Re: Opinions are like... WAS: Re: wuthering heights

Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 01:35:38 +0000
Newsgroups: misc.writing.screenplays,alt.fan.jai-maharaj,rec.arts.movies
Size: 6,182 bytes

----------
In article <email-address-deleted>, email-address-deleted
(Dr. Jai Maharaj) wrote:
>> I
>> don't particularly value the critiques of other writers, unless I know
>> them well and know their ability to be creatively open minded, because
>> in most cases other writers will only try to get me to write their
>> way. Writing is a lot like religion: There's a whole lot of
>> proselytizing going on!
>
> Well, Islam and Christianity are the main culprits
> as far as that's concerned. They try to *force* conversion
> by murder and deceipt.
I would personally appreciate it if you did not use a writing group for
anti-Christian propaganda.
I know nothing of Islam.
But I do know about Christianity. Unlike you, I went to a Church junior
school, and a High School where Christianity was the received religion.
At no point at all was pressure of any type put upon me to see the light,
through pressure of an abusive nature was put upon me to be many things I
was not. Actual Christianity is quite the opposite of what you suggest.
I kindly suggest you search for reality.
Certainly many dreadful people have used the Christian religion as their
justification, as no doubt many evil Hindus have used their religion in a
similar manner.
I will not comment further in response to your inappropriate and misleading
observations on this subject.
>
>> There is also a great advantage that comes to writing through age,
>> though Hollywood seems totally blind to this aspect. Age provides a
>> rich range of experience and accrued knowledge to draw upon. Age also
>> gives you the confidence and experience to say to someone (producer,
>> director, whomever), "No, that character wouldn't do that because
>> ...." But age also (hopefully) brings wisdom and open mindedness and
>> therefore the ability to consider the merits, if they exist, of a
>> suggestion to do something another way.
>
> Excellent points about age and experience. But, you know what --
> the penudulum is swinging the other way now. I think that the
> main reason for this is that the younger generation in a certain
> age group is now trying to grow up.
>
>> And all of this experience also brings ease with the fact that not all
>> approaches work for all people. All this said, here's a thought for
>> you to consider or reject outright... You might try looking more into
>> yourself and your talent for writing than in checking out what other
>> people think or do... Writing *is* a solitary pursuit. '-)
>> Caroline
>
> As within, so without.
>
> Jai Maharaj
> http://www.mantra.com/jai
> Om Shanti
>
>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 08:22:04 -0800, Mysti Rubert
>> <email-address-deleted> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm not being a literary critic, I'm being a thinking, working writer,
>> encouraging
>> >another writer to open his eyes and actually examine material instead of
>> merely
>> >dismissing it based on personal reaction. Who cares what I personally think
>> >of Pulp Fiction or Wuthering Heights except my fiance, my cat, and my
shrink?
>> >
>> >When I read a post here, I expect my fellow writers to do more than knee
>> jerk.
>> >
>> >To dismiss something as "crap" without explaining why, or looking for the
>> value of a work even if it isn't personally valuable to the writer, is what
>> writers do to keep learning, expanding, growing. Dismissing any work as
>> "crap" is immediately satisfying but not useful to oneself or other
writers.
>> Now, if the crap thrower had thought
>> >about the work long enough to say WHY it failed to move him, that would be
>> >useful information, fodder for discussion.
>> >
>> >For example, why Pulp Fiction failed to move me was I did see any action
>> >or reaction that helped me give a flying fig about the characters or their
>> dilemmas,
>> >the dialog was sufficiently arch to make me feel the hand of the writer at
>> almost
>> >all times, and the themes felt familiar, shopworn, not like homage so much
as
>> >bad xeroxes of the original. Now, there was also plenty to admire about the
>> >piece, interesting story structure, lovely dark look at American culture,
>> impassioned
>> >performances from actors who can do hackwork, but none did here, and some
>> >very interesting visuals/colors.
>> >
>> >Another example re: Wuthering Heights: the vision of class trapping humans
in
>> >tragic situations was powerful. Pacing was "old-fashioned" slow for me,
>> visuals
>> >in black and white sometimes quite stunning, Olivier was by turns
>> sympathetic,
>> >terrifying, pathetic....that's all I remember, I'll have to see it again to
>> give it a
>> >real go.
>> >
>> >This may be useful information to other writers, a basis for discussion,
such
>> as
>> >"Mysti, you clown, that movie wasn't about class warfare! it was about the
>> >way two passionate people in love can still end tragically because of their
>> >inability to throw off their own fears" or whatever. That's useful and
>> interesting.
>> >"that movie was crap" sounds so much like Eric Cartman that it hurts.
>> >
>> >I'm sure the original poster has lots of interesting opinions, and is not at
>> all
>> >like Eric Cartman, and I look forward to posts that include fodder for
>> discussion.
>> >
>> >Mysti
>> >
>> >D C wrote:
>> >
>> >> ----------
>> >> In article <email-address-deleted>, Mysti Rubert
>> >> <email-address-deleted> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I think some of the most valuable assets a writer can have include:
>> >> >
>> >> > - an open mind
>> >> > - a compassionate spirit
>> >> > - an ability to research topics of interest to him or her
>> >> >
>> >> > If millions of billions of people love a work, be it Wuthering Heights
>> >> > or a snappy song-and-dance
>> >> > from Bollywood, it's likely there's SOMETHING GOING ON. Your exercise is
>> >> > to compare and
>> >> > contrast the events in WH with this lyric from the Tina Turner song:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Neal wasn't being a literary critic - he offered a personal opinion
>> >> on a film, that seemed mannered and pretentious (at least to
>> >> two psters here.)
>> >>
>> >> Stating the obvious with a massive non sequiter is not helping.
>> >
>>