(I don't often shout, but my Pay Shence is running out.....)
The question "what is love?" was posed in response to my statement (I paraphrase as it's lost in the thread) that science can (as in, has the potential to) answer everything worth knowing. I offered an explanation of love from a scientific context. That answer was not accepted. No other answer to "what is love?" has been offered by anyone on the thread.
The biological basis of love is *a* question, not *the* question about it. The felt experience, its psychological, social, intimate function - they are all other questions, more interesting questions, to which I would need some convincing that biology has much to say.
The biological basis of love is *a* question, not *the* question about it. The felt experience, its psychological, social, intimate function - they are all other questions, more interesting questions, to which I would need some convincing that biology has much to say.
But the felt/psychological experience is entirely down to chemicals in the brain and biology/science has quite a lot to say about them.
However, I read "What is love?" as asking what love is in an objective sense: as in what role does it serve for our species, rather than what does it feel like for individual members of our species to be in love.
No other answer to "what is love?" has been offered by anyone on the thread.
You didn't accept "Baby don't hurt me" as an answer (when clearly it is, as the Prophet Haddaway spaketh). There is more day-to-day truth in a 3 minute pop song - pretty much any 3 minute pop song - than the scientific explanation you've offered.
(eta)
However, I read "What is love?" as asking what love is in an objective sense
Of course you did. And that's why you're not even wrong.
I was responding to a couple of direct attacks on my writing (which no one here had read) by Rossweise and Doc Tor. I wanted to show that I can write believable Christian characters.
I didn't attack your writing. I attacked your reductionist approach to finding out about Christians and what they believed, and that it would fail you when it came to writing believable Christian characters.
I was responding to a couple of direct attacks on my writing (which no one here had read) by Rossweise and Doc Tor. I wanted to show that I can write believable Christian characters.
I didn't attack your writing. I attacked your reductionist approach to finding out about Christians and what they believed, and that it would fail you when it came to writing believable Christian characters.
I haven't been proved wrong yet.
I don't agree. My research here has proved very useful. I have concluded that my viewpoint character is not in his heart a Christian but is only engaging in church activities for cultural reasons and out of habit. That was a very useful discovery and it fits in perfectly with what will eventually happen to him.
And I wasn't attacking your writing. As I said (in the Styx, for which I apologize; that was the wrong place for this), << I was responding to your own description, posted earlier, of the protagonist and of why you were here. No one wants you to get your Christian characters wrong, but no one wants to be used, either. >>
Colin, you were annoyed with what you perceived as attacks on your writing before you posted your writing, and now you've posted it, and people are giving critique (not nasty at all, either, even though in hell) you are getting defensive and insisting your writing is fine.
With regard to your comment in Styx - 'I am coming to the point where I think I shall write as I see fit and if some Christians don't like it, sobeit' - surely your purpose is not to please Christians but to write believable characters, so that you create a good work that you are pleased with. Personally, I am not bothered in the slightest if you write a story that shows Christians in a reductionist way. Lots of people love creative writing and often write unrealistic, stereotyped characters. Not just with Christianity, but all sorts of groups people might belong to - gender, race, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, political affiliation, social class, etc.
If you were a really influential writer, and your character became a prototype by which people understood Christianity (like Mark Haddon with Asperger Syndrome), that could be a bit bothersome. Very unlikely though, since many Christian characters have already been written by authors before you. If it happened though, it wouldn't be the end of the world - your work would be criticised and spark debate, and then someone would come along and write something less reductionist.
So you are quite free to write characters however you like, and I don't think people here are terribly bothered by the idea that it might be reductionist or bad writing. That's more a problem for you than for us, I think. If you are passionate about writing, you will improve over time, I imagine, but this is your personal quest. It feels a bit arrogant and presumptuous that you are assuming we should be rushing to assist you, to ensure we as Christians are accurately represented in your personal creative writing project!
I've also concluded that those who dislike the idea of a non-Christian coming here to find out and ask questions will never approve of what they have done with the information gained.
Sorry, but that dog just won’t hunt. I don’t think anyone has objected to “the idea of a non-Christian coming here to find out and ask questions.” What many have objected to is the way that you have gone about it.
The irony is, if I wanted to mock Christians and Christianity I could do so without bothering to ask Christians anything.
No, the irony is that while you say you are here to ask questions and learn from Christians so as to make your characters more believable, you have shown little interest in actually listening to the people you claim you want to learn from, unless your specific question is being answered on your terms.
