The good news is that NASA have just released a beautiful new image of the Orion Nebula, so the thumbnail for the next Escape to New Orion will be gorgeous.
The bad news is there may be a delay in the upload schedule, if I'm trapped for 30 hours in the 750,000-strong queue to see the Queen (that our government's planners failed to anticipate over the last decade of meticulous preparation...)
Did you get to go for the viewing? Is that something you'd release a piece on? Though I could see it as a moment/event one may rather keep to oneself for personal significance.
John, thank you for lining up for those of us living in the United States who are unable to do so. I will be getting up at 2.00am to watch Her Late Majesty's funeral as a loyal subject of the Crown with my dual British and American citizenship.
Amazing John and yes, I too love seeing the revival of the monarchy and our traditions for once and in place of wokery. It's out there but we're canceling it out with our greater voices.
I adore the rituals we have. It's a way to unify people just by adding value to something which could otherwise be seen as mundane.
But those poor Japanese waitresses. Just thinking about the care they took to try to make an experience worthwhile for a Westerner, who might have been scowling at his drink the whole time is a bit sad. Am I exaggerating? Absolutely. It's a rather entertaining image though.
Although, having an interloper present who was just observing might have barred the other patrons from becoming immersed in the magic. There is a reason why 'unbelievers' are usually banned from witnessing rites.
It is a shame we are losing the value we add to these kind of things. Some people are becoming too focused on the materialistic, hard aspects of life, which to me seems like a natural response to the left trying to usurp the abstract and the idealistic. It is better to debate your point with logic and facts after all.
But this is not a good method to use. There is a lot of potential in the art of being able to dream up grand worlds. It is better to try to reach something if you know where you want to go. Or to introduce other people, capable people to your visions so that they know what there is to be won, or at least, to let them remember what is worth fighting for.
Unfortunately the schools and universities offering to teach these kind of skills are overflowing with a certain kind of people. Going there with another mindset will usually result in unpleasant consequences. But being a self taught artist means giving up receiving a recognized degree to show you're capable at what you do, and even more important, handing over a place where people gather to learn from each other.
Thank you, John. Especially the last few paragraphs hit home for me!
I went to law school and specialized in finance and fiscal policies (more or less forced into that by my parents, of course). Other members of my family went to business school and/ or studied engineering. When I wanted to become a painter I had to do that on my own, because conservative families just don’t support career paths like that. Which is a shame and absolutely the reason for a lack of conservative/ libertarian actors, writers, musicians and artists in this day and age.
I was laughing while reading your comment. No offence, really.
I actually went to art school, and quit halfway my masters because it finally got too much for me at that point. The thing about creative studies is that they tend to attract people who want to radically amend the society we live in, not by learning the finer points and rules and improving upon those, but by dreaming up a complete new world order.
Those people are usually not conservative.
Of course, I can't assume it would be the same for everyone, but I think you might have made the better choice by studying law, even if you have been pressured to do so. It took me a long time to start creating things again and to enjoy it with the same naivete I had before. I don't regret my choices, but being a self-taught artist would certainly have been better for me.
Also, currently I work for a division of the tax administration (Lacking the necessary diplomas, but I can be very charming) and a lot of my colleagues are lawyers (They're nice. There is always someone who hands me snacks and there is not one blue hair in sight). So I'm kind of your antithesis. •ᴗ•
But! Like I said, I started being creative again and I am currently also studying for an art history degree! Things worked out for me at the end. And I am convinced that people who have the urge to create will eventually do so, no matter their education. I am a firm believer in autodidaction.
I'm finding it difficult because on the one hand, I'm trying to write a book, but on the other, there's literally nothing in my local area to support any kind of creative career. Nothing that isn't dominated by SJWs (who are, ironically, the least creative people imaginable... Evidence: all modern movies, tv-shows, video games etc.), and nothing that isn't in a city. So instead I have to either be stuck getting constantly interfered with by the DWP and their partners, or spend all my time working in farflung places in jobs I don't like or care about that drain me of all energy (my hometown is something of a rotting corpse, even more so now after The Great Plague). I don't really need support per se (beyond people to sort of chuck my ideas at and to give feedback or just to listen because I tend to talk my way to answers) but either way I get people constantly interfering. -.-
I am sorry you are dealing with that. It can definitely be a frustrating and isolating experience to do your own thing in life!
Have you considered putting your work up on AO3, RoyalRoad or Wattpad and to ask for feedback from readers and other writers? Or do you not want your work to be that public (yet)?
What is DWP, by the way?
