This has absolutely nothing to do with that controversial law. The pluralisation of the word stands testimony. The following is just to echo the woes of the enthusiast who yearns to get an article in his college magazine. He does realize that there are well over a three hundred and seventy seven articles under scrutiny and hardly ten make it all the way to the publishers’. So what does one have to write about that will effectively confirm his being one among the elite? For starters, never ask the editor or the editorial committee. For they would come up with their usual line “You can write about absolutely anything under the sun. But make it different and refreshing”. Fact is, most things under the sun are quite boring already and the remote expectation of something different yet refreshing under this sun would be a blue coloured watermelon.
If you were hanging onto the bandwagon that believes ignorance is bliss, you might go right ahead and write about something as mundane as your girlfriend’s pet walrus or the identical evil twin you wish you had. You skip watching a crucial show of Desperate Housewives, put in that hour’s thought, topped with continuous references to the thesaurus and bingo, you have crafted the most extraordinary article known to man. You are so completely satisfied with your accomplishment that you order in economic cheese bursts from Pizza Hut to celebrate the occasion and half way through your eighth slice, it hits you - Nothing about your article is good enough to make it all the way. Even those cool jokes you might have come up with about the uncanny resemblance between your girlfriend and her walrus would suddenly begin to appear stale.
The truth about a good article is a cult secret known to very few in this world. Some say it is humour, some say it is flowery language. The Johnny Bravos say it is better to write something boring and take the editor out for coffee instead. The glitch is, most editors are already male and I also clearly said we are not discussing Article 377 here. One who writes a good article takes something normal as a base and weaves something intriguing out of it. The topic is just a farce. Never think like a writer. Think like a reader and package in just enough so that they sit through your article and a smile plonks on their faces when they’re done. When you’ve begun to think like a reader, you’re already doing fine and dandy. There are only two ways to impress the editor - You either write something they love, or put a post-script mentioning the fact that you look extremely hot. So go get your paper and begin.
P.S: The irony in this whole plot is, I wrote this very article for my college magazine too. They didn't publish it. Honest.
12 comments:
If you included the post-script making mention of the fact that you're hot, I'm not surprised that it wasn't published!
Cheesy articles that leave you with a good aftertaste are hard to