That’s why many have been trying to tell you that they feel like they’re being used by you rather than being engaged with by you.
Besides, if you are going to invent a fictitious real ale, 'Cropwell's Peculier' is unconvincing as a name.
The only reason Theakston's Old Peculier - and there's an 'e' not an 'a' in it if I remember rightly - is so named is because it was brewed in Masham in Yorkshire which was designated a 'Peculier' for arcane legal or administrative reasons.
'Peculier' is not a generic name for a traditional ale.
If you can't research your beer names properly then I don't rate your chances very highly of representing either Christian characters or ceremonies / beliefs very accurately either.
BTW, Colin, there something I wanted to clarify from our discussion on Styx. This isn't a Hell rant or anything, but just posting here because such discussion was stopped in the Styx as inappropriate there.
When I suggested you might want a Colin-Smith-shaped community, I didn't mean you wanted a community where everyone was like you. I meant a community where everyone did what you wanted, answered all your questions in the way you want, understood you, liked your writing, conformed to your etiquette ideals, had the rules and ideals you wanted them to have. That is, metaphorically speaking, to all come together to form a perfect Colin Smith shape for you to fit neatly and happily into. Because that is what all your posts seem to suggest. You are not happy with the ship because it doesn't meet your expectations and ideals. Which is fine. It's not going to be everyone's cup of tea, and even those who stick around and appreciate it are probably not going to like every aspect of it.
Something has just occurred to me. Not very Hell-like, but since you find community difficult, you may find it easier to get into the mindset of someone with faith by reading their books, where they explore their faith and their doubts honestly and at length. Autobiographies, memoirs, even novels. I bet if you started a thread in Heaven asking for recommendations for books that people here find give a real, convincing depiction of the inner thought process of someone with faith, you'd get a good reading list. I can think of several books right off the bat, and I would also be interested to hear people's recommendations.
Oh, okay. I was also thinking Marilynne Robinson's novel Gilead is a wonderfully detailed and nuanced look into the mind and experience and struggles of someone with faith. Ah well, maybe I'll start the thread in Heaven myself sometime, for my own benefit, as I love specific book recommendations.
That's a matter of opinion. Madame and I both read what you posted (yes, every last word) and we'd both advise you to secure another source of income.
Bear in mind it was an unedited first draft and very over-written. I do have evidence that my writing is okay. Some of the evidence came in the form of payment.
Besides, if you are going to invent a fictitious real ale, 'Cropwell's Peculier' is unconvincing as a name.
The only reason Theakston's Old Peculier - and there's an 'e' not an 'a' in it if I remember rightly - is so named is because it was brewed in Masham in Yorkshire which was designated a 'Peculier' for arcane legal or administrative reasons.
'Peculier' is not a generic name for a traditional ale.
If you can't research your beer names properly then I don't rate your chances very highly of representing either Christian characters or ceremonies / beliefs very accurately either.
The overall tone of the work is farce. It's not meant to be realistic. That said, I like to take reality and bend it out of shape rather than wholly invent, hence my interest in Christian faith. It's also not a depiction of our world but an alternative world with different rules: for example, the horse is the character's soul, albeit he doesn't yet know it.
I suggested the works of various Christians, especially converts, for an insight into belief as it develops. This was not what was wanted.
Thank you for your suggestion. The viewpoint character has been brought up within the church so the view of converts doesn't really apply. He is also, as I have realised through discussion here, a habitual Christian rather than someone with a deep faith.
Colin, you were annoyed with what you perceived as attacks on your writing before you posted your writing, and now you've posted it, and people are giving critique (not nasty at all, either, even though in hell) you are getting defensive and insisting your writing is fine.
With regard to your comment in Styx - 'I am coming to the point where I think I shall write as I see fit and if some Christians don't like it, sobeit' - surely your purpose is not to please Christians but to write believable characters, so that you create a good work that you are pleased with. Personally, I am not bothered in the slightest if you write a story that shows Christians in a reductionist way. Lots of people love creative writing and often write unrealistic, stereotyped characters. Not just with Christianity, but all sorts of groups people might belong to - gender, race, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, political affiliation, social class, etc.