Another annoying thing I have noticed on this creative journey is that people expect you to be successful right from the start, otherwise you’re considered a failure.
Doctors study for over a decade and lawyers often for four to six years and still start at the bottom of the ranks at a hospital or law firm.
Why do writers, sculptors and painters have to be brilliant and wealthy artists from the moment they release their first work?
Creatives don’t get the same patience and courtesy from society as people in other fields, I have learned… which also doesn’t help.
Not yet. I typically send emails to friends whose judgement I trust and send them extracts to read.
The DWP is the Department for Work and Pensions, who manage unemployment benefits.
I know, like I tried to look for some kind of writing job I could as a side-project to make money quicker, and I wound up being met with (very few) vacancies all wanting someone who'd been in the business and published for many years. Well... that gatekeeps me out... -.- Guess I just have to do factory work then... -.-
Try to get published in small writing journals or participate in contests to get your name out there.
Publishers and other people are taking an enormous risk by publishing, or hiring an author who is not known. They'll have to invest a lot of money in you and so they'll want to be sure there is an audience who likes you and that you're able to produce. It is a business. There are a few cases in which someone gets pulled out of a pile of manuscripts and published because of their talent, but those are extremely rare.
Also "writing job I could do as a side-project to make money quicker" is not a mindset which will help. And take care you're not ending up with a self fulfilling prophecy.
I'll keep this in mind. I do have one idea I've been working on... but I want to develop it first. Looking before I leap. Probably for the best though if the mindset isn't quite there.
Great to hear! Try not to fall in the trap of keeping rewriting things [pot, meet kettle if that is the case] because you're trying to achieve something flawless.
I get the difference between the way artists and people like lawyers and doctors are treated, career wise.
A doctor who starts working in a hospital to specialize can, since they already have a basic medical degree, still work and funtion like a doctor. That work is valueable enough to get paid for. While they are working there as an intern, i.e. they are there more to learn than to be able to actually do work, they get paid peanuts, if at all.
Artists are constantly learning. I do agree that it is ridiculous to expect an artist to be phenomenal from the get go, but there is still an idea of the romantic artist like a Mozart like genius the general public just can't seem to let go.
I do apologise for how harsh this sounds, but to put it simply: to get paid in this world you need to be able to produce work people value, and are willing to work for themselves to pay for it and own it. You're not a charity case.
Art is important and I do agree with government investments in culture and art since most people forget its worth, but as an professional artist you need to invest. Constantly. Most will need to invest more than they will ever get out of it. So only choose this kind of career if you are willing to do so.
It is difficult. One thing I learned really fast was to keep my opinions to myself and try to ignore people when they talked about certain subjects I cared about. It made me feel hollow after a while.
You should be able to discuss your ideas with other people. Thinking keeps the creative juices flowing and since art is supposed to be essentially a way to show how you view the world around yourself, it should be fervently and completely honest. Hiding a part of yourself to succeed, even when political ideologies would never even end up in your art, still means you're obstructing some part of yourself, which will restrict your creativity.
I understand your dilemma about work, I've been stuck in a draining job for years. The best advice I've heard about a situation like that was to try to use the experience to create. Kafka did. Or to use the time you can spare to write, even if that means you only have a moment to write a few sentences down between helping costumers like Banana Yoshimoto.
Regarding the last bit, I do believe 'Creative Liberty' was established to share creative work. If you have something, why not try submitting it?
I did actually ask John but the things I would have submitted would have been work-in-progress from much longer works, not really shorter works specifically designed to be shorter. I would have to basically create "side-projects".
Short stories are a great exercise. A lot of writers started out writing stories or novellas before writing a novel.
One of Murakami's short stories was actually later on used as the first chapter of one of his novels, so you could try to do something like that if you only write novels. Short stories are also easier to get published, if that is something you would like to accomplish. From there on it is also easier to find a publisher for your book.
But please don't disregard short stories. They are usually approached in a completely different way than books, there is a lot less room to make mistakes because they are short enough to make those noticable for example. It is a different kind of art, neat for trying out an idea you have, a 'sketch' of something so to say, but extremely polished.
One writer who is regarded as one of the best short story writers, if not the best, is Chekhov. (You might know him from Chekhov's gun.) It can be worth it to read some of his work.
I have to second Maureen here, short stories are one of the best exercises to do (as well as opening opportunities to publish and learn from feedback).
The only writing skill that you can't hone with short stories is the development of a vast, sprawling plot. But really you ought to have polished prose, gripping characters, and the ability to deliver compelling set-piece scenes before you start working on long-form plotting. And short stories are the way to get there.
