h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hemingway is credited with saying 'All writing is rewriting.' This isn't of course, entirely true, because there's a case for doing a mad dash at the beginning to get your ideas down in some kind of order. But the rewriting is where the real work comes in.

Personally, I never think the stuff I write is any good. I'm more likely to ask whether to scrap it, or rewrite it yet again. I'm currently on the 4th version of a novel. It's got an elevator pitch - "In war-time France, a young couple is torn apart when their resistance activity is betrayed." I've already taken chunks out and put others in, and changed my mind about characters. I'm wondering whether to take the first section out and start somewhere in the middle. But it's actually very short (probably because I don't have enough authentic detail.) I probably need to do yet more research and rewrite yet again.

So, at what point do I decide to give up and do something easier? Brain surgery perhaps?

I always think you should start over if you realise your premise is flawed or your characters are zombies. Unless, of course, you're writing about zombies.... Otherwise, just rethink the presentation.

Of course, with historical material - particularly when there is so much documentation available - there's always the danger of 'more research needed.'

I can think of one example where 'more research needed' could lead to a change of project. Or should, perhaps.

Now, I admire the heck out of Thomas Keneally. I was just recommending him to the Core Team. Personally, I think he deserves a Nobel Prize more than anybody. But he really shouldn't have tried to tackle Abe Lincoln, in my opinion.

I suspect I know what happened: it's a 'Penguin Life', which is probably a condensed series. And the first section is brilliant. After that, it falls apart rapidly. But who can write Lincoln's life in 192 pages? Nobody, that's who. This is an historical figure whose documentation fills whole libraries. Remember that somewhere in those 192 pages, a major war took place....

Do I think the author started out with good intentions, realised it was a hopeless task, but couldn't back out of the deal? Er.....

I could write something for hootoo of course!

This is true. And always welcome.

I shall try tantric writing from now on DG....expect the next tale sometime around 2027...

"A lot of bad writing is out there – particularly on the internet" [Dmitri]

This is demonstrably true. Google "bad writing" and you get almost a million hits.

It's not that I'm sensitive to criticism because of ego. If I reach the point where I think something I've written is good, I'm afraid to tamper with it for fear of making it as bad as it was when I started.

The 42-word stories that I write are an exercise in concision. How many words are necessary, and how many are superfluous?

Also, writing was painful for some surprisingly good writers --Steinbeck, for instance.

I tend to opt for haikus -
'Take a group of words
shuffle and explore their sounds,
unveil a poem.'

How dare you! I told you I would sue, if you mentioned my entries...er, you did mention my entries, didn't you?

Paige....my post-orgasmic ego demands that this blatant slur was directed this way surely?

DG you have stirred the wrath of the League of the Unread!

You mean like this?

He looked at the door. From the gate he could see it was the right address. He rang the doorbell. No response. He rattled the letterbox. Rumblings. He banged on the door. Steps down the stairs.
"Your cat has been run over."

FWR - better dead than unread, surely? (I know, don't call me Shirley)

If i cross -post, I can be sure of being read by at least three people.

Can I join the League of the Unread?

We can stand on street corners shouting 'Read all about it!' and, when people ask us 'About What?" we can say 'Well, I haven't read this one yet.'

post-orgasmic ego.....