ernienieves

Ernie Nieves Nieves itibaren San Antonio, Prado, Tolima, Kolombiya itibaren San Antonio, Prado, Tolima, Kolombiya

Okuyucu Ernie Nieves Nieves itibaren San Antonio, Prado, Tolima, Kolombiya

Ernie Nieves Nieves itibaren San Antonio, Prado, Tolima, Kolombiya

ernienieves

Hassas bir dokunuşla ele alınan ağır konularla dolu güzel ve ilham verici çağdaş bir hikaye. Bu kitabın karakterleri, derinlikleri ve karmaşıklıklarıyla sayfadan atladı.

ernienieves

onu sevdi !!!

ernienieves

What are writers like? What makes them different? On goodreads, for example, they will be the people that write their 'about me' sections in the third person. However, I had a feeling there must be more to that. When I was younger I thought writers were an entirely different caste of people. You can't become a writer, you have to be born one. There are no creative writing courses in Poland, because writing is not something you can teach. It comes from divine inspiration and not from knowing your craft. Anyway, writing is not a craft. This attitude is responsible for the embarrassing quality of Polish literature. It relies on gold nuggets rather than a gold mine. I want to know everything about writers and the writing process. I mean, everything! This collection of interviews was an immense pleasure. The writers come and confess what they do and how they do it (alas, some very reluctantly, I am looking at you, Hemingway). I could fill out this whole review with all the quotes I neatly underlined in my copy, but that might take a while. The final conclusion is that there is no right way to write. Every writer in the selection was contradicted by another writer at some point. You can read while you write, or you can't. It will affect your writing or it won't. You have to write when you feel very emotional about the subject or you need to wait till you calm down and detach yourself. You have to know the history of literature inside out or you might not even read Madame Bovary until you are 40. You need to show your work to people before it is finished, or you can't ever do that. You need to invent new metaphors and be creative or quite the opposite - use only the well established metaphors because only those are true. You can't have a hidden agenda, or you might, or maybe you even should. And so on. I found myself in bits of every writer. It got me fantasising about publishing my own book. When the writers tell you how they started writing, it seems like something you might do yourself. They all of a sudden don't seem larger than life but they come across as ordinary human beings (that they were once, before they became AUTHORS). My favourite interview was the one with Robert Gottlieb, editor who worked with people like Doris Lessing, Toni Morrison, Le Carre. This was probably the most honest interview and the most fascinating one. See, the problem with writers is that they are writers. Even if they try to be candid they can't help being writers. They start to write themselves eventually, because that's what they do and that's who they are. Sometimes they become their own creations.

ernienieves

Interesting. Makes me feel better about not being a successful novelist - haven't put in the sweat equity yet. Makes me reflect on parenting too - the "food court" approach to exposing your child to as much as possible isn't likely the best recipe for being really good at something. The key, it seems, is help him/ her find "the thing" and then dive in wholeheartedly toward those 10,000.

ernienieves

This book made it to the bedside table--good sign--but has been sitting there for awhile--not so good sign. The sociologist in me was initially very intrigued at understanding more about how we make snap judgments and the accuracy of them compared to detailed study. The book seems to drag on, however, with more examples in various areas without adding anything new to the initial premise. Lots of support for his thesis, I guess, but that's why it's still on my end table and I haven't finished reading it. It is probably too much to hope for a surprise ending... Finally finished Blink and had to take away one more star. I'm not even really motivated by the book to go into my explanation in depth. Essentially, the rest of the book carved out such large exceptions to the main theory that we're probably left with more exceptions than the rule. What I got out of it is that our snap judgments are better than detailed study UNLESS you're an expert in the field OR you're not paying attention to the right things. Which begs the question, am I going to pay attention to the right things if I'm NOT an expert? After all the endless examples of when "Blink" worked, I think Gladwell exhausted all instances of when the rule avoids the exceptions. I think Gladwell is looking for something that's out there, but I think he blinked and missed it.