Mathius wrote:
> "Aik" <arthur@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:1139017348.082619.73400@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Oh right. This despite the fact that "the man" has already stated the
> > fomula to which he writes?
>
> I'm not sure what comments, specifically, you're responding to here.
Ah - "The man's work is too simliar and I think his approach is just
plain wrong from what I've read from him and about him. "
> > PS "Every story has been done in the history of mankind" doesn't look
> > good for the future then Toots?
>
> I guess that depends on how you look at it. I'm just saying, it's
> impossible to be totally original in every ( or perhaps any?) event in
your
> story. The events are already there. They have been there. As an
author,
> I think two of your biggest jobs are A. to pick the right events to make
> your story interesting, and B. to put those events down on paper in a
way
> that really speaks to your writer, i.e. catches their interest, paints
them
> a picture, etc. Whatever genre you choose to do that in is your own as
> well.
>
True, but my point's still there. DE has stated that he writes to a
formula nad yet people still complain that he writes to a formula.
Something here seems a little pointless. You either like the formula
or not. Even watered-down as it has become.
Aik
|