They also say that the best short stories are the ones you read and say "This should be a novel and if it were, I'd buy it." So you do have to have some restraint sometimes, and hold back from expanding on your favourite story ideas until you're really sure that your prose is up to snuff.
I recently re-watched The Cat Returns and i had completely forgotten that Tim Curry voices the cat king. Tim Currys voice being something i find myself quite nostalgic for, a mark of better times that have now passed, a door i try to keep ajar.
Only if you discredit Netflix taking the executioners blade to so many beloved IP’s, with many more lined up for the chopping block.
Western adaptations of Japanese stories always seem to be so poor and often disingenuous to the source material. I just wonder if it’s intentional or just a critical misunderstanding.
Cultural difference in my opinion. I've had a few phases in which I consistently only read books from certain countries or periods (yes, I was one of those insufferable teenagers) and one thing I noticed was that there sometimes are characteristics to the work of authors from different cultures and eras. It's often subtle so I don't think I would have noticed it if I wouldn't obsessively had read one catagory and then suddenly changed my, so to speak, diet. That's the fun thing about books, it's a very unadulterated method of building worlds in the mind of the reader. It's only you and the writer.
Other creative work also has cultural characteristics. There are always subtleties, while they are important in creating a certain 'feeling' that world has, simply go unnoticed because it doesn't play an notable role and other people just don't have the background to pick up on the symbolism. Even the original creators may not realize what they added to make it work, because it has been a part of them from childhood and it was just the natural feeling way for them how to translate the story from their imagination to the screen. So Western adaptions often result in a confused mixture of lost in translation and conflicting emphases which feels 'off' for most people. Let alone the purists.
~
But please, for the love of god, tell me what 'IP' means. I can't think of anything beyond internet protocol. It's very frustrating.
I'm curious, what do you think about the Japanese real life adaptations of anime? The few I've seen were disappointing.
Like Mushishi, there was a certain bittersweet fairytale atmosphere in the manga and anime which the movie did not seem to be able to duplicate. Every frame in the anime seemed like a watercolour painting, while the movie seemed just harsh in comparison.
Maybe there are some aspects to anime that just don't translate very well to real life movies? There are a lot of subtle artistic visual choices you can't use without it looking so forced the viewer can't help but focus on that.
Urasawa's Monster would be perfect for an adaptation though.
If the animation is more story focused and less heavy on visuals then it could work, but I’m yet to see a live action remake that can stand on its own next to the original.
Part of the magic of animation is that you can create literally anything, so long as you can bring it to life with the mighty pen.
Real life adaptations just can’t display the surreal landscapes, twisted characters or the over the top reactions that animation can create.
Funnily enough when John and Connor were talking about Howls moving castle, watching the scenes I thought to myself that there’s a certain atheistic beauty to the animation that most likely can’t be captured by a real life performance.
Same as a real life The Cat Returns, I can’t imagine it working with a bunch of CGI cats, even if they respeecher Tim Curry as the cat king again.
Maybe there’s a possibility that some art cannot be recreated, personally I kind of hope it’s that way. Some things need to remain unique and special.
The thing is, they don't actually believe in free speech as a universal absolute, but rather as a tool of convenience. They only want free speech for themselves, but not their opposition... and their opposition is literally anyone but themselves (the individual) in the end because it's a movement of aggressively insane people who can't help starting civil wars with one another over minor and petty ideological differences (I keep bringing up the comparison to the Daleks and the arc in old Doctor Who where it was the Imperial vs Renegade Daleks killing each other over minor genetic differences and loyalties). They're loving the fact their own guys are getting stopped because then like naughty children they can play victim and invoke values they themselves don't actually believe in, and people just back down to it. They can proclaim absolute free speech all they like, but it'll always ring hollow and be nothing but a lie.
Anyway, we have a Pokemon Center here in England now. Granted it's in London... about as far away from me within England as you can get (near Durham), but still, it's there. It's probably the one commercialist thing I indulge in really because it's always been a love of mine. I think the thing that I really liked about it was the fact that I could imagine myself with what were essentially friends but like powerful friends who could back me up and go on journeys with. As a child, I never really had such things. The magic never really faded for me either... despite how cynical I seem and certain... experiences that happened. Same is true for other things, though I think the magic may have faded for a time with some. Maybe I'm just rediscovering a lot of things though I tried to bury... and probably murder of my childhood (and no, not for "growing up" reasons, that idiocy is just insecure people trying to convince everyone else they're mature when that very act is the height of immaturity - I mean more... survival; adapting to unfriendly environments, then realising you're not in that environment anymore, or might not be soon anyway...).
