Do you REALLY want to be published?

LOL

So do you think they'll let me talk about The Hippie Narrative at half-time of the Superbowl?

I guess the trick is to get someone else to read our work and talk about it, then it's not a commercial. I once spent $35 to see the Grateful Dead at Winterland in '78 to support that Bill Graham Presents commercial gig. But, man, it was worth it. But, hey, I'm not the best judge to say my book is worth it. I, of course, think it is worthy to be out there. And,indeed, it would be cool if some people will read it and dig it.

Anyway, thanks for the backhanded compliment!

Scott (who-doesn't-use-some-trippy-nickname-because-his-real-name-is-on-the-friggin'-book) MacFarlane

 

Do I 'really' want to be published? Hell no. I write for the art's sake of it.
When my imagination has something to say, I write.

 

Imagine if writers already published had decided against doing so because they didn't want their art bastardized or cheapened in some way. The free exchange of ideas stilted, the progress of society stopped dead in its tracks, the creative geniuses able to overcome the bigotry and fascist undermining of totalitarian governments.

If you don't publish...how then do you change the world for the better?
For those not into reading, you do realize most of the best movies ever made were based on a novel, somebody had to get that book published first, no?
As for art for art's sake, well what good is it if it isn't appreciated by the world?
If you want to hide away your thoughts and your mind and enjoy yourself then that's fine, but really...what a shame to never have known you through your words.
Yes, someday I want to be published, but not yet, I am a man of many words, learning to economise.

8I

ps. I couldn't help but notice that on a lot of threads throughout the forums there does seem to be quite a bit of sweeping generalizations in posts. I don't mind debate, but it would help if people would cite proper facts with literate documentation to back it all up. I'm new here, bear with me. lol.

 

Well stated, 8I. Books are still the best way to fully explore ideas, or, in the case of literature, to get into the interiority and nuances of people and culture.

As for your comment on the best movies coming from books, compare the mega-and-multiple-Oscar-winning hit, ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO's NEST with the novel. In the movie, the Chief is part of an ensemble cast (including Danny Devito). It is well done, but truly two-dimensional in how it dwells only on the conflict between Nurse Ratched and Randle P. McMurphy. The book, by comparison, is a "tripod." Chief Broom tells the story through his surrealistic dissonance. It's the secret to the novel's literary status. It is not McMurphy or Nurse Ratched who change by the end of the book, but The Chief. He is the true protagonist. Ken Kesey, interestingly, chose never to see the movie made from his book.

COMMERCIAL ALERT: I write an opening chapter about this in The Hippie Narrative.

http://www.mcfarlandpub.com/book-2.php?isbn=0-7864-2915-1

Damn good literary study, if I may say so myself! arty:

 

Well, didn't know that about the flick or Kesey's refusal to show support of the project. I guess if the director or studio need to mainstream or streamline a writer's work to fit the big screen then what's a boy to do. Now I have to read the book. Maybe if the moguls would have kept the integrity of Kesey's vision closer to heart, he would have seen the movie himself. Beware all you aspiring great american novelists...you could be next.

8I