|
Post by Stacy on Sept 30, 2010 10:20:32 GMT -5
Actually, the thread you saw in Beth's post wasn't "this isn't supposed to be taken seriously" but "this is for fun." Two completely separate things. I wouldn't walk into someone else's blog and start correcting them and telling them what they're doing wrong and how to improve because they're sharing a part of themselves with us as the reader and they're doing it because they honestly like to. That was the thread I saw. But uh, I'm very confused about what sim stories and reading have to do with school and disliking writing. Like I said in the PM - I guess the phrases "taking things too seriously" and "just for fun" are loaded for me because the context I've generally heard them in is insults and people telling me that I am doing things wrong. And when I googled the phrase while writing that post in an attempt to understand, I found more insults and people criticising others and hating on people who "took themselves too seriously". So I guess it hit that nerve of "You're too obsessed with your story! You love your characters too much! You think too much. You try too hard. You need to chill out and relax." And those would be the nicer examples. So I think what happened is that we were agreeing, but coming from such different directions that the messages weren't getting across. Another thread you'll find in Beth's Friday Thoughts posts - when she asks what you think about whatever she's talking about in other people's stories, I tend to say something like "I'm pretty easy to please and I'm just there to read, not tell the author what I think they should do." Which, by the way, that LJ post was on my blog and no one had to read it if they didn't want to - I respect personal blog boundaries. And if anyone got personal criticism from that LJ post, then they were misinterpreting it. And yeah, that was partly my fault because I didn't get across what I meant well enough. But I think another part of it is this language and conceptual divide, and I'm not sure if I could have gotten across what I meant at that point in time with the words and concepts and understanding that I had then, when I wasn't so aware of the divide and had even less understanding of the other side. Like where you guys say that "this is for fun" and you mean love and acceptance and celebration, which are all things I agree with, but what I hear is what you're taking a stand against, lol. I hear you telling me that I am doing things wrong. I hear you criticising me. No, it's not rational. And I know you did not mean that at all. Still, that was my first emotional reaction. And the school and hating writing thing - "taking things seriously", to me, means caring about them and putting effort into them and trying to do your best. I had honestly never associated the idea with nitpicky criticism and telling other people they're doing things wrong. So I was working from how I defined the term and trying to figure out why people would be so defensive about caring about Sims stories and putting effort into them. And by this point - honestly the comments on that post may have started the train of thought (or did the book start the train of thought and then those posts helped illustrate the thought a bit?), but that's it. By the time I got around to reading The Tao of Writing and theorizing about attitudes, it was more about just people and writing in general, and all the things I've seen in writing communities online, Sims and webfic and traditional publishing, where people get all defensive about just writing for fun and how what they're doing is not art or literature or meaningful or "serious". And in their insistence on that, they insult me. Or at least that's what it feels like emotionally when I read diatribes against "literary" writing, from people saying that none of us are going to win the Pulitzer for a Sims story to people saying that your writing is only worth anything if you're paid for it to people who...well, that's a whole other post but I saw an example the other day that sums it all up. On a blog somewhere a commenter was talking about some literature professor talking about some lousy writer (someone who wrote classics, I don't even remember) instead of talented writers like Stephen King. And the commenter's username was Middle Class Hero. But like I said, the conflation of art with socioeconomic class is a whole other post - or series of posts - or a lifetime's worth of study and writing, lol. I may have brought in a micro example, but I was expounding on a macro issue. And like I said in my thread about how I get it now in the creative process forum - I just never got these ideas about rules and literature and art that other people seem to have. John did say that a big part of it was my egalitarian background - I was never taught to see literature or art as a highbrow elitist social status thing with rules and expectations. I come from people who made their own art and knew that it was good, that everything humans create from their true selves is meaningful. And "serious". And I really really really need to go now, but hopefully that cleared some things up. If not, feel free to reply and I PROMISE on...on Seth, so you know I mean it - I promise to not be scared and to read your reply as soon as I see it.
