tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-51987929144573189342024-03-13T12:21:47.450-07:00Rhysaurus Rexa modern glossary of terms useful in the world of genre fictionRhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comBlogger71125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-73947088006047026332013-12-08T03:37:00.004-08:002013-12-08T03:56:29.898-08:00Maturity WankerA <i>Maturity Wanker</i> is an insincere writer; insincere in a special way.
<br><br>
I recently read a book of stories by Milan Kundera. Although I enjoyed them enormously, if I was a (healthy) woman I would have been extremely annoyed by the sexual politics of the writing. All the stories were fundamentally based on the objectification of females.
<br><br>
Although I disapprove rationally of such an outlook, I like Kundera's honesty in this regard. He's utterly sincere about the cynicism of his own psychology, which, if we are going to be completely candid, is also the psychology of most males....
<br><br>
There are too many insincere writers out there who constantly glance over their shoulders to see who is behind them and tailor their prose to please that audience. "Better make myself look nice in front of women!" "Better make myself look compassionate and reasonable!" "Better do something to attract the pink pound and the socialists!"
<br><br>
Such writers are <i>maturity wankers</i>.
<br><br>
True sincerity is about accepting what you are; being open about your <i>perfectly natural</i> dark, aggressive and selfish desires (which are really only promptings of the Id, which we all have) and never pretending you don't have them. Morality consists in choosing reason over urge, not in pretending not to have the urge in the first place.<br><br>
Writers who pretend not to have the urge are <i>maturity wankers</i>. A great many modern writers are <i>maturity wankers</i>. They are, in fact, in the majority.
<br><br>
The prime aim of a male <i>maturity wanker</i> is to make himself look good. To make himself appear reasonable, nice, tolerant, fair, sagacious and ethical, and he does this for a specific and acqusitive purpose: to be approved of, to make himself liked by women in order to get them into bed more easily. Because the fact is that reason, niceness, tolerance, fairness, sagacity and ethics are alien to the human condition on anything other than a tactical level. These are tools of social acceptance and communal interaction used to make our lives easier. They are not products of our deep psychology, of our true drives.<br><br>
A male <i>maturity wanker</i> is a writer who has learned that if he says "I want to fuck women!" his chances of fucking women will be diminished; but that if he says "I think that women should be treated as human beings and not as sexual objects!" his chances of fucking women are vastly increased. He has learned a technique.
<br><br>
I prefer writers who don't pretend to be nice but who are truthful instead, no matter how much damage they risk to their reputations as a result.
Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-45553431813490591422012-06-02T03:54:00.000-07:002012-06-02T03:54:00.699-07:00MeatocriteA <em>Meatocrite</em> is a meat-eating writer who dares to pass any moral judgement whatsoever on a vegetarian writer.<br />
<br />
Example: a <em>meatocrite</em> called M may accuse another writer called V of being "insensitive", "aggressive" and "unpleasant." But if V is a vegetarian, then M is <u>automatically</u> more insensitive, aggressive and unpleasant than V could ever be.<br />
<br />
The brilliant Nobel Prize winning writer <strong>Isaac Bashevis Singer</strong> once said:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"When a human kills an animal for food, he is neglecting his own hunger for justice. Man prays for mercy, but is unwilling to extend it to others. Why should man then expect mercy from God? It's unfair to expect something that you are not willing to give. It is inconsistent. I can never accept inconsistency or injustice. Even if it comes from God. If there would come a voice from God saying, "I'm against vegetarianism!" I would say, "Well, I am for it!" This is how strongly I feel in this regard."</blockquote>
And that's exactly how I feel too.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-79621478769776346492012-06-02T03:48:00.001-07:002012-06-02T03:48:41.880-07:00WriterA <em>writer</em> is a former <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/norm.html" target="_blank">norm</a>.<br />
<br />
There are two broad categories of writers:<br />
<br />
Fiction Writers: who tell deliberate lies.<br />
Non-Fiction Writers: who tell accidental lies.<br />
<br />
Despite what is generally believed, it <u>is</u> possible for writers to revert to being <em>norms</em> again. All that is required is to fail to publish anything for a period of five years or for one's <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/beerbohm.html" target="_blank">Beerbohm</a> rating to fall to exactly zero.<br />
<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-14737540211889131922012-06-02T03:45:00.002-07:002012-06-02T03:45:19.934-07:00PermashadesA <em>Permashades</em> is a writer who wears sunglasses all the time, even indoors.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-89816547958768206062012-06-02T03:44:00.001-07:002012-06-02T03:44:10.172-07:00Dorkvice<em>Dorkvice</em> is advice given by a less experienced writer to a more experienced writer.<br />
