i practise many forms of art, but literature is one ive never touched.as an exercise to combating my crippling perfectionism, ive decided to write a book. it wont be perect, because ive read about 5 books in my entire life. i have the story characters etc ready in my head. im very creative and i can easily just sit down and write for hours. however, ive never attempted to write a book before, nor have i read many books at all. what are some of the most basic things i need to take into consideration while writing a novel? while the point of the exercise is to just create instead of ruminating, i still want it to be readable and enjoyable for the reader.
>>20571620>i still want it to be readable and enjoyable for the readerI think the only audience it would be enjoyable to would be people who have only read 4 books in their entire life.
>>20571620>what are some of the most basic things i need to take into consideration while writing a novel?If you're basing the "creativeness" and "ingenuity" of your novel on plot and story you've already failed. What makes a great novel is not plot.
>>20571650what makes a great novel then?
>>20571620Mashallah, I can't give you advice but your staircase reminded me of Islam. Alhumdillilah
>>20571654Its style and diction. Most great novels are part of an art movement. Rarely do genre novels and plot vehicles transcend their genre status to become literature. When this does happen it happens due to the pieces ability to cross genre limitations through the style and prose of the author as well as being a means to allow it to exist in an art movement outside of literary fiction.You need to ask yourself what you're wanting to convey with your novel and think about how writing style can serve that. This is where having read and analyzed more than five books would be helpful. You could recognize elements of style and see how they serve the novel and how they serve the novel more than the plot.
>>20571679shalom abdullah khamzat chimaev>>20571723bruh i understand what youre trying to say but i disagree. you kinda remind me of this guy i met recently who tried to educate me on art. he told me all this deep stuff about famous paintings, meanwhile he didnt paint at all, and i live off my paintings and illustrations. i could only look at all these famous paintings and think "this lighting is great, these colors are lovely, i like this shape but this tangent bothers me". meanwhile he was saying shit like "you can tell the darkness in the background represents his own surpressed sexual desires". like bruh the darkness in the background just looks nice in contrast to the foreground. i could only think that i probably knew what the artist was thinking better than him, seeing how i can actually paint and he couldnt. i thank you for the reply, but you sound so much like him, so i cant trust you.
>>20571654Not the person you're responding to, but I think good writing always has something to do with allowing the inherent weirdness of the material you're dealing with to fully unfold, almost by itself. That's what makes good novels feel 'alive'.Bad writing, on the other hand, has the meaning or value of all the materials it employs fixed beforehand. It knows exactly what payout it wants from them: this is the sexy character, this is the shocking plot twist, this is the bittersweet breakup. This is why all bad teenage poetry reads the same: everyone wants to express the same angst, but no one has read enough yet to be sensitive to the different ways that that angst can be objectified in a poem, so all you get it is emotional message and the images and language are just there as easy, conventional vehicles for that message, instead of being allowed to develop on their own terms. Even if you have some idea of what you want to say or express, or an image or story you want to put on paper, you have to be sensitive to how that original intention is transformed by contact with the alien element of the twists and turns of the text. Like Moby Dick starting off as the story of a guy setting off on an adventure, and then slowly seeing him dissolve into the background as the mad world of the ship takes on a life of its own.There's an essay I like on Henry James's writing process. Apparently he was a big collector of anecdotes, and he explicitly says that the most important thing for him is 'the subject': the anecdote at the centre of the work. But the essay describes how the actual text of The Turn of the Screw is a way of almost circling around the original anecdote without touching on it directly - the real events are unclear, all you have are character's interpretations, secrets, memories, etc. So the big original idea is the impetus to start writing, but the final text is the unfolding of the weirdness of the storytelling itself.If you're serious about wanting to write a good book, I would try reading three short stories by three different authors, and then writing an episode from your novel in the style of each of them, seeing how the way they write inflects the story you tell.
>>20571781>you can tell the darkness in the background represents his own surpressed sexual desiresNot what I'm talking about at all. You're an idiot. Enjoy writing your genre schlock with its "heckin epic" plot twists and "le subversion" genre trash. It will be consigned to the self-published trash of Amazon where only your Mom will read it.
>>20571781>>20572017Hang on OP, this guy said that what's important in a novel isn't content but style, and that you should try reading more so you can gain experience of the specifics of how style functions. Your disagreement was based on an episode where you claimed that in painting style is more important than content, and how you should know because you have a lot of experience of the specifics of it.
>>20571781>asks for help>his whole attitude is "I know best and learning the basics of a craft aren't important because I am a true artist and a true artist just feels"Lol so you came here to brag about how "talented" you are. It was already very obvious with the whole>I'm a polymath who has exceeded in all artistic fields except writing! I've already got my masterpiece planned out in my head! Oh and did I mention I'm not a reader and hate literature and that I've read like five books in my life?Fuck off to reddit with this karma farm shit.
>>20571831>allowing the inherent weirdness of the material you're dealing with to fully unfold, almost by itselfoh wow that is an amazing way to put it! thank you so much i will try my best to let that happen.your entire post is incredibly well written, i cant believe how good you are at formulating your thoughts into words. i felt intimidated, but after having your post i feel at ease. i cant thank you enough, whoever you are.
>>20572075no, hes probably right, but he came off so snobby and elitist that i just cant trust his judgement.
>>20571781You're confusing analysis and exegesis, which is an end, with the means which bring you to that end. Your brain doesn't seem to be able to handle nuance, though attenuate that conclusion with the fact this is 4chan and you're just trying to flex your e-peen instead of actually thinking.Both you and your friend recognized the darkness as an element of style of the painting. Your friend was doing exegesis by attributing an interpretation of this element of style, but nevertheless the element of style was still there. I honestly can't believe you're this retarded to hold learning elements of style in contempt. It's pretty obvious the subject of the picture isn't what makes the picture great. It's the style and composition which is used to create it. It's the same with a novel. Plot isn't everything, and if you negelct style then your work has nothing which makes it special. Anyone can tell a story. Give 10 people the same plot points and tell them to turn it into a story. They will all be different and the ones which will stand out will have well-developed style which serves what the writer wants to communicate.
>>20571781>but you sound so much like him, so i cant trust you.lmao
>>20571620ur so talented wow. I actually find this quite comical. Read anything "good" according to /lit/ ( a collection of PhD and postdocs in literature) and you will be quickly humbled artfag.
>>20571620If you want to write something good you should read a lot of great books (mostly classics, if a book is still being read decades or centuries after the authors death its probably really good) and learn a second language. You cant say youve mastered your native tongue until you know another. And literature, and especially poetry, doesnt translate that well.>>20571781Why does it matter what the author or the painter thought when creating a piece? How do you know he didnt imbue the elements that constitute it with deeper meaning. Thats quite a common practice. And whats wrong with someone analysing a work of art anyways? Honestly you sound like a midwit or a teenager when you say stuff like >like bruh the darkness in the background just looks nice in contrast to the foreground.
>>20571620Post a sample of something you’ve written.
>>20571781>and i live off my paintings and illustrationsI'm trying to do this as well. What does your art look like anon?