| Author | Message | ||
     des |
Having first constructed the writer's mandala on these TTA threads - I tried it elsewhere. An exploding head, a toilet and a wonderfully inspiring response from Jon Merz: http://p082.ezboard.com/fshocklinesforumfrm2.showM essageRange?topicID=31382.topic&start=1&stop=20 | ||
| des |
The mandala (so far): (1) Means of fiction transmission Mainstream professional .....Semi-professional ... Small or Independent Press ... Self-published (print or internet) (publication-on-reading?).... Vanity Press (2) Personal drive (derived by money needs, ego, artistic conviction etc.?) Publish at all costs (or at greatest reward?) .... Art For Art's Sake or kept in cupboard (3) Perceived talent Very skilled ... pedestrian. (4) Market suitability of one's writing Commercial (bestseller material) .... commercial mainstream .... jobbing writing ... uncommercial (acquired taste) (5) Luck Always in the right place at the right time ... always subject to sod's law. Some of the progressions above are simply positive to negative, others not. Whilst they do intersect, they do not conflate. des http://www.weirdmonger.com http://www.nemonymous.com | ||
| Carole |
Re: 2) The thing is with writing something that doesn't get published is that it just lies 'dead' in the drawer and therefore more or less does not exist at all. Whereas if you do a piece of art that no-one likes at least it still has an existence - it's a solid thing that can hang on a wall, etc. So I reckon it's always better to be published than not, as even if it appears in the most obscure webzine, at least it has some kind of an existence rather than ending up in the trash or eaten by rats. | ||
| Wayne Blackhurst |
That's true, although I think you have to give it some consideration. It could be all too easy to self publish or use a vanity press just to get into print. I could go that route if I wanted, although if I did, I'd fear it would jeopardise any future plans and the work that was published in such a way would not, more than likely, be published again. In that case, I'd stick it in a draw until something suitable, or in my opinion, more viable, would come my way. | ||
| des |
I'm sure Jon Merz won't mind me reproducing his views on the Mandala - as they are on a public thread elsewhere but as it an impermanent thread, it's worth crystallising below, I feel: ********* It's not that you have to agree with the mandala at all. The purpose of mandala isn't that you necessarily find the one image/personality that fits you and that's it. The mandala is used to help you gain the perspective of how *other* personalities operate, thereby granting you a better understanding of yourself in relation to the universe. One way you do this is by choosing (or through random selection) a personality and then setting your life up to personify it. In certain sects of Buddhism, there are different mandala, each offering many hundreds or thousands of personalities or incarnations that help those aspiring to understand themselves and the universe the ability to do so. Some of the incarnations are simply defined, such as a "heroic" ideal or even a "demonic" ideal. The aspirant then embodies the characteristics that define that incarnation for a certain period of time and then moves on to another and so on. Looking at it from a more modern viewpoint, you could examine your own life and figure out where you fit in Des' mandala above. If you've enjoyed some commercial success, you might - as an experiment - choose to look at life from the viewpoint of someone who is just starting out with no success, say, for a week. How would you write? How would you view your future and the potential it might contain? How would you even post on message boards when operating from that perspective? Or flip it around. If you're a newbie, start functioning as if you'd just written a bestseller. How would you behave then? Would your success humble you or turn you into a raging jerk? Would you help others or would you shit all over those who hadn't yet achieved the level you had? Mandalas are useful tools for illuminating the millions of perspectives available to all of us every single moment or every day. If you cling to only one viewpoint or one belief system without taking the opportunity to explore the many varied perspectives of other people (thereby learning how to respect those you may not even remotely agree with), then the belief is you are not fully embracing all that life has to offer. You are locking yourself in a prison that you have built and when you die, you will come back to learn the lessons you should have learned in this lifetime, rather than move on to the next stage of existence. You don't have to be a Buddhist to appreciate this. All you need to do is understand whether you are open-minded enough to explore these concepts or are more comfortable operating from the perspective of limited experience. Neither is necessarily right or wrong. There are plenty of narrow-minded zealots who would argue their life is successful, and, given the parameters of their life, they might well be correct - from their perspective. Just so, there are plenty of people who embrace any new concept and would say their life is just as successful, even if they fail to meet the parameters of the zealot's life. Des' mandala is interesting but by no means all inclusive, especially if you take a gander at the many weird personalities that post just on message boards and how people carry themselves in the cyber environment alone. It's all a matter of perspective. (so ends comments by Jon F Merz) | ||
| Wayne Blackhurst |
Says it all, des, good stuff! | ||
| Damien G Walter |
