Writing

Now that is has been a while since it's release a well rounded consensus can be established. Disregarding the overall quality of the execution of how the story was told, did it have a reason for existing? Did anybody feel that the book justified its existence by providing a well needed chapter of emotional development missing from Harry Potter's character arc?

REVISION: How can writing benefit a student in all jobs/careers?

What is important and necessary when becoming an author? This topic is about helping others outside of the book store, and keeping the ideas of others fresh. Help those who need help, and inspire those who need inspiring. Sometimes, we can only introspect so far, and need some outside advice.

As writers, we ground ourselves in the do's and don't's of writing and study those who come before us. But, if you strip every fiction story ever told to the bare, bare bones, you'll find that stories all move in a similar way. One of two things happens: Someone leaves town to go on an adventure, or a stranger comes to town. What does this mean to us as writers? Do we write the same stories or do we refine the same stories as time passes?

Scholars of literature have argued over Romanticism and Neo-Classicism as one happens to follow the other in writing movements, though the two are starkly different from each other. A huge shift in narrative expression, especially in poetry, is seen as written works shift from the garnished Neo-Classist to the emotional Romantic. Which style is truly more moving to the audience: The grandiose and otherworldly descriptions in Neo-Classicism, or the human and personal confession of Romanticism? Most would say Romanticism as it is easier to relate to for the audience. Rather than describe something as untouchable by all else and remove the audience from the piece (which is what Neo-Classicism tends to do), Romanticism brings the audience in and puts them in the poem or story with the speaker. An audience is more easily moved when they are emotionally and personally engaged.

The standard tense that most novels are written in appears to be past tense but more recently, especially in amateur writing like fanfiction, there is a shift towards writing in present tense. Why is it shifting?

Perhaps it is due to the immediacy and the ability to better characterize in the moment that lends itself well to the fast-paced, character-driven structure of fanfiction.

It would be interesting to look at this shift and see if it enhances the writing, if these stories tend to be more popular, and then perhaps compare fanfiction to its published counterpart. Is this same trend happening in novels? If so, why? Does it say anything about the current media-consuming generation's predilections and preferences in story telling?

Even a brief examination of the history of literature, poetry and playwriting reveals that much of humankind's essence has already been explored in a myriad forms. We, as modern writers, are trying to find new things to say about emotions, beliefs, states of mind, and ideas that have been with us for millennia. Can anything new be said, or is everything just a reformulation of old things? Has writing exhausted its potential for innovation?

All said, does novelty even matter? It could be that there is "nothing new under the sun" in terms of literary explorations of emotions, thoughts and human experiences. However, is it more important that something new actually be said or that an artist tries to do so? Why? What makes either attempt successful or unsuccessful?

To what extent should a reader consider the author's intention in producing the work? Is the reader's individual relationship to the written work more important than the author's intended effect? Does the author have any right to dictate what the work should mean to the reader? Or, can the author only provide an interpretation of their own work and leave the rest to the reader? Consequently, are all interpretations of a written work, however absurd, valid and worthwhile? Whose opinion matters more?