I found it a really enjoyable, I might pick up more on Peter Mayle's books.

[Dupin]

I recently read Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. To rekindle the flames, the grammar in it was awful, but it was an excellent read. Of course, Vonnegut is a professional author and I'm sure he could write with good grammar, but that's not the point - my point is that good grammar in writing is not an absolute necessity. Instead, grammar, structure, and writing style are simply narrative tools that can help an author convey his or her point more effectively. Is the ability to write with good grammar a necessity? No. Is it useful? Of course. And yes, reading books is the best way to build strong grammar skills. However, grammar is only a small part of writing a story.

 

Anyways, right now I'm reading The Hunt for Red October by Tom Clancy. It's good, but I haven't really found anything extremely exciting. It will probably pick up the pace once I get further in. I also have Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea ready for when I finish, and after that I'm going to look for Red Dragon, the first in the series about that psychotic killer guy.

 

I've been reading a collection of satire on the side, and I must include my little mini-rant: MACHIAVELLI IS NOT (BLEEP)ING SATIRE. He may have included a witty comment here and there, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I shouldn't be sujected to the entirety of "The Prince" in its barely-translated version. Someone needs to argue with me about this.

[re4p3r1]

There are always copy editors. :twss:

that's like saying there's always spellcheck.

[nine naked men]

Just finished Lord of the Flies. Yeah, I probably should've listened to whoever it was that told me to not read it. A very sadface-inducing book.

[Serpent Eye]

There are always copy editors. :twss:

that's like saying there's always spellcheck.

 

Oh. I thought my TWSS face would have given it away that I was joking. :unsure:

 

Just finished Lord of the Flies. Yeah, I probably should've listened to whoever it was that told me to not read it. A very sadface-inducing book.

 

It's kind of a morbid book, but still worth reading. It's a classic. Also, "Don't read this book" is very bad advice for someone to give, I think. You may not end up liking a certain book, but everyone's opinion varies, and you may end up loving a book someone else hates! :thumbup:

[nine naked men]

There are always copy editors. :twss:

that's like saying there's always spellcheck.

 

Oh. I thought my TWSS face would have given it away that I was joking. :unsure:

 

Just finished Lord of the Flies. Yeah, I probably should've listened to whoever it was that told me to not read it. A very sadface-inducing book.

 

It's kind of a morbid book, but still worth reading. It's a classic. Also, "Don't read this book" is very bad advice for someone to give, I think. You may not end up liking a certain book, but everyone's opinion varies, and you may end up loving a book someone else hates! :thumbup:

 

Oh yeah, it was a great book, I was being hyperbolic... I know that's a math thing, but I have no idea if it can also be used for hyperbole too. I'm pretty sure the non-recommender was, too. Maybe. ._o Also watching the movie in English, but that's a story for another topic.

 

Still waiting for the books I ordered online to arrive. >_> The Gap Cycle and the Second Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, to be precise.

 

I've also hired from the library several random fantasy books. They're pretty much the equivalent of those crime books you can buy at the airport. They're pretty decent, but I've probably got a biased opinion since I'm a giant fantasy nerd.

 

Finally, on the recommendation of the teacher who marked the writing task of my QCS practice test, I've bought some of those crime books you can buy from the airport mentioned above. He said I should read up on different styles of fiction writing, since all of my stuff tends to be written in a fantasy kind of style, all long and flowy and stuff.

[Skeptical]

A good writer is always an avid reader.

 

You can write without reading, but you won't be a good writer. Ever heard of an author that can't tell you his/her favorite books? Chances are it'll be a list that never ends.

 

 

OT, I just finished Brave New World, and I can see why it's a classic. Next, on to David Foster Wallace - Infinite Jest.

[re4p3r1]

A good writer is always an avid reader.

 

You can write without reading, but you won't be a good writer. Ever heard of an author that can't tell you his/her favorite books? Chances are it'll be a list that never ends.

 

 

OT, I just finished Brave New World, and I can see why it's a classic. Next, on to David Foster Wallace - Infinite Jest.

what if they are constantly reading their own stuff? or what about people in publishing who read tons of other peoples unpublished stuff?

[1_man_army]

what if they are constantly reading their own stuff? or what about people in publishing who read tons of other peoples unpublished stuff?

 

1) You can't learn about writing, or more importantly good writing, from reading your own work.

 

2) People who work in publishing are interested in reading anyway. They tend to be readers first and foremost and that is what leads them in the world of publishing in almost every case I've come across. People don't get into publishing if they don't read. For the record, I have a degree in Publishing which is why I can comment with a certain amount of authority.

[Hawks]

Just finished Lord of the Flies. Yeah, I probably should've listened to whoever it was that told me to not read it. A very sadface-inducing book.

Is it bad then that I read the entire thing and just thought it was kind of dumb? I mean it was a good book and all, but not particularly earth-shattering in how it exposes the human psyche.

 

Haven't actually read books since that, I did read the latest issue of Popular Science and Diabetes Forecast.

[Skeptical]

A good writer is always an avid reader.

 

You can write without reading, but you won't be a good writer. Ever heard of an author that can't tell you his/her favorite books? Chances are it'll be a list that never ends.

 

 

OT, I just finished Brave New World, and I can see why it's a classic. Next, on to David Foster Wallace - Infinite Jest.

what if they are constantly reading their own stuff? or what about people in publishing who read tons of other peoples unpublished stuff?

 

 

All writers are readers. Not all readers are writers.

