I'm utterly convinced: both ways. The problem is perhaps glut - and quality therein. Take Johnson, writing as Swift suggests: this is why one should really have a series prepared rather than write on the fly (which is a silly thing to try). Because it leads to 'that'll do' output with stamps it substandard.
Another example is the Sheffield Blues scene. I never intended to play it, but circumstance took me there in the early 80s. Madison Blues, Strongheart, The Back Street Band and Shedds On Fire were all doing well, managing to share out available venues, keep healthy followings and not bore people with the same old same old. Others seemed to think it was another three-chord trick for easy money and swamped the market with utter tripe. In no time mentioning blues when booking a gig got a negative response. Thank crikey we weren't all dependent on an income...
In ye olden days of the 1960s when I had the gall to share poetry, the next known poet lived maybe two towns away. As I have come back in the last five-ish years (just preJohnson death Poorlies), there are so many groups on social media, open mics, micro publishers etc that entire businesses thrive on eejits paying to learn how to become a poet. Even great endeavours get kneejerk comment and bitchy argument. I have thankfully connected with people who can converse rationally and even write good, but one still must trawl through folk writing about writing and wondering why their writing isn't being read.
I've decided the best thing is to just write and publish. If others like and read, fine. Either way, I get my pleasure researching and writing and even just tumbling into the gladdening worlds of inspiration.
That way, the nemotoads or whatever start proffering similar stuff, rather than just cramming your inbox thing with what seems popular. I even noticed that empathising with cries in the dark sucked in ghouls who bled my time. We all have that nobody cares thing to deal with and even fewer will if you bleat on.
Which brings me acutely to catharsis; and my realisation that there are two kinds. Imagine you do something that you love doing. At the end of it, you feel marvelous. It's just body chemicals really, affecting mood. But others involved might also get a buzz - like reading some marvelous output. As opposed to reading about somebody 'putting it out there to help others through whatever shit'. I don't want to read about anyone else's shit and I won't be so crass as to drill you with mine.
It's like people assume that 'charitable' effort as admirable when its just a frigging sympathy vote their after. We can and will say 'well done' to folk who survive and succeed. But let it be known as a natural course. More bible than Mein Kampf, I suppose, though I can't reccommend either. But you know, Jesus was treaded kinda rough but done good.
If I wanted lessons in owt, I'd ask around. I'm too curmudgeonly to fall for 'how to sell thousands of pamphlets'.
In closing I like Mike's arguments both ways. It is perhaps entertaining for someone to touch on literary woes through jape and skit. And I too, Tim old chap, am saved writing my articles on two types of catharses; one being like the blues player who suffered for their art (now it's your turn) or the musician who just put together the best ever riff (see Mozart, Vivaldi et al).
I can just picture the contemporary scene as Ludwig scribbles the last few bars, slams them on the joanna and shouts "Bingo!"
You have saved me writing a pretty much identical piece, which I have neatly condensed into the statement "This site is free and always will be. Probably because no-one will pay for it". I have had two potential pledges for The Fig Tree, but I'd really rather not take the cash.
I'll make you a coffee.
Excellent - Thats all I need
I'm utterly convinced: both ways. The problem is perhaps glut - and quality therein. Take Johnson, writing as Swift suggests: this is why one should really have a series prepared rather than write on the fly (which is a silly thing to try). Because it leads to 'that'll do' output with stamps it substandard.
Another example is the Sheffield Blues scene. I never intended to play it, but circumstance took me there in the early 80s. Madison Blues, Strongheart, The Back Street Band and Shedds On Fire were all doing well, managing to share out available venues, keep healthy followings and not bore people with the same old same old. Others seemed to think it was another three-chord trick for easy money and swamped the market with utter tripe. In no time mentioning blues when booking a gig got a negative response. Thank crikey we weren't all dependent on an income...
In ye olden days of the 1960s when I had the gall to share poetry, the next known poet lived maybe two towns away. As I have come back in the last five-ish years (just preJohnson death Poorlies), there are so many groups on social media, open mics, micro publishers etc that entire businesses thrive on eejits paying to learn how to become a poet. Even great endeavours get kneejerk comment and bitchy argument. I have thankfully connected with people who can converse rationally and even write good, but one still must trawl through folk writing about writing and wondering why their writing isn't being read.
I've decided the best thing is to just write and publish. If others like and read, fine. Either way, I get my pleasure researching and writing and even just tumbling into the gladdening worlds of inspiration.
That way, the nemotoads or whatever start proffering similar stuff, rather than just cramming your inbox thing with what seems popular. I even noticed that empathising with cries in the dark sucked in ghouls who bled my time. We all have that nobody cares thing to deal with and even fewer will if you bleat on.
Which brings me acutely to catharsis; and my realisation that there are two kinds. Imagine you do something that you love doing. At the end of it, you feel marvelous. It's just body chemicals really, affecting mood. But others involved might also get a buzz - like reading some marvelous output. As opposed to reading about somebody 'putting it out there to help others through whatever shit'. I don't want to read about anyone else's shit and I won't be so crass as to drill you with mine.
It's like people assume that 'charitable' effort as admirable when its just a frigging sympathy vote their after. We can and will say 'well done' to folk who survive and succeed. But let it be known as a natural course. More bible than Mein Kampf, I suppose, though I can't reccommend either. But you know, Jesus was treaded kinda rough but done good.
If I wanted lessons in owt, I'd ask around. I'm too curmudgeonly to fall for 'how to sell thousands of pamphlets'.
In closing I like Mike's arguments both ways. It is perhaps entertaining for someone to touch on literary woes through jape and skit. And I too, Tim old chap, am saved writing my articles on two types of catharses; one being like the blues player who suffered for their art (now it's your turn) or the musician who just put together the best ever riff (see Mozart, Vivaldi et al).
I can just picture the contemporary scene as Ludwig scribbles the last few bars, slams them on the joanna and shouts "Bingo!"
You have saved me writing a pretty much identical piece, which I have neatly condensed into the statement "This site is free and always will be. Probably because no-one will pay for it". I have had two potential pledges for The Fig Tree, but I'd really rather not take the cash.
Haha - my one liner would read “This site is free and always will be. But if anyone actually wants to throw some cash at it, I will not bat it away”.
I will retain my purity and integrity as an amateur generator of authentic bullshit.