Can a virgin shut-in autodidact be a good writer?

This sums up my own situation well. I have found the true and genuine great thinkers of history have always deviated to some extent from the common "intellectual".

There are people feeling dead inside from reading all day just as much as there are people feeling dead inside from wagecucking mon-fri. You would feel much more alive staring at the ceiling or writing a journal.

>There are people feeling dead inside from reading all day just as much as there are people feeling dead inside from wagecucking mon-fri. You would feel much more alive staring at the ceiling or writing a journal.

Well sure but I mean the monotonous existence of continual learning and uncreative thought may result in enjoyment from some rather than a deadness. that others get, although it will always lead to a uncreative mind within this specific example.

This guy knows.

Also, today with the internet you have acess to information about almost alllife situations. Let's say you want to write about a fireman whose son is battling cancer. You can look for diaries about cancer (from the perspective of the sick and of their relatives) and the work of firefighters. You can see the inside of hospitals and firefighting facilities with youtube. You can even research chemotherapy drugs and cancer types and radiation therapy machines, all online (even scientific articles).

This is mostly incorrect.
How can he be expected to write about, say, a relationship, if he has not experienced it himself? He could only reflect back on the writings of others on that topic, which is poor form.

So from what you are saying what really matters is the feelings you have experienced? Love, loneliness, anger, boredom etc.
After all the details of a relationship aren't hard to figure out and are always given infinite artistic liberty.

most good books are a mixture of the author using what they know and learning about what they do not know. This is what I was referring to tempering ones writing with what they know, their life experience and what it has taught them. Few fiction writers write strictly about what they know, and even fewer of them pull it off when they do, it is fiction after all, lots of breathing room here.

you do not know that OP has no relationships, just no sex. Also, nothing says OP needs to write about relationships in the normal sense, plenty of great books do not.

Yes, essentially.
Technical knowledge can be learned easily, especially in the digital age, but the actual intimate things, not so much.
He's defined himself as shut in virgin autodidact, there isn't much hope of him being a celibate Casanova.

writing is hard
i get stuck and dont know where to go next
i cant plan
i get bored and lose motivation and go off on some other idea
it takes too long and i need instant gratification
im just a shit

>Love, loneliness, anger, boredom

Relationships are not just the feeling alone but the specific details involved. You must know the exact look she gives in the morning, the things she says when on the phone talking to the mother whom she secretly resents, the specific job gripes she will reveal to you on some languid day when both of you have decided to go to a movie, but decided not to at the last moment, and are now wandering in a park where there is plenty of shade, and where she tells you that a certain business executive is getting on her case for being unable to resolve a deal with Vietnam, and you must describe how you will point towards some child at a nearby fountain, wearing a red shirt accompanied his family, how that reminds you of the early periods when you, too, wore a red shirt, and how all red shirts seem now to you a manifestation of one's dying memories- and you must describe how she sighs and leans closer for a kiss, the exact taste of that kiss, the contours, the smell, and, then, how she wonders if that movie you previously thought of going but did not go because she didn't feel like it... was that movie any good? Why didn't you want to see it darling? I felt deja vu, like I had seen it before. Then let us go to some cafe, sip coffee, stare into one another, and hope that we will not become the red shirts of laughing children. Yes. Yes. Lets.

>it takes too long and i need instant gratification
>im just a shit

That's one thing I envy in musicians. Beethoven and Mozart produced far more and much faster than novelists and playwrights, because music is a different medium. You can write a shymphony in 2-3 months, but a good novel ussualy takes at least 1-2 years.

A wonderful wooden reason

You have two parents for a reason.

Unless you dont which in that case sucks for you

yes, you can be a good writer without having much life experience.

How do you write a conversation if you are unable to converse in real life?

that was pretty much Proust, excep the was homo, well, sort of, maybe just in intent. He didn't get out much.

desu why hurt me

Attached: photo_2019-02-16_21-22-43.jpg (750x481, 25K)

Does anyone else trawl the Internet just to find Lain somewhere inside?

just don't write about sex & use spellchecker

That’s what I’m afraid of, I’m trying to write a fiction novel with a significant love interest aspect in it but I’ve never experienced love or even any sort of relationship with a girl

Lovecraft wrote well and he spent like 5 years of his life doing absolutely nothing (does anyone have that screen cap btw)?

