The Last Adventurer

I had a lot of spare time on my hands this weekend. While crusing through the blogosphere, I did come across this blog. At first I was mystified - it said it was a blog - but it didnt read like one. So I kept reading. I noticed several things. While the subject material may be similar to some stuff thats already out there, because thats life, the writing is very unique. I dont want to necessarily say that its unpolished, because I dont completey think that it is, but its very raw. I guess how Id explain it is that its very in your face, Im going to tell my own story type of deal. Like with the crew bits, the guy just kept writing. Which I thought was neat, because a lot of people would definately change, especially with all of the criticism and all that. And sure, I might not like all the posts, but I do have to say that I like how the author is uncompromising with his vision. What says everyone else?

That's cause its called a blovel. If you had looked farther through the "blogosphere" you would have noticed this. But glad you found it here.

Ok, be nice. My favorite part lately has been the whole "looking through the spyglass" when the title was about looking for eels in the sea, very entertaining!

Aw yeah, that was funny. I definately had a chuckle when I saw the title refelected in the opening line.

I think we're talking about two different things here, what we liked recently, and what we think of the author's position with respect to convention. Maybe we could split up the two to make the reading easier for people?

As for the author's convention, without overly repeating that there are other blovel's, I would agree that he sticks to his guns, no matter what happens, which is a good things. Lots of people are too malleable when they get criticism, so conviction carries a lot in my book.

I think there's a bit of a difference between being inventive, necessarily, and sticking to a style stubbornly.

obviously, that concept is going to change depending on one's perspective. IMAO, the LA sticks to his style to the point of foolishness. If you look at the forum, you'll find a couple of instances where people basically told him to stop writing the thread, and he kept on.

However, he does turn a phrase well, so that is a plus. Overall, maybe a wash?

"you look at the forum, you'll find a couple of instances where people basically told him to stop writing the thread, and he kept on."

Unfair. If you look at those "instances", you'll find that there were some people that liked those stories, besides, what was he supposed to do - just drop the thread mid-way?

Hmm. I see that your name is already somewhat deserved. And yes, that's what he COULD have done. Just because some like it, doesn't mean that he has any obligation to continue.

Ok, ignoring your personal attacks, let's focus on your bad reasoning.

"Just because some like it, doesn't mean that he has any obligation to continue."

Conversely, just because some don't like it, doesnt' mean that he has to stop.

Well, if enough people don't like it, why not just admit failure, and be bold, and just abandon the project? In some cases, that almost might be better, because its more experimental!

That's a little weird. By that reasoning, anytime things go bad, you give up??? How is anything going to get done then?

That's why its called EXPERIMENTAL. People would be impressed by the author taking a different and better tack.

That's stupid. By that reasoning, anytime things go bad, you give up. By that reasoning, anytime someone has a different opinion, you give up. By that reasoning, anytime anything less than actual 100% consensus occurs, you change. But hey, its experimental. So I guess that makes it ok for some people.

Im not sure whats experimental about quitting.

The POINT is that he's not quitting, but changing. Leaving people hanging, etc. Get with what I'm saying!

Oh, i think we get what you're saying. Im just saying myself, I dont think people agree!

I def. get what he's saying. I just don't agree with it. I don't think quitting mid-story makes one experimetnal. I think it goes back to what the orignal guy was saying that the author sticks to his guns. How does doing what this other guy suggests make that so? It doesnt. And if everyone quit because of whatever reason, then nothing would ever get done. Its not an understanding issue, pal.

Hmmm. While one can praise the idea of "experimental" fiction until the cows come home, the reality of fiction is that most people want to know the end of the story. And I'm not sure why ending a story mid-way is necessarily a great option. But that's me.

If you leave half-way through, it allows the reader to formulate their own concept of what they think will happen, rather than dictating to them what to think.

Nah, it just annoys people who want to know what happens.