/lit/ - Literature

Being published in a journal

>>7250520
Selling any of there work.

Someone who seeks and exploits weaknesses in a computer system or computer network.

>>7250520

Not releasing it posthumously.

so basically what i'm getting here is that it is a meaningless pejorative?

>>7250616
No, what you're getting is a load of shitposts.

I consider a hack to be someone with little original thought; one who has figured out what will get his book to sell loads and subsequently allows the quality of his work to slip in favour of meeting deadlines and such.

There are exceptional authors who have their market, blazing production speed and top quality writing, but they're rare.

Hack authors are sellouts.

>>7250616
>>7250665

Following on from that, actually, I also consider one a hack when they deliberately choose to be monumental faggots and sell their soul by writing clickbait, femidrama and "game journalism", but obviously have solid style and worthwhile talent.

Obviously my opinion is my own. I'd like to see what other definitions are bouncing around for people.

>>7250520
my definition?
somebody too willing to please. willing to jump through hoops for some imagined consumer. writing what they think people want to hear rather than what they want to say.

Look up the definition of hackneyed.

It's fairly clear what a hack is.

>>7250520
Someone I dislike for whatever reason.

>>7250692
Someone who needs more Rand in their life?

>>7250520
I see someone as a hack when their writing is focused on appealing to the largest audience possible at the expense of any artistic credibility. When an author puts out the same style of book with little to no variation beyond the names of characters and puts no effort into their writing beyond coming up with some "epic" story or some "twist" at the end.

Of course, it's hard to discern between someone's genuine artistic efforts and work devoid of artistic merit, especially when you get into discussing what art is, so to actually define someone as an objective hack is hard to do.

Personally, I'd consider writers like J.K. Rowling (and all the Harry Potter copycats), Suzanne Collins (and all the Hunger Games copycats), E.L James, Stephen King, etc all to be hacks. Furthermore, Chuck Palanhiuk, Khaled Hosseini, etc are arguably hacks too, and I'd consider them so, but some wouldn't. Stephen King could maybe be put in this category, too.
I'd say that the typically mundane 'holiday reads' and 'crime thrillers' that fill the shelves of walmart are obviously written by hacks, too.
Even more ambitious, 'artistic' writers can end up falling into a style they know is popular and forfeiting creativity and experimentation for mass appeal or convenience (I'd consider Murakami to fall in to this category, for example; some of his work is incredible, such as Kafka on the Shore, A Wild Sheep Chase, perhaps A Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, but then a lot of it is the same "girl disappears, lonely easy-going young adult is sad and wants to find her, he gets hard over some ears, etc stuff that gets boring after two repetitions).

Hope that helped OP. Just my opinion.

>>7250676
Who is this semen demon

>>7250720
Could you elaborate on why Palahnuik is a hack? I haven't read all of his works, but he seemed indifferent to consumer demands to me.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/6540057.Andy_Weir

“The screen went black before I was out of the airlock. Turns out the “L” in “LCD” stands for “Liquid.” I guess it either froze or boiled off. Maybe I’ll post a consumer review. “Brought product to surface of Mars. It stopped working. 0/10.”
― Andy Weir, The Martian

Truly a masterpiece

>>7250730
Same shit over and over

>>7250725
Just some bird I found on 4chan a couple years ago, no name as of yet. You're welcome to hunt for a name though.

>>7250768
I imagine that'd become more apparent as I read more of him.

>>7250753
I feel like this should be in comic book.

>>7250520
People who passionately write what they think but don't think anything worth writing.

ayn rand, and willy smiths kid, for example, had/have nothing of value to say and said/say nothing of value a lot.

>>7250520
Writing on philosophy.

>>7250520
Writing as if one's opinions are inherently morally correct, rather than writing to prove they are.

if any of their works are made into movies in less than 3 years

>>7250520
Having no discernible talent

>>7250676
>>7250775
>>7250725
Just enjoy (naked pics included):
http://www.imagefap.com/photo/2105027385/#0

>>7251014

I'm going to dedicate the book I'm currently reading (Matter by Ian Banks) to you. My book diary will read "Matter, Ian Banks, Finish Date, Dedicated to Anon and his dick-pleasuring astuteness".

Thank you.

>>7251019
It's nothing, mate. Anyway, I've seen better girls. She's too old for me.

>>7251043
It's more a principle-fap tbh; had that chicks face in my folder for a while, never bothered to hunt her down. Nudes are actually pretty poor (still came).

I wish you a life safe from v&'s, Pornographer.

>>7250714
Nobody needs Rand in their life.

>>7250520
Just being cliche and boring. Spelling out everything to the reader. Making the book a drag and expectable.