Jane Austin didn't know she was Jane Austin / writing encouragement
Cozy fantasy/romance author Lidiya Foxglove has a youtube video called "How to write a classic bestselling novel that everyone will read in 200 years," that's very interesting and inspiring. Here are some parts that really struck me, and that I think other creators will resonate with:
…Pride and Prejudice has been one of the most enduring novels of our time. It's very impressive to me that all of Jane Austin's novels are still widely read, and I'm quite sure that Jane did not write them thinking, “I bet people are still going to be reading my books in 200 years.” And then she died without ever knowing that she was Jane Austin, which I think about constantly … She sold some books, some of them sold decently well. A few prominent people read them, which I'm sure must have pleased her very much at the time. And then she died and then over the course of ages she became Jane Austin.
…
The point that I want to make … is that I think it's just really important to write the books that call to you. Maybe even just the books that you need to write to make money. I think it's really important to write the books that call to you, even if they feel a little self-indulgent or silly at times. If they don't feel like they're necessarily what you're capable of, but they're what you want to write because you don't really know where a powerful theme or a character that's going to resonate with people will emerge, and you also don't know where culture is going in the future, it could be that people of the future appreciate different things than we appreciate now, and that something that's only minorly successful now is going to be huge in the future.
Perhaps you really love literary fiction and you got a bachelor in English, and you got an MFA, and you genuinely love classic literature, and you love, like, really beautiful literary prose, but the work that you're working on is like a cute little romance about lesbians running an adoption agency for baby dragons. Something in your head is like, “That is what I'm capable of. That sounds kind of silly, but it's just something that I write because it's fun.”
I'm here to give you permission to write whatever calls to you, whether it is yet another broody vampire, or a horror novel that just reminds you of books you read under the covers when you were 12. Even if you want to write a literary novel about a sad man suffering, yeah, you know, if that's what calls to you, there's always room for another one. Don't feel bad about writing something that just feels like you, and don't get too in your head about whether it is a great work or not. If you're going to devote some of your time, your one precious life, to writing, then I think the last thing we should be worrying about is whether it's important or whether it will be a classic or a bestseller, much less both, which as we've established is extremely rare.
You have no idea what will resonate with people 50 or 100 years from now and you don't know what will resonate with people now. It might be that you die not knowing that you were Jane Austin, but aren't we so glad that Jane Austin just was Jane Austin without knowing she was Jane Austin?
And the other point I want to make is if you need to write something for money, as I have done, it doesn't mean that that book won't mean something to people as well. You really have no clue how long a book will last or what kind of long term relevance or popularity it will have, or whether it will just like hit someone a certain way at a certain time in their life. There are entire categories of creations like pulp science fiction or superhero comics that were kind of treated as throwaway amusements when they first came out, and now have a much more elevated place in our culture. So it's also possible that a Court of Thorns and Roses will in fact be more popular in 50 years and that people will be getting their Sarah J Maas books graded and encased in plastic. Like, I don't know. They are also books that never become classics in a broad sense but have a small group of people who love them, or there's books that really influence someone when they came out so, they might not have been known themselves, but some other great artist would never have been what they were without that work.
I think all of these things are important and that art is just a big web and conversation and that you can drive yourself crazy trying to decide where you fit into it. So write what you love, write what you need to write to be able to keep on writing, and don't worry about tests of time or bestseller lists.
Be sure to check out the video, because she touches on so much more. And check out Lidiya's channel, The Cozy Creative!
9 notes
·
View notes
SO as an aromantic villain liker, I have to admit that whether aro or not, there's something compelling about Philip perhaps clinging to Caleb in part because of an alienation from the Other way of acquiring a Good God-Loving Family in his day and age. because if Caleb spurns their witch hunting dreams to go fall in love with a witch that's a perceived betrayal to Philip on two fronts, the witch sympathizing and the abandoning Philip for romance. it's compelling in a "Belos selectively ignores all the norms of his own oppressive belief system that he spurns, when he could have easily found a home amongst the freaks if he let go of his hate" way. it's compelling in an "adds even more parallels to Lilith, who avoids following his path, and shows that people who start in a similar place, with both genuine flaws and genuine instances of being wronged by the world, the latter not entirely unrelated to aromanticism, are still able to find joy instead of hatred, because aromanticism is not a destiny to endlessly suffer nor a destiny to do evil" kind of way.
