Here's a short story I wrote a few days ago to kick things off. I'm curious to see whether the themes come through.

I love reading but hate writing. I was never interested in writing, but multiple events in my life have made that lack of interest turn into something even more negative.
>>2
Please don't put tab characters in like that again, indenting every single line. It makes reading it much, much harder. Why did you do it? Why is there also a space character at the end of every line?
This story, probably because I've read stuff by him recently, much of the story makes me think it could've been a prelude to an Edogawa Ranpo story. The end was a mild surprise. Anticlimactic: in the end, nothing happened. A story of a two people having a morning.

>>3
>multiple events in my life have made that lack of interest turn into something even more negative
Care to elaborate?
>Why did you do it?
That's pretty standard formatting for fiction, no? I indent when a different person begins speaking, or when the focus of the writing changes.
>Why is there also a space character at the end of every line?
To preserve formatting in case the tab characters were not recognized after I had copied it elsewhere. I guess that's not an issue.
>spoiler
Well, fair enough. I meant for the "meat" of the story to be the symbolic stuff; the interactions/drama between the characters was just meant as a device to hold the reader's attention. But I guess I may have not made it clear enough. Thanks for the input, and for editing the text file.

>>1
I'd like to write, and I spend a lot of time coming up with stories in my head, but I just haven't gotten around to actually writing much, yet. Maybe someday.

>>4
>Care to elaborate?
When I was in elementary school, my parents forced me to write many essays and short stories, with conditions like "you aren't allowed to eat or drink until you finish"
They did the same for math problems, etc.
In high school, assignments also had incredibly long and unrealistic minimum word counts, and I could never meet them. I find it difficult to write meaningless sentences. So I often got beaten for not getting good grades or submitting homework in time. I even had the police called on me once. My father lied to the police after getting angry with me about an essay.
>That's pretty standard formatting for fiction, no? I indent when a different person begins speaking, or when the focus of the writing changes.
Well, in this story, every line except for the first was indented. So it just meant every line was indented the same, making the indentation somewhat meaningless and in my case, when reading on my screen, harmful: it made the word wrap very distracting.
It was a nice story to read though: comfortable. I saw no symbolism at all in this story, though. I read it as a story about people.

Here's a poem I wrote a few weeks ago.

>>5
Do you have the free time for it? If you write even 500 words per day, you can finish the first draft of a short story in anywhere from a few days to a week.
>>6
>parents
I'm very sorry to hear all that. That's terrible.
>every line except for the first was indented
To be fair, I originally wrote it in an .rtf file. Laid out on a standard book-like page, the indents are much more functional. But I see what you mean, reading in a browser.
I'm glad you enjoyed the it, either way. Don't get me wrong, the interactions between the people are significant too. Probably I just need to drop more hints about the nature of the story. Then again, the issues it confronts would probably only interest a narrow subset of people, so maybe I'll just leave it as is.

>>8
I think I understood this poem, if you indeed intended for an inner meaning to exist in it. Losing aim, being aimlessness, being lost from not paying attention.
However, as for it being a poem, I don't understand why you made the line breaks occur where they did. If one assumed the end of a line had a pause slightly smaller than the pause between sentences, it would be hard to read aloud. Poems are an oral rather than written art.
Still interesting!
>.rtf file
Ahh, I see. In wordpad it probably looked quite different compared to in vi. Now I understand!
>Probably I just need to drop more hints about the nature of the story.
I'd be very happy to read such a version with more clear symbolism.
>Then again, the issues it confronts would probably only interest a narrow subset of people, so maybe I'll just leave it as is.
One of the purposes of writing is to communicate: to communicate clearly could benefit people inside and outside of that subset.

Interestingly enough, last summer I did come up with an idea that I'd actually want to write, so maybe I will enjoy writing sometime.

>>9
>spoiler
That's a part of what I was going for, definitely. But I did mean for it to be a bit more specific, particularly with regard to the things that might cause that loss of attention. The easy and immediate gratification is an important element.
>line breaks
For the most part it is regular iambic pentameter, which is split up into five "iambs" (duh-DUM) per line. Most poetry (that I've read, anyway—this includes Shakespeare, Tennyson, Yeats, blah blah) is read across the lines as normal sentences. The lines are just there to serve as "units" of stresses, as well as for some organizational/formal inventiveness that I have not yet tackled in my own work. But I'm glad you liked it, anyway!
>I'd be very happy to read such a version with more clear symbolism
>to communicate clearly could benefit people inside and outside of that subset
Yeah, you're right. When I end up changing it I will post it here! I'm currently in the middle of another piece, though, so I'll save that for when/if I'm really stuck on this current work. Thanks for the encouragement and criticism.

Please do try to write your idea! I'll be here for feedback if you want it. Maybe some other tabafriends will chime in, too.