Anyway, completely off topic but I saw the clip about Howl's Moving Castle (the film) and just yesterday by sheer coincidence, I finished reading the book. :D
You know, I tried reading Howl's Moving Castle and it was one of the few books I actually abandoned before getting to the end. Not a great fantasy reader unfortunately, although my wife writes fantasy fiction! I prefer my Bronte and Jane Austen novels.
Well, first thing is something you mentioned: No war in the book. Only mention of a potential war, maybe in the future. The plot goes in a very different direction in the book, with the Witch of the Waste being more of an antagonist. Also, the book goes into a lot more depth when it comes to the characters, like for example, Sophie's family are featured way more heavily (the Ghibli film actually cut out a Hatter sister, since in the book, Sophie has two younger sisters: Lettie and Martha) and are far more involved. The curse on Sophie also never fluctuates like it does in the film; while she is under the curse it remains consistent (no changing of appearance based on emotions). Sophie's personality though is pretty similar, but Book Sophie I would say is far more savage then film Sophie. She does have a similar arc though where she has to develop her personality more, particularly though her sense of agency on the world around her which is far more emphasised in the book. Her protectiveness of her sisters is also way more emphasised. Howl as a character is... actually quite different in the book. He's still dramatic, but more of, what Sophie calls "a slitherer-outer" as he basically refuses to get tied down to anything, but he's a kindhearted scoundrel and very eccentric. The story actually in the book I think is a lot more about the clash between Sophie's very feminine world and Howl's more masculine one, and both having to adjust to one another. Though not in an obnoxious kind of way. It is similar to the film in that respect but it's played up a lot more in the book. Transformation is a huge theme though. Calcifer is largely the same in the book, but Howl's apprentice is completely different (he's a teenager in the book), and the film seems to have combined Wizard Suliman and Mrs. Pentstemmon together to make "Madame Suliman". There's other differences but I want to remain somewhat vague...
In terms of the way it's written, the book is very witty and tongue-in-cheek. Each of the chapters has a very blunt title that just outright states something that happens in it. My favourite being "In which Sophie expresses her feelings with weed killer" (most are titled like this where it's "In which Sophie..." and then something she does in blunt, but broad terms). It's told from Sophie's perspective too, and she often gets the wrong end of the stick so there's a lot of things that aren't what they seem at first and there are things foreshadowed and hinted at, which Sophie never latches onto until she's outright told about them later on or she eventually puts two and two together and realises things that have been going on the entire time. Sophie though is actually really funny as a perspective character just because of how quickly she rushes to judgement about things, and her reactions to things are just funny. The amount of "That's it. I'm done..." moments she has... xD Also, character appearances are very different. Sophie actually has short, red-gold hair in the book, and as an old woman she's more thin and emaciated. Howl's described even more flamboyant in the book, Calcifer is also not cute and is a multi-coloured fire demon with features made of fire. Lettie is dark-haired, not blonde etc. What's also interesting is that Wynne-Jones has a lot of details about characters, but they all add up to some kind of clue or are used to introduce you to things like the family dynamics of the Hatters etc. A lot of seeds are planted in that first chapter.
I think I do actually prefer the book, mainly because I like how much more rounded the characters are.
Alright, you've sold it to me. I'll order the book now ;)
I always remember Diana Wynne Jones as being one of those prolific authors whose books were everywhere when I was in primary school, but never appealed to me. I read one of them and found it very dull and simplistic. Perhaps I just picked up a dud.
I'd say the book is more complicated than the movie. Along with the other changes (like the anti-war stuff), the movie I think simplified a lot of things for time due to the inherent nature of films. I think the book may be more interesting now in today's world than back when it was first written tbh. The funny thing was I never wound up reading her as a child, or even a lot of other children's authors (before Howl's Moving Castle, I read through all of His Dark Materials), and I'm trying to think why... because I did buy a lot of books as a kid. I think it may have been my parents forced me to read things, when I don't enjoy anything if it's forced, whereas I'm reading these of my own volition. But also may have been just money since poor family and all, and we only had one small bookshop in town (which isn't there anymore sadly, it's now a barber's and there is a bookshop but it's a more corporate one).
Good and bad news:
The good news is that NASA have just released a beautiful new image of the Orion Nebula, so the thumbnail for the next Escape to New Orion will be gorgeous.
The bad news is there may be a delay in the upload schedule, if I'm trapped for 30 hours in the 750,000-strong queue to see the Queen (that our government's planners failed to anticipate over the last decade of meticulous preparation...)