BUT. unfortunately. I've seen way too many posts that just spew garbage like "Belos is evil because he's incapable of love, obviously! and the heroes are good and moral and (cough) not subhuman (cough) because they actually love people 🥰," just total horseshit right at the intersection of aphobia and ableism. just a total admission that they don't think love can ever motivate people to hurt anyone, that they don't think they can hurt anyone they love and no one they love could really hurt them, that love is a get out of jail free card when doing harm while harm is a get banned from love and humanity permanently card, so. basically, we can't have nice things.
41 notes
·
View notes
What if TWST has a game franchise similar to LOZ, but it's Alice's adventures in Wonderland?
The series is quite popular, you play as Alice, with the Cheshire Cat as your companion (who tends to cause more problems than help out), the Vorpal Sword is basically the Master Sword and you help the Queen of Hearts by exploring dungeons and solving riddles and puzzles. There is even an Ace Attorney spin-off (not very successful, since the nonsensical rules annoy most players).
However, it's a general consensus that no one understands the first game. The whole playthrough amounts to 2 hours at most, though dataminers found more content in the code. It that wasn't enough, there is a weird sign right next to the first dungeon, who clearly breaks the fourth wall:
*
WARNING! YOUR GAME WILL NEVER BE THE SAME IF YOU DON'T GET THIS MESSAGE!
"Up is down, left is right,
Count the letters, subtract the spaces,
1 2 3 know 9 8 7 are your friends, now and ever,
Mind the gaps, ignore the rabbit,
There is no fun that is not maddening!"
There is also a small note in the back, written in blood-red ink, signed with a paw-print:
"I watch everything with a disinterested smirk,
With lazy eyes that twinkle like faraway suns,
You'll never find me in the night sky while I lurk,
'Cause, "mime a ton, drum te hey!"
*
Now, the Cheshire cat was only introduced in a later game, so people kept trying to find glitches to the moon (they also didn't find the cat and kept talking to a mime NPC). A quick look at the Queen's Rules also didn't help, since the number you get when subtracting the letters and spaces while ignoring the numbers just doesn't add up (something about doing parkour whenever a tree is planted).
So it stayed that way, just like the "Mew under the truck" thing.
Until Cater decided to stream a playthrough alongside the dorm (it fits the Heartslabyul theme, also Riddle is interested in gaming, so why not start with a simpler game that is also a classic).
You see, firstly, if you consider the numbers as actual names and write them as words, you get additional letters that, when subtracted by the spaces...still get a rule that doesn't make sense (don't eat a tart after midnight) BUT, if you know about Queendom history, you'll know that this rule was added by the White Rabbit to fill a GAP in the book after the Queen banned a rule about the correct way to dance (up, down, left, right, two steps forward, one step back).
Long story short, Riddle solved the problem.
So, you can get that dance and replicate it in the game, swapping up with down and left with right (forward and backwards would also be up and down, in this case).
As for the extra note, they already knew it was the cat, but if you scramble "Mime a ton, drum te hey!", you get "I am on the tree, dummy!"
The cat introduced himself, saying he'll follow the player on the next journey, but not before giving a tip: "If you want to keep going, you have to be as mad as everyone here! Why kill when you can dance? They do say singing wards off evil..."
Riddle explained all of this in fifteen minutes. Just to humor him, Cater left the sign and made a beeline for the first tree in the area, expecting nothing of it.
The Cheshire Cat showed up, his smile overtaking the screen.
And with that, Cater wordlessly rushed to the first dungeon, doing the dance code instead of killing the first enemy.
The game crashed.
And then a cutscene started playing.
It was basically the Jabberwock appearing and destroying the dungeon's ceiling. Apparently he is "searching for that damn cat" and "hoping to battle his nemesis again". With that, he leaps to the sky, and we get the game's title drop.
Do note that the game was using a style similar to "A Link to the Past" at first, but everything changed and now it looks like Twilight Princess.
And that's how Cater's streams became famous. Also everyone is trying to memorize the Queen's rules.
The streams now happen in Ramshackle, with the entire cast present. Also Riddle is annoyed because people keep asking for his assistance with solving game puzzles.
Alternatively, this could also happen in Book 6.
Everyone speedrunnimg the Overblot fight just so they can keep playing.