If you were a really influential writer, and your character became a prototype by which people understood Christianity (like Mark Haddon with Asperger Syndrome), that could be a bit bothersome. Very unlikely though, since many Christian characters have already been written by authors before you. If it happened though, it wouldn't be the end of the world - your work would be criticised and spark debate, and then someone would come along and write something less reductionist.
So you are quite free to write characters however you like, and I don't think people here are terribly bothered by the idea that it might be reductionist or bad writing. That's more a problem for you than for us, I think. If you are passionate about writing, you will improve over time, I imagine, but this is your personal quest. It feels a bit arrogant and presumptuous that you are assuming we should be rushing to assist you, to ensure we as Christians are accurately represented in your personal creative writing project!
Agreed. I have come to the same conclusion. Though I quibble about your comment "If you are passionate about writing, you will improve over time, I imagine" as I am 58 and have been writing for some time and have been paid for it. As I said above, the extract was a first draft and in need of heavy editing. It was also posted for amusement rather than critiquing.
I suggested the works of various Christians, especially converts, for an insight into belief as it develops. This was not what was wanted.
Thank you for your suggestion. The viewpoint character has been brought up within the church so the view of converts doesn't really apply. He is also, as I have realised through discussion here, a habitual Christian rather than someone with a deep faith.
I would suggest that habitual Christians in the UK today are a myth propagated by others. There are so many other things people could do on Sundays with no censure whatsoever that there is no reason to go to church at all. In rural communities it's a real effort to attend church as there are so few services in any one church, and the services tend to be at varying times from Sunday to Sunday to accommodate all the other churches in the joint benefice. Those who do come are choosing to come. Had you bothered to check the Avebury church website you'd have realised this - two services a month at different times here
Colin, you were annoyed with what you perceived as attacks on your writing before you posted your writing, and now you've posted it, and people are giving critique (not nasty at all, either, even though in hell) you are getting defensive and insisting your writing is fine.
With regard to your comment in Styx - 'I am coming to the point where I think I shall write as I see fit and if some Christians don't like it, sobeit' - surely your purpose is not to please Christians but to write believable characters, so that you create a good work that you are pleased with. Personally, I am not bothered in the slightest if you write a story that shows Christians in a reductionist way. Lots of people love creative writing and often write unrealistic, stereotyped characters. Not just with Christianity, but all sorts of groups people might belong to - gender, race, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, political affiliation, social class, etc.
If you were a really influential writer, and your character became a prototype by which people understood Christianity (like Mark Haddon with Asperger Syndrome), that could be a bit bothersome. Very unlikely though, since many Christian characters have already been written by authors before you. If it happened though, it wouldn't be the end of the world - your work would be criticised and spark debate, and then someone would come along and write something less reductionist.
So you are quite free to write characters however you like, and I don't think people here are terribly bothered by the idea that it might be reductionist or bad writing. That's more a problem for you than for us, I think. If you are passionate about writing, you will improve over time, I imagine, but this is your personal quest. It feels a bit arrogant and presumptuous that you are assuming we should be rushing to assist you, to ensure we as Christians are accurately represented in your personal creative writing project!
Agreed. I have come to the same conclusion. Though I quibble about your comment "If you are passionate about writing, you will improve over time, I imagine" as I am 58 and have been writing for some time and have been paid for it. As I said above, the extract was a first draft and in need of heavy editing. It was also posted for amusement rather than critiquing.
Oh okay. I am quite surprised at your age. I thought you were much younger.
However, I made my comment about you improving over time not to suggest your writing was currently crap (though it's not my cup of tea - but that's neither here nor there) but because I interpreted your posts as you being a very young man starting out on a writing career and wanting us to help you by giving feedback. I was suggesting that even though this isn't really a forum for that to happen, you will improve naturally anyway as you continue to write, if you are passionate about it. And surely that still applies at 58 - you're never too old to improve. Unless you think you've done all the improving you need to do and have reached a pinnacle of perfection - then you're likely to stagnate.
Yes, it may well be farce but you are using real places such as Avebury, which rather suggests that accuracy might be important if you are going to cite actual locations.
So, you've been paid for some of your writing. So have I. So have other Shipmates here. That doesn't make any of us Tolstoy.
Don't give up the day job.
I wouldn't part with any of my cash to read your drivel.
