Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Developing one's writing style . . .

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Developing one's writing style . . .

    Alright, this post doesn't intensively involve of Leaves or any of its contents--as typically discussed on these forums--but rather the style in which it is written. This post involves my study of Danielewski and his writing style, and using his novels to help me in developing my own. (Incidentally, it's a drag encoding correct punctuation into one's posts, so, beyond marks and capitalisation, I give up.) I’m an 18 year old guy from the Chicagoland area who, come hell or high water, will someday see print. And not just see print, but hopefully create a work as remarkable as that of of Leaves, because, as bullshitty and stupid as this sounds, you folks have no idea how beautiful and profound all of the rigourous discussion, contemplation, and reflection aroused by Mr. Danielewski’s two novels—just two novels—seems to me. And to date, they're still a puzzle we’re all trying to figure out. This is, for those as myself who loathe finishing a book, saying good-bye to the characters and places therein, the perfect novel, because one is almost required to read it multiple times to gain even a nominally decent understanding of the whole, and with each successive reading one finds greater fulfilment. I would like someday soon to write a book of comparable worth and uniqueness, but first have questions to ask of the reading/writing community. In a way, I guess, this is a call to fellow writers for advice. If none of this is of concern to you, then I implore you, please, to disregard this post.

    To date, Chuck Palahniuk and Mark Z. Danielewski are my favourite authors. Chuck Palahniuk is a minimalist, and easily one of the foremost writers of our day. Danielewski, while still a prevalent member of the writing community, is the polar opposite. His style ranges the spectrum, utilizes elements not only of prose, but of poetry as well. While I don’t have a copy of of Leaves on hand (the copy I purchased off eBay should be here any day, now, but that still leaves dangling the matter of The Whalestoe Letters), I do recall that a good number of Johnny Truant’s footnotes were astounding in their use of imagery and structure. The structures, they must each have distinct literary names, but I’ve never been involved in any intensive studies of the like. Anything I’ve learned in regard to style, I’ve learned from reading, like most people, I suppose. I’ve found grade school and high school proficient only in teaching me the most rudimentary precepts of writing, but nothing in the way of developing a narrative or critical thinking beyond the commonplace, or how to analyse a body of work—certainly not one so mind-reamingly complex as of Leaves. Online writing tutorials, in fine, PISS ME OFF, because they're so rigid and objective, like the instructions for creating weapons of mass destruction, only after a page or two of the like, I'm the one who's blowing his top. Interviews with Palahniuk have yielded that he only started writing when he was 32, but up till then, studied the works of minimalists as Amy Hempel and Denis Johnson, while also mimicking the narrative styles of F. Scott Fitzgerald and Bret Easton Ellis. And even today, he says, he reads their works over and over again to prove to himself that narrative can be clean and concise. For Mr. Palahniuk, these writers are the corner stone of his now widely acclaimed writing style. And in case you’re wondering who exactly is Chuck Palahniuk, he’s the guy who wrote Fight Club, which at the box office wasn’t such a smash, but later developed quite the following upon recognition of the literary genius who actually thought up the tale.

    Mark Z. Danielewski, he’s my corner stone. It seems unhealthily obsessive, I realise, but I go to bed each night ruminating over how outstanding a piece of literature of Leaves is, and this leaves me, at times, a little deflated at the seemingly zero-probability of myself, or anyone else for that matter (but most especially myself), writing a piece of comparable excellence. Upon the advice of a close acquaintance, I no longer compare my work with that of the aforementioned authors—especially Danielewski—as this is in a very real way psychological suicide. When I receive my copy of of Leaves, I intend to read it through a second time, not looking to so much mimic Danielewski’s writing style, but to use it as an augmentation to my own, which, presently, might be counted amongst the likes of your castaway penny dreadfuls.

    Where this concerns any of you is your advice. Any advice you could offer in developing my style of writing, please, do not hesitate to assert; I would greatly appreciate it. In August I begin college. As of yet, I'm undecided on which classes I'll take. A few writing classes may be of some use, but I know for certain that majoring outright in literature is most probably a bad idea, since I'll need a profession to provide substantial income while I'm working on my novels. I don't want to be a teacher of any sort. I’m sure that some of you are college professors or writers yourselves, and have much to share of your knowledge of the craft and maintaining a safe balance between work and writing.