The government failed at something? Unthinkable. :P
Did you get to go for the viewing? Is that something you'd release a piece on? Though I could see it as a moment/event one may rather keep to oneself for personal significance.
John, thank you for lining up for those of us living in the United States who are unable to do so. I will be getting up at 2.00am to watch Her Late Majesty's funeral as a loyal subject of the Crown with my dual British and American citizenship.
Amazing John and yes, I too love seeing the revival of the monarchy and our traditions for once and in place of wokery. It's out there but we're canceling it out with our greater voices.
I adore the rituals we have. It's a way to unify people just by adding value to something which could otherwise be seen as mundane.
But those poor Japanese waitresses. Just thinking about the care they took to try to make an experience worthwhile for a Westerner, who might have been scowling at his drink the whole time is a bit sad. Am I exaggerating? Absolutely. It's a rather entertaining image though.
Although, having an interloper present who was just observing might have barred the other patrons from becoming immersed in the magic. There is a reason why 'unbelievers' are usually banned from witnessing rites.
It is a shame we are losing the value we add to these kind of things. Some people are becoming too focused on the materialistic, hard aspects of life, which to me seems like a natural response to the left trying to usurp the abstract and the idealistic. It is better to debate your point with logic and facts after all.
But this is not a good method to use. There is a lot of potential in the art of being able to dream up grand worlds. It is better to try to reach something if you know where you want to go. Or to introduce other people, capable people to your visions so that they know what there is to be won, or at least, to let them remember what is worth fighting for.
Unfortunately the schools and universities offering to teach these kind of skills are overflowing with a certain kind of people. Going there with another mindset will usually result in unpleasant consequences. But being a self taught artist means giving up receiving a recognized degree to show you're capable at what you do, and even more important, handing over a place where people gather to learn from each other.
Nice reflections on magic and materialism. We are not merely rational or mechanical beings. My reaction: https://scottcampbell.substack.com/p/half-mast
Thank you, John. Especially the last few paragraphs hit home for me!
I went to law school and specialized in finance and fiscal policies (more or less forced into that by my parents, of course). Other members of my family went to business school and/ or studied engineering. When I wanted to become a painter I had to do that on my own, because conservative families just don’t support career paths like that. Which is a shame and absolutely the reason for a lack of conservative/ libertarian actors, writers, musicians and artists in this day and age.
I was laughing while reading your comment. No offence, really.
I actually went to art school, and quit halfway my masters because it finally got too much for me at that point. The thing about creative studies is that they tend to attract people who want to radically amend the society we live in, not by learning the finer points and rules and improving upon those, but by dreaming up a complete new world order.
Those people are usually not conservative.
Of course, I can't assume it would be the same for everyone, but I think you might have made the better choice by studying law, even if you have been pressured to do so. It took me a long time to start creating things again and to enjoy it with the same naivete I had before. I don't regret my choices, but being a self-taught artist would certainly have been better for me.
Also, currently I work for a division of the tax administration (Lacking the necessary diplomas, but I can be very charming) and a lot of my colleagues are lawyers (They're nice. There is always someone who hands me snacks and there is not one blue hair in sight). So I'm kind of your antithesis. •ᴗ•
But! Like I said, I started being creative again and I am currently also studying for an art history degree! Things worked out for me at the end. And I am convinced that people who have the urge to create will eventually do so, no matter their education. I am a firm believer in autodidaction.
I'm finding it difficult because on the one hand, I'm trying to write a book, but on the other, there's literally nothing in my local area to support any kind of creative career. Nothing that isn't dominated by SJWs (who are, ironically, the least creative people imaginable... Evidence: all modern movies, tv-shows, video games etc.), and nothing that isn't in a city. So instead I have to either be stuck getting constantly interfered with by the DWP and their partners, or spend all my time working in farflung places in jobs I don't like or care about that drain me of all energy (my hometown is something of a rotting corpse, even more so now after The Great Plague). I don't really need support per se (beyond people to sort of chuck my ideas at and to give feedback or just to listen because I tend to talk my way to answers) but either way I get people constantly interfering. -.-
I am sorry you are dealing with that. It can definitely be a frustrating and isolating experience to do your own thing in life!
Have you considered putting your work up on AO3, RoyalRoad or Wattpad and to ask for feedback from readers and other writers? Or do you not want your work to be that public (yet)?
What is DWP, by the way?
Another annoying thing I have noticed on this creative journey is that people expect you to be successful right from the start, otherwise you’re considered a failure.
Doctors study for over a decade and lawyers often for four to six years and still start at the bottom of the ranks at a hospital or law firm.