I would suggest that habitual Christians in the UK today are a myth propagated by others. There are so many other things people could do on Sundays with no censure whatsoever that there is no reason to go to church at all. In rural communities it's a real effort to attend church as there are so few services in any one church, and the services tend to be at varying times from Sunday to Sunday to accommodate all the other churches in the joint benefice. Those who do come are choosing to come. Had you bothered to check the Avebury church website you'd have realised this - two services a month at different times here
Perhaps so. But a useful myth. I may find myself watching box-sets of The Vicar of Dibley. No idea how realistic a portrayal of rural church life it is, but it seems to be what the audience wanted.
Yes. I have been to Avebury many times and to the church and have downloaded every edition of the parish newsletter since January 2016 from the url you gave. I am cheating considerably as in reality the incumbent at Avebury covers several other churches in the area so services at St James's are much less frequent than I portray. That said, most of the details of the vigil, procession, and dawn service came from the parish newsletter, albeit reworked to avoid plagiarism charges.
I think you might be surprised just how much research I have done.,
Oh, okay. I was also thinking Marilynne Robinson's novel Gilead is a wonderfully detailed and nuanced look into the mind and experience and struggles of someone with faith. Ah well, maybe I'll start the thread in Heaven myself sometime, for my own benefit, as I love specific book recommendations.
It's a very good novel indeed, well worth reading several times just for the joy of reading something as well written as it is.
And Colin Smith - I'd still suggest that you look for another source of income.
I'm on my way back from a genre con, having spent four days in community with other writers (at all stages of their careers), publishers, agents, artists and fans.
I benefited enormously from it (and I am far from a people-person) and hopefully I paid some of that forward too. The conversations I have (and have had) there are a vital part of my formation as a writer.
But sure, reject community, advice, relationships, accountability. You'll be fine.
Oh, okay. I was also thinking Marilynne Robinson's novel Gilead is a wonderfully detailed and nuanced look into the mind and experience and struggles of someone with faith. Ah well, maybe I'll start the thread in Heaven myself sometime, for my own benefit, as I love specific book recommendations.
It's a very good novel indeed, well worth reading several times just for the joy of reading something as well written as it is.
And Colin Smith - I'd still suggest that you look for another source of income.
Anyone hoping to make a living out of writing is being optimistic. My income is Universal Credit and I'm very happy with it.
You do realise that there are several writers on the Ship who do make a living out of it? Not necessarily novel writing, but I am sure there's at least one. Others earn their crust from technical writing, journalism and other writing type activities.
The biological basis of love is *a* question, not *the* question about it. The felt experience, its psychological, social, intimate function - they are all other questions, more interesting questions, to which I would need some convincing that biology has much to say.
I would need some convincing that anything other than biology and what emerges from it has much to say.
Oh, okay. I was also thinking Marilynne Robinson's novel Gilead is a wonderfully detailed and nuanced look into the mind and experience and struggles of someone with faith. Ah well, maybe I'll start the thread in Heaven myself sometime, for my own benefit, as I love specific book recommendations.
It's a very good novel indeed, well worth reading several times just for the joy of reading something as well written as it is.
And Colin Smith - I'd still suggest that you look for another source of income.
As someone who couldn't write even the shortest of short stories, I hesitate to comment, but one thing I know for sure having listened to one and a half posts of the story is that it will not work as an audio book, especially for someone without access to print. I have a reader who has been coming to me for nearly elevn years and we knowalmost within a page of starting a book whether it wil work being read aloud. It has to flow.
FWIW, your opinions as a listener are surely as valid as those of readers, or other authors.
/slight but related tangent alert/
Many years ago, I used (at her request) to read to Mrs BF whilst she was doing the Ironing (I hasten to add that she did the difficult items, I did the easy i.e. square items). This is, I'm sure, a rather Victorian thing (think 'Papa reading Improving Literature to the Family'), and some authors are better read out aloud than others!
As I am of a rather conservative mind regarding literature, Mrs BF was treated to readings of Anthony Trollope, Wilkie Collins, Thomas Hardy, and our local lad, Charles Dickens. Whether her mind was Improved thereby, I hesitate to say......but I venture to assert that my choice was Good.
The biological basis of love is *a* question, not *the* question about it. The felt experience, its psychological, social, intimate function - they are all other questions, more interesting questions, to which I would need some convincing that biology has much to say.
I would need some convincing that anything other than biology and what emerges from it has much to say.
Biofundamentalism is spreading rapidly. It is a ridiculously mechanistic way of looking at the world, and we have not hitherto been machines. That would be their ultimate triumph, for us to make ourselves willing vassals.