    [ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Arkady ]

  • #2
    Developing one's writing style . . .

    Salve Arkady,
    Is there anything to be read by You? I mean, could You send anything along, be it email- or snailmail-wise?


    quote:
    Originally posted by Arkady:
    Alright, this post doesn't intensively involve of Leaves or any of its contents--not directly--but rather the style in which it is written. This post involves my study of Danielewski and his writing style, and using his novels to help me in developing my own. (Incidentally, it's a drag encoding correct punctuation into one's posts, so, beyond marks and capitalisation, I give up.) I’m an 18 year old guy from the Chicagoland area who, come hell or high water, will someday see print. And not just see print, but hopefully create a work as remarkable as that of of Leaves, because, as bullshitty and stupid as this sounds, you folks have no idea how beautiful and profound all of the rigourous discussion, contemplation, and reflection aroused by Mr. Danielewski’s two novels—just two novels—seems to me. And to date, it’s still a puzzle we’re all trying to figure out. This is, for those as myself loathe finishing a book, saying good-bye to the characters and places therein, the perfect novel, because one is almost required to read it multiple times to gain even a nominally decent understanding of the whole. I would like someday soon to write a book of comparable worth and uniqueness, but I have questions to ask of the reading/writing community. In a way, I guess, this is a call to fellow writers for advice. If none of this is of concern, then I implore you to, please, disregard this post.

    To date, Chuck Palahniuk and Mark Z. Danielewski are my favourite authors. Chuck Palahniuk is a minimalist, and easily one of the foremost writers of our day. Danielewski, while still a prevalent member of the writing community, is the polar opposite. His style ranges the spectrum, utilizes elements not only of prose, but of poetry as well. While I don’t have a copy of of Leaves on hand (the copy I purchased off eBay should be here any day, now, but that still leaves dangling the matter of The Whalestoe Letters), I do recall that a good number of Johnny Truant’s footnotes were astounding in their use of imagery and structure. The structures, they must each have distinct literary names, but I’ve never been involved in any intensive studies of the like. Anything I’ve learned in regard to style, I’ve learned from reading. Like most people, I suppose. I’ve found grade school and high school proficient only in teaching me the most rudimentary precepts of writing, but nothing in the way of developing a narrative or critical thinking beyond the commonplace, or how to analyse a body of work—certainly not one as mind-reamingly complex as of Leaves. Online writing tutorials, in fine, PISS ME OFF, because they're so rigid and objective. It's like building a nuclear bomb. Interviews with Palahniuk have yielded that he only started writing when he was 32, but up till then, studied the works of minimalists as Amy Hempel and Denis Johnson, while also mimicking the narrative styles of F. Scott Fitzgerald and Bret Easton Ellis. And he says that even today, he says, he reads their works over and over again as to prove to himself that narrative can be clean and concise. For Mr. Palahniuk, these writers are the corner stone of his now widely acclaimed writing style. And in case you’re wondering who exactly is Chuck Palahniuk, he’s the guy who wrote Fight Club, which at the box office wasn’t such a smash, but later developed a cult following upon recognition of the literary genius who actually thought the whole of the tale up.

    Mark Z. Danielewski, he’s my corner stone. It seems unhealthily obsessive, I realise, but I go to bed each night ruminating over how outstanding a piece of literature of Leaves is, and this leaves me, at times, a little deflated at the seemingly zero-probability of myself, or anyone else for that matter (but most especially myself), writing a piece of comparable excellence. Upon the advice of a close acquaintance, I no longer compare my work with that of the aforementioned authors—especially Danielewski—as this is in a very real way psychological suicide. When I receive my copy of of Leaves, I intend to read it through a second time, not looking to so much mimic Danielewski’s writing style, but to use it as an augmentation to my own, which presently might be counted amongst the likes of your castaway penny dreadfuls.

    Where this concerns any of you is advice. Any advice you could offer in developing my style of writing, please, do not hesitate to assert; I would greatly appreciate it. I’m sure that some of you are college professors or writers yourselves, and have much to share of your knowledge of the craft.

    [ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Arkady ]

    [ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Arkady ]

    [ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Arkady ]

    Comment


    • #3
      Developing one's writing style . . .

