We all have one novel we write over and over

Ms. Haiku

It's a paraphrase, and I don't know who by, but it brings up a point. I thought I should stray from my favorite subjects or try a different approach to writing to expand my horizons. . . and I should as it is a part of growing. However, if I keep coming back to the same themes is that so bad? My writing should be more grounded in how I want to present myself, but my subject matter may be the same. Do you still like to write about stuff that you liked to write about years ago?

trappedinmyradio

i like to write about the things that i know and feel. you have to write what you know or it's going to be shit. but, i do like to change up form now and then. maybe not. i don't know. present yourself in a way that is comfortable. try new things in the privacy of yourself and then unveil them when you are ready to do so.

Ms. Haiku

My best poetry usually revolves around 1 woman, and she is fighting for basic human rights or arguing for basic human rights/justice. All these years, my most passionate poetry is that same woman in different disguises. Sometimes she's just enjoying life, but the passionate poetry is where she shines.

EvilToasterElf

You don't have to write about what you know, that's why we have a brain, you just have to create situations where you characters can feel their way through it.

I've written plenty of poems about things I know nothing about which Ithink have come out ok. They key is that I've trapped my characters into a situation they can't escape, so they, and I, have to deal with it, and what comes out will generally be pretty natural.

FinsburyParkCarrots

I think the career of George Eliot pretty much proves this notion wrong.


Discuss, in 1500 words. I won't. I haven't done the pickled onion thing yet.

FinsburyParkCarrots

EvilToasterElf wrote:

You don't have to write about what you know, that's why we have a brain, you just have to create situations where you characters can feel their way through it.

I've written plenty of poems about things I know nothing about which Ithink have come out ok. They key is that I've trapped my characters into a situation they can't escape, so they, and I, have to deal with it, and what comes out will generally be pretty natural.

Do the situations come first, or the characters? There's a good, old fashioned question for ya.

FinsburyParkCarrots

Here's some stuff to consider:

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst337/Zola-ExpNovel.htm

suffragette

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Do the situations come first, or the characters? There's a good, old fashioned question for ya.

I always start with a character. And it's usually title first with me.

FinsburyParkCarrots

I think I'd start with a character, too.

Ms. Haiku

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

I think the career of George Eliot pretty much proves this notion wrong.


Discuss, in 1500 words. I won't. I haven't done the pickled onion thing yet.

She's pretty consistent in her writing. I'm not sure what you mean. She and Thomas Hardy could switch places they are both so consistent and write of the same things, really. If I had cats I was going to name them Bethsheba and Eustacia Vye after two of her heroines . . .isnt' that ironic? Ok, Fins, what do you mean?

Ms. Haiku

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Do the situations come first, or the characters? There's a good, old fashioned question for ya.

For a particular poem it's the situation, because no matter what I seem to have the character down - that woman alone can be caught in any situation.

Ms. Haiku

Ms. Haiku wrote:

She's pretty consistent in her writing. I'm not sure what you mean. She and Thomas Hardy could switch places they are both so consistent and write of the same things, really. If I had cats I was going to name them Bethsheba and Eustacia Vye after two of her heroines . . .isnt' that ironic? Ok, Fins, what do you mean?

Ooops, where's the edit button. Anyway, Fins, were you responding to EvilToasterElf or myself with your statement? I think I got lost.

FinsburyParkCarrots

Both.

Being Enlightened

Hi Ms. Haiku! For me, I write when something strikes me--be it the particular way the moon's reflecting off the water or, the way a story I have read affected me or, something I read in the news or, something a friend has said that made me ponder or, just pure silly drivel...I stray for a time and then I come back and rehash with a new perpective. I know I have a tendency to use particular lines and words over again. I usually do this because they're very effective and sometimes people even make the connection to something I wrote previously because I recycled a thought or line. I like that! To me, it makes it yours.

I actually enjoy that in Pearl Jam's lyrics as well. The references to the shades going down or being raised, to the ocean and the waves, to sound...I just find that conectedness really appealing.

Of course, you should always leave room for growth and explore new techniques but, I don't think you should let those things make you lose sight of yourself. So no, returning to the same themes is not a bad thing in my opinion. You can return with a more open mind, more experience, and expand on what once was, and that's pretty cool. I mean, after all, your past self is connected to your present self is connected to your future self is connected to the leg bone...