Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 01:38:59 -0400
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>, "'WSFA members'" <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Great Con Redux...(DMZ Version)
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

At 12:53 AM 10/18/2005 -0400, Ernest Lilley wrote:
>I think this is a neat program idea, but it might be kind of hard to
>implement, and would have to be juggled against all the other good ideas.

Agreed on all counts.  I think there are some authors who might be capable
and willing, but unless at least one is attending, it won't work out, even
if there's time in the program track for it.  Given what I've read in his
how-to books, Orson Scott Card might manage it as an audience participation
deal...his book on Character and Viewpoint describes similar things he's
done as part of teaching writing classes.

I've taken a few writing classes and I've seen the same thing I saw in
Calculus class.  No real explanation of *how* to do it, just examples of it
having been done, a command to go forth and do likewise, and evaluation of
the results.  I decided that my Calculus teacher didn't *know* how do do
Calculus...he just did it.  I got revenge on him years later when he was
teaching a class that involved some programming and couldn't figure out how
to write code, while I could without effort.  I used the same responses in
answer to his frustration that he'd used with mine...unfortunately, I'm not
sure he recognized them for what they were.  :-/

I think most writers are like my Calc teacher...they can do it, but they
don't know how they do it.  I do know that there are some who have greater
understanding of the process though...I've read some of their books about
it.  Perhaps one will be available, interested and there will be time for
it.  If not, it can stay in the "suggestion trunk" for some other time when
conditions are more favorable.

-- Mike B.
--
=============================================================================
| I didn't really say all the things that I said.  You probably didn't read |
| what you thought you read.  Statistics show that this whole thing is more |
| than likely just a hideous misunderstanding.                              |
============================================================================
=