![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
dave the dope fiend shootin' up dope who don't know the meaning of water nor soap
May. 13th, 2009 | 12:59 am
i really enjoyed this panel of today's dino comics.
there is not much else going on in my life
OH
a door closed in my life and it is a strange feeling. i'm not used to it. there are a lot of doors i have wished were closed at various points, but i can't think of a single instance where there has been a single solid moment where that was it - that was the end. things have faded away i mean, or simply not been revived, but this was the first time it has ever been "it's over. goodbye" and i know that neither i nor the other person will try to bring it back
i wish i could do this to more things in my life and know the other person won't try and cling on
but i don't trust anyone not to
so i guess there is not much else going on in my life, but there is one thing less than there was a day ago, and that is an Event? i don't know
Link | Leave a comment (2) | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend
if i could pull up my trailer pegs we could get away together for good
May. 13th, 2009 | 02:51 am
music: Elton John - Sweet Painted Lady | Powered by Last.fm
so in year 12 for english literature one of the sacs was to write a piece in the style of raymond carver. if you have read any carver you will know this is a sort of open brief - he is a minimalist but he changes his style from story to story depending on the speaker.
he is also a master of unease in that in a lot of his works there is this deep unsettlement that is hinted at abstractly and sometimes a lot less so. while trying to avoid sounding too silly and literary, there's this very subtle, very quiet sense of malaise that pervades a lot of his stories and it is derived from the working-class milieu that a lot of them are set in
the story i chose to write in the style of was "why, honey?" which is one of the more outright ones. it is written in the style of a woman writing a letter to someone who has asked a question about her son, and as the story/letter goes on you get this portrait of a fundamentally broken young man, violent and possibly sociopathic but written through the eyes of a woman who is scared and confused for her child. it is extremely forthright compared to some of his other work but the actual voice of the narrator changes it - while she is talking about her son trying to explode a cat with firecrackers or coming home with a bloody shirt it transforms from this violent act into a shallow portrait that sounds brittle and fragile.
when i was writing my piece i knew exactly what i wanted to write it about, it was just setting it up that was the problem. i wanted to emulate that very simple voice that was achieved by the use of the letter as setting - it lets you speak with a narrative voice that his other minimalist work takes away. but at the same time this was an issue because i had to write my story but make it something that this character would write, and i look at it now and i know i could do better but i am still extremely proud of how it turned out, for a year 12 lit sac.
i would like to add that i find it amusing that how i wrote then, for a simple character while trying to emulate a writer i could never match up to, is how i write in my livejournal now as a matter of course. something happened there
in some places i think it gets too simple and in others too complex, but i was trying to make a character who wrote in a way he thought he should write, not actually one who wrote how he wrote. think of a man who acts the way he thinks he should act in front of other people and never looks quite natural and that is what i was aiming for with this - there are one or two turns of phrase that i think he has picked up as cliches. in the parts of it that seem too simple i think when i wrote it i was trying to communicate the fact that he remembers it as a child and so he wrote as a child because he still thinks of it in those words
this is one of the few pieces of writing i have ever truly thought about and planned and attempted to communicate a message without saying it and honestly i still feel it is one of the best things i have written. you may think otherwise but i am not bothered, this is not a dismissal of your feelings but a reflection of the fact that i am honestly proud of the work that went into this, because it has not happened for anything since
and without further ado
( i was so surprised to receive your letter asking about my sister )
he is also a master of unease in that in a lot of his works there is this deep unsettlement that is hinted at abstractly and sometimes a lot less so. while trying to avoid sounding too silly and literary, there's this very subtle, very quiet sense of malaise that pervades a lot of his stories and it is derived from the working-class milieu that a lot of them are set in
the story i chose to write in the style of was "why, honey?" which is one of the more outright ones. it is written in the style of a woman writing a letter to someone who has asked a question about her son, and as the story/letter goes on you get this portrait of a fundamentally broken young man, violent and possibly sociopathic but written through the eyes of a woman who is scared and confused for her child. it is extremely forthright compared to some of his other work but the actual voice of the narrator changes it - while she is talking about her son trying to explode a cat with firecrackers or coming home with a bloody shirt it transforms from this violent act into a shallow portrait that sounds brittle and fragile.
when i was writing my piece i knew exactly what i wanted to write it about, it was just setting it up that was the problem. i wanted to emulate that very simple voice that was achieved by the use of the letter as setting - it lets you speak with a narrative voice that his other minimalist work takes away. but at the same time this was an issue because i had to write my story but make it something that this character would write, and i look at it now and i know i could do better but i am still extremely proud of how it turned out, for a year 12 lit sac.
i would like to add that i find it amusing that how i wrote then, for a simple character while trying to emulate a writer i could never match up to, is how i write in my livejournal now as a matter of course. something happened there
in some places i think it gets too simple and in others too complex, but i was trying to make a character who wrote in a way he thought he should write, not actually one who wrote how he wrote. think of a man who acts the way he thinks he should act in front of other people and never looks quite natural and that is what i was aiming for with this - there are one or two turns of phrase that i think he has picked up as cliches. in the parts of it that seem too simple i think when i wrote it i was trying to communicate the fact that he remembers it as a child and so he wrote as a child because he still thinks of it in those words
this is one of the few pieces of writing i have ever truly thought about and planned and attempted to communicate a message without saying it and honestly i still feel it is one of the best things i have written. you may think otherwise but i am not bothered, this is not a dismissal of your feelings but a reflection of the fact that i am honestly proud of the work that went into this, because it has not happened for anything since
and without further ado
( i was so surprised to receive your letter asking about my sister )