|
|
|
Post by thelunarfox on Sept 30, 2010 10:48:18 GMT -5
lol, Stacy! <3
I think the problem is that you just have the complicated part of the brain while I've retained the more simple part of the brain. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Sept 30, 2010 20:58:42 GMT -5
lol, Stacy! <3 I think the problem is that you just have the complicated part of the brain while I've retained the more simple part of the brain. ;D LOLOLOLOL! I admit I was scared and it did take me a while to come check out your reply. And then I laughed so much and I told John "People better not tell me I can't laugh at myself." *hugs*
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Sept 30, 2010 20:59:39 GMT -5
Ooo yes please! More Seth Eventually. Good ideas come slowly and this week I think I've had something major percolating. Planning on spending the weekend with Seth.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 2, 2010 0:43:52 GMT -5
I had to reinstall Windows. But luckily it saved everything for me and I pulled 10 out of the Windows.old folder thingy and just reread 10.04. And OMG - it...err, not going to use the s word...it does not reach the level of writing I know I am capable of. 10.07 is closer. But omg - omg, I have to go to sleep and get up and eat and then block out all distractions. And try my best to write straight from my soul, straight from me. Stretch in and up and out, see what I find. Reach for my potential. Shoot not for the moon, but the sun. One day. One day I will be good. I have to keep trying and learning and accept that even if the final product is not what I feel, what I know I can do, I learned from it. It moved me closer. It got me to the moon, if not the sun. Still gonna try for the sun, though.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 2, 2010 15:46:04 GMT -5
I talked to John about this. Did the usual "I wish I was a good writer." "Well, congratulations, because you are.", etc.
And then I said that it didn't reach my expectations and he said "This isn't a comment on its quality or anything, but isn't the goal here to write transcendent literature that's beyond anything a human has ever written before?"
I said "Yeah."
He said "Something can not quite reach that level, but still be good."
And then I talked about how I'm learning that it takes practice and that you get better at things over time and that 10 is better than Valley and I will be better than 10 in the future and that it may not be what I want yet but I'm learning and getting closer. And that I WILL meet that goal of transcendence before I die.
I said "But it's just - I never had to do that before, you know? Everything was so easy before."
And he said "Well, you never played sports really, and you learn pretty fast there that that's how the human body works, that you get better slowly over time."
Of course, that's a big part of why I never played sports. I would fail and not be the best and get mad and give up, because my identity was tied into always being the best, always being perfect on the first try.
And then he said something like "And now you're trying stuff where the difficulty level is so high that even you notice it. And it's okay, people say that Shakespeare's early plays aren't his best and it took him a lot of plays to hit his stride."
I don't know - I guess...
Public Service Annoucement:
Support "gifted" education. Never being challenged in the first 18 years of your life creates bad habits and bad self-identity and does no one any good.
And if you're reading this and look at 10 and think "Who does she think she is? This sucks and reads like it was written by a kid in third grade" - I'm learning. I'm trying. I'm getting better over time. You'll see, one day. One day I will be good.
