"If you want to be writer you must read 3 hours per day, and write 3 hours per day"

1 step: Acknowledge language is a means of communication and you can't just attribute whatever autistic meaning you want to a word for memes.
2 step: Acknowledge a need for a human perception to properly define what humans call things, in other words, understand there are no fixed criteria for what makes a writer-nor is there a need for one.
3 step: Pick up a dictionary.

Balzac had a better schedule.

>as many as 50 cups

I love coffee but how the fuck can anyone physically imbibe that much coffee. I probably couldn't even drink 50 cups of water in that timespan.

>getting money in exchange for your hard work is wrong all art should be free lololol
>even though it costs money to make decent art in most any medium except perhaps pure writing and always takes up large amounts of time, you shouldn't charge anything for it
People like this just don't want to pay for shit.

We live in a highly commercialized society that produces a ton of crap, but that doesn't mean we don't need that system. Someone could make the greatest, most wonderful piece of art in the world, in any medium, and if they didn't even advertise it or charge money you would never hear about it and no one could enjoy it.

Without money as an incentive we would have very little art at all, because people who would otherwise be artists would take up other jobs and give up so as not to starve. They'd have little time to hone their craft and wouldn't be able to make anything they did available to a wider audience.

I understand what you're saying, but the implication that art can only exist outside of a market system, and that creating art from and internal motivation and profiting from it are mutually exclusive, is completely false.

>Actual art is made from the innerself, not to please an elite or society.
>Books, tv, movies, paintings, are all made to extract wealth, this isnt called art, its called entertainment.

You're exposed to "entertainment" because its shoved in your face. Art exists, you just have to not be a lazy edgelord who would rather whine about the mediocre stuff that's readily available than actively seek out the more underground stuff that's made out of artistic passion.

Likewise, there are things that are made for entertainment that never take off due to poor marketing, and there are also things that begin as art, but become popular when people latch onto the superficial elements and ignore the deeper meaning.

art is based off emotion, you can create it for financial gain, but youre still an asshole.
A big part of art is trying to decommodify it.

Think of religious icons, people made these based on faith, not finical gain.
Lots of old art was just because some rich royal fuck commissioned a painting or song.
Van gogh was never recognized in his time and died a mentally ill loser.

Real art is not based off financial gain

If you wanna be a King-esque writer, just read a few books and write when you feel like it. If you want to be a (good) writer you must devote yourself to your craft.

It's not based of financial gain, at least not solely, but it needs financial gain in order to reach public eyes.

Beauty is what brings a person pleasure, money does not bring pleasure, but is attached to pleasure.
You do not need money to get famous.
Just make a video of some cats chasing around a flashlight and slap it on youtube

Van Gogh still sold a lot of art.

>Everything would be better in my imaginary Marxist society
Keep telling yourself that.

Yes. I'm writer

>cat videos are art now
If you say so.

Name one written work of literary merit that became well known through being freely available online.

I've never liked Stephen King but he's an international bestseller so whatever. If you've ever watched the Ratatoille Disney movie, the cook guy says "anyone can cook". Anyone can write but only a few are good at it. These mainstream books are trash and I probably would'nt follow this tip but I would keep a daily journal where you can write ideas that pop up and there are books that help with plot development and such. If I wanted to be a writer, I would write on a topic that interested me, think about a problem or condition or people that would be a good focus, or simply on an event from multiple perspectives. I read only classics, and the occasional modern books but the classics always combine humanistic elements or condition, some politic or religious ideology, and a convincing plot that makes one think.

John Dies at the End.

You need to get your taste checked senpai

Pic related

>literary merit
>free

What the difference between him and Thomas Ligotti?
I been wanting to find good writers of the macabre like Poe.

Let not forget that Shakespeare wrote for money.

>Think of religious icons, people made these based on faith, not finical gain.
you're generally wrong about that you stupid bitch

What is Maslow's hierarchy of needs, there is art and there is artistic skill. Yes a lot of art produced is commercial with little artistic value but just because something is spread to the masses for some financial gain doesn't mean it isn't art

In Shakespeare's time literally all of what snobs like the one in previous post would consider "true art" were commissioned by kings and nobles. You needed to be sponsored to do shit.