Maybe the mandala should have another vector for 'Influence', from 'world shaker' to 'own bedroom'. I think people assume that this is equivalent to your level of publication but more and more it isn't. There are self publishing Bloggers with regular audiences of 150,000 and majour authors who never sell more than 5000 copies of a new book, and also majour authors who sell 3 million copies which are instantly forgotten as soon as the last page is turned. So being published by Random House these days is no guarantee that you will have any kind of readership or a long term relationship with your readers. | ||
| des |
That's a good point, I feel, Damien. Perhaps another spectrum: (6) Legacy Durable ... easily forgotten* *example: typical airplane or beach reading. | ||
| des |
And (7) Fanbase Millions .... Coterie | ||
| des |
So following further input above, I've added two vectors to the original Mandala: (1) Means of fiction transmission Mainstream professional .....Semi-professional ... Small or Independent Press ... Self-published (print or internet) (publication-on-reading?).... Vanity Press (2) Personal drive (derived by money needs, ego, artistic conviction etc.?) Publish at all costs (or at greatest reward?) .... Art For Art's Sake or kept in cupboard (3) Perceived talent Very skilled ... pedestrian. (4) Market suitability of one's writing Commercial (bestseller material) .... commercial mainstream .... jobbing writing ... uncommercial (acquired taste) (5) Luck Always in the right place at the right time ... always subject to sod's law. (6) Legacy Durable ... easily forgotten* *example: typical airplane or beach reading. (7) Fanbase Millions .... Coterie (for example a writer could have say 150,000 on a blog but another writer 5000 for a book). Some of the progressions above are simply positive to negative, others not. Whilst they do intersect, they do not conflate. des | ||
| Paul M |
Consider... (8)Ego Needs constant strokes...couldn't give a shit. | ||
| P M |
Actually, reading back I see that (2) might encompass the above. However, there's something more Id about (2). The ego mediates but still wants a good rubbing! Lovely. | ||
| Pffftth |
And is (3) subjective or objective? Perhaps the whole mandala can be polarised thus? | ||
| des |
I feel (3) is subjective and objective synergistically, indeed subjective and objective in how the writer *sees* the objective subjectivity and subjective objectivity (vis a vis his 'talent') of his readers who are, of course, separate from him...as well as how he *sees* his own views on his own 'talent'. I think (2) is appropriate for id, ego and nemo alike. However, any suggested re-wordings or additional vectors (or subtractions) would be welcome. I shall be updating the whole chart here: http://weirdmonger.blogspot.com/2006/02/writers-ma ndala.html des | ||
| des |
Incidentally, an illuminating exercise is aligning (by empathy with its author) a known work with the mandala. Try Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown. des | ||
| Rhys |
Most important of all: (8) Rewards Attention from ladies... Sad fatboy lifestyle | ||
| Carole |
Re: 8) - you could go into it thinking it's Attention from ladies (or attention from men), and find out that it's really Sad fatboy/fatgirl lifestyle. Same with the fame/living room aspect - apparently George Michael now only goes out at night (I read it in the Mail so it must be true). Like Elvis, Aretha, too many others to mention - end up reclusive, junk food, watching daytime TV, trapped in living room. | ||
| des |
Rhys' vector (8), I feel, is incorporated in (2) but thanks for the input which led to the insights by Carole which probably do have some bearing on the mandala along various points of its length. des | ||
| Damien G Walter |
How about: Sanity Particularly relevant for SF writers. Is your sanity in onverse proportion to the originality of your work i.e. PKD, or are SF writers just fundamentaly insane i.e. L Ron Hubbard. | ||
| Daniel Tenner |
Well, first you'd have to define what Sanity actually means. That seems like a pretty tall order to me. Good luck. Daniel | ||
| des |
Balance Jagged ... Smooth ? | ||
| Rhys |
Coffee Espresso... con leche Peanuts Salted... honey roasted etc | ||
| des |
LO?L - This mandala is indeed intended to be taken humorously as well as seriously. Thanks for your input, Rhys. | ||
| des |
So following further input above, I've added one new vector to the original Mandala and slightly amended some others: (1) Means of fiction transmission Mainstream professional .....Semi-professional ... Small or Independent Press ... Self-published (print or internet) (publication-on-reading?).... Vanity Press (2) Personal drive (derived by money needs, ego, id, nemo, artistic conviction, some aspects in (8), etc.?) Publish at all costs (or at greatest reward?) .... Art For Art's Sake or kept in cupboard (3) Intra- and extra-perceived talent as a writer Very skilled ... pedestrian. (4) Market suitability of one's writing Commercial (bestseller material) .... commercial mainstream .... jobbing writing ... uncommercial (acquired taste) (5) Luck Always in the right place at the right time ... always subject to sod's law. (6) Legacy Durable ... easily forgotten* *example: typical airplane or beach reading. (7) Fanbase Millions .... Coterie (for example a writer could have say 150,000 on a blog but another writer 5000 for a book). (8) Non-(3) Objective and Subjective Balance (humour, frame of mind, optimism/pessimism, intelligence (and/or memory), body/mind interaction, (il)logical abilities, creativity, sociability etc?) Intra- and extra-perceived balance .... intra- and extra-perceived imbalance. Not sure where Rhys is situated in (8) ;-) Some of the progressions above are simply positive to negative, others not. Whilst they do intersect, they do not conflate. des |
