From: A_Tina_Hall@kruemel.org   
      
    wrote:   
   > A_Tina_Hall@kruemel.org (A. Tina Hall) wrote:   
   >>  wrote:   
      
   >>> 2. To write with a beginning, middle, and end. You can learn this.   
   >>   
   >> I disagree. I don't see where they are supposed to be in other   
   >> stories, and don't write with any frame of what's to go where in   
   >> mind.   
   >>   
   > A story has a beginning, middle, and end.   
      
   If you mean the same way that you have a beginning, a middle, and an   
   end, and a TV has a beginning, a middle, and an end, yeah, everything   
   has.   
      
   Beyond that, you may be talking about plays on a stage where you get   
   curtains, but a story isn't restricted to work hours, needed breaks,   
   change of clothing, whatever.   
      
   > Without a beginning, middle, and end, it's not a story.   
      
   You say that without even defining beginning, middle, or end. So, no, I   
   don't even see what you are talking about.   
      
   > If nothing changes, it's not usually a story,   
      
   This is a change of subject.   
      
   > If something changes there's at least a why which implies a beginning   
   > and middle, although the end may be either implied or left as a   
   > question for the reader.   
      
   What does stuff happen have to do with beginning and middle? Which of   
   the 1000 things that happen do you tag with which?   
      
   (Stuff happens = something changes.)   
      
   > If you have an obstacle with such a frame, You wouldn't be able to   
   > actually write a "story."   
      
   You have yet to explain what you actually mean by that frame.   
      
   > This does not prevent you from writing a vignette.   
      
   Looking up 'vignette', there's the term 'brief'. No, brief is the   
   opposite of what I do. The story that actually came to an end (but not   
   an end of writing, but I've been rambling on about that) has 6x~130k   
   words (plus #7 and #7b with around 145k words together).   
      
   >> Such a frame would be an obstacle to me, if anything.   
   >>   
   >>> 3. A sense of the music of words.   
   >>   
   >> I don't really know what you mean by that. Can you rephrase it?   
      
   > I had hoped that the two examples I supplied would suffice. Brendan   
   > Behan, Under Milk Wood is a particularly obvious example.   
      
   I'm not going to spend time and/or money just to have a random comment   
   on Usenet explained.   
      
   > This seems to be a property of poets and occasional writers. TS Eliot   
   > in Murder in the Cathedral ("Yet we go on living,/living and partially   
   > living.") is another. Almost the entire play, JB by Archibald McLeash   
   > is a retelling of the Book of Job based on the King James Version,   
   > and it also sings. You may be able to describe it better than I can   
   > if you take a look at any of the examples.   
      
   I'll have to leave this at unexplained then.   
      
   >>> 4. To know where to start the story, and to know when to end the   
   >>> story.   
   >>   
   >> I agree, as long as you don't mean you have to know that from the   
   >> start. (Not everyone writes that way.)   
      
   > You don't need to know from the start. Many authors give more   
   > backstory than is needed to set up the story and continue after the   
   > climax or character growth to fill out an idea that is better left to   
   > the reader's imagination to tell.   
      
   I was more thinking that I knew where a book would end and start while   
   writing the ME (also S&E, but that isn't finished), and I knew I'd   
   reached the end of the story in book #6 when I got there. (Regardless of   
   me writing past the end to get the thing out of my head, and regardless   
   that some things aren't yet done at that point, end of #6 is end of the   
   story.)   
      
   But 'climax' and 'character growth' is stuff I wouldn't want anyway.   
      
   Climax sounds like there's one thing that's important, rather than a lot   
   of things weaving together. I want long stories, with lots of things   
   happening, because basically I just want to follow characters around   
   that are the way I want them to be.   
      
   And character growth would mean characters I don't want. They need to   
   start out grown, and not change who they are and what they see as right   
   and wrong no matter what happens. If the core changes, it was either   
   wrong before, or is wrong after (concerning what characters I want).   
   Gaining knowledge and/or abilities does not change that.   
      
   Even minor characters that start out wrong aren't going to become right.   
   It's not happening in my stories, because I don't want it.   
      
   There was one character I thought was a bad guy, and would (me doing   
   things DIFFERENT to what other people do) not ever repent or anything of   
   that sort. Well, he ends up with the good guys anyway, and it turns out   
   he was right from his point all along. (And I had to tweak the bad stuff   
   he did a little to have it be acceptable, at least to anyone who 'gets   
   it'. Which I doubt anyone would who hasn't had that story in their head   
   the past 8.5 years or so. Oh well.)   
      
      
   > A particularly good example of this comes from Harry Potter. The   
   > epilog tells us that Harry and Ginny lived happily ever after, same   
   > for Ron and Hermione. People don't live happily everafter - when you   
   > have a series of adventures, happily ever after is rapidly boring.   
   > The epilog was 1) unnecessary, 2) detrimental to the story, and 3)   
   > out of character with the preceding several thousand pages.   
      
   I can imagine. (Not read the books. And no, not going to, so I take your   
   word for it.)   
      
   >>> Otherwise, your role models will teach you to be blind to   
   >>> their own shortcomings. Almost everybody develops "blind spots"   
   >>> where they learn "not to see" whatever their parents want to keep   
   >>> hidden. (Almost all children develop blind spots.)   
   >>   
   >> You lost me.   
   >>   
   >> Only thing I can think of is the character behaviour (including   
   >> thoughts) that annoys me in stories, which is why I stopped buying   
   >> books and write my own. Most people think such behaviour is ok and   
   >> normal. I so disagree.   
      
   > The easiest way to describe this is "do as I say, not as I do."   
   > Virtually all parents say this to children and it never quite works.   
   > Basically what happens is that the message to the child comes off as:   
   > "You didn't see Mommy do that," so just pretend that never happened   
   > and "learn not to see it if it happens again." The kid develops a   
   > blind spot and can't see him/her self doing the same thing. (Mommy   
   > does that, so it's okay to do that, but nobody can see, so when I do   
   > it [because Mommy does it] I won't be able to see myself doing it   
   > because Mommy says it's bad.)   
      
   Ah. I guess that's what you deal with when you get normal parents, that   
   take care to raise you and pass on values.   
      
   I basically made up my own idea of what's right and wrong.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)