You do realise that there are several writers on the Ship who do make a living out of it? Not necessarily novel writing, but I am sure there's at least one. Others earn their crust from technical writing, journalism and other writing type activities.
I do, But there are many writers, some who are well-known who only make a partial living from writing. I tend to focus on fiction writers as that's what I do.
As someone who couldn't write even the shortest of short stories, I hesitate to comment, but one thing I know for sure having listened to one and a half posts of the story is that it will not work as an audio book, especially for someone without access to print. I have a reader who has been coming to me for nearly elevn years and we knowalmost within a page of starting a book whether it wil work being read aloud. It has to flow.
That is a good point. Because it's written in a journal style it is very choppy. I have no experience with audio books at all.
The biological basis of love is *a* question, not *the* question about it. The felt experience, its psychological, social, intimate function - they are all other questions, more interesting questions, to which I would need some convincing that biology has much to say.
I would need some convincing that anything other than biology and what emerges from it has much to say.
Biofundamentalism is spreading rapidly. It is a ridiculously mechanistic way of looking at the world, and we have not hitherto been machines. That would be their ultimate triumph, for us to make ourselves willing vassals.
You know I like the cut of your jib. We're innocent vassal vessels. Often willing. But more often helpless.
Universal Credit is the state benefit for people of working age, or it will be. It's the universal benefit that tries to roll up all the confusing UK benefits system into one single benefit, replacing Income Support, Job Seekers' Allowance and a whole lot more. The one that is hitting the news with the problems in implementation.
Colin try reading Adrian Plass if you want humour and understanding of Christians. One of the problems is there are so many Christian characters who have a crisis of faith or come to see themselves as not really deep Christians that it has become somewhat of a cliche as if I am honest is getting a bit boring. I am not saying you are not a good writer, just that your idea maybe a little over done.
Universal Credit is the state benefit for people of working age, or it will be. It's the universal benefit that tries to roll up all the confusing UK benefits system into one single benefit, replacing Income Support, Job Seekers' Allowance and a whole lot more. The one that is hitting the news with the problems in implementation.
Good recommendation, Hugal. Plass nails it when it comes to humorous writing about contemporary Christianity in a way that is genuinely amusing, insightful and respectful all at the same time.
@Colin Smith, I can't speak for anyone else but I'm not at all surprised at the amount of research you've done. The issue isn't the quantity of research but what you do with it and the quality of the writing.
From the examples I've seen you've not applied your research very well. As for your writing, it's truly dreadful.
Oh, FFS. Colin Smith enjoys his hobby. So long as he isn't posting it here on the ship, he is free to enjoy it and have fun with it, regardless of how in depth his research is.
GG, this isn't goodreads, and I've had enough 1* reviews there to now wear them as a badge of honour.
Hobby writing is fine, as fineline says. That's not what we're objecting to. It's the lack of emotional intelligence, social graces, and willingness to compromise that are the chief complaints.
Colin is, of course, perfectly entitled to enjoy his writing hobby and even to inflict in on other people, provided it's done behind closed doors and with their consent.
The issue, as has been said, isn't the quality or content of his screeds but the dearth of any sign of emotional intelligence, empathy or any acceptance whatsoever that what he's doing is likely to irritate people.
He's not the first poster to display such characteristics, nor will he be the last.
I wish him well with his writing, though. It keeps him off the streets.
Comments
I didn't ask it! Someone wanted me to answer it!
(I don't often shout, but my Pay Shence is running out.....)
The question "what is love?" was posed in response to my statement (I paraphrase as it's lost in the thread) that science can (as in, has the potential to) answer everything worth knowing. I offered an explanation of love from a scientific context. That answer was not accepted. No other answer to "what is love?" has been offered by anyone on the thread.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_basis_of_love
But the felt/psychological experience is entirely down to chemicals in the brain and biology/science has quite a lot to say about them.
However, I read "What is love?" as asking what love is in an objective sense: as in what role does it serve for our species, rather than what does it feel like for individual members of our species to be in love.
You didn't accept "Baby don't hurt me" as an answer (when clearly it is, as the Prophet Haddaway spaketh). There is more day-to-day truth in a 3 minute pop song - pretty much any 3 minute pop song - than the scientific explanation you've offered.
(eta)
Of course you did. And that's why you're not even wrong.