Also Tatsuhiko Takimoto wrote an entire book about how he couldn't leave his room.

Attached: 1501958956353.png (818x434, 134K)

Emily Dickinson proves autistic shutins can be great writers.

i would argue that anyone can create art that's impactful because if you find a way to take your personal experiences and present them in such a way that people can connect with them, then they will, and you've accomplished what should happen

>Tatsuhiko Takimoto
Is Welcome to the NHK(Novel) worth reading? I just want the best form of the story that conveys the authors ideas the best.

The novel is very much worth reading, and both it and the anime very much have their reasons to exist. I recommend checking both of them out.

The novel is more psychological and philosophical than the anime. You get to see the inside of Satou's head as every day has a new existential crisis, and many of his rants come off as the ramblings of a madman. It's also darker with more perverse characters and events.

However the Anime has more of a story to it and is much broader in terms of the subjects it tackles, as It features a plethora side stories not present in the novel, that shine an in-depth spotlight on all sorts of degeneracy. The plot also has more of a mystery to it too.

>I needed a gf to figure out people are complex
Absolutely pathetic. You proved yourself wrong. Stay out of writing that was trite trash fyi

Attached: 1523924933812.gif (368x349, 2.53M)

Jokes on you pal. I don't have a girlfriend.

Writing good shymphonies in a few month comes only after decades of learning the trade though.
Comparing the two seems to be a little besides the point.

>Do you need life experiences to be a good writer?
Not in the sense that you think of it. What is much more important is an ability to introspect and to learn from what experience you have.

"BUT user a book should take no more than a season to finish."

Attached: 280x425.jpg (280x425, 20K)

autodidact isn't even a real thing. You're probably meaning to say like half a brain personality disorder and want to just arrive at some disabliity and push it for a while but if you mean a scared kid that flips over to answers and problems and then math and running away, then, you wouldn't be a bad writer if you were actually interested in it because you wouldn't do anything else. Naturally. Of course, it's more like you're interested in covering bases for people so maybe you should look into becoming a civil servant. I think you have a black boyfriend and he works at the dmv or something.

That is just because you can make self-indulgent music in moments just by following the formulas. It's Stephen King tier and it is only not called out because most people don't have the knowledge of music theory. Mozart's entire life was basically this, it's why he has 40 symphonies and only 2 of them are famous.

While he may only have two famous symphonies, there are not that many famous symphonies and the only reason they are played by any famous orchestra is to get the attention of the casually interested.

You are reducing him cliche that orchestras use to get people to buy tickets, he has a great deal of worthwhile work beyond those and most anyone who knows their music theory would not reduce him down to formula even if they do not like his work. Lots to learn from Mozart, did some interesting things.

I kind of hate his aesthetic though.

Mahler wrote 9 symphonies, Shostakovich 15 and the majority are widely performed. Any layman could tell each one of them took far more effort than your average Mozart or Haydn. It could easily match the amount of dedication put into a novel.

y do u need 2 write abt relationships

You are a genuine retard if you think this. Seriously. There’s not only one type of romantic relationship, and you clearly don’t even understand that.

>Any layman could tell each one of them took far more effort than your average Mozart or Haydn
There is no way you can qualify that, ask a layman how long they think it takes to write a symphony, the results will be useless. You could easily skew the results of a comparison by what you played them, not really going to get the layman to listen to the entire catalog of all of them and remember them well enough to form a judgement on who spent the most time on their work.

Neither Mahler or Shostakovitch have the fame of Mozart and Haydn, they wrote music that is accessible to most anyone and that is why they have the status they do and people love to shit on them with weak arguments.

I really hate Haydn's aesthetic.

Think it is pretty clear user was saying that to write a realistic relationship you need to know those small details, you need to figure out the minutiae even if they are not part of the book, it is part of know the character well enough to write about them in a convincing manor, especially in the case of an intimate relationship.