Why do writers, sculptors and painters have to be brilliant and wealthy artists from the moment they release their first work?
Creatives don’t get the same patience and courtesy from society as people in other fields, I have learned… which also doesn’t help.
Not yet. I typically send emails to friends whose judgement I trust and send them extracts to read.
The DWP is the Department for Work and Pensions, who manage unemployment benefits.
I know, like I tried to look for some kind of writing job I could as a side-project to make money quicker, and I wound up being met with (very few) vacancies all wanting someone who'd been in the business and published for many years. Well... that gatekeeps me out... -.- Guess I just have to do factory work then... -.-
Try to get published in small writing journals or participate in contests to get your name out there.
Publishers and other people are taking an enormous risk by publishing, or hiring an author who is not known. They'll have to invest a lot of money in you and so they'll want to be sure there is an audience who likes you and that you're able to produce. It is a business. There are a few cases in which someone gets pulled out of a pile of manuscripts and published because of their talent, but those are extremely rare.
Also "writing job I could do as a side-project to make money quicker" is not a mindset which will help. And take care you're not ending up with a self fulfilling prophecy.
I'll keep this in mind. I do have one idea I've been working on... but I want to develop it first. Looking before I leap. Probably for the best though if the mindset isn't quite there.
Great to hear! Try not to fall in the trap of keeping rewriting things [pot, meet kettle if that is the case] because you're trying to achieve something flawless.
I get the difference between the way artists and people like lawyers and doctors are treated, career wise.
A doctor who starts working in a hospital to specialize can, since they already have a basic medical degree, still work and funtion like a doctor. That work is valueable enough to get paid for. While they are working there as an intern, i.e. they are there more to learn than to be able to actually do work, they get paid peanuts, if at all.
Artists are constantly learning. I do agree that it is ridiculous to expect an artist to be phenomenal from the get go, but there is still an idea of the romantic artist like a Mozart like genius the general public just can't seem to let go.
I do apologise for how harsh this sounds, but to put it simply: to get paid in this world you need to be able to produce work people value, and are willing to work for themselves to pay for it and own it. You're not a charity case.
Art is important and I do agree with government investments in culture and art since most people forget its worth, but as an professional artist you need to invest. Constantly. Most will need to invest more than they will ever get out of it. So only choose this kind of career if you are willing to do so.
It is difficult. One thing I learned really fast was to keep my opinions to myself and try to ignore people when they talked about certain subjects I cared about. It made me feel hollow after a while.
You should be able to discuss your ideas with other people. Thinking keeps the creative juices flowing and since art is supposed to be essentially a way to show how you view the world around yourself, it should be fervently and completely honest. Hiding a part of yourself to succeed, even when political ideologies would never even end up in your art, still means you're obstructing some part of yourself, which will restrict your creativity.
I understand your dilemma about work, I've been stuck in a draining job for years. The best advice I've heard about a situation like that was to try to use the experience to create. Kafka did. Or to use the time you can spare to write, even if that means you only have a moment to write a few sentences down between helping costumers like Banana Yoshimoto.
Regarding the last bit, I do believe 'Creative Liberty' was established to share creative work. If you have something, why not try submitting it?
I did actually ask John but the things I would have submitted would have been work-in-progress from much longer works, not really shorter works specifically designed to be shorter. I would have to basically create "side-projects".
Short stories are a great exercise. A lot of writers started out writing stories or novellas before writing a novel.
One of Murakami's short stories was actually later on used as the first chapter of one of his novels, so you could try to do something like that if you only write novels. Short stories are also easier to get published, if that is something you would like to accomplish. From there on it is also easier to find a publisher for your book.
But please don't disregard short stories. They are usually approached in a completely different way than books, there is a lot less room to make mistakes because they are short enough to make those noticable for example. It is a different kind of art, neat for trying out an idea you have, a 'sketch' of something so to say, but extremely polished.
One writer who is regarded as one of the best short story writers, if not the best, is Chekhov. (You might know him from Chekhov's gun.) It can be worth it to read some of his work.
I have to second Maureen here, short stories are one of the best exercises to do (as well as opening opportunities to publish and learn from feedback).
The only writing skill that you can't hone with short stories is the development of a vast, sprawling plot. But really you ought to have polished prose, gripping characters, and the ability to deliver compelling set-piece scenes before you start working on long-form plotting. And short stories are the way to get there.
They also say that the best short stories are the ones you read and say "This should be a novel and if it were, I'd buy it." So you do have to have some restraint sometimes, and hold back from expanding on your favourite story ideas until you're really sure that your prose is up to snuff.
