Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
1–10 of 97 posts
Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#2Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#3Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#4Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#5Can we stop with the random posting of non-technical nytimes.com articles?
Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#6Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#7Would be interesting to know, his work process to achieve that output. I'm reading "Deep Work", and I bet Stephen King, did the "lock yourself" and write until it's finished or something among those lines (avoiding all distractions)
Reserve a time. For that time you do nothing but write. No internet, no phone, no people, nothing. Just you and your writing. Same time every day like clockwork. Yes, every day. Defend this time viciously.
Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#8I don't read his books as often now, but I do love the man and his works for how much they mean to me. I never regretted reading any of them (even ones I may not have finished). I'm glad he doesn't regret writing them either.
Favorite quote from that piece that I think applies to many of us, in any creative field:
> But I also understand that life is short, and that in the end, none of us is prolific. The creative spark dims, and then death puts it out. William Shakespeare, for instance, hasn’t produced a new play for 400 years. That, my friends, is a long dry spell.
Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#9I'm reminded of Lovecraft, who would use a thesaurus to pad his paid-by-the-word word counts by inserting various adjectives that sounded scary but didn't actually mean anything in context.
Re: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive? (2015)
#10Can we stop with the random posting of non-technical nytimes.com articles?
I don't think you're ever going to persuade a given HN user to stop posting content here. But to order 'we' to stop deeming content relevant and worthy for the rest of the community (by up-voting — which is what I think you meant) is rather laughable.
The community decides what it wants to make popular, not you or I alone...