Not sure how anyone can read that as the definitive relationship.

>dO YoU NEeed REAL LIFE to make FAKE LIFE??????????????///
no way, just be yourself
you learned everything you need to know inside your containment cage

houellebecq.info/popdivers.php?id=13

Attached: image_12333508.jpeg.jpg (1200x512, 223K)

yeah

Attached: Celine.jpg (196x266, 9K)

>That is just because you can make self-indulgent music in moments just by following the formulas. It's Stephen King tier and it is only not called out because most people don't have the knowledge of music theory. Mozart's entire life was basically this, it's why he has 40 symphonies and only 2 of them are famous.

I am a complete pleb when it comes down to music: I cannot read music scores and don't know how to play any instrument. I like to listen to classical music, thought, and I recently discovered some symphonies of Mozart that are not that famous, but that I loved very much.
They are:

Symphony nº 38 (Prague) – It’s one of my favourites
Symphony nº 35 (Haffner)
Symphony nº 34

And of course, symphony nº 39, one of the last three, but that is not as famous as the other two. The first movement, slowly soaring higher and higher, is quite beautiful, in my opinion.

You're a fucking idiot, the user was right, you can not make up details during sex also, you can not know the feeling of a bead of sweat that is dropping from your girlfriends forehead as she is guiding your cock into her vagina after it slipped out, you can not know how it smells, these things have to be experienced and everyone will be able to tell if you are a virgin by the way you write about sex. So a lot of people leave it out because they don't know what romantic sex is like.

>houellebecq.info/popdivers.php?id=13
>This site is currently suspended
Truly demonic

>There is no way you can qualify that
By the fact that Mahler's symphonies last thrice as long and feature thrice the number of instruments. My point is, in Mozart's time symphonies were not much more than pulp fiction, so we should really be comparing a novel like War and Peace to more serious symphonies from the late romantic.

It was up earlier... I can't find it anywhere else so here: docs.google.com/document/d/13gK9EYCsGJkX8Sp63ktvoH1KT9vsLsE4WxnyY6wJIVc/edit

>virgin shut-in autodidact
That's literally Borges, so the answer is yes.

To write uniquely
>you need unique experiences
or
>you need unique thought
but most importantly
>you need to write
Odds are that you've never really written OP. And no matter how much you try and justify what little you have done you know the truth is that you literally cannot exert yourself to write the yuge volume of writing it takes before you actually start producing unique work. Not that you aren't capable of writing well but that you literally cannot work. You lack the ethic which compels you to work. You never developed it. And you know---ironically even---that it can only be cultivated by actually working. This is not unlike those two locked boxes which each held the others' key. This uneasy paradox of work ethic is literally the reason why you,me or any of us will never work.
>yes but what then?
Of the people who have 'done it' there are two kinds. The first are those who with the aid of lady luck have found success to come to them with any doing of theirs. Clearly you aren't one among them. The second are those who have ignored the paradox of work ethic entirely and just done what they have loved. Mind you, you don't need to like what you love.
>or maybe all of this is bull and you are just a faggot

>you don't need to like what you love
Thanks user, well said

Borges was one, but he did read a billion books.

I know the point you ard trying to make but all you are demonstrating is a rudimentary knowledge of music theory at best.

Write the book, expose Mozart's formula, it will make your career if you can pull it off.

He has some great work and most that go beyond the big two find others to be much better. He is stigmatized by the over played bits.

This is fucking cringy dude

I recommend you read the short story "The Last Question" by Isaac Asimov, and while you're reading it ask yourself, "Was this story the product of life experience?"

I think you'll find that the answer is "No."

Attached: R-7365528-1439906601-2177.jpeg.jpg (599x589, 119K)

yikes

Holy fucking cringe

t. Virgins

this reads like an edgy ya novel

Loneliness, bitterness, disappointment, hopelessness, etc. *ARE* life experiences. Wealthy, good-looking people falsely promote the idea that "meaningful life experiences" are just enjoyable things, so that they can portray themselves indulging in pleasures (nothing wrong with that) as something spiritually/intellectually "meaningful" rather than just physically satisfying.