Thank you.
And luckily I have a plan... :D
Is it a *cunning* plan?
We all need a lil bit of magic in our lives.
I recently re-watched The Cat Returns and i had completely forgotten that Tim Curry voices the cat king. Tim Currys voice being something i find myself quite nostalgic for, a mark of better times that have now passed, a door i try to keep ajar.
"The one place uncorrupted by capitalism.... ANIME!"
Wait, what?
Only if you discredit Netflix taking the executioners blade to so many beloved IP’s, with many more lined up for the chopping block.
Western adaptations of Japanese stories always seem to be so poor and often disingenuous to the source material. I just wonder if it’s intentional or just a critical misunderstanding.
Cultural difference in my opinion. I've had a few phases in which I consistently only read books from certain countries or periods (yes, I was one of those insufferable teenagers) and one thing I noticed was that there sometimes are characteristics to the work of authors from different cultures and eras. It's often subtle so I don't think I would have noticed it if I wouldn't obsessively had read one catagory and then suddenly changed my, so to speak, diet. That's the fun thing about books, it's a very unadulterated method of building worlds in the mind of the reader. It's only you and the writer.
Other creative work also has cultural characteristics. There are always subtleties, while they are important in creating a certain 'feeling' that world has, simply go unnoticed because it doesn't play an notable role and other people just don't have the background to pick up on the symbolism. Even the original creators may not realize what they added to make it work, because it has been a part of them from childhood and it was just the natural feeling way for them how to translate the story from their imagination to the screen. So Western adaptions often result in a confused mixture of lost in translation and conflicting emphases which feels 'off' for most people. Let alone the purists.
~
But please, for the love of god, tell me what 'IP' means. I can't think of anything beyond internet protocol. It's very frustrating.
I think the western adaptations of anime have far more issues than just cultural differences.
Yep, intellectual property :)
I'm curious, what do you think about the Japanese real life adaptations of anime? The few I've seen were disappointing.
Like Mushishi, there was a certain bittersweet fairytale atmosphere in the manga and anime which the movie did not seem to be able to duplicate. Every frame in the anime seemed like a watercolour painting, while the movie seemed just harsh in comparison.
Maybe there are some aspects to anime that just don't translate very well to real life movies? There are a lot of subtle artistic visual choices you can't use without it looking so forced the viewer can't help but focus on that.
Urasawa's Monster would be perfect for an adaptation though.
Personally I think they’re awful, mostly.
If the animation is more story focused and less heavy on visuals then it could work, but I’m yet to see a live action remake that can stand on its own next to the original.
Part of the magic of animation is that you can create literally anything, so long as you can bring it to life with the mighty pen.
Real life adaptations just can’t display the surreal landscapes, twisted characters or the over the top reactions that animation can create.
Funnily enough when John and Connor were talking about Howls moving castle, watching the scenes I thought to myself that there’s a certain atheistic beauty to the animation that most likely can’t be captured by a real life performance.
Same as a real life The Cat Returns, I can’t imagine it working with a bunch of CGI cats, even if they respeecher Tim Curry as the cat king again.
Maybe there’s a possibility that some art cannot be recreated, personally I kind of hope it’s that way. Some things need to remain unique and special.
Wait... "Intellectual Property". I may have the stupid.
The thing is, they don't actually believe in free speech as a universal absolute, but rather as a tool of convenience. They only want free speech for themselves, but not their opposition... and their opposition is literally anyone but themselves (the individual) in the end because it's a movement of aggressively insane people who can't help starting civil wars with one another over minor and petty ideological differences (I keep bringing up the comparison to the Daleks and the arc in old Doctor Who where it was the Imperial vs Renegade Daleks killing each other over minor genetic differences and loyalties). They're loving the fact their own guys are getting stopped because then like naughty children they can play victim and invoke values they themselves don't actually believe in, and people just back down to it. They can proclaim absolute free speech all they like, but it'll always ring hollow and be nothing but a lie.
Anyway, we have a Pokemon Center here in England now. Granted it's in London... about as far away from me within England as you can get (near Durham), but still, it's there. It's probably the one commercialist thing I indulge in really because it's always been a love of mine. I think the thing that I really liked about it was the fact that I could imagine myself with what were essentially friends but like powerful friends who could back me up and go on journeys with. As a child, I never really had such things. The magic never really faded for me either... despite how cynical I seem and certain... experiences that happened. Same is true for other things, though I think the magic may have faded for a time with some. Maybe I'm just rediscovering a lot of things though I tried to bury... and probably murder of my childhood (and no, not for "growing up" reasons, that idiocy is just insecure people trying to convince everyone else they're mature when that very act is the height of immaturity - I mean more... survival; adapting to unfriendly environments, then realising you're not in that environment anymore, or might not be soon anyway...).