I didn't attack your writing. I attacked your reductionist approach to finding out about Christians and what they believed, and that it would fail you when it came to writing believable Christian characters.
I haven't been proved wrong yet.
I don't agree. My research here has proved very useful. I have concluded that my viewpoint character is not in his heart a Christian but is only engaging in church activities for cultural reasons and out of habit. That was a very useful discovery and it fits in perfectly with what will eventually happen to him.
My writing is fine.
Every two-bit wannabe author thinks as much. The vast majority of them are dead wrong.
Whatever.
Exactly.
One editorial suggestion: Don't write "it's" when what you mean is "its."
With regard to your comment in Styx - 'I am coming to the point where I think I shall write as I see fit and if some Christians don't like it, sobeit' - surely your purpose is not to please Christians but to write believable characters, so that you create a good work that you are pleased with. Personally, I am not bothered in the slightest if you write a story that shows Christians in a reductionist way. Lots of people love creative writing and often write unrealistic, stereotyped characters. Not just with Christianity, but all sorts of groups people might belong to - gender, race, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, political affiliation, social class, etc.
If you were a really influential writer, and your character became a prototype by which people understood Christianity (like Mark Haddon with Asperger Syndrome), that could be a bit bothersome. Very unlikely though, since many Christian characters have already been written by authors before you. If it happened though, it wouldn't be the end of the world - your work would be criticised and spark debate, and then someone would come along and write something less reductionist.
So you are quite free to write characters however you like, and I don't think people here are terribly bothered by the idea that it might be reductionist or bad writing. That's more a problem for you than for us, I think. If you are passionate about writing, you will improve over time, I imagine, but this is your personal quest. It feels a bit arrogant and presumptuous that you are assuming we should be rushing to assist you, to ensure we as Christians are accurately represented in your personal creative writing project!
No, the irony is that while you say you are here to ask questions and learn from Christians so as to make your characters more believable, you have shown little interest in actually listening to the people you claim you want to learn from, unless your specific question is being answered on your terms.
That’s why many have been trying to tell you that they feel like they’re being used by you rather than being engaged with by you.
The only reason Theakston's Old Peculier - and there's an 'e' not an 'a' in it if I remember rightly - is so named is because it was brewed in Masham in Yorkshire which was designated a 'Peculier' for arcane legal or administrative reasons.
'Peculier' is not a generic name for a traditional ale.
If you can't research your beer names properly then I don't rate your chances very highly of representing either Christian characters or ceremonies / beliefs very accurately either.
That's a matter of opinion. Madame and I both read what you posted (yes, every last word) and we'd both advise you to secure another source of income.
When I suggested you might want a Colin-Smith-shaped community, I didn't mean you wanted a community where everyone was like you. I meant a community where everyone did what you wanted, answered all your questions in the way you want, understood you, liked your writing, conformed to your etiquette ideals, had the rules and ideals you wanted them to have. That is, metaphorically speaking, to all come together to form a perfect Colin Smith shape for you to fit neatly and happily into. Because that is what all your posts seem to suggest. You are not happy with the ship because it doesn't meet your expectations and ideals. Which is fine. It's not going to be everyone's cup of tea, and even those who stick around and appreciate it are probably not going to like every aspect of it.
Something has just occurred to me. Not very Hell-like, but since you find community difficult, you may find it easier to get into the mindset of someone with faith by reading their books, where they explore their faith and their doubts honestly and at length. Autobiographies, memoirs, even novels. I bet if you started a thread in Heaven asking for recommendations for books that people here find give a real, convincing depiction of the inner thought process of someone with faith, you'd get a good reading list. I can think of several books right off the bat, and I would also be interested to hear people's recommendations.
Bear in mind it was an unedited first draft and very over-written. I do have evidence that my writing is okay. Some of the evidence came in the form of payment.
The overall tone of the work is farce. It's not meant to be realistic. That said, I like to take reality and bend it out of shape rather than wholly invent, hence my interest in Christian faith. It's also not a depiction of our world but an alternative world with different rules: for example, the horse is the character's soul, albeit he doesn't yet know it.
Thank you for your suggestion. The viewpoint character has been brought up within the church so the view of converts doesn't really apply. He is also, as I have realised through discussion here, a habitual Christian rather than someone with a deep faith.
Agreed. I have come to the same conclusion. Though I quibble about your comment "If you are passionate about writing, you will improve over time, I imagine" as I am 58 and have been writing for some time and have been paid for it. As I said above, the extract was a first draft and in need of heavy editing. It was also posted for amusement rather than critiquing.