      At my site, sure. www.hushmonger.net It's really just a journal site, but if you look through the more recent "Chronicles," which are basically just melodramatised journal entries, you'll get a decent sample of my writing. Sometimes the content is a little dicey (no nudity or gore, though), so you've been forewarned. As of recent, I've done nothing in the way of short stories, since I'm seriously wanting for ideas. Er, maybe it's not so much that, as it is the need for a means of neatly structuring the ideas I have. Thanks for the reply, Axolotl.

      [ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Arkady ]

      Comment


      • #4
        Developing one's writing style . . .

        I'm sure that many will disagree with what I have to say, but I speak from my own experiences only.

        Bob Dylan once said, "Colleges are like old-age homes, except more people die in colleges." I thought this was amusing when I read this during my first year of college, and I wasn't really prepared learn how true it is.

        With the lack of any other decent ideas, I went to school for art. I was conviced that I could make a living either selling paintings, or playing music on the side. In the years that I attended school, I learned a great deal about not only art, but music, literature, philosophy, and other things I've long since forgotten.

        I also learned that I hated the art world. No, not the art itself, but the pretentious pricks that created it. The deeper I looked, the more I saw it. I knew this wasn't my place. In the end, I learned that I didn't even like art enough to devote my livelihood to it; it was merely something I was good at doing.

        Well, if I were to have any advice after this pointless story, it would be this: go to school, take the classes, and take what you need from them. If you truly love your craft, your doors will remain opened. Don't let a few bad instructors or foolish students ruin what you have.

        You are also intelligent enough to understand that you will have to have an income while you create your work (I never looked this far ahead). Believe me, after a long day at work, it can be difficult to harness the motivation to work on what is important to you, and believe me, at times it will seem like a lot of work.

        Devotion is the key. Keep in mind that Jimi Hendrix wasn't born a great guitar player. He made himself one through years of practice. You may lose touch with people along the way, mostly people that don't understand your devotion. It happens. Just remember your ultimate goal.

        I hope that I've helped in any way. I also hope to someday be opening an excellent book with your name on the front cover.

        Comment


        • #5
          Developing one's writing style . . .

          *nodding emphatically*

          what thomasj said about school is so damn true, you don't even understand!

          i am currently double majoring in philosophy and poetry (they had to make up the poetry degree just for me, woo hoo! =]) at a very small, very EXPENSIVE catholic college (and no, i'm not catholic. wierd, eh?). EVERYONE there is majoring in business. even if it bores them to death and they absolutely hate it more than anything in the world, even if they get bad grades cuz its so damn lame, even if they can't even imagine running a company as a career, they are ALL majoring in business. people have been known to either burst out laughing or walk slowly away from me when i tell them i'm doing my philosophy/poetry thing. this is a horrible generalization, but all the kids there come from extremely rich families, and "do something that will make you money" has been pounded into their brain so much that they don't even know what "do something because you want to do it" means. do you really want to learn stuff at school that you're not interested in, just for the sake of the goddamn bling bling (heh)? that's logical, that's realistic, but its also fucking boring and its not PASSION. if i were you, i would screw the school entirely and lock yourself in a room with nothing but a typewriter, some wine, and some tomato juice.

          kay, i got carried away there a bit. my point is that you've gotta do what you love, even if its not logical. the whole point of love is being incredibly illogical and insane just for something that makes you happy. do you love writing? then show the world how much you goddamn love it! make it your life! be brave! be bold! don't get lost in the sea of business majors strapping themselves in for nine to five death!

          *phew*

          umm.... oh, yah, and don't mimic or study other people's writings. everyone on here will eat me alive for this one, and so would a few of the most brilliant instructors i've ever met, but i think it limits the creativity crawling around your brain by forcing you to forget what you know, and know what someone else knows instead. you're you. if i'm going to read something by you, i don't want to read pahalunik (i can never spell his damn name right), i don't want to read MZD, i'd want to read something that is one hundred percent yours, inspired by your mind and your experiences and your feelings and your passion. does that make a bit of sense? sorry if it doesn't.

          don't take my advice though.
          i'm crazy, definitely crazy.

          *runs into a wall*

          see, only a crazy person would run into a wall at eight in the morning!

          errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr........

          Comment


          • #6
            Developing one's writing style . . .

            Do what moves you.