|
|
|
Post by rad on Oct 2, 2010 20:43:51 GMT -5
And then I talked about how I'm learning that it takes practice and that you get better at things over time and that 10 is better than Valley and I will be better than 10 in the future and that it may not be what I want yet but I'm learning and getting closer. You certainly will! You're improving all the time - I think we all are, to be honest, it's that iron sharpens iron thing around here. Hmmm. I don't really agree. If you're gifted at something, there are other things (say if you're good at maths, you might be lousy at PE) that are a big challenge, so not having a challenge isn't really true. And mixing with people of different backgrounds and skill levels is really important for life - in the real world we all have to rub along together. I know it's horses for courses, and maybe separating people out according to ability works for some, but even so I think it should be done for the odd session/subject, not every part of someone's education. If I had been to a grammar school, or if we'd had top sets for everything and not just some subjects, I wouldn't have learned much in terms of the socialisation aspect of life - just rubbing along with the other smart kids wouldn't have been that good for any of us in the long run. Helping the 'weaker' kids learn concepts has proved pretty valuable for my future work. Of course, there are times when mixed ability groups (which we were in for everything except English, Maths and Languages) hindered us - I think the kids who would have been really good at PE were dragged down at times by the rest of us - but that could be solved by just having sets for a few more subjects than we did. A good school is one that can find a way of challenging the gifted students (in various subjects, because the chances of students who are gifted at sport, or music, or science, or art all being the same students are rare) whilst not letting the weak ones fall behind or the average ones coast. It's a tricky balancing act and I know it's not always easy to meet but I think that's what school should be striving towards, where they can. Still, maybe that's just our differing personalities/backgrounds talking. Perhaps I got lucky with teachers that tried to find ways of stretching those of us who were gifted as much as they could, by giving us extra tasks or extra activities to take part in, and a school where academic achievement was not the be all and end all. Would I have got better grades at a grammar school? Maybe in science, but not in anything else. Would I have ended up being even more neurotic and competitive than I am (and I am more neurotic and competitive than I let on, believe me) - almost certainly. I get that there can be peer pressure to under-achieve or see ability as negative, and that was certainly true of my school, and one of its weaknesses, but that's not about the school as much as it was us coming from a relatively deprived working class town where generations of people have just stayed and very few ever left, so it was a whole town mindset not just a school one. Hmm, soapbox rant is long. What I'm saying is that I think separate education for the 'gifted' would have some advantages in terms of skill development, but I think it's probably a double edged sword at best in terms of living in the real world.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 2, 2010 23:53:16 GMT -5
Ah! I did not use the word "separate". I agree with all of your points really. My background - I was in the academically gifted program in elementary and middle school, which in elementary school amounted to 45 minutes a day every other week of stuff like making up board games and learning about paper airplanes and in middle school it was reading some stories and writing essays. In high school, I took honors and AP classes and they were all ridiculously easy. I never had social problems - at my school it was cool to be smart and there wasn't the anti-intellectualism you see online. The closest we had to a popular group was the people in AP/honors classes, and I was respected as the resident "genius". People wanted me on their teams for review games and wanted me to look over their homework for them, lol. And signed my yearbook "To the only person I know who's smarter than me". And this was a regular non-magnet public high school in a rural community where most of our parents were laborers in factories. I remember I got some mail for the Mary Baldwin early college program, but I decided against it because my mother wasn't ready to be on her own yet, I didn't want to go to school with all girls, and I didn't want to leave my friends. I did go to Duke University's Talent Identification Program in the summer - took the SAT in 7th grade and my verbal score qualified me. The classes were interesting, but not challenging. I don't regret those first 18 years at all - they made me who I am, and I like who I am. I guess it's more - it would have been nice to get a head start on the whole writing thing, you know? I was writing in my second grade journal "I am going to be a true story writer." My teachers said I should be a writer from first grade on. The interest and talent were there, and it would have been nice if someone had noticed and put me to work earlier. I don't even care about the other subjects - and I needed to be in regular math classes, lol. I suck at math. But I never cared about being challenged in it, because I never cared about it. I loved my friends. I loved my school. You see how I talk about it, how it was a positive experience. I don't mean some separate and special total program. I think what I mean is - I don't know, like a writing apprenticeship. Like it would have been nice if back in second or third grade someone had said "Hey, this little girl loves writing and is good at it. Let's hook her up with someone who can be a mentor and guide her and set challenges for her." Like how back in the day young painters would study under master painters and young composers would learn from master composers. I could have done that instead of, say, English. Never needed English - I would have read most of those books without prompting, and in quite a few cases I had read them years before we studied them. And you know - if my mother had been educated and rich, maybe I could have had a writing tutor or something. But as it is - she boarded socks in a factory. I got a full scholarship to TIP every summer, and I wouldn't have gone to TIP if my middle school hadn't been involved with it and if it'd just been up to my mother, because she wouldn't have known about it. So yeah. Would have been fine with me if everything else had been the same, but for one class period a day I got to do hardcore writing work. I mean, you could say that I didn't do well at college because I had never learned how to work, but - in the end I just didn't care. There's only ever been one thing I cared about, and I didn't need college for it - I've seen the products of the Iowa Writer's Workshop on the shelves and I'm not too impressed with them. What I wanted, what I would have cared about, would have been one on one work with an accomplished writer. Some demanding teacher who would have seen my potential and pushed me, challenged me. I mean, in the year since starting Valley, I've done my best to be that to myself, to push myself and challenge myself. But how much farther along could I be now if I'd had someone else do that when I was younger?
|
|
|
Post by celebkiriedhel on Oct 3, 2010 0:53:45 GMT -5
@rad and Stacy...
