I'm thinking about writing a book for 10 years and I still did not do it...

I'm thinking about writing a book for 10 years and I still did not do it, is there even a point to that impotent idea of mine? And I get reminded by friends whenever old stories come up. Me having experienced the weirdest events and that according to my circle of friends being enough to write a book or use it as starting point for other ideas or train of thoughts.
I have writer's block since 10 years.
Pic unrelated

Thinking you need "experiences" to write just shows you don't have what it takes

Serious recommendation: Write a piece of shit before writing something serious.

What I did was write something shameless and pornographic, something I would never show anyone else. This act of writing garbage is identical to the act of writing something valuable, it's just the subject that's different. So try writing trash, and then when you realize writing is possible and that writer's block can go away, write something that matters.

Having autobiographical inspirations for a book are bad, what? okay.

Thanks for your reply, learning by doing, I guess

Yes they are, they're bullshit and self affirming

According to what? Your in depth knowledge of pure bile and vitriol or what?

I'm not that user, user, but the concept of autobiography in fiction is a relatively recent phenomenon. He's not wrong. He's not necessarily right, but he's not wrong.

If y'all are going to discuss this there has to be a distinction between a work of fiction written as an autobiography and a work of fiction where the author draws upon real world experience.

So far I don't think anyone has specified what they mean by, for example, "the concept of autobiography in fiction.

Every writer draws from experience and if an 'autobiographical' story (experience) is the spark or inspiration for a novel I don't think that's so 'self-affirming'. I think that's only natural.

Shit, tons of famous and well respected authors are megalomaniacs. I don't think any writer can in good conscience claim to completely compartmentalize their work from their ego.

You're neglecting to note the distinction between experience simply as a persons history of phenomenal life, emotions and narratives which is of course inescapable as a writer and "experiences" in the popular culture sense as contrived demarcations of particular moments or ordeals in a persons life as allegedly important or relevant.

The difference being between My Antonia being a novel written based on the writers experience of life on frontier America, and experiences such as OP the faggots dumb drug trips or his boring tourist stories

Ayy yo hol' up doe.

Define "experience." Of course there are universal experiences. Experiences that make people want to write a story. But you can't claim that just because two writers in separate times and separate places "experienced" love that means that both love stories are autobiographical.

Like, Shakespeare may have felt young love, but he didn't live Romeo & Juliet. I mean, it's possible that, when he was 18, he wooed Anne Hathaway (I mean, have you seen dem tittays???) outside her window and he pretended it were a balcony. It's possible it could have been some other girl, too. But he also took a shit ton of the story from Ovid's Metamorphoses, Xenophon's Ephesiaca, and the Divine Comedy.

Truth is, OP, you can't really read/write anything as autobiography except autobiography. That's why it's a genre. If you're writing fiction you have to tell a story. You can use parts of your life and experiences to help shape the story, but you have to have a story around the universal experience of man. To say it's autobiography is disingenuous.

How old are you?

>the concept of autobiography in fiction is a relatively recent phenomenon

Not if you're French.

>Not if you're French.

There's your first mistake.

Well, maybe I worded myself wrong. I of course meant that French lit has a long tradition of autofiction.

>Well, maybe I worded myself wrong. I of course meant that French lit has a long tradition of autofiction.

Oh, I understood perfectly.

>Oh, I understood perfectly.

I don't think so.

>I don't think so.

Indeed, I did. The French were a mistake.

^this

proust, mishima and many others wouldn't agree

You don't even understand WHY people say this.

It's not to cut and paste life events directly into their books you useless simp.

It's to get a feel for the texture of reality; how people really speak and act, the very nature of the thing itself, that cannot be quite conveyed through brute text alone, but that the author must strain to capture.

If you never live your stories will come out flat, paint by numbers and indistinct, like a painting of a painting; because you have never directly witnessed the underlying reality that all art is a mere impression of.

You are a know-nothing, and by your attitude quite probably also a do-nothing, vainly attempting to defend their parochial letterbox worldview.