>>10
>spoiler
Ah, that, I noticed too.
>iambic pentameter
Iambic pentameter almost always sounds incredibly artificial and broken unless a lot of rhyme is added to it. Trying to adapt rhythmic patterns from Greek, Latin, Italian, etc was a mistake.
That's just how I feel. I've been interested in linguistics for years, so it becomes easy to spot when something is artificial or evolved naturally. Not that an appeal to nature is right, though! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
>Yeah, you're right. When I end up changing it I will post it here!
Thank you so much!
>Please do try to write your idea! I'll be here for feedback if you want it. Maybe some other tabafriends will chime in, too.
I guess I better start writing: the ideas are there, and I think I have an OK plan for chapter one.
Get hyped for a science fiction action and mech novel with mild but definitely existent themes.

>>11
>Iambic pentameter almost always sounds incredibly artificial and broken unless a lot of rhyme is added to it
Do you dislike Shakespeare? I've never heard someone say that his verse sounded artificial or broken.
>Trying to adapt rhythmic patterns from Greek, Latin, Italian, etc was a mistake
Iambs occur very naturally in the English language. Consider this excerpt of my previous post:
>Most poetry (that I've read, anyway [...]) is read across the lines as normal sentences.
Granted, I don't know much about the history of the form, but even if its origin was in another language, it wouldn't be unreasonable to suspect that English would have developed it independently.

I'm looking forward to see what you post here! Sounds like a fun story.

>>12
I don't dislike Shakespeare, but he is overrated. He's just okay. And I will say his iambic pentameter was often, but not always, less broken, because he used rhyme more often. I prefer Chaucer. Chaucer, despite being older, has English that is so much more clear and understandable. Shakespeare intentionally tries to be obtuse, like a drunk guy trying to use as many fancy words as he can think of.
>Iambs occur very naturally in the English language.
Then why is it that iambic pentameter is so difficult to read? Why does it not flow from the mouth?
\_(ツ)_/
>I'm looking forward to see what you post here! Sounds like a fun story.
I'm excited to begin it. I planned to last night but became busy.

>>13
>because he used rhyme more often
Huh? Outside of his sonnets, Shakespeare only used rhyme very sparingly, and most often just for ending a scene.
>I prefer Chaucer. Chaucer, despite being older, has English that is so much more clear and understandable
Interesting that you mention Chaucer—his meter relies on some archaic pronunciations, meaning that it should sound much more "broken" to a modern reader.
>Shakespeare intentionally tries to be obtuse
We'll agree to disagree, I guess.
>Then why is it that iambic pentameter is so difficult to read
I can't imagine why it would seem that way. I've always found iambic meter to be one of the most natural rhythms in speech, along with dactylic. Eh, to each their own.

>>14
You shouldn't sage useful posts! I missed the thread because of that, since I only check the first page of /all/ often.
>Interesting that you mention Chaucer—his meter relies on some archaic pronunciations, meaning that it should sound much more "broken" to a modern reader.
I like his prose. His work about the astrolabe is very readable.
>I've always found iambic meter to be one of the most natural rhythms in speech
All meters are inherently less natural than prose. But yeah.

I'm thinking of writing some essays to practice my Japanese and then later on my Chinese.

>>15
Sorry! I try to be careful not to bother people with off-topic bumps. Perhaps I should set my filter a little lower.
>Chaucer
Fair enough. I've never read his prose.
>All meters are inherently less natural than prose
By this do you mean metric poetry doesn't "flow" as well for you as a reader? Of course, meter is not as "natural" as unrestricted language, but is that a negative thing? I'm curious to know where you're coming from with this—art overall is also less "natural," and harder to consume, than undoctored reality.
(It's my first day on new meds. Sorry if I'm not making sense, I can't really tell.)
>>16
Do it! I'm not sure how many people here would be able to read them (if you even plan on posting them here), but it'll be good for practice either way.

>>17
>By this do you mean metric poetry doesn't "flow" as well for you as a reader?
Well, poetry is usually determined as something meant to be read out loud. Some meters make reading out loud somewhat difficult though. Some meters are better. And some poems without a meter do very, very well at sounding good when spoken.
Reality is an interesting thing. Reminds me, I should take more photographs, both those that do and don't represent reality.
>meds
What are you taking, and why?
As for saging, I only sage if 100% of my post is off-topic or mediocre. If even a little bit is good, I don't sage.

>>18
>some poems without a meter do very, very well at sounding good when spoken
Agreed. While most of my favourite poetry is written in blank verse, it's hard to deny that (good) free verse is unmatched for its musical flow. Free verse also has the potential to be a whole lot worse, though, and I feel it's become a bit of a "dirty word" in poet's circles. Everyone thinks they can write free verse, after all.
>meds
Dexedrine XR (d-amphetamine, if you don't call it by that name). I have pretty horrible ADHD, as well as anxiety and dysthymia, and it helps with all three. I was on it for a long time but my coverage ran out about a year ago, and I just got it back. So unfortunately I'll be feeling high every day until my body adapts. Makes me nervous to work on my writing projects for fear of turning them into a bunch of gibberish.
>sage
Yeah, that seems reasonable. I'll adopt that strategy.

Also, the thing I'm writing right now is coming along quite well. It's got sort of a fantasy element to it (castles, kings, etc.) which is funny because I have never enjoyed fantasy. It's all quite allegorical and might end up being hamfisted, but that's okay seeing as it's mostly for practice anyway. Finished the first draft as of a few days ago, and now I'm just editing/revising.
How are everyone's projects going?

