who unfortunately I did not tell me stories, in our village people is close, yes, completely, one is a stranger there. They
them talking, sitting on their luggage in the evening to tell stories and stuff, but when one comes, they fall silent or begin to talk about the weather: "Today it seems that there are the clouds ..." Anyway, I did not have the fortune to hear the greatest story-telling why I had to invent them and I believe that precisely one of the principles of literary creation is the invention, imagination. We are liars, every writer who believes he is a liar, literature is a lie, but that lie out a recreation of reality to recreate reality is thus one of the fundamental principles of creation.
think there are three steps: the first is creating the character, the latter create the environment where that character will move and the third is how that character will speak, how they will express. These three points of support are all that is required to tell a story: now, I have him fear the blank page, and above all in pencil, because I write by hand, but I mean, more or less, what my procedures in a very personal way. When I started writing I do not believe in inspiration, I never believed in the inspiration, the subject of writing is a matter of work, start writing and see what comes out and fill pages and pages, to suddenly see a word that give the key to what to do, what will be that. Sometimes it is to write five, six or ten pages and not see the character I wanted to appear, the one real character has to move by itself. Suddenly appears and arises, one is going along, you go after him. To the extent that the character comes to life, one can, in ways that an unknown but, still alive, leading one to reality, or unreality, if you will. At the same time, manages to create what one can say that, ultimately, seems to have happened, or could have happened or might happen but never happened. So I think that this question of creation is fundamental to think about what one knows, what lies will say, think if you go into the truth, the reality of things known, as one has seen or heard, is making history, reportage.
I have long criticized my countrymen that I tell lies, do not do history, or that everything I talk or write, they say, has never happened and so. For me the first thing is the imagination, within three points of support of which we spoke earlier is flowing imagination, the imagination is infinite, no limits, and must break where you close the circle, there is a door can be a door window and that door must lead, must go. Thus it appears another thing called intuition: intuition leads one to think something that has not happened, but what is happening in writing.
Specifically, it works with: imagination, intuition and an apparent truth. When this is achieved, then accomplished the story you want to make known: the work is solitary, you can not conceive of collective work in the literature, and that alone leads one to become a kind of medium of things know yourself but not knowing that only the unconscious, or intuition lead one to create and keep creating.
I think that is, in principle, the basis of every story, of any story you want to say. Now, there is another element, another very important thing also is wanting to tell something about certain issues, we know perfectly well that there are only three basic themes: love, life and death. No more, no more tracks, so to capture their normal development, one must know how to treat them, how to give, not to repeat what others have said. Then, the treatment given to a story leads, although the subject has been treated infinitely, to say things differently, we are expecting the same thing been told from Virgil to not know who else, the Chinese or whoever . But you have to find the foundation, how to address the issue, and I think in creative writing, form-call-literary form is in force, which causes a history has an interest and call attention to others. As
publishes a story or a book, this book is dead, the author does not think about it again. Before, however, if not completely finished, what goes around in his head constantly: the issue is still hanging around until you realize, from experience, that is not concluded, that something has been left inside, then must restart the story, we must see where the failure have to see what the character did not move by itself. In my personal case, I have the feature eliminate me from the story, never tell a story that has personal experience that there is something autobiographical or that I have seen or heard, if I have to imagine or recreate, if ever there is a point of support. That is the mystery of literary creation is mysterious, and one concludes that if the character does not work, and the author has to help you survive, then it fails immediately. I'm talking about basic things, you must forgive me, but my experiences have been them, I never reported anything that has happened, my bases are intuition and, within that, there has emerged what is alien to the author.
The problem, as I said before, is to find the item, the character and what to say and what to do that character, how it will come alive. As the character is forced by the author, immediately gets into a dead end. One of the hardest things I've ever done, precisely, is the elimination of the author, remove myself. I let those characters work themselves and not my listing, because then entered the wandering of the trial, the vagary, does one even get their own ideas, he is a philosopher, in order, and you try to make believe in the ideology that has one, his way of thinking about life, or the world, human beings, what is the principle that moved the man's actions. When that happens, it becomes an essayist. We know of many novels, essay, literary work that is very novel-test; but generally, the genre that is less susceptible to this is the story. For me the story is a genre really more important than the novel because you have to concentrate on a few pages to say many things you have to synthesize, it should be curbed, in that the storyteller is a bit like the poet, the great poet. The poet has to be stopping the horse and not get out of hand, if goes on a rampage and write by writing, the words will come out one after another, and then just fails. The essential thing is just hold back, not out of hand, not empty, the story has this peculiarity, I just prefer the story, especially about the novel because the novel is strongly susceptible to these ramblings.
The novel, say, is a genre that encompasses all, is a pocket where it all fit stories, drama or action or non-philosophical philosophical essays, a number of topics which are going to fill that sack, whereas in the story is one that reduced synthesized and in a few words to say or tell a story that others tell in two hundred pages, that is, more or less, the idea that I have on the creation, on the principle of literary creation; clear that not a brilliant exposition that I'm doing, but I'm talking about a very basic, because I fear I have a lot of intellectuals, so I try to avoid them, when I see an intellectual, I will move back, and I think the writer should be the least intellectual of all thinkers, because their ideas and thoughts are very personal things that do not have to influence others or do what he wants others to do, when it comes to that conclusion, when it comes to that site, or call it final, then one feels that something has been achieved.
As you all know, there is no writer to write everything you think it is very difficult to transfer his thoughts to writing, I think nobody does, nobody did, but simply, there are many things to be developed are lost.
0 comments:
Post a Comment