You write about your own life experiences. If your life experiences are misery and despair then you write about that.

But does that sell?

Attached: __fujimaru_ritsuka_and_mash_kyrielight_fate_grand_order_and_etc_drawn_by_kouji_campus_life__770b04a1 (337x304, 45K)

Not really but you can make good literature around that. Kafka, Pessoa, Dazai and so on are examples.

>Neither Mahler or Shostakovitch have the fame of Mozart and Haydn, they wrote music that is accessible to most anyone and that is why they have the status they do and people love to shit on them with weak arguments.
Neither Joyce or Goethe have the fame of King and Rowling, they wrote literature that is accessible to most anyone and this is why they have the status they do and people love to shit on them with weak arguments

For structure, his compositions followed standard forms the were popular during his times and the gallant movement e.g. composing rondos and sonata-allegro form
For his harmonies you can just read any single treatise on harmony written in the past 300 years and then do the same thing as Mozart. His rough draft works were literally just him writing out a melody line and filling in the accompanying chords.
If we want to critique his composing further, his modulations are incredibly awful.
It honestly sounds like you are the one with little knowledge of music theory.

But how do you keep from reading yourself silly ? I thought that spending more time reading would make you smarter.

you need to reach your own conclusions, user, you need to improve yourself and constantly question your motives and opinions. there is no set of rules for this one, just remember to go out and live as an aware person because otherwise the things you have read wont matter since you have never applied them and learned from it.

>Still a retard.

>That was...

Attached: 224B92AD-9DDA-4E41-8260-299987DA2FFC.jpg (1280x720, 109K)

So, did it seem like it took life experience to write that?

No. Just a culmination of reading. Its something special when the author can evoke that spine-chilling sensation in you at the end. It leaves you in bliss and surprise. True comfiness...

Attached: 08F3A70F-E4D7-47D2-9545-8DFA59FF7EB7.png (567x960, 1011K)

>Myers-Briggs thread on Yea Forums
This has surely been done before?
Best board for it.

He did not exactly follow the established forms, certainly built upon the past, just as Mahler did, his contributions to the piano concerto come to mind. He also worked in forms and with ensembles that were thought not suitable for serious music, many are now standards and he cerainly played a role in that.

Even the harmony of Mozart's time was considerably more nuanced than you make it out. This argument means you either do not know theory or assume I do not, it is weak.

Can you give me a few examples of these aweful modulations along with analysis and explanations of what makes them so bad, using the ideas of his era of course, no fair judging by modern standards. Your choice on the method of analysis.

Tell me what lasting influence and innovation Mozart provided in your opinion; what did his piano concertos do better than, for example, Bach's concertos and where are these nuances you speak of? His composing was full of clichés.
Give me a bit of time to pull up some of his compositions.

>NEET shut-in

You might have the talent or the experience, but NEET-hood is a period of extreme stagnation and lethargy, I highly doubt you'd complete much in that state.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahhahahhahahahahahahaaaa

If memory serves he changed how the piano and orchestra worked together and played with the structure some. It has been awhile since I was forced to suffer through the romantics.

Also finding bad modulation in Mozart is not hard, I mean 600 works and all, somewhat a trap, but the exercise of analyzing music with the tools of its time is a good one and I am all for taking part in some theory fun.

There’s more to classical music than symphonies user.

YIKES

ONLY a virgin shut-in autodidact can be a good writer

Yes, there's more to literature than novels. Serious literature should be compared to serious music, that's all I wanted to say

I second this.
Past writers might have been more outgoing because that was the only way to experience real life. The best way to reflect the cultural and intellectual climate of the 21st century is to unironically be a virgin shut-in autodidact.

>Past writers might have been more outgoing because that was the only way to experience real life. The best way to reflect the cultural and intellectual climate of the 21st century is to unironically be a virgin shut-in autodidact.
I don't really have anything to add but I just want to say that you're 100% right