I know for me that if I had encouragement to stretch my wings as a child, and to be challenged and to experience failure and how to handle it then - it would not be so stressful or difficult for me to deal with now.
I'm a polymath and given that my one abiding joy has been reading anything I can get my hands on, I did not fit in anybody's curriculum.
I was stigmatised and bullied for that by both kids and teachers, and for being different.
So I've ended up being a person who is wary of 'flying' in public because the rest of the world walks.
An education program tailored to the needs of each child rather than just the minimum requirements the government believes you need, is something that would revolutionise education and the society.
But that is obviously something that they can't do. So supporting both ends of the intelligence bell-curve is a great idea. There's plenty of remedial teaching, and support.
It would have made a huge positive impact on my life, if I had the help I needed to use the wings I was given.
Kiri
edit:
My family moved around a lot, and I went to many different schools. (8 all up). I found that no matter what the socio-economic status of the community around them - people who were different were ostracised. If you were more intelligent you were shunned in the wealthier schools. In the more rural and lower-class schools it was a discouragement of a much more physical nature.
I believe that everyone without exception, has a fear of the different and the other. Some people learn to assimiliate that fear and do something constructive with it - to embrace it. For others it turns into a prejudice which they deal with in many and varied destructive ways.
I'm a lot loath to go into details of my experience of schools because I'm a private sort of person, and I'm not sure I'm wanting those to be in the public domain. (And all of the internet is public domain). So I hope you can take my summary of my experience as enough, of why I disagree with you.
( and of course, I'm happy for you to disagree with me - I'm not trying to convince you of anything, except that I disagree and I have reasons why I disagree).
|
|
|
Post by rad on Oct 3, 2010 6:15:42 GMT -5
@stacy - Ah, I get what you mean now, sorry for the misunderstanding. @kiri - Sorry your experiences sucked I think the problem is that if you tried to tailor make education for everyone, nice as it would be in some ways, it would be pretty impossible - the amount of money, time and resources it would take would render it impossible. There's no way individual students could be singled out for extra tuition in very specific skills, say writing or painting (as opposed to more general subjects like art and English) - but I guess a bunch of schools could pool together and add in extra classes for gifted students in order to offer more and share the cost - or, more realistically, charge families for it. As schools have an obligation to give kids an all-round education (for better or worse) they couldn't really get kids to specialise without the accusations (or even the reality) that they were forcing kids down one route they may not want to continue down rather than giving them a broad base of experience. We all know in reality we tend to keep going at the things we were always good at, but those experiences of sucking at maths/woodwork/cross country running/whatever are just as formative as the experiences of doing well at something else. So I guess within curricula there's only so much leg room for "extra", and although the best schools/teachers will give students extra work once they've completed the minimum expected of them, beyond that, advanced tuition and so on usually comes in the form of extra classes and that's something most schools aren't financially or materially equipped (or in some cases skilled) to deliver. Yes, they have extra support for kids with learning difficulties, but that's a more pressing need for the most part - it'll be harder for them in the 'real world' than for anyone else. The more 'gifted' kids do need to learn to fail, though, as you said, not sure how you do that, maybe someone developing advanced curricula for different subjects - but usually the harder stuff comes at the later levels of education anyway, and some schools fast track people through higher levels when they can (not personally keen on that way of doing things but that's just me). Kiri - what do you disagree with, and what would you propose instead? The thought of being separated out into any kind of 'gifted' thing other than the few top sets we had and the extra English sessions we had once a week makes my blood run cold. They suggested I did my GCSE English a year early and start A-Levels whilst still at school rather than waiting til college and the thought was abhorrent, not because I couldn't cope with the work, but because it was unnecessary do to do it early and would have made me 'different' to everyone else in an entirely pointless way. I guess there's no easy answer. A 'gifted' stream might work for some 'gifted' people and for others it would be utter hell - in the same way being in the 'bottom' set gives some weaker students the help they need, but others do better in a mixed stream where they are able to improve because of the challenge of the 'more able' students around them.