Anyway, completely off topic but I saw the clip about Howl's Moving Castle (the film) and just yesterday by sheer coincidence, I finished reading the book. :D
I think there's a pop-up Pokemon Centre, but nothing like the scale of the massive ones in Japan.
I've never read the book, what's it like? How does it compare to the Ghibli film?
You know, I tried reading Howl's Moving Castle and it was one of the few books I actually abandoned before getting to the end. Not a great fantasy reader unfortunately, although my wife writes fantasy fiction! I prefer my Bronte and Jane Austen novels.
Ahh, I just know of the online one.
Well, first thing is something you mentioned: No war in the book. Only mention of a potential war, maybe in the future. The plot goes in a very different direction in the book, with the Witch of the Waste being more of an antagonist. Also, the book goes into a lot more depth when it comes to the characters, like for example, Sophie's family are featured way more heavily (the Ghibli film actually cut out a Hatter sister, since in the book, Sophie has two younger sisters: Lettie and Martha) and are far more involved. The curse on Sophie also never fluctuates like it does in the film; while she is under the curse it remains consistent (no changing of appearance based on emotions). Sophie's personality though is pretty similar, but Book Sophie I would say is far more savage then film Sophie. She does have a similar arc though where she has to develop her personality more, particularly though her sense of agency on the world around her which is far more emphasised in the book. Her protectiveness of her sisters is also way more emphasised. Howl as a character is... actually quite different in the book. He's still dramatic, but more of, what Sophie calls "a slitherer-outer" as he basically refuses to get tied down to anything, but he's a kindhearted scoundrel and very eccentric. The story actually in the book I think is a lot more about the clash between Sophie's very feminine world and Howl's more masculine one, and both having to adjust to one another. Though not in an obnoxious kind of way. It is similar to the film in that respect but it's played up a lot more in the book. Transformation is a huge theme though. Calcifer is largely the same in the book, but Howl's apprentice is completely different (he's a teenager in the book), and the film seems to have combined Wizard Suliman and Mrs. Pentstemmon together to make "Madame Suliman". There's other differences but I want to remain somewhat vague...
In terms of the way it's written, the book is very witty and tongue-in-cheek. Each of the chapters has a very blunt title that just outright states something that happens in it. My favourite being "In which Sophie expresses her feelings with weed killer" (most are titled like this where it's "In which Sophie..." and then something she does in blunt, but broad terms). It's told from Sophie's perspective too, and she often gets the wrong end of the stick so there's a lot of things that aren't what they seem at first and there are things foreshadowed and hinted at, which Sophie never latches onto until she's outright told about them later on or she eventually puts two and two together and realises things that have been going on the entire time. Sophie though is actually really funny as a perspective character just because of how quickly she rushes to judgement about things, and her reactions to things are just funny. The amount of "That's it. I'm done..." moments she has... xD Also, character appearances are very different. Sophie actually has short, red-gold hair in the book, and as an old woman she's more thin and emaciated. Howl's described even more flamboyant in the book, Calcifer is also not cute and is a multi-coloured fire demon with features made of fire. Lettie is dark-haired, not blonde etc. What's also interesting is that Wynne-Jones has a lot of details about characters, but they all add up to some kind of clue or are used to introduce you to things like the family dynamics of the Hatters etc. A lot of seeds are planted in that first chapter.
I think I do actually prefer the book, mainly because I like how much more rounded the characters are.
Alright, you've sold it to me. I'll order the book now ;)
I always remember Diana Wynne Jones as being one of those prolific authors whose books were everywhere when I was in primary school, but never appealed to me. I read one of them and found it very dull and simplistic. Perhaps I just picked up a dud.
I'd say the book is more complicated than the movie. Along with the other changes (like the anti-war stuff), the movie I think simplified a lot of things for time due to the inherent nature of films. I think the book may be more interesting now in today's world than back when it was first written tbh. The funny thing was I never wound up reading her as a child, or even a lot of other children's authors (before Howl's Moving Castle, I read through all of His Dark Materials), and I'm trying to think why... because I did buy a lot of books as a kid. I think it may have been my parents forced me to read things, when I don't enjoy anything if it's forced, whereas I'm reading these of my own volition. But also may have been just money since poor family and all, and we only had one small bookshop in town (which isn't there anymore sadly, it's now a barber's and there is a bookshop but it's a more corporate one).