[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 8 KB, 170x267, 7DAA7427-2EEB-43D4-A0A7-EC545A835C7D-4431-000005BE8C2831E0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
10322373 No.10322373 [Reply] [Original]

To be honest, I have no interest in making a "New York Times Best Seller" or anything like that. I just want my novel to be remembered across the ages as a classic. I'd rather write the next Paradise Lost than the next Twilight, you know? I'd rather the book not sell well initially but for it to have a good reception anyway (a cult classic, in other words) and to become something beyond a trashy product of its time. How do I make sure that happens?

>> No.10322409

Focus on writing a really amazing story instead of your grandiose literary legacy.

>> No.10322421

Make sure yours is the only book to survive the nuclear apocalypse.

>> No.10322428

Try selling your soul to the devil.

>> No.10322444

read alot, and try copping the people you like and gradually create your own signature.

>> No.10322477

Make an interesting idea, interesting characters, interesting setting, an interesting plot, and wrap it in the trappings of philosophy in a quirky but relatable and witty way.
Also have prose that's equally beautiful, haunting, and cogent.
Also, make sure your characters have interesting interplay and that there's comedy in dialogue.
Also, make sure it doesn't follow a bunch of platitude cliches (aka the guy doesn't get the girl).

>> No.10322485

>tfw I'm 100% confident I could do that
>tfw I actually couldn't do that

>> No.10322508

It's actually all pretty easy I think except for dialogue being comedic, natural, etc, it least for me.

>> No.10322531


>> No.10322564

The fact that you've made this thread indicates you don't have the genius to write a classic.

>> No.10322650

>because you asked how to do something means you'll never be able to do it
When will this retarded meme end?

>> No.10322659


great advice righ here (trips confirm it)

>> No.10322666

>tfw dialogue is the easiest part for me but I can't create an interesting narrative to save my own life

>> No.10322673

All you need to do is publish my diary desu

>> No.10322677

You need to have a marketable meme persona IRL, start wearing a bandana or some shit

>> No.10322703

kill yourself

>> No.10322708

Can't. Won't be able to write about it in my diary desu

>> No.10322722

instantiate characters/events from your favorite philosophical or religious text. create a setting.

>> No.10322803

That's great advice you guys, but what makes this approach different to the approach of pop fiction authors? Wouldn't someone like, say J.K Rowling say that she used this approach as well?

>> No.10323256

JK's books had very simple but digestible prose, the philosophical trappings were very simple and on-the-nose, the chief protagonists were pretty juvenile and predictable, the chief antagonist was comically bad as a character, the books were very episodic, the story relies a LOT on deus ex and maguffins, etc. They're aimed primarily at children from the onset and it shows.

HP books are great for showing how to employ an extended cast in a compelling way and how if a middle-aged woman can make a compelling group of characters, anyone can. They're good for showing that straight-forward and simple motivations can work in an extended series as long as they're consistent. They're great for lots of reasons, but they're not literary fiction.

In the end you'll know what you have when you're done anyways; trashy genre fiction or something else.

>> No.10323261

Looks like we have a book between us.

>> No.10323475

>How do I make sure my novel is a classic?
Holy lel, what's next op? Are you going to ask /r9k/ how to seduce a girl?

>> No.10323485

>interesting characters, settings, plots
>trappings of philosophy
not OP, but I'm new and curious. Which one comes first when writing fiction?

>> No.10324445

Shut your fucking mouth. If you're not going to say anything substantial then fuck right off.

>> No.10324447

you’re all so self indulgent, i hate artists so much

>> No.10324455
File: 150 KB, 359x414, 1510693638086.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.10324495

don't write fiction for the sake of fiction. You even mentioned paradise lost - do you think John Milton sat down and said "lmao I'm gonna write a poem because I'm, like, creative, and uh stories are cool"

You have to have a philosophical core to your work. it needs to be directed, even if there isn't a central question being phrased and answered. You aren't just going to shit out a novel about space elves that also happens to be a 10/10 magnum opus major literary work because the off-gassing of your incredible genius is just that good. You can't stumble into shit and come out a visionary.