            Check out Stephen King's "On Writing" if you get the chance (Harold Washington Library has a TON of copies on the 7th floor, fellow Chicagoan!)

            I think the first and foremost step, it is to write every single day, even if it is crap. I'm not a writer; but I could be one if i really tried. I took Fiction Writing as a professed minor went I went to Columbia College and came up with some good shit that I let go by the wayside and put my creative energy towards music creation instead. I've ignored it big time due to personal events in my life. Mmaybe I will pick it up again, after reading your post--you sound determined and inspiring.

            A great exercise to do if you ride in public transportation--sit near a talkative person and try to transcribe what they saying (but odn't let 'em catch you, dummy [img]images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]). Note *how* they say things as well as what they say. Incorporate THAT into a story.

            Comment


            • #7
              Developing one's writing style . . .

              Thomas J, Girl2, you both bring up excellent points about college and school in general, really, and I thank you so much for the encouragement. You have no clue at all of the gravity and reverence with which I regard such honest and well-meaning words. What you have to say actually gives me insight. During my high school experience, I possessed a fervour for reading great literature and writing, which other students would ridicule and cause me to feel inferior about. Because, as I did write better than most other students in the school (or so it seemed, at any rate—my writing is trash, as it stands), this feather in my cap, so to speak, came at the expense of maintaining any sort of social life. Blah-blah-blah. There's a quote by John Dryden: "There is a pleasure sure, in being mad, which none but madmen know." If anywhere, it certainly has applied here.

              Matters as these are no longer concerns anymore, because I feel I have a clear-cut purpose, an end, if you will. I simply require the means to bring it to fruition. Thomas J, you’re right: devotion is the key. But the matter stands as to how exactly I can best devote my time to the study of literature. Mind you, I do all my best studying (and consequently, the most learning) independently. That’s not to say that I’m in any way abhorrent of useful suggestion as to how I might better my study time and methods. So, what I’m asking you, Girl2, and anyone else who reads this post is: how exactly does one go about studying a given author. Well, obviously, someone’s going to answer, “By reading his books, tard-ass!” Granted. As I stated earlier, my copy of of Leaves is in the mail. But what am I looking out for?

              Again, understand that I do not intend to just emulate Danielewski’s style, but rather to use it sort-of as a reference point, kinda like Chuck Palahniuk does with novels by Amy Hempel, Denis Johnson, and F. Scott Fitzgerald. Girl2, I can totally understand your perspective. It’s just that I realise that in and of myself, I probably do not possess the raw smarts to rival a writing style the likes of Danielewski’s. After all, for what it’s worth, he did, at one time, attend Yale. By comprehending and likening my style to his, I can from there deviate from that point into an even better, more unique, style. But first, I have to pay my dues and learn what Mark Z. Danielewski and other authors I deem worthy have to teach me, because like Thomas J said, “Devotion is the key. Keep in mind that Jimi Hendrix wasn't born a great guitar player. He made himself one through years of practice.” I’m certain he did. And I’m certain, also, that he put a helluva lot of time and effort into studying the guitarists he most admired.

              All replies to this post are much appreciated, as I realise this is entirely apart from the norm here. Girl2, Thomas J, Axolotl, thanks again for your replies.

              By the way, Thomas J, I recognise that haiki from Fight Club. [img]images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

              Comment


              • #8
                Developing one's writing style . . .

                Eh, don't mind me. I'm just presently in a position for the next hour or so where I can tentatively reply to posts as they come in. I promise you'll hear nothing from me while I'm at work for 5 hours. Agrimorfee, it's funny that you mention On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft by Stephen King. I'm actually reading it for the second time through. The narratives toward the start of the novel are hilarious and intriguing, to say nothing of inspiring, and the advice King offers toward the middle and latter portions of the book are helpful. Sometimes, though, I can only take what King has to say with a grain of salt, because reputedly he has a high proclivity for churning out slightly re-hashed versions of old material.

                Aside from that, I admire his voracious lust (addiction?) for writing. The only thing impeding his progress these days is his eye disease. In a very real way, he's a modern day Beethoven.