|
|
|
Post by celebkiriedhel on Oct 3, 2010 7:38:23 GMT -5
I was disagreeing with the assumption that the prejudices against intelligence is purely a lower socio-economic phenomena (hence your quote).
My own personal experience was that prejudice against intelligence, was among the children in both high and low economic environments, the only difference was in the way they expressed their prejudices.
I've also found (in the computer industry) that it is rife among businesses and society as a whole. It is rare that gifted people working in a standard work environment are not looked upon with distrust.
I don't think that children need to be separated to be challenged. Nor do I think that one necessarily needs to even push them through the classes quicker. (Depending on class size of course). My experience of skipping a year didn't make things any more challenging to me intellectually or educationally, but socially proved to be quite debilitating.
I think for me - a gifted program - is about opening up what we are learning to scrutiny, so that the child has to research, and develop - given harder questions to find the answers for. Given the opportunity to look at the questions that don't have an answer.
Most gifted children I've known are naturally inquisitive - given the permission they'll go and learn on their own cognisance.
What they need is the opportunity. And I think it's a valid and good enterprise to give it to them.
|
|
|
Post by thelunarfox on Oct 3, 2010 11:59:38 GMT -5
Was I the only one who went to school where the popular kids were the smart, intelligent and responsible ones? One of the most popular girls in school was class president and in all my AP classes with me except for history. Most of the popular people in my school were the intelligent ones.
This is an interesting conversation though. Maybe we should move it out of Stacy's babble thread and give it a proper thread in the off topic forum?
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 3, 2010 22:48:23 GMT -5
I'm not scared this time, but it is bed time and I don't feel much like being social at the moment - will read and reply to responses later. So I actually did some research for 10.08 tonight, refreshing myself on the idea of the graffiti on the wall. I talked a little bit about it and it led to this discussion: Grace: "How can Seth have an antagonist? Seth is the antagonist." Me: "Seth is the main character of 10." John: "I thought Caitlyn was the antagonist." Grace: "Your mom's an antagonist." John: "Your face is an antagonist." I have to admit I'm worried - I still haven't typed one word of 10.08. But well - worrying is counter-productive, right? I think - maybe I'm just still in the idle information-gathering stage, still putting material into my brain for my subconscious to work with. At least I'm thinking about it now and reading things that are related. I'm somewhat in 10space mentally now. That's progress, right? Man though - that random dinner conversation about Seth and Caitlyn riding Grace the pony around the factory and how that would fit into the Oz thing with the horse of a different color is going to end up having a major major effect on the story. I actually drew a pic in my notebook and then did some googling and found that there was an actual historical IRL counterpart to my random free association idea and the rough stylized representation I saw was a lot like the one I'd done. I've noticed, in the last few days - when I see links to articles about rules for writing and "why your story gets rejected" and all that on various Twitter feeds, I'm just like - yeah, whatever. I don't even click on them. I don't need your rules. I don't need your structure. I don't need you telling me how to write. They give me a wrong feeling now. I have lost any interest I had in that webfic community push for getting webfic more attention. I'm finding myself more and more distanced from the numbers on the stats page, less and less caring when I see someone just come to the home page and decide to not read anything. I don't know. Oh, and since I really do seem to be entering into 10space now - I also don't really feel like being social. I still love you guys, though. It's just...I need to be myself. I have to be quiet and still if I want my story to come creeping softly into existence. Haha - meant to type be "by" myself, but I will let the Freudian slip stand.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 9, 2010 22:33:54 GMT -5