<br />
Not to be confused with <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/badvice.html" target="_blank">badvice</a> and <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/sadvice.html" target="_blank">sadvice</a>, both of which are malign, <em>dorkvice</em> is generally given sincerely. The only problem is that the writer giving it has far less experience of the world than the writer he is giving it to, rendering it <u>ludicrous</u>, <u>embarrassing</u> and <u>worthless</u>.<br />
<br />
An extreme example of <em>dorkvice</em>: a <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/baldie.html" target="_blank">baldie</a> <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hackling</a> <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/weirdminger.html" target="_blank">weirdminger</a> telling a <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/metamaturity.html" target="_blank">metamature</a> <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/vanderkat.html" target="_blank">vanderkat</a> that the best way to impress girls is to write convincing <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/weepy-boo-hoo.html" target="_blank">weepy boo-hoo</a>.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-20270830876252387382012-06-02T03:36:00.001-07:002012-06-02T03:36:31.500-07:00SemisultA <em>Semisult</em> (alternatively, <em>halfsult</em> or <em>hemisult</em>) is the first half of an insult, although frequently it is mistakenly regarded as a whole insult by itself. But without the application of the second half, there is no real insult.<br />
<br />
The truth about insults is that they are taken, not given. The last time I was in Morocco a group of children shouted at me in Berber, a language I don't speak. They might have been verbally abusing me for all I knew! But did I feel offended? Not in the slightest! Why? Because I didn't <em>convert</em> their words into an insult in my own head. I didn't provide (through my own volition) the second half of the 'insult'.<br />
<br />
And that essentially is how an insult works, that's the mechanism: it's the person who feels insulted, not the person who casts the 'insult', who completes the insult, who brings it into being, who makes it a proper insult. Without the contribution of the insultee, there is no insult. There is only a s<em>emisult</em>. In fact the insultee (or <em>semisultee</em>) is <u>more</u> responsible for creating the insult than the insulter (or <em>semisulter</em>). If it ever became the case that insults were made illegal, it is the <u>person who feels insulted</u> who logically ought to be arrested.<br />
<br />
Writers and <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hacklings</a> <em>semisult</em> each other all the time; almost always the recipient of the <em>semisult</em> provides the second half of the insult as a reflex.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-76903820510367694102012-06-01T02:05:00.002-07:002012-06-01T02:05:22.404-07:00BaldieIt's a curious but true fact that most male writers of great ability have good heads of hair. <em>Baldies</em> are male writers without much hair on their heads (sometimes none) and they tend to be grotesquely untalented.<br />
<br />
However, there are exceptions to this rule. <strong>Aristophanes</strong> was reputedly bald.<br />
<br />
A bald male writer who is nontheless imbued with great ability is called a <em>Watson</em>, after the writer <strong>Ian Watson</strong>, who is shockingly bald but massively talented.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-13597705453941348842012-06-01T01:55:00.001-07:002012-06-02T03:23:07.684-07:00Weepy Boo-Hoo<em>Weepy Boo-Hoo</em> is any kind of writing that attempts to make a reader squirt <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/sentimental-eye-juice.html" target="_blank">sentimental eye juice</a>.<br />
<br />
Slipstreamers often include passages of <em>Weepy Boo-Hoo</em> into their prose works. In contemporary literary culture, <em>Weepy Boo-Hoo</em> is considered in a more positive light than formerly and is inexplicably associated with 'maturity', a fact noticed and exploited by maturity wankers, many of whom are <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/lit-thario.html" target="_blank">Lit.Tharios</a>.<br />
<br />
The truth of the matter is that it is foolish to waste pity on the tribulations of fictional characters for the simple reason that fictional characters <u>don't exist</u>. Their sufferings are therefore illusory. Every individual with a mortal lifespan logically has only a finite amount of pity inside them (let's give this amount the number P) and on each occasion that pity is expended, this value decreases. When P reaches zero it will be impossible for the individual to feel pity thereafter; but circumstances may subsequently arise in which pity is needed. Why waste your pity on non-existent 'characters' when you could save it for living people or animals, or even yourself? Don't spend your P willy-nilly!