Condemning Conspiracy

E: Writing For Your Lives I T: Amused

Chapter One:

 

 I got this book today. It’s called “Write For Your Lives” by Jospeh Sestito. Assignment 1.1:Getting At the Root. What is the origin of the book, what is it trying to tell me?

--

 At the moment I can’t give a complete answer. I can say that it’s wanting me to explore different religions (possibly) or at least myself in a way that I can find inner happiness.

Chapter Two:

 

 Wisdom is the opposite of ignorance, and when you have it you understand that nothing exist permanently all by itself, independent of everything.

 

 As far as I can tell, the Buddhist avoid negative emotion and focus on the positive. However, I don’t understand it thoroughly because I recently grabbed this book but it seems that you throw away those emotions completely. The book mentions that one should schedule writing for two hours at the maximum each day they decide on writing.

On a degree of someone who hasn’t started their writing journey I believe this is understandable. Although, if I were to maximise my writing time to two hours a day I’d be limiting myself. It says to write for two hours in the same setting around the same time. That could probably be around six in the morning to eight in the morning in my room or in the kitchen. But either way… I don’t believe (with as much as I write) that I can force myself to not express myself

 Who knows. I can try writing for only two hours a day but then I’d have to time myself. Before,I used to write from ten at night till twelve so that I could go to sleep but then it turned into from ten at night till two in the morning. Within time, I’d start to write at ten and wouldn’t quit until four or five in the morning. Sometimes I’d write till six.

 After a few ‘nights’ of this I began to write the moment I got home from work which would be around eight to nine in the afternoon. Then, I started to get tired by twelve again. However, it slowly bleed its way to two in the morning and the four. So, I try not to write my way into sleep but it somewhat helps get the ideas out.

 I think I’ll try writing for two hours at the max for a week. I’ll see how that goes…Sestito uses a lot of references. I’m guessing he’s probably amazing at essay writing. I suck at essays.He mentions the All-or-Nothing approach in writing. “Sartre proposes that you are either heroic or weak.”

 Without bringing in Sestito’s response to this I can already give one of my characters the complexity of both. Sinoak is the strongest character in Eyes of the Deceived when I first wrote it and is the weakest emotionally because she’s pushed forward past the second thought of doubt prior to the world around her. She’s emotinally weak yet physically strong. She’s heroic when she needs to set into her game but alone she is weak.

 Now going back to the book. The statement that wins against the either or thought process is “you are also constantly changing.” Because of this, there’s no set side of one’s self being heroic or weak. For the most part, I set off the heroic side of me but in cases of right now (with my father and uncle in law on the verge of death as they say) I am weak. However, I am heroic for letting everyone tell me of the feel about the situation and not allow them to see that the moment they’re not in my presence I’m on the verge of tears.

 As I finish reading this section I realize that this was meant for people who thought in that manner. I don’t know how my writing style is. In the call of all-or-nothing you’re writing is either good or bad. One would think that their writing was amazing regardless of what people say and not focus on the reader. What the book recommends is to focus more on the reader and how one can help the reader. By doing this, there isn’t as much of a focus on how well the writing is but rather how it’ll help others and how it influences.