Shakespeare was also criticised for pandering to the masses with his plebshit plays.

Dude I masturbate at least four hours a day, can I get in on this?

lol, looks like i pissed off the capltist who is mad because i dont find his disposable products to be artistic.
Thats what you are doing when you commodify art, you turn it into a product, not art.
I

If you want to be a good writer, then yes that's a viable and working system to construct. Moreso, I would say to read as much as possible (3 hours a day will be enough) and write when you feel inspired or emotional.

1:1 ratio is a bit out, most people who want to be writers have a massive backlog of reading to make up first.

Its a Dunning-Kruger type thing I think.

Balzac was a big guy.

small cups

This is true.

Shakespeare was sponsored, though.

This is also true.

>Shakespeare was sponsored, though.
Literally what I said.

He also masturbated furiously but not to orgasm while he worked. Guy's dick was probably fucking blue.

>Michael Bay isn't an artist
teenager detected, Pain & Gain was a masterpiece.

Why does he look like a shaved orang utang?

This user is more right than you may think. To all these people protesting, your attempt at creating or writing in any sense with the end goal to wealth is not art, it is "entertainment" simply. Being creative does not mean or entitle people to call the end product art.

Art, as this user said comes from within and is made from the self, with usually the intention of "pouring your heart onto the page or canvas", but that phrase has now been bastardized with instead, simply with, "putting long hours, time and effort into a work", rather than putting yourself, you, a part of you, into the work, a sort of deep flow, that simply flows freely, not to be picked at and gouged at with a shovel to find the gold core of yourself to be profiteered.

But, as the age old discussion of what constitutes a piece of work as being "art" or not, there will probably be a slew of people whom have never really attempted to make "art" in any real attempt, but simply ingest the culture, ideas and discussion from it, commenting on what they "observe" art to truly be.

No, you must be clever and suffer. Ideally be poor and go to war.

>tfw he is too enlightened

This is perfectly right. This doesn't mean there can't be exceptions but it's spot-on.

Nah, you just have to write. Even fanfiction writers are still writers.

You've been reading too much Adorno and Horkheimer. "Actual art is made from the innerself" according to who? are you the dictator of what is defined as 'Art' and what is entertainment? that's the most elitist bullshit i've ever heard. Sure, they may be 'bad' art with a certain standardization/commercialization aspect about them, but that doesn't mean that they are no longer forms of art.

>In order to do thing good, you must study and practice thing, a lot
Wow, so profound

mostly. reading a lot is good for a writer, writing once a week is good enough.

to many posters equate being published with being a writer.
>capitalist society
you are the one who choosing to sell your art. in an society if you use it as a tool for something than it will need aspects of a tool, like being a call to action or being about a teen girl. How do you think you would do in a communist society?
>Actual art is made from the innerself, not to please an elite or society.
Art that is not aimed at communication is garbage that only attracts autists and takes the artist on an ego trip.
>read more marx
kys

Wow, someone reported that post, someone is butthurt.

Where do I fit that in my wageslave schedule? When I get home I"m too exhausted to do anything but masturbate and shitpost

>15 minutes of exercise
it paid off

My sides can see pic related

Is Balzac the new Veeky Forums meme? His name would already imply so

In Roger Ebert's review of the 2004 movie Secret Window, he stated, "A lot of people were outraged that [King] was honored at the National Book Awards, as if a popular writer could not be taken seriously. But after finding that his book On Writing had more useful and observant things to say about the craft than any book since Strunk and White's The Elements of Style, I have gotten over my own snobbery."

wtf i hate ebert now

>then still goes to shit on video games while saying the only one he enjoyed was a fucking visual novel of all things

That book is cancer

>Honorary Ballsack

For you.

>How fucked up do you think his stomach was from that much coffee?

I read for an hour and a half and write for an hour and a half. That makes me half a writer right?

What if the end goal is not wealth, but sustenance?