Stitch on 24/7/2009 at 02:51

---

I think only one side of the debate here is getting tied up in semantics (largely over the word "creative").

Nobody can teach a talentless noob how to write, of course; nobody is arguing that you can go to a class to learn how to tap a wellspring of ideas. But effective writing classes can certainly help one improve one's writing, and yes, even perhaps tap more effectively into that creative wellspring (assuming it's there in the first place--no class can create that out of thin air).

Also: we really should take this into a new thread if we care enough to continue.

june gloom on 24/7/2009 at 02:57

---

Queue, first of all let's not get started on "literary" zombie movies because you are dead fucking wrong but that's neither here or there.

Also, let me give a clarification- at long last- that the story takes place in a town that emptied out, Pripyat style, in mid-1990 and the main characters are visiting it nearly 20 years after the fact. Hence the grocery store scene, with magazines with Saddam Hussein's face on it. One of the characters makes mention of history seemingly repeating itself, so on and so forth.

Anyway, because pop trends frequently repeat themselves, even if the names change, frequently the messages stay the same. For example, Mark Twain once wrote this essay completely lambasting what he considered to be a terrible romance writer. It was called 'The Literary Offences of Fenimore Cooper.' Fenimore Cooper has, of course, been lost to posterity. But you can still get a lot from reading the essay, because SO MANY writers, even published ones, make the same mistakes. The only thing different are the names. But the message stays the same. A good writer can use pop references, because a good writer can use the reference beyond its face value. Which is what I attempted to do in the story I quoted. Maybe I didn't quote enough of it, but whatever. If you want to tell me that pop culture references have no place in writing you can go sit and spin.

Stitch on 24/7/2009 at 03:02

---

Also: I do think Queue is generally giving solid writing advice in this thread, but I will say two things in defense of dethtoll: (a) straight-ahead genre fiction has its place, regardless of innovation, and (b) a scene where someone encounters abandoned, never worn Air Jordans carries a different impact than if things were kept brand-free and generic.

Queue on 24/7/2009 at 03:09

---

So, so far your story references: G.I. Joe, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, My Little Pony, Superman, and Saddam Hussein.

It's not that cultural references are not useful at times (as Stitch as pointed out), but it's better writing if one can avoid them unless they are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, it can be perceived as lazy writing.

Fringe on 24/7/2009 at 03:14

---

I'll temper my original phrasing to something less pithy. I think the best creative writing instruction opens up new playgrounds that beginning writers didn't realize they had, or gives them the tools to explore them more thoroughly. The more prescriptive the advice, the less useful it is.

A good example of this is the recurring explosion in the science fiction community about (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundane_science_fiction) Mundane SF. Mundane SF is an idea that basically holds that many of science fiction's old recurring tropes (interstellar travel, alien contact, alternate universes) and a lot of its new ones (the Singularity, etc.) aren't likely to ever happen, and so stories that make use them are closer to fantasy than science fiction. This by itself is an interesting and valuable idea, and has produced a lot of good stories. Where I think a lot of Mundane SFers go wrong is insisting that no truly good science fiction can come of these ideas and (http://mundane-sf.blogspot.com/2008/06/singulatarian-spectrum.html) mocking those who try. The new playground Mundane SF opens up is interesting to me. The attacks on writers who don't follow their guidelines are not. Plenty of good stories can come from outside the Mundane Manifesto.

Writers get so wedded to their schools of thought (they have to be to devote their fiction to it) that their advice becomes nothing but prescriptive. Then playgrounds get closed off rather than opened.

I've been lucky in the writing courses I've taken. Still, I've had to go out of my way to persuade instructors that, Why, yes, good stories can come out of genre science fiction, and always ground my teeth about that. I can't imagine a useful writing instructor flat-out barring pop culture references from a story, like in dethtoll's example.

Also, to Queue: phrases like, "If not, then you're not writing," make me want to fucking shoot someone. Perfect example of what I'm talking about. So what if you think someone's limiting their audience? At least be self-aware enough to just say it's not a good story, or at least not a marketable one, rather making it sound like you're comparing astrology to real science.