>>19
>musical flow
Yes, this!
>Everyone thinks they can write free verse, after all.
Everyone can. After abstract art came into being, hasn't art become subjective?
>taking psychoactive drugs
Bad life choice, really. Instead of adapting to drugs, adapt yourself to a life without drugs: cold turkey.

>never enjoyed fantasy
Interesting, why not? And it's cool you believe it's going well!
>It's all quite allegorical and might end up being hamfisted
Better to get your point across too much rather than not at all. Though I certainly prefer art for art's sake rather than art as simply a tool for delivering meaning. But both can be fine if done well.
>How are everyone's projects going?
Mine's not going at all. I just need to /quit IRC and vidya and start typing my ideas up!

>>20
>Everyone can. After abstract art came into being, hasn't art become subjective?
Of course, anyone can make art, and I believe anyone can benefit from it too. However, this loosening of the formerly rigid standards/conventions for art (meter for poetry, representation for visual arts, etc.) carries some unpleasant consequences.
Consider this: The average consumer of art is not familiar with the theory behind the craft. As such, his view of quality is likely to be informed by what he can see on the surface. In the case of contemporary poetry, these traits include line breaks (often in jarring positions), imagery, sentence fragments, and a lack of clear "message." These techniques can be very easily emulated, leading prospective poets to believe that, since they "already know how to write poetry" and there are "no rules," they can go ahead and begin publishing their work—there is no rigorous standard (at least, on the surface) against which they might be judged. Granted, there has always been bad poetry. However, because free verse has been popularized, and the public believes that there are "no rules" in art, this imitation circulates without issue or complaint, thus perpetuating the cycle. One name that comes to mind is Rupi Kaur.
Postmodernism, and its applications in the art world, is certainly justified philosophically. But what comes from it is a disregard for high culture and beauty, and that is enough to demonstrate to me that it is not worth following. Toxic fruit comes from a toxic tree. I could get into the political motivations for these trends as well, but I fear that may be pushing the bounds of this thread a bit too far.
>Bad life choice, really.
For you, sure. I'm not proud to be on drugs, but I just finished a year without them and my life was markedly worse despite all my efforts to improve myself. There comes a point at which the brain needs a bit of help. Maybe one day I'll be able to manage myself better, but for now I need that help.
>fantasy
It feels like escapism to me. The depth of the world we live in is beyond staggering, and I'm content to explore that. Then again, maybe I've just never read a fantasy book good enough to change my mind.
>I certainly prefer art for art's sake rather than art as simply a tool for delivering meaning
My goal is to blend those two, though it is very important to me to deliver meaning. But I guess I'm willing to sacrifice on the first bit if it means I can more communicate with others.
>/quit IRC and vidya
No more slacking! Get to work! Chop chop!

>>21
>But what comes from it is a disregard for high culture and beauty
I disagree. Modern and classic art can and do coexist.
>I could get into the political motivations for these trends as well, but I fear that may be pushing the bounds of this thread a bit too far.
I made /bol/ for a reason.
>But I guess I'm willing to sacrifice on the first bit if it means I can more communicate with others.
Well, if your intent is to communicate any "deeper" or "bigger" meaning, the first part was already 100% sacrificed. It's a mutually exclusive situation, though I really don't dislike either: I just have a preference.
Van Gogh's paintings of trees are beautiful because there are trees and brushstrokes, not because there's a meaning to them. Same with most other paintings that are enjoyed for being beautiful. The same dichotomy exists in writing. Some things are written to be wonderful!

>>22
>Modern and classic art can and do coexist
Yeah, but only one philosophical/aesthetic foundation is "valid" within contemporary art: postmodernism. Styles and movements of the past are no longer relevant in today's art world.
>I made /bol/ for a reason
Ah, maybe I'll make a thread there later for discussions-gone-awry. Good call.
>if your intent is to communicate any "deeper" or "bigger" meaning, the first part was already 100% sacrificed
Why do you think this is so? There is "bigger" and "deeper" meaning to many important literary works, and yet they don't suffer aesthetically. This is true for works as old as those of Homer, as well as those of modernists like Virginia Woolf and James Joyce. Only in postmodern fiction is this search for meaning ridiculed. And yet, the best and most loved postmodern authors (I'm thinking Gaddis, Pynchon, Delillo) still imbued their work with many layers of secondary meaning—however obfuscated those may be. (Yeah, yeah, death of the author. You get what I mean, though.)
I don't mean to namedrop for appearances. Just wanted to provide concrete examples.

>>23
>There is "bigger" and "deeper" meaning to many important literary works, and yet they don't suffer aesthetically.
I disagree. Stories written as a tool rather than written for the story themselves suffer greatly.
There is no deeper or bigger meaning in anything Homer. Saying there is is to lie, to create fiction, to create something that isn't there. The two works attributed to homer are just great epics and myths. Action stories. And action stories can be good.
>death of the author
Yeah, I consider death of the author to be unfortunate. I think that your own opinion is the second-most important in the world. The author's is the most important opinion.