9 notes
·
View notes
casey also talks about sepang 2015 what do you think of that
oh in that podcast? uh... lemme listen again...
yeah idk it's not really anything new I'd say? he's said basically all the same stuff in more interesting and extensive ways elsewhere. I think casey inevitably has a very 'well feuding is bad and helps nobody' point of view, has expressed that before in the past, does it here again, and he's also drawn a parallel between himself and marc on several occasions. which... well, of course there's similarities in terms of public discourse or whatever, but the parallel really falls apart whenever casey argues the feuds cost valentino. like, I do think it's sometimes important to just. keep in mind. it's interesting that casey draws this comparison in his mind but that doesn't necessarily means he's right about this. I'm not sure how you'd argue that starting a feud with casey cost valentino anything competitively? you can argue it didn't help him I guess, and then we can have a debate about the ins and outs of the 2008 season. we can also have an argument that in a hypothetical world where casey isn't ill in 2009, valentino doesn't break his leg and casey isn't on a piece of junk in 2010, and valentino isn't on a piece of junk in 2011-12, then actually maybe valentino sparking open animosity with casey COULD have cost him. but we don't know that! didn't happen! I wish we could have found out, but we never got the chance! as it stands, the tally on this is pretty straightforward: casey won the title when things were reasonably civil between them in 2007, and valentino took control of the following season at the exact moment he worsened the relationship between the pair of them in 2008. obviously, it's all more complicated than that and casey would of course argue laguna didn't negatively affect his subsequent performances... but it certainly didn't help them. like, at the very worst valentino escalating tensions in 2008 is a complete net neutral. after 2009, them being bitchy to each other every other tuesday was completely competitively irrelevant beyond maybe affecting how they approached occasionally fighting for a podium position. hey, maybe casey used that feud to fire himself up through sheer spite throughout the later stages of his career, but that doesn't actually support his anti-feud stance - it's basically the exact same thing as what valentino does. they're both quite similar in that regard! always so hungry to prove a point, to show how someone else is wrong. kinda half the point with this feuding business is to get yourself going, get yourself motivated, yeah. he straight up openly admits to using yamaha's repeat rejection of him as a way of giving himself motivation, and at the end of the day that's really not all that different?
anyway, what else does casey say... oh yeah, that him and the other aliens were already kinda prepared for this and had learned vale's tricks. that valentino had only been able to get into the minds of the previous generation. welllllll *wiggles hand* sure, I mean, he did clearly have to change his approach... he couldn't just use the exact same playbook to get to them, either on-track or off-track. but that's why he did change up the playbook... again, whether you want to believe valentino won his final two titles 'in the head' rather than just through pure pace kinda depends on how you assess the evidence, but it is at the very least a debate. and, y'know, it's always worth remembering that valentino's most important mind games with casey didn't happen in a press conference... it was on the track. and the on-track stuff really is just embedded in how valentino approaches winning. speaking of aliens, this is what dani and jorge have said:
like, valentino's entire approach to his riding, even to the way he's setting his bike up, is deliberately about directly fucking with you... he's not actually always trying to be faster than you as much as he's trying to give himself the tools to make your life miserable, to pressure you into mistakes, etc etc... and again, especially with casey (if anything because he was so mentally sturdy), the off-track stuff was really just window dressing. (I know they bicker a lot after 2009 but it's just so fundamentally irrelevant to actual on-track competition.) so you can be aware of those tricks, but it also doesn't necessarily help you when someone's being nasty to you on-track in a way you just fully do not enjoy. which is what it was like for casey! for casey, a lot of this comes back to the truly unpleasant context of how he was perceived by the public, how he was treated as mentally weak or 'broken' or whatever partly because he had the misfortune of coming up against a bloke who had the reputation for breaking rivals. I think it's quite natural to end up with a bit of a hardliner 'actually I've never been mentally affected by a result in my life' stance - and of course casey is a lot tougher than a lot of people give him credit for. that being said. sometimes your rivals affect you, shit happens, it's part of the game. it's fundamentally a nice idea to think that valentino's tactics weren't just morally wrong but also ineffective, which is kind of the appeal of this narrative, right? you want to believe you're above that, you want to believe you were adequately prepared and wise to valentino's tactic. it's unsurprising and understandable that casey does tend to tell the story that way, but again it's *wiggles hand* also hard to describe it as completely factual
uh. what else. oh I'm thrilled casey does canonically know valentino and marc were friends, he has said he wasn't following motogp too much during that time period so you couldn't be sure of that. does this mean anything? does it tell you anything? well, no, but it's just a pleasing thought to me. I like that. oh also 'provoking particularly aggressive riders isn't a good idea' is kinda a funny take from casey? like, he of all people would hate the idea of being cowed by someone's reputation like that... casey's right that provoking fast riders can potentially be dangerous, but y'know I do think that's probably not news to anyone almost nine years later. um. that's all I've got I think
9 notes
·
View notes