I can't do this anymore. No, not talking about writing or 10. Still plan to do both of those. I wouldn't delete the blog, not at all, but I might would make it private and just give you guys the password if I was feeling like making an effort. I just can't fight anymore. I can't fight rules or expectations or prejudices or social things that I don't get or any of that. Not anymore. From here on out, I am writing for myself and for you guys. Oh, and printing out a copy of Farmer Brown when it's done for my mother. I told her I would today. It's just...I don't even care about numbers anymore - or even being a literary rock star. I just care about telling the stories I want to tell, in the best way that I know how. I care about learning and growing, as a writer and as a person. I care about doing the best that I can at this. But...just for me. And for you. And I guess I won't make the blog private, because maybe there are some lurkers who don't comment or post here who get it and enjoy it and find some worth in it. Especially Valley, looking at my stats page - and hey, okay, so maybe I think it's not good and I've learned a lot since then, but apparently other people find it enjoyable. But I can't fight the human species anymore. If you want to know what brought this on - this LJ post about rules and writing - and no, it's not involved with the Sims community in any way. That post was just the last straw of general frustration that's been building for quite some time. And I am exhausted and going to bed now. Had a great trip though. I love the mountains. We were a few hours west of where I grew up, but still - it felt like home. I'm sorry my social anxiety gets in the way so much here. You would think that of all places, I would not be scared here. But I am, and there it is and it has to be dealt with. I will read and reply to the preceding posts as soon as I'm able - and please please don't take it as me ignoring you. I love and value all of you. I'm just scared. I'm working on it, though. And Lunar - I will answer your PM when I can.
|
|
|
Post by celebkiriedhel on Oct 10, 2010 1:58:17 GMT -5
You care about all the important things Stacy. <hugs>
|
|
|
Post by raquelaroden on Oct 10, 2010 6:36:48 GMT -5
Just keep doing what you're doing, because it's obvious that is what makes you happy--it's when you start letting the writing advice of others intrude that you get upset and start questioning yourself. I'm not saying that it isn't good to seek out advice, but it's better to just write than to look for more rules to follow.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 10, 2010 15:09:51 GMT -5
You care about all the important things Stacy. <hugs> Aww, thanks. *hugs* back.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 10, 2010 15:21:26 GMT -5
Just keep doing what you're doing, because it's obvious that is what makes you happy--it's when you start letting the writing advice of others intrude that you get upset and start questioning yourself. I'm not saying that it isn't good to seek out advice, but it's better to just write than to look for more rules to follow. Very good advice. I don't think I was looking for rules - it's just that "rules" is one of my keywords, lol. I came upon that post in a list of writing posts gathered by a self-publishing writer I've friended on LJ. He posts a list every Friday, and I look for ones with interesting titles. I like to read and think and talk about writing as well as actually writing. So I saw that title, and I clicked on it. Wasn't really expecting advocation of slavishly following rules, lol. I'm not questioning myself really. It's more...reorganizing. Lately some of my internal values and dreams and hopes have changed, and I'm trying to see what has changed and how and what that means and where to go to follow what I want now, as opposed to what I used to want. A lot of it is learning more about myself and my heritage and culture, I think. Finally figuring out why I have such a hard time understanding internet culture, which is for the most part mainstream middle class and upper middle class white American culture. On the trip yesterday, I bought a book. Voices from the North Carolina Mountains: Appalachian Oral HistoriesJust read this paragraph. "Back then, playing in a band didn't have anything to do with money. People got together and played because they loved music."
|
|
|
Post by Stacy on Oct 18, 2010 10:01:11 GMT -5
|
|
lepifera
Junior Member
"....."
Posts: 93
|
Post by lepifera on Oct 20, 2010 5:33:34 GMT -5
Two months ago, I made the mental note to read 10 when I can sit down and read through the whole thing from the start. I just did. It is very gripping. I love it. So I come straight here to find out how the writer is doing with 10.08. lol.
The human race has been making up stories and passing them on forever (myths, folklores, and even the Biblical stories if they can be counted). There can be a lot more to creative writing than publishing and making money off it!
|
|