That's why Harry Potter sold well but will never be a great classic. Rowling just wrote it to write it. She had no purpose above simply telling a story, and no idea about what was in her story beyond the facts of the plot. She learned a little bit right at the end with that power of love bullcrap but she was, ironically, new to it and very poor at insinuating actual ideas into her writing so it came off as hamfisted and awkward.

In other words, you're going about it THE WRONG WAY. You will never, ever sit down and say "I'm going to write a great literary classic" and be able to do it, because you are being motivated by the wrong thing. If an idea strikes you that is so important to you that you need to write it down, then you have a start. Otherwise, the book came before the idea, which is wrong. You'd be trying to fabricate a good idea, to fake genius, all so you can masturbate your own ego. ANd whatever comes of that is not going to be worth anybody's time.

>> No.10324511

I didn't write it explicitly, but my point is pretty substantial - you can't ask people who haven't done a certain thing (and probably can't) how to do that certain thing.
But ok, great writer, ignore me and follow all the great advice itt, "make an interesting idea, interesting characters".

>> No.10324529

Well, it's either them or dead people, and I can't talk to dead people.

>> No.10324538

Lots and lots of allusions
Make them as esoteric as possible

>> No.10324541

Actually, I am going for writing something philosophical. I'm going for things beyond just characters and plot. I'm going for mature, relatable themes, philosophy, symbolism, a unique prose, etc, and I know those things are what made those works classics. I just don't know if it's like a 100% guarantee of a classic.

So... now what?

>> No.10324543

>I can't talk to dead people
You need to work on that.

>> No.10324547

game set and match

>> No.10324554

What a banal post. You're not exactly wrong, but I can't believe you thought it was remotely insightful.
"I set out deliberately to write a tour-de-force." -Faulkner on As I Lay Dying
>You will never, ever sit down and say "I'm going to write a great literary classic"

>> No.10324560

Eat a dick you fucking faggot. We see you robot, and now we all know what you are. Go back to your fucking containment board.

>> No.10324577

Yes sir

>> No.10324585

Ooh, I touched a nerve, didn't I?

>> No.10324590

good luck. People don't read like they used to. The book market is way too flooded nowadays for the same kind of literary canon there was in the past.

>> No.10324593

Sure you are champ, I bet you'll be writing it on your MacBook Pro while sipping some faggy drink at Starbucks so the world can appreciate your genius.

You're going to end up writing a quarter of a pretentious, shallow "novel" and then abandon it when the newest Call of Duty catches your eye. It'll sit on your hard drive for years, you'll mess with it a little every now and then and still tell people you're working on the next Great Novel.

You're not writing anything, who the fuck are you kidding? You can lie to us anon, but don't lie to yourself.

>> No.10324615

Obsessing over creating this legacy piece of art instead of just writing and conceptualizing will get you nowhere. You have no power over how well it will be received or remembered, so get off 4chan and write this so-called masterpiece instead of begging anons for tips.

>> No.10325988

>That's why Harry Potter sold well but will never be a great classic. Rowling just wrote it to write it. She had no purpose above simply telling a story, and no idea about what was in her story beyond the facts of the plot.
According to Rowling, a major theme in the series is death: "My books are largely about death. They open with the death of Harry's parents. There is Voldemort's obsession with conquering death and his quest for immortality at any price, the goal of anyone with magic. I so understand why Voldemort wants to conquer death. We're all frightened of it."
t. wiki

>> No.10326439

It's more of "because you asked how a ball looks (and are already 18+), it's unlikely you're going to become a pro football player". Most people who wrote one, had a story they HAD to tell, not trying to find "the classic formula" or some juvenile shit like that.

Rowling did write a classic. Like it or not but a book that sold 600m times isn't going to disappear with time.

It's not popular compared to other media but people still read (or at least buy) fuckloads of books.

>> No.10326872

Die young. If you die before 40, you'll be hailed as a legend no matter what. Just make sure you have some kind of reputation going where you have a circle of people who share your interests in writing and literature, and have respect for you as a writer so there's a bigger chance of them passing your work along after you die.

>> No.10326877
File: 36 KB, 800x800, 100poztwinkmenstshirt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

is this a copypasta

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.