 

If you're "learning" to write by reading your own writing, then it either won't be very good, or it doesn't exist.

[Giordano]

A good writer is always an avid reader.

 

You can write without reading, but you won't be a good writer. Ever heard of an author that can't tell you his/her favorite books? Chances are it'll be a list that never ends.

 

 

OT, I just finished Brave New World, and I can see why it's a classic. Next, on to David Foster Wallace - Infinite Jest.

what if they are constantly reading their own stuff? or what about people in publishing who read tons of other peoples unpublished stuff?

 

 

All writers are readers. Not all readers are writers.

 

If you're "learning" to write by reading your own writing, then it either won't be very good, or it doesn't exist.

If you read only your own stuff you're being stubborn, ineffective, and only hurting yourself. If a writer truly wanted to become better, they would take the time to read and study the works of others.

[re4p3r1]

what if they are constantly reading their own stuff? or what about people in publishing who read tons of other peoples unpublished stuff?

 

1) You can't learn about writing, or more importantly good writing, from reading your own work.

 

2) People who work in publishing are interested in reading anyway. They tend to be readers first and foremost and that is what leads them in the world of publishing in almost every case I've come across. People don't get into publishing if they don't read. For the record, I have a degree in Publishing which is why I can comment with a certain amount of authority.

well you can't really learn writing. creative writing classes are crap. i'm a writer and a reader but i read more than i write but i think someone can be a good writer just by writing often

[Dupin]

what if they are constantly reading their own stuff? or what about people in publishing who read tons of other peoples unpublished stuff?

 

1) You can't learn about writing, or more importantly good writing, from reading your own work.

 

2) People who work in publishing are interested in reading anyway. They tend to be readers first and foremost and that is what leads them in the world of publishing in almost every case I've come across. People don't get into publishing if they don't read. For the record, I have a degree in Publishing which is why I can comment with a certain amount of authority.

well you can't really learn writing. creative writing classes are crap. i'm a writer and a reader but i read more than i write but i think someone can be a good writer just by writing often

 

The best way to learn to write is to just write, and enjoy it. It's hard to enjoy writing if you don't enjoy reading, and reading is pretty much necessary if you want to be able to write well. In the end, however, all one really needs to do to be a writer is write.

[Serpent Eye]

I've just started reading J. M. Barrie's Peter Pan.

 

From reading the introduction and short biography of the man, he sounds like a complete lunatic, but I'm looking forward to the craziness that came out of his mind and onto the page. :thumbup:

 

Been a bit uninspired lately and couldn't select a book to read, so I'm resorting to going through my collection of classics -- however, I think it best to neglect reading the last remaining hundred pages of Dracula, lest I kill myself due to boredom and aggravation (reading the dialogue of Professor Van Helsing is like rubbing sandpaper onto my eyes.)

[meol]

I haven't found anything of interest to read lately, so I started reading some non-fiction. It can sometimes be more interesting and and captivating than your normal fantasy or sci-fi book. I'm currently Physics of the Impossible by Michio Kaku and Consciousness Explained by Dan Dennet and I love them thus far. :thumbsup:

[Dupin]

I think it best to neglect reading the last remaining hundred pages of Dracula, lest I kill myself due to boredom and aggravation (reading the dialogue of Professor Van Helsing is like rubbing sandpaper onto my eyes.)

 

Lol, really? I was planning on reading Dracula, but maybe I won't bother.

[i_love_burritos]

I'm currently Physics of the Impossible by Michio Kaku and Consciousness Explained by Dan Dennet and I love them thus far. :thumbsup:

 

Eeeeeh, I've read that book. Kaku explains stuff very clearly but some of the things he categorizes as Class I -III too frequently invokes the limits of what is science and science fiction, then again I may have no idea if it is really like that since I'm not a physicist. Still a great read though.

 

I'm currently working my way through Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene. I don't understand half of it. :|

[Serpent Eye]

I think it best to neglect reading the last remaining hundred pages of Dracula, lest I kill myself due to boredom and aggravation (reading the dialogue of Professor Van Helsing is like rubbing sandpaper onto my eyes.)

 

Lol, really? I was planning on reading Dracula, but maybe I won't bother.

 

One man's trash is another man's treasure? -- perhaps you'll end up liking it more than I. I'm used to more modern vampire fiction (see: Anne Rice) so it doesn't help that Dracula was published in 1897. :P

 

 

I read almost all of Peter Pan last night; it's turning out to be a really good book! :thumbup:

[meol]

I'm currently Physics of the Impossible by Michio Kaku and Consciousness Explained by Dan Dennet and I love them thus far. :thumbsup:

 

Eeeeeh, I've read that book. Kaku explains stuff very clearly but some of the things he categorizes as Class I -III too frequently invokes the limits of what is science and science fiction, then again I may have no idea if it is really like that since I'm not a physicist. Still a great read though.

But that's the point, isn't it? :P

[Serpent Eye]

Finished reading Peter Pan yesterday -- it wasn't at all what I had expected, but it was still a rather interesting book. It was rather a whole lot... darker than I expected it to be, and the character of Peter Pan himself is much more disturbed that I had ever imagined him to be.

 

After finishing Pan, I started reading Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There. I finished Wonderland today, and am nearly through with reading Looking-Glass. I have decided that Lewis Carroll must have been under the influence of some sort of drug when writing these books (especially the latter) as it is full of INSANE things; my brain feels like it's melting as I'm reading it.