5 ms·

My feelings as well. tl;dr, I am sorry I can't read your unsolicited manuscript because I am a humble writer with a humble background with a duties to my humbl

My feelings as well. tl;dr, I am sorry I can't read your unsolicited manuscript because I am a humble writer with a humble background with a duties to my humble college students in creative writing class. Let me mention all of my friends who are really humble, from middle-upper class who have earned an inheritance to travel and write from their experiences; but not all of them are white lest you get the wrong idea about me, in fact one of them is colored with such a interesting background you should hear about because he gets confused for either being "Black" or "Arab"; so in closing, I am a really humble person who have lots of humble friends who value friendship; wait, by the way did I mention that I am really humble?

PhasmaFelis 11y ago
Are you Alan?
- blueblob 11y ago
  Pretty sure alan wouldn't have a name consisting of "no name," he sounds more like "TheGreatestAlan" kind of type.
- noname123 11y ago
  No I am not Alan. My commentary is just how reading the author's explanation; he came off as so many people I've known previously at liberal arts colleges and then later at parties/cafes college towns. The "conscientious" type who likes the idea of pursuing something "pure" and "artistic," but ultimately their lives lead them to nothing beyond the wording on the marketing on a college brochure, "think deeply, be worldly, travel!" I'd love to go into a in-depth analysis of the original author's text, and how every single of his example of his friends he upheld is a stereotype that is in the wheelhouse of a New York City MFA class or Lena Dunham's "Girls".(Unfortunately, I am trying to debug Docker to run a compute cluster job. ) I am deeply disappointed that the author didn't try to use the opportunity to try to appeal to the craft of writing as a daily discipline, a joy, a pain, a biological compulsion for people who persist regardless of prestige nor fame; or why writing in particular means so much to him, and revealing his own egotism and follies; instead, he wrote a rant that is a thinly-veined guise about he and his circle of friends are the "truer artists" with "much more interesting life experiences" than Alan. However, perhaps you have a more nuanced reading than I did, I'd love to hear what was your takeaway from the author's article?
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    I didn't read it like that at all. I read it as a very very very patient reply to an arrogant jerk. I didn't read the author as being about "pure" and "artistic" writing. Given limited time, he's investing it in people he has some reason to care about, not in some random "you must pay attention to me because I'm a major literary figure even though you stupid mundanes haven't realized it yet" type who demanded the author's attention.
  - striking 11y ago
    If someone mailed you 55 pages* of unparseable nonsense steeped in pretension, and threatened that there would be consequences should you choose to ignore it, what would you do? The author decided to explain that he'd rather read articles by people he knows and by his students who allow him to make a living. He doesn't read things as part of an imagined "profession." He reads things relevant to his own life. It's about the ability to freely associate, and the ability to decide what is relevant to you, with regards to the "profession" of writer. Your interpretation seemed somewhat uncharitable. I don't think you're being particularly nice, either. * The amount was not revealed to us. But take it as a hypothetical anyway.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - michael_h 11y ago
    nothing beyond ... "think deeply, be worldly, travel!" I'm failing to see the bad part.
  - mbrock 11y ago
    Lots of people are like stereotypes. Especially when you describe them concisely. That's why the stereotypes are even remotely amusing. If this guy values travel, biographical writing, and friendship, and you value eccentricity, uniqueness, and nonconformity, that's just a difference between you. He's describing his friends to show that he has actual relationships with actual people who write actual things that are on his actual desk... which is the reason he can't be reading everything strangers send to him. Beyond that, he's making a larger point about how it is rude, selfish, and immoral of Alan to make claims on his time and energy, because it's a failure to let him have his own life and choose his own activity. And then also he's saying he values friendship over genius. Even if Alan's Shakespeare research were truly groundbreaking and fascinating, he'd still choose to read his friends' books, because for him that's the value of literature: empathy, connection, civility, etc. You might find his values banal or uninteresting, and that's fine.
more_corn 11y ago
Heh, I'm not saying I agree, but I'm tickled that you said this.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago

Are you Alan?

blueblob 11y ago
Pretty sure alan wouldn't have a name consisting of "no name," he sounds more like "TheGreatestAlan" kind of type.
noname123 11y ago
No I am not Alan. My commentary is just how reading the author's explanation; he came off as so many people I've known previously at liberal arts colleges and then later at parties/cafes college towns. The "conscientious" type who likes the idea of pursuing something "pure" and "artistic," but ultimately their lives lead them to nothing beyond the wording on the marketing on a college brochure, "think deeply, be worldly, travel!" I'd love to go into a in-depth analysis of the original author's text, and how every single of his example of his friends he upheld is a stereotype that is in the wheelhouse of a New York City MFA class or Lena Dunham's "Girls".(Unfortunately, I am trying to debug Docker to run a compute cluster job. ) I am deeply disappointed that the author didn't try to use the opportunity to try to appeal to the craft of writing as a daily discipline, a joy, a pain, a biological compulsion for people who persist regardless of prestige nor fame; or why writing in particular means so much to him, and revealing his own egotism and follies; instead, he wrote a rant that is a thinly-veined guise about he and his circle of friends are the "truer artists" with "much more interesting life experiences" than Alan. However, perhaps you have a more nuanced reading than I did, I'd love to hear what was your takeaway from the author's article?
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  I didn't read it like that at all. I read it as a very very very patient reply to an arrogant jerk. I didn't read the author as being about "pure" and "artistic" writing. Given limited time, he's investing it in people he has some reason to care about, not in some random "you must pay attention to me because I'm a major literary figure even though you stupid mundanes haven't realized it yet" type who demanded the author's attention.
- striking 11y ago
  If someone mailed you 55 pages* of unparseable nonsense steeped in pretension, and threatened that there would be consequences should you choose to ignore it, what would you do? The author decided to explain that he'd rather read articles by people he knows and by his students who allow him to make a living. He doesn't read things as part of an imagined "profession." He reads things relevant to his own life. It's about the ability to freely associate, and the ability to decide what is relevant to you, with regards to the "profession" of writer. Your interpretation seemed somewhat uncharitable. I don't think you're being particularly nice, either. * The amount was not revealed to us. But take it as a hypothetical anyway.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- michael_h 11y ago
  nothing beyond ... "think deeply, be worldly, travel!" I'm failing to see the bad part.
- mbrock 11y ago
  Lots of people are like stereotypes. Especially when you describe them concisely. That's why the stereotypes are even remotely amusing. If this guy values travel, biographical writing, and friendship, and you value eccentricity, uniqueness, and nonconformity, that's just a difference between you. He's describing his friends to show that he has actual relationships with actual people who write actual things that are on his actual desk... which is the reason he can't be reading everything strangers send to him. Beyond that, he's making a larger point about how it is rude, selfish, and immoral of Alan to make claims on his time and energy, because it's a failure to let him have his own life and choose his own activity. And then also he's saying he values friendship over genius. Even if Alan's Shakespeare research were truly groundbreaking and fascinating, he'd still choose to read his friends' books, because for him that's the value of literature: empathy, connection, civility, etc. You might find his values banal or uninteresting, and that's fine.

more_corn 11y ago

Heh, I'm not saying I agree, but I'm tickled that you said this.