                Yes, I write everyday, though for months, now, at a loss for original ideas; most of what I write are re-runs of past originals, which really isn't saying much. I keep a journal, but, anymore, most of it is just self-replicating whiny monologues about nothing important. So it goes. Upon the suggestion of Mr. King, I've also picked up a copy of The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White. It has much to do with the nicities of writing, the ins and outs as to why some things work and why others simply do not. I'm paraphasing King here, but probably every writer should have a copy of this book handy at their workplace.

                Agrimorfee, yes, currently I am taking public transporation, and you can be sure that from now on I'll take note of on-going conversations. I'm not much of a conversationalist, especially since, in a bitter twist of irony, I can't speak a tenth as well as I write, which really isn't saying much, and definitely does not boast well for future interviews with the press. ^^; Regardless, this gives you an idea of how bad off I am in that regard.

                Again, Agrimorfee, thank you kindly for your response. I've found it terribly helpful.

                [ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: Arkady ]

                Comment


                • #9
                  Developing one's writing style . . .

                  When it comes to studying the work of a particular author, I've always felt best about discussing the author or his/her works in a group. However, since you want to do this independently, you may want to read a book about a particular author.

                  Unfortunately, I don't think anyone has written a book about MZD. My suggestion is to, yes, read, re-read, and re-read his work, and draw your own conclusions.

                  Oh, yeah. Talk to yourself a lot. It helps to work things out in your head, and when others see you do this, it will undoubtedly give you the privacy you seek. lol

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Developing one's writing style . . .

                    Hey Arkady. I wanna second T-J in advising you to talk to yourself outloud a lot (it's best to do it when you're alone): it's a great way of hashing through ideas and interrogating yourself and what you're doing, and it helps you with clarity of thought and expression. That's great advice from Agrimorfee. I'd add to it that you sort of use your diary to put down the actual things people say. I've been keeping a diary for almost thirty years, and when I read over it, a lot of the best stuff is what specific people said on specific occasions. If you have friends you really like that say amazing things all the time, be sure to write down some of their best lines. Often you'll find you've captured their character, and it'll sometimes make you realize why you like them. You might want to read some of the great diarists and see how they do stuff.
                    For my money, some of the best are Kafka,
                    Kierkegaard, Virginia Woolf, Sylvia Plath. It might be a help to you as a writer, cuz
                    often in their diaries, the writers we admire are rawer and unedited, so you get a bit more of an immediate sense of the writer's sensibility at work, how the writer' mind reacts to its surroundings. Some of the great writers are sort of lousy diarists, though, so you might not want to wade through them: Robert Musil, Thomas Mann,
                    Albert Camus.

                    Keep writing that diary, cuz it's where a lot of us get all of our lousy writing out of our systems.

                    I say you're well on your way. Just keep doing what you're doing. You express yourself pretty well on your posts and you read a lot of good stuff. Since great books can be so intimidating they'll squirm you into not writing, you might want to try some of the real shite books pretty good writers have written. You might not write something as perfect as A Farewell to Arms or Go Tell it On the Mountain, but if you read Hemingway's The Torrents of Spring, you'll realize you can definitely write better than Hemmy on a bad day--no offense to the fellow Chicagoan. When you find published writing by established writers that you think is really bad, that can be more encouraging than when you read something that grabs you like HOL.

                    I'd recommend you keep even your most brutally crumby diary entries, though, cuz that way you get a sense of progress and development as you get older.

                    You're already laying yourself open to other writers, so you've already made an important step.

                    "To write is thus both to disclose the world and to offer it as a task to the generosity of the reader. It is to have recourse to the consciousness of others in order to make oneself recognized as essential to the totality of being; it is to wish to live this essentiality by means of interposed persons; but, on the other hand, as the real world is revealed only by action, as one can feel oneself in it only by exceeding it in order to change it, the novelist's universe would lack thickness if it were not discovered in a movement to transcend it."
                    --Sartre, What is Literature?

                    Check out Sartre's The Words, where he divides his early life into two phases: Reading, Writing (if you haven't already). If JPS seems a little intimidating, keep in mind, he's just about the best mind the whole twentieth century puked up.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Developing one's writing style . . .

                      gah! the elements of style! strunk and white!

                      *horrible tenth grade flashbacks*

                      aaaah!

                      *sprints away from the evil*

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Developing one's writing style . . .

                        and if you do read sylvia plath's journals, make sure you get the UNedited version...

                        damn ted hughes...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Developing one's writing style . . .

