5 ms·

> The stuff comes from the sky, and it’s only afterward that you convince yourself you had something to do with it Oh yes, the romantic notion of "inspiration"

by goto11 3y ago

> The stuff comes from the sky, and it’s only afterward that you convince yourself you had something to do with it Oh yes, the romantic notion of "inspiration" from the gods. I guess this works if you are gentleman poet, having the leisure time to "wait for inspiration". But for most professional writers without a family fortune, you have deadlines to meet and you need to understand the creative process just as any artist need to know the tools they use.

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
And that process is surprisingly full of rigour and self-imposed restriction. Cinema is an excellent example of this. Good cinematographers follow a set of cinematic conventions that have emerged as "rules" and around which the industry has evolved (like the single-camera convention). Great cinematographers invent rules and convey them to the viewer in the first act and use them to communicate the rest of the film. And to make this point even more clear you could substitute throughout the above for animation/animators, and everyone would get it.
lsmeducation 3y ago
Not “inspiration”, I am literally talking about pure intuition. I’m sure it’s one of the few things that’s provable with just anecdotes. You can have whatever ruleset you want, your ass ain’t making Reservoir Dogs or writing Old Man and the Sea. Now imagine either of those two writers gave you a list of rules to follow. You’d throw that piece of paper in the garbage. It’s a like a hot girl giving you work-out and diet advice. Thanks, I’m sure that’s what really got you your beauty. It’s from the SKY.
- andrei_says_ 3y ago
  I wholeheartedly agree with you. Not everyone is a writer. Surely rules can improve someone’s writing but what do they have to say? That’s up to them, their curiosity, drive, obsessions - and is completely unique. I posit that the tendency to stick with writing and have discipline and honing the craft is one of the gifts.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  > Now imagine either of those two writers gave you a list of rules to follow. You’d throw that piece of paper in the garbage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manual https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manual This book has been the inspiration for/method for a lot of hit records. I think you are underestimating how much method, methodology, effort and development goes into something like Reservoir Dogs. Tarantino may have apparently emerged fully-formed, but he had spent decades learning about cinema the hard way -- watching it, studying it, absorbing the logic/form of cinema. It is (and Pulp Fiction is) not a work of pure intuition; it's clearly a work of homage.
  - lsmeducation 3y ago
    spent decades learning about cinema the hard way -- watching it, studying it, absorbing the logic/form of cinema. It is (and Pulp Fiction is) not a work of pure intuition; it's clearly a work of homage. So you think he took an academic approach? Dude dropped out of high school and worked in a video rental store. You are only applying the pastel of studious (the puns are just flying today) because he didn't make absolute shit. If he did make absolute shit, we'd say "gee my god, that's what happens when you drop out of high school and think watching movies is enough to write a good movie". Right? No seriously, right? Me and you disagreeing is proof enough we have no idea where this stuff comes from.
    - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
      > So you think he took an academic approach? After a fashion, yes. He took a research-heavy approach, in the same way that many unconventional, outsider thinkers do. And no, I'm not post-rationalising it. You can see that work in the films, in the way they reference and invert cinematic tropes, in the choice and timing of lines, and even in the way they rip up stereotypes. He's an obsessive, but he has definitely studied. For example you can see a deep understanding of B-movies, exploitation movies, and of films like The Taking of Pelham 123. There's huge evidence of studying, of thinking through the logic and the flow of cinema. He didn't just watch films and luck out. It's much more considered than that. There's clearly an element of an unwritten manifesto in it all (most clearly to me this appears early on in his influence over Four Rooms, which could almost have been the foundation of a Dogme 95 type movement, had they all chosen it) > Me and you disagreeing is proof enough we have no idea where this stuff comes from. I think you're assuming magic where in fact there is considerable evidence of effort. Is Tarantino a maverick brat who grew up within the landscape of cinema? Yeah. But it doesn't mean he doesn't work at it, or defend his opinions with study.

by goto11 3y ago

bemusedthrow75 3y ago

And that process is surprisingly full of rigour and self-imposed restriction. Cinema is an excellent example of this. Good cinematographers follow a set of cinematic conventions that have emerged as "rules" and around which the industry has evolved (like the single-camera convention). Great cinematographers invent rules and convey them to the viewer in the first act and use them to communicate the rest of the film. And to make this point even more clear you could substitute throughout the above for animation/animators, and everyone would get it.

lsmeducation 3y ago

Not “inspiration”, I am literally talking about pure intuition. I’m sure it’s one of the few things that’s provable with just anecdotes. You can have whatever ruleset you want, your ass ain’t making Reservoir Dogs or writing Old Man and the Sea. Now imagine either of those two writers gave you a list of rules to follow. You’d throw that piece of paper in the garbage. It’s a like a hot girl giving you work-out and diet advice. Thanks, I’m sure that’s what really got you your beauty. It’s from the SKY.

andrei_says_ 3y ago
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Not everyone is a writer. Surely rules can improve someone’s writing but what do they have to say? That’s up to them, their curiosity, drive, obsessions - and is completely unique. I posit that the tendency to stick with writing and have discipline and honing the craft is one of the gifts.
bemusedthrow75 3y ago
> Now imagine either of those two writers gave you a list of rules to follow. You’d throw that piece of paper in the garbage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manual https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manual This book has been the inspiration for/method for a lot of hit records. I think you are underestimating how much method, methodology, effort and development goes into something like Reservoir Dogs. Tarantino may have apparently emerged fully-formed, but he had spent decades learning about cinema the hard way -- watching it, studying it, absorbing the logic/form of cinema. It is (and Pulp Fiction is) not a work of pure intuition; it's clearly a work of homage.
- lsmeducation 3y ago
  spent decades learning about cinema the hard way -- watching it, studying it, absorbing the logic/form of cinema. It is (and Pulp Fiction is) not a work of pure intuition; it's clearly a work of homage. So you think he took an academic approach? Dude dropped out of high school and worked in a video rental store. You are only applying the pastel of studious (the puns are just flying today) because he didn't make absolute shit. If he did make absolute shit, we'd say "gee my god, that's what happens when you drop out of high school and think watching movies is enough to write a good movie". Right? No seriously, right? Me and you disagreeing is proof enough we have no idea where this stuff comes from.
  - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
    > So you think he took an academic approach? After a fashion, yes. He took a research-heavy approach, in the same way that many unconventional, outsider thinkers do. And no, I'm not post-rationalising it. You can see that work in the films, in the way they reference and invert cinematic tropes, in the choice and timing of lines, and even in the way they rip up stereotypes. He's an obsessive, but he has definitely studied. For example you can see a deep understanding of B-movies, exploitation movies, and of films like The Taking of Pelham 123. There's huge evidence of studying, of thinking through the logic and the flow of cinema. He didn't just watch films and luck out. It's much more considered than that. There's clearly an element of an unwritten manifesto in it all (most clearly to me this appears early on in his influence over Four Rooms, which could almost have been the foundation of a Dogme 95 type movement, had they all chosen it) > Me and you disagreeing is proof enough we have no idea where this stuff comes from. I think you're assuming magic where in fact there is considerable evidence of effort. Is Tarantino a maverick brat who grew up within the landscape of cinema? Yeah. But it doesn't mean he doesn't work at it, or defend his opinions with study.