wrote an interesting post with this title -- but she was writing where the fun has gone for us as writers.
wrote an interesting post Monday that contained a riveting snippet from her eight page torture scene from her new novel, BLOOD UNDER WILL.
Diana Krall who felt uncomfortable with using her image to sell her albums was "convinced" to pose for her new album like this:
The Studio Execs felt another shot was needed:
50 SHADES OF GREY has breathed new life into S&M bondage novels.
My own Monday post had this photo which says it all on today's world:
WHERE HAS THE FUN GONE?
I remember when entertainment was fun.
STAR WARS wowed the movie audience because it was epic fun. There was danger, loss, but most of all ... fun.
THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK evoked the angst and drama of a good Greek tragedy, but there was still echoes of fun.
RETURN OF THE JEDI was a re-working of the first movie -- which worked as a bracket for the trilogy.
The next trilogy seemed to lose its way ... as many of the novels of today seem to have lost their way.
But IN COLD BLOOD and THE GODFATHER were bestsellers long ago so reveling in violence and brutality is not a new occurance.
Is it that what culture sees as "Fun" has changed? What do you think?
Do you read for "fun?" If so, what novel last made you glad you bought it?
Do long descriptions of violence, torture, and cruelty entertain you?
In PEOPLE WHO EAT DARKNESS by Richard Lloyd Parry
This sentence is on page three:
"Exhausted tubes of toothpaste curl on the edges of the sink, sodden lumps of soap drool in the floor of the shower."
The second sentence in Gail Jones's novel FIVE BELLS is:
"Before she saw the bowl of bright water, swelling like something sexual, before she saw the blue, unprecedented, and the clear sky sloping upwards, she knew from the lilted words it would be a circle like no other, key to a new world."
Professional reviewers described Ms. Jones's prose as "intensely lyrical" and "poetic."
But where's the fun?
I read Robert B. Parker's Spenser series because, despite the grimness of the murders, the dialogue was fun, the friendship between Spenser and Hawk solid, and the love between Spenser and Susan uplifting
(except for the "Wounded Spenser" novels but even they were revealing of what it meant to be a whole human being.)
Roger H. Garrison, author of HOW A WRITER WORKS, described bad writers as those who fall victim to the
"tides of phony, posturing, pretentious, tired, imprecise slovenly language, which both suffocate and corrupt the mind."
That's a good start, but I'd add repetitious, smug and disrespectful of the readers' time.
C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, among other Oxford literati, reportedly held contests to see who could read Amanda McKittrick Ros' work longest without breaking into guffaws.
Consider this sentence from her:
"Do not sit in silence and allow the blood that now boils in my veins to ooze through cavities of unrestrained passion and trickle down to drench me with its crimson hue."
Well, imagining C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien manly struggling to keep their faces straight while reading that line aloud IS FUN. :-)
Some readers don't care how a story is written as long as it's comprehensible and keeps them turning pages—
THE DA VINCI CODE, for example, or TWILIGHT or FIFTY SHADES OF GREY.
Responding to a question about TWILIGHT on a Yahoo Answers page, a reader wrote,
"I never quit reading a book because I think the style of writing is bad. It may not be bad, just different from what I'm used to. Focus on the story more than the writing style."
The mystery writer Dorothy L. Sayers wrote:
"The most intricate plot ever woven will never carry bad writing. But good writing will often carry a thin plot, and really inspired writing will carry almost anything."
What do you think?
Don't forget WORDS CRAFTER reviewing my audio book today on:
THE JOURNEY SOUTH!http://thewordscrafter.blogspot.com/