                          With you all. I went to film school for three years and hated it. Not the filmaking, just the people, students with no sight and lecturers who can only judge you based on how you've understood established filmaker's work. It's so stifling.


                          For what it is worth:

                          I made a mistake. I used to write all the time, almost obsessively. I reasoned that writing is what I loved and I find it an easy thing to do so I got a job as a writer. So I wanted to write a novel, but writing all day leaves me with no desire to write in my spare time. And I've been working on my first 'big' idea for a year now and have a fragmented prologue and a bunch of notebooks. It's depressing. Get a mindless job that pays the rent and doesn't sap your reserves. (For those who like happy endings, I'm an editor these days so I don't write much at work anymore and am getting my novel back on track)

                          Other suggestions:

                          Find a place where you can write easily. For me this is public places, particularly trains for some reason. I find it easier to focus in a busy place. Put me in a silent room and I can't concentrate.

                          Write daily for a set period of time. Doesn't matter when. For me, I get all my best ideas in the middle of the night when I'm trying to sleep. Sleep deprivation is good for the imagination. Messes with your logic glands though.

                          Write as much as you can then cut it to shreds. Similar to editing a film, you can see your work getting tighter and more focused. If you're not precious about your work this'll come easier and its one of the most satisfying things in the world.

                          Studying authors is all well and good but is best done unconsciously. Else it becomes formulaic. Find something that evokes some emotion in you and work backwards from that point. Ask how the author did that to you. It's not at all easy. e.g. How do you write a character that is likeable?

                          Find someone on your wavelength, preferably another writer, who you can trust and show them what you've done. If you can find someone who is prepared to tell you honestly what they think, its an invaluable tool.

                          Write honestly, don't adopt a style - you have one and its you.

                          Don't read any books about novel writing.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Developing one's writing style . . .

                            to all participants of this thread: great posts!

                            arkady: im also starting at college this fall... what sort of college are you gonna go to? mine is a united world college, dont know if you know what that is, but it follows the IB program and has students from like 70 different countries [img]images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]... im mainly taking subjects within social studies (history and economics) and language/literature (english and norwegian)...

                            but i guess like girl2 and thomasj say, the most important thing when it comes to learning is not what the school does, but what you do. the past years ive probably learned a lot more from my personal reading than anything at school (except the more basic things in different, definite subjects)...

                            girl2: the sort of school you described sounds terrible! i mean with all the "brainwashed" students seeking only educations leading to financially profitable jobs... i think schools should make sure to encourage individual thinking in students when it comes to career-path selection- so they choose whats right for them and not what will make them the most money..

                            okay dokay, my school year begins in one month! ill be sure to tell you how it is (and please tell me about yours, arkady)!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Developing one's writing style . . .

                              My advice/comment is probably not useful for anyone reading it. If you read it and it helps, good. If you read it and it didn't Yah!! I wasted a part of your life reading something useless!!

                              I went to Leeds University and graduated in astrophysics, making sure I had something solid to fall back on (if all else failed I could be a science teacher), and then trained in my true passion: photography. Fortunately that is panning out and I have no need for the science teacher thing. However, my degree is not useless, since I am now doing scientific imaging (forensic stuff mostly - dead people), and find the science training always helped me work more efficiently than my peers, who were all at least 5 years younger than me.

                              The advice I think I am getting around to is that even if you come out of college/university thinking it didn't help you, it probably did more than you will ever know. I know that my time in Leeds taught me more about independence, communication skills and self-reliance than it ever taught me about relativity (although some of that stuff is pretty damn cool).

                              In other words, I found the learning process more useful than the things I learned. If someone 18-20 is unsure whether they are going to study the right thing at college, I would say it probably doesn't matter.


                              "Don't feel guilty if you don't know what to do with your lives. The most interesting people I know didn't know, at twenty-two, what they wanted to do with their lives. Some of the most interesting forty year olds still don't."

                              - Baz Luhrman "Everyone's Free (To Wear Sunscreen)"

                              By the way:

                              quote:
                              Originally posted by Arkady:
                              ...beyond marks and capitalisation...


                              ...Marks and Capitalisation? Marks? Marx? Capitalism? Haha... I'm going to imagine that was intentional [img]images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

                              [ July 26, 2002: Message edited by: fatwoul ]

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X