/lit/ - Literature

>>18408669
Practice and starting before you're 21.

>>18408669
Well, don’t be a pseud since that hinders your writing abilities.

>>18408682
Check.
>>18408689
Check, I think. This can be hard to confirm though, I bet all the pseuds out there don't see themselves as pseuds either.

>>18408669
I think practicing some skills is important but in order I think it's strategy of some sort so where you put your writing always in a good position so you're not stuck having to figure out how to iron over plotholes throughout the book.
After that writing style should be developed and then writing skills.

>>18408669
>>18408742
Should be treated like a game of chess

>>18408698
>I bet all the pseuds out there don't see themselves as pseuds either.
No they don't, but its best if you just ignore the contrived, bullshit writing rules made by people who have self-fellating attitude about their supposed intellect.

>>18408768
Sure, alright - what's your methodology to becoming a writing god? Is there anything that you do which is completely unrelated to mechanical rules?

>>18408788
Just Write. I know it may not seem enough, but it is. I've been posting on /wg/ for months now and nobody but "animefags" write in that general. So write.

>>18408819
I've written a lot in the past and probably will write a lot in the future too. I just really want to go beyond. I hate the idea of being on the same level as all the other garbage out there which I despise.

Alright, since you all asked. I'll give you the steps for having your own literary theory. Keep in mind literary theories aren't political, some supplant others in ability to tell a story.

In analogy I will be following these:
>>18352165
>>18352290

First you need to decide the structure of your story. This gives you a solid bearing of where you'll be going and where you are and it's the soul of the story.
If your structure is foundational then choose what you want to be the heart of the story. It could be very complex/rigorous (love among samurais, chivalry code etc), it can be rudimentary (horror) or very abstract (a partocular place and time). These can be very one dimensional but allow abstract stories. You derive all elements of the story of these and can be, like the last example, a very trippy endeavor.
Coherentists will have a structure which is like a circle to some degree. Everything informs the next or last bit with the main elements only referring to each other and the story develops off that.
There are other structures.

How to tie it all in together is writing style. This can be trippy, surreal, funny whichever your style is that can derive the elements from the structure.

The last bits are elements. These can be characterization, plots etc. If characters inform plots that can be in a very distinct way or you could have characters influence plots but one isn't informed by the other. How they work is decided in structure and your writing style.

>>18408913
My literary theory is predicational monist. My writing style is hyper irony which defines my humor etc and I haven't developed my elements yet because I'm still working on writing style.

>>18408913
>>18408936
This stuff seems kinda strange, ngl. But I appreciate your contribution, anon.

>>18408957
Usually people write consequently but it opens up books to being more than a one dimensional line.
I think it'd be cool to read books by turning cubes when we become ai.

>>18408957
>>18408964
A cool example would be for coherentist if you have a globe you could turn the story the way you wish to see it develops and it would develop like that. We could have ai books.