I would suggest that habitual Christians in the UK today are a myth propagated by others. There are so many other things people could do on Sundays with no censure whatsoever that there is no reason to go to church at all. In rural communities it's a real effort to attend church as there are so few services in any one church, and the services tend to be at varying times from Sunday to Sunday to accommodate all the other churches in the joint benefice. Those who do come are choosing to come. Had you bothered to check the Avebury church website you'd have realised this - two services a month at different times here
Oh okay. I am quite surprised at your age. I thought you were much younger.
However, I made my comment about you improving over time not to suggest your writing was currently crap (though it's not my cup of tea - but that's neither here nor there) but because I interpreted your posts as you being a very young man starting out on a writing career and wanting us to help you by giving feedback. I was suggesting that even though this isn't really a forum for that to happen, you will improve naturally anyway as you continue to write, if you are passionate about it. And surely that still applies at 58 - you're never too old to improve. Unless you think you've done all the improving you need to do and have reached a pinnacle of perfection - then you're likely to stagnate.
So, you've been paid for some of your writing. So have I. So have other Shipmates here. That doesn't make any of us Tolstoy.
Don't give up the day job.
I wouldn't part with any of my cash to read your drivel.
Perhaps so. But a useful myth. I may find myself watching box-sets of The Vicar of Dibley. No idea how realistic a portrayal of rural church life it is, but it seems to be what the audience wanted.
Yes. I have been to Avebury many times and to the church and have downloaded every edition of the parish newsletter since January 2016 from the url you gave. I am cheating considerably as in reality the incumbent at Avebury covers several other churches in the area so services at St James's are much less frequent than I portray. That said, most of the details of the vigil, procession, and dawn service came from the parish newsletter, albeit reworked to avoid plagiarism charges.
I think you might be surprised just how much research I have done.,
It's a very good novel indeed, well worth reading several times just for the joy of reading something as well written as it is.
And Colin Smith - I'd still suggest that you look for another source of income.
I benefited enormously from it (and I am far from a people-person) and hopefully I paid some of that forward too. The conversations I have (and have had) there are a vital part of my formation as a writer.
But sure, reject community, advice, relationships, accountability. You'll be fine.
Anyone hoping to make a living out of writing is being optimistic. My income is Universal Credit and I'm very happy with it.
I would need some convincing that anything other than biology and what emerges from it has much to say.
/slight but related tangent alert/
Many years ago, I used (at her request) to read to Mrs BF whilst she was doing the Ironing (I hasten to add that she did the difficult items, I did the easy i.e. square items). This is, I'm sure, a rather Victorian thing (think 'Papa reading Improving Literature to the Family'), and some authors are better read out aloud than others!
As I am of a rather conservative mind regarding literature, Mrs BF was treated to readings of Anthony Trollope, Wilkie Collins, Thomas Hardy, and our local lad, Charles Dickens. Whether her mind was Improved thereby, I hesitate to say......but I venture to assert that my choice was Good.
Biofundamentalism is spreading rapidly. It is a ridiculously mechanistic way of looking at the world, and we have not hitherto been machines. That would be their ultimate triumph, for us to make ourselves willing vassals.
I do, But there are many writers, some who are well-known who only make a partial living from writing. I tend to focus on fiction writers as that's what I do.
That is a good point. Because it's written in a journal style it is very choppy. I have no experience with audio books at all.
You know I like the cut of your jib. We're innocent vassal vessels. Often willing. But more often helpless.
Universal Credit?
Thank you - not a term I knew.
@Colin Smith, I can't speak for anyone else but I'm not at all surprised at the amount of research you've done. The issue isn't the quantity of research but what you do with it and the quality of the writing.
From the examples I've seen you've not applied your research very well. As for your writing, it's truly dreadful.
Find another hobby. Try trainspotting.
Hobby writing is fine, as fineline says. That's not what we're objecting to. It's the lack of emotional intelligence, social graces, and willingness to compromise that are the chief complaints.
The issue, as has been said, isn't the quality or content of his screeds but the dearth of any sign of emotional intelligence, empathy or any acceptance whatsoever that what he's doing is likely to irritate people.
He's not the first poster to display such characteristics, nor will he be the last.
I wish him well with his writing, though. It keeps him off the streets.