<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-47226105048300138982012-06-01T01:39:00.001-07:002012-06-01T01:39:12.272-07:00Empathy Problem<span style="font-family: inherit;">Few 'problems' in the literary world cause as much inexplicable anger among writers as the <em>Empathy Problem</em>. Attempts to discuss the <em>Empathy Problem</em> are generally met with extreme hostility and exposure to the full arsenal of tactical twatism.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Breifly stated, the <em>Empathy Problem</em> runs as follows:</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">How do we manage to feel empathy for fictional characters? How can the plight of beings <em>that don't exist</em> affect us emotionally? The question isn't whether or not we feel empathy for fictional characters: patently we do. The question is <em>how</em>? What is the mechanism that makes such empathy possible? This is a genuine philosophical problem that still hasn't really been solved.<br /><br />Consider two characters created for the sake of this argument: Sea Tiger and Ramphastos. They are fictional characters. Do you already have empathy for them? Unlikely: you don't know enough about them yet. But that's not the point. The point is that I <em>could</em> make Sea Tiger and Ramphastos into characters that a reader might have empathy for if I wanted to; or at least I could <em>try</em> to do so. And in such a case, and if the reader did indeed end up feeling empathy for them, what exactly would be going on? There is a profound mystery here. Sea Tiger and Ramphastos don't exist. That's unarguable. And it's impossible to feel empathy for beings that don't exist.<br /><br />It is often suggested that this basic premise is faulty. But it is difficult to see how. <em>It's impossible to feel empathy for beings that don't exist</em>. Where's the fault in that statement? Surely the proof is in the definition of the word 'empathy' itself? To have empathy means to identify with some other individual, to put yourself in their shoes, to see the world from their point of view. But fictional characters don't exist and something that doesn't exist is a void, a nullity. So when you empathise with a fictional character, you are logically identifying with a void. If may be stated that we gradually develop empathy with fictional characters as we read about their lives, but we should take care to remember that f</span><span style="font-family: inherit;">ictional characters don't <em>have</em> lives, for the simple reason that they don't exist.<br /><br />To restate the problem again: fictional characters don't exist and it's impossible to empathise with beings that don't exist (can you have empathy with the number 0 or with a cubic metre of vacuum?). Stop for a moment and try to imagine what would happen if you <em>did</em> manage to successfully empathise with a being that doesn't exist! By empathising and therefore identifying with a void, you would <em>become</em> that void, and the only way back out would be to empathise with something else quickly, but this would be impossible because to empathise you need a brain and a void doesn't have one, so you would be stuck in that condition forever, an empty space where your body had once been, a black shapeless non-mass like one of the characters in <strong>Jack London's</strong> short-story,'The Shadow and the Flash'. Briefly stated, turning into a void is a one-way trip. <br />And yet we <em>do</em> empathise with certain fictional characters. As a personal example, I often identify with Jack Vance's protagonists: they are often individualists trying to surmount social obstacles and make their mark on the cultures they live in. I feel empathy for those imperfect heroes, but <em>how</em>? What is the mechanism by which I do so? What is the mechanism by which <em>you</em> identity with your own favourite fictional characters? Whenever I posit this question I never get a straight answer. I mostly get a grumpy reaction that seems to consist of variations of the response, "Well, I'm capable of empathising with fictional characters even if you aren't." And yet, at no point have I said that I <em>don't</em> empathise with fictional characters. What I'm asking is simply <u>how</u> do I empathise with them? <br /><br />It was pointed out to me that even though Anne Frank doesn't exist, we can't fail to be moved by her diary; and that Bertie Wooster also doesn't exist but that we feel an emotional resonance with him too. But these examples don't belong in the same category. To put them together is a category mistake.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> Anne Frank doesn't exist now, true, but she did once exist, and we must bear in mind that although her internal ego has vanished, her external ego persists (the concept of the external ego is less well-known than it deserves to be; simply put, what we <em>are</em> is not just what we think we are, but also the effect we have had on our environment). Proof that Anne Frank's external ego exists is demonstrated in the fact that you know whom I'm talking about and know that she was a real person. Bertie Wooster, on the other hand, has neither an internal ego nor an authentic external ego. And yet it's true that we can empathise with both of them. But the mechanism must be different, at least if we accept that Bertie Wooster is a fictional character and Anne Frank isn't. <br /><br />Suspension of disbelief may be cited as a mechanism to enable us to feel empathy for beings that don't exist. We simply stop believing that they don't exist. But this doesn't change the basic fact that they don't exist. I can <em>believe</em> in a wide variety of things, that the moon is made of glass, that unicorns work in pubs, that a dandrum's favourite hobby is to forestall a bugaboo, but that doesn't make any of those things true. Even if I convince myself that Bertie Wooster really lives, the fact of the matter is that he doesn't. It would seem that the most we can really feel for him is quasi-empathy. And quasi-empathy isn't empathy, in the same way that a <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/quasi-blurb.html" target="_blank">quasi-blurb</a> isn't a blurb. <br /><br />So is all empathy for fictional characters really just quasi-empathy? Is the whole process of feeling empathy for a fictional character some sort of mistake or unsolvable paradox? I don't think so. I have a feeling that the empathy we feel for fictional characters is real empathy; and yet if that is so, a viable mechanism is needed to explain it. I would like to suggest such a mechanism, namely the 'many worlds interpretation' first developed by Hugh Everett in 1957 as a solution to the quantum mechanics problem of what act of observation could collapse the wave function of the entire universe, a problem that Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation was unable to resolve satisfactorily. <br /><br />In plain language, Everett's theory allows for the coexistence of a vast number of parallel alternative realities in which every possible outcome of every potential action is real. So in trillions upon trillions upon trillions of universes, Bertie Wooster doesn't exist, just as he doesn't exist in this universe; but somewhere, in at least one parallel reality, he does exist, he's real, a living person with an internal and external ego and therefore <em>someone we can empathise with without violating logic</em>. <br /><br />This seems to me to be the most plausible and satisfying solution to the problem of how we manage to empathise with fictional characters. The answer is that, yes, they are fictional in our universe, but elsewhere they exist. So when we feel empathy for them and identify with them, we aren't identifying with a void (which could be dangerous) but with beings that have substance, life and purpose. It just happens that those beings exist in another dimension. The logical outcome of this happy reasoning is that Sea Tiger and Ramphastos are also real, somewhere, and probably enjoying a series of absurd but charming adventures together. </span>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-80685160561453594032012-06-01T01:21:00.002-07:002012-06-01T01:56:21.529-07:00Simper BunnyA <em>Simper Bunny</em> is a writer who produces or promotes <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/weepy-boo-hoo.html" target="_blank">Weepy Boo-Hoo</a>.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-66750832955847662772012-06-01T01:18:00.000-07:002012-06-02T03:15:52.337-07:00SlockleyA <em>Slockley</em> is a reviewer who never reviews the free books he receives but sells them on eBay or other online auction sites.<br />
<br />
<em>Slockleys</em> have been known to actively request expensive hardcover books by the same author from publishing houses, sometimes failing to review the <u>entire corpus</u> of a particular writer's career but making money by selling the 'not for resale' review copies.Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-17115376898190648652012-05-31T02:27:00.000-07:002012-05-31T02:34:00.864-07:00Wisdumb<em>Wisdumb</em> is fake or stupid wisdom.<br />
<br />
Most wisdom is in fact <em>wisdumb</em>. Wisdom doesn't work. Take a look at the world around you. For thousands of years, sages, gurus, holy men, sadhus, philosophers, hermits, wizards, witch doctors, shamen, mystics, gnostics and various other 'enlightened ones' have been dispensing advice about how to make the world a better place. If such advice really was effective, the world would be a better place <em>now</em>. But it isn't.<br />
<br />
Some <em>wisdumb</em> is deliberately generated to mock the entire idea of 'wisdom'. <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/rhysaurus.html" target="_blank">Rhysauruses</a> are prone to doing this. A typical example:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<em>"Just be yourself! If you are an idiot, act like an idiot! If you a fool, act like a fool! If you are a moron, act like a moron! Don't be afraid to be what you really are! If you are a fake, be an authentic fake. Don't be a <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/phony-fake.html" target="_blank">phony fake</a>!"</em></blockquote>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-1311129452386758912012-05-31T02:19:00.003-07:002012-05-31T02:32:30.555-07:00Simian FlipflopA <em>Simian Flipflop</em> is a closed circuit of exactly <u>two</u> <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/monkeybator.html" target="_blank">monkeybators</a>.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-83618139358486484772012-05-31T02:18:00.004-07:002012-05-31T02:18:51.239-07:00DeaditorA <em>Deaditor</em> is an editor who <u>never</u> responds to a writer's enquiries and acts as if that writer doesn't exist.<br />
<br />
Some <em>Deaditors</em> really are dead. Most are not.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-40867338176955049282012-05-31T02:13:00.004-07:002012-05-31T02:31:50.284-07:00Magic Realism<span style="font-family: inherit;">Many writers are described as <em>Magic Realists</em> when in fact they aren't. <em>Magic Realism</em> doesn't really have a specific mandate and yet ther are some rules; and while it is good and healthy and wise not to apply overly <i>strict</i> criteria in one's own fictional use of it, before breaking the rules it's also good to know what the rules <i>are</i>. <em>Magic Realism</em> isn't just a hazy definition but a precise term for a precise thing (<strong>Terry Pratchett</strong> defined <em>Magic Realism</em> as "fantasy written by someone who has gone to university"; he was wrong). <br /><br />It's the same with Surrealism and Absurdism. They don't just mean what you want them to mean or think they <i>might</i> mean (i.e. stuff that's a bit weird or doesn't make sense). They have specific manifestos: Surrealism is <i>intimately</i> connected with Freudian psychoanalysis; Absurdism is <i>intimately</i> connected with Existential philosophy, etc.<br /><br />It's fine to take elements from those movements you agree with and discard the rest, and it's even possible to argue that the original meanings have changed over time and that the correct definitions are now those of modern consensus, but again, it's nice to learn the original meanings too, just to give yourself a firm basis to show what you're working <i>from</i>. <br /><br />One of the problems with lazy definitions of <em>Magic Realism</em> in particular is that misunderstandings of its intentions and techniques can produce embarrassing work. <strong>John Updike</strong>, for example, was so enamoured of the <i>surface effects</i> of such writers as <strong>Gabriel García Márquez</strong> and <strong>Jorge Amado</strong> that he wrote a novel (called <i>Brazil</i>) full of the effects without the rationale. In true <em>Magic Realism</em> people don't just start flying for no reason whatsoever or because it's pretty: the flight is a concrete symbol of an emotional state (intense happiness, for example).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><em>Magic Realism</em> simply means a style of fiction where the author doesn't write about how the world actually <i>is</i>, but how it sometimes <i>feels</i>... So it's emotionally based, rather than intellectually, politically or philosophically based. It uses exaggeration, overstatement and grandiosity to put over a wholly subjective world view (inter-subjective world view really, because all the different subjectivities should interact and modify each other). Understatement has little or no place in <em>Magic Realism</em>. <br /><br />There's a character in <i>One Hundred Years of Solitude</i> who has bad wind. In <em>Realism</em> it would simply be stated that he farted loudly; in <em>Magic Realism</em> his farts kill sparrows in mid air and wither palm trees. This doesn't mean (as Updike seemed to think) that the sparrows <i>really</i> were killed by the fart, but that the fart was so powerful it <i>felt</i> like a phenomenon that might kill sparrows in mid air. So Magic Realism makes very heavy use of symbolism. Every significant event is a symbol or extended metaphor. <br /><br />And yet, even though all the events are determined by a literal application of feeling, those fantastical events are presented in a very deadpan style. So if someone is deliriously happy they might start flying, but nobody around them will comment on this, or even note it, because the flying is actually internal. <br /><br />I now expect to told that actually <em>Magic Realism</em> has always been an ambiguous term. Yes, that's true, but the above is a good place to <u>start</u> for a definition.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-34308810099706793462012-05-31T02:02:00.002-07:002012-06-02T03:22:08.540-07:00Lit.TharioA <em>Lit.Thario</em> (alternatively, <em>Dong Juan</em>) is a male writer who mistakenly believes that being published will <u>directly</u> result in sexual experiences. Back in the 1930s, when female readers were more naive and easier to manipulate, this might have been true. "Look at me, I've just published a novel! Suck me off immediately!"<br />
<br />
A surprising number of modern writers are <em>Lit.Tharios</em>. They fail to understand that the girls they are vainly seeking to get into bed are probably writers themselves and thus feel no compelling need to submit to the ego of the <em>Lit.Thario, </em>whom they often regard as little better than a <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/weirdminger.html" target="_blank">weirdminger</a>.<br />
<br />
There is a school of thought that claims the <em>Lit.Thario</em> is an honest and relatively harmless form of tactical twat, in the sense that what he wants (sex) is natural and understandable and less grasping than what most tactical twats want (power, status, ego reassurance).<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-68268871491055895722012-05-31T01:53:00.003-07:002012-05-31T02:30:39.142-07:00Sadvice<em>Sadvice</em> is a specific kind of <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/badvice.html" target="_blank">badvice</a> designed to discourage the recipient by fostering a hopelessness in him. The point of sadvice is to deflate aspirations by utilising a feeling of exasperated melancholy as a weapon.<br />
<br />
Example: a writer will 'thoughtfully' tell another writer that a particular market is too difficult to break into and that it's not worth even trying and that he would save himself a lot of heartache by giving up writing altogether and doing something more in tune with his natural talents, such as working in a newsagent's.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-6901570744666180832012-05-31T01:47:00.004-07:002012-05-31T02:29:56.243-07:00Badvice<em>Badvice</em> is bad advice given by a writer or <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hackling</a> to another writer or hackling for tactical twatish reasons.<br />Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-74261614614273314742012-05-30T01:15:00.004-07:002012-05-30T01:18:17.823-07:00Harrendence<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A <em>Harrendence</em> is an artist of genius who is able to produce extremely high quality illustrations within an amazingly short time.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A writer may make a casual remark such as, “Squinty the cyclops was short-sighted and had to wear a monocle; he was very upset when the other cyclops children called him, ‘Two Eyes’.”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A simple offhand throwaway joke; but if made in the vicinity of a <em>Harrendence</em>, the chances are high that an hour or so later a superb illustration of that scenario will be presented to the astonished writer out of the blue. A <em>Harrendence</em> is prone to rendering the scene or situation in a way that is superior to the original conception.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The word is an allusion to <strong>Chris Harrendence</strong>, an artist of genius who is able to produce extremely high quality illustrations within an amazingly short time. His work often resembles an original hybrid between that of <strong>Edward Gorey</strong>, <strong>Gary Larson</strong> and <span class="st"><strong>Jože Tisnikar</strong></span>.</span></span><br />
</div>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-36766644684079333642012-05-30T01:12:00.004-07:002012-05-30T01:18:51.390-07:00Sentimental Eye Juice<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The formal name for tears, those drops of water adulterated with salt and other minerals that come out of upset human faces through special ducts.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Characters in stories by girls, slipstreamers and maturity wankers often seem to lose a measurable amount of <em>Sentimental Eye Juice</em> during the progress of the prose tales they are encased in.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A reader’s reluctance to drip sentimental eye juice when reading ‘emotional’ books is frequently cited by tactical twats as evidence of that reader’s immaturity. Some of these dry-eyed readers may indeed be immature, but in fact it is <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/metamaturity.html" target="_blank">metamaturlings</a> who are most unlikely to waste precious bodily fluids on fictional (and therefore non-existent) tragedies.</span></span><br />
</div>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-87059629599291975672012-05-30T01:11:00.004-07:002012-06-01T01:57:55.567-07:00Victoria Plumjob<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The archetypal bad romance novelist. A fictional figure, Victoria was originally called Victoria Plum but things got sticky when she burst on the literary scene. After her marriage to Dominic Job, she became Victoria Plumjob and re-launched her career.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Victoria Plumjob describes herself a ‘writer’ but is actually a <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hackling</a> with a very low <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/beerbohm.html" target="_blank">Beerbohm</a> rating (less than 0.0001). Her books are mainly ebooks and self-published. She is a <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/monkeybator.html" target="_blank">monkeybator</a>, <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/fart-signer.html" target="_blank">fart signer</a> and <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/simper-bunny.html" target="_blank">simper bunny</a>, prone to squirting <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/sentimental-eye-juice.html" target="_blank">sentimental eye juice</a>, and often reviews her own titles under various pseudonyms.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Example:</span></span></div>
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“<em>Victoria Plumjob will make you believe that cake fairies really do exist and can fall in love with handsome moon doctors! I was totally captivated by her haunting and evocative and haunting prose; and her kissable descriptions took me by the hand and led me into the wonderful world inside the fabulous mind of this magical authoress</em>. — Cassandra Chestnuthair.”</span></span></div>
</blockquote>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-32070912063329863172012-05-30T01:09:00.007-07:002012-05-30T01:20:19.727-07:00Gunky Fibbon<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A <em>Gunky Fibbon</em> is a reader, critic, reviewer, writer, <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hackling</a>, <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/cocknob.html" target="_blank">cocknob</a>, maturity wanker, <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/softvark.html" target="_blank">softvark</a> or tactical twat who disparages a work of literature purely because of a dislike of its creator.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Gunky Fibbons make value judgments about a book or story based on how they regard the moral worth of the author. For instance, one may read a Felipe Alfau novel and enjoy it immensely; later one learns that Alfau supported Franco in the Spanish Civil War; suddenly the book is no longer <i>as good as it was</i>. That is gunky fibbing.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The lowest kind of gunky fibbons are those who not only erroneously use the moral life of an artist to gauge the independent worth of the artwork but whose reasons for gunky fibbing are petty and personal (example: the author has refused to like the gunky fibbon’s own literary efforts; the gunky fibbon will then take ‘revenge’ on the author by pretending his work isn’t good.)</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A song popular in the 1970s encouraged honest citizens to injure <em>gunky fibbons</em>. The simplistic refrain went as follows:</span></span></div>
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“<em>Do, do, do the gunky fibbon</em>!”</span></span></div>
</blockquote>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-17155017215225859782012-05-30T01:08:00.003-07:002012-05-30T01:22:13.770-07:00Too Soon Guru<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">A writer or <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hackling</a> who acts like a fully-fledged guru before he is properly ready to be one. To deserve the privilege of being allowed to dispense advice and wisdom about the writing world while adopting a guru’s characteristic inner pose, one first requires a minimum <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/beerbohm.html" target="_blank">Beerbohm</a> rating of 1.75.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Too Soon Gurus</span></i><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"> are frequently found ‘teaching’ creative writing to <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/norm.html" target="_blank">norms</a>; ‘authoring’ <i>How to Write</i> documents; and ‘sharing’ wrong tips (singly or bunched in lists) on little-visited blogsites.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Among many other causes, the creation of a <em>Too Soon Guru</em> may be the result of pure egotism, tactical twatism, <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/arsebollocks.html" target="_blank">arsebollocks</a> or <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/monkeybator.html" target="_blank">monkeybation</a>. Some <em>Too Soon Gurus</em> are sincere but misguided; many are lebbonizers, oblique crows or curt simians; most are <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/twonky.html" target="_blank">twonkies</a>.</span></span><br />
</div>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-24187279777755417762012-05-29T01:17:00.004-07:002012-05-29T01:42:22.202-07:00Arsebollocks<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">This is the act of deviously promoting a fellow <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hackling</a> by voting for his story in competitions or by writing artificial letters of praise in his favour to magazine editors, etc. The unspoken understanding is that a hackling who <em>arsebollocks</em> (also a verb) another hackling will be <em>arsebollocked</em> in return. When <em>arsebollocking</em> reaches an absurd intensity it becomes Hazardous Flapdoodle.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Knobworking is a form of Arsebollocks.</span></span><br />
</div>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198792914457318934.post-40984985474436681262012-05-29T01:16:00.001-07:002012-05-29T01:20:35.459-07:00Quasi-Blurb<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Unknown <a href="http://rhysaurusrex.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/hackling.html" target="_blank">hacklings</a> frequently solicit little prose packets of approval from other equally unknown hacklings. On the surface these packets look like blurbs but they have no real conviction or force. They are in fact only <em>quasi-blurbs</em>.</span></span><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Example:</span></span></div>
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><em>Victoria Plumjob once again demonstrates her breathtaking ability at creating believable characters in fraught domestic milieus who are all writers like she is and almost as brilliant and lovely. —</em> Miranda Poutylips.</span></span></div>
</blockquote>Rhys Hugheshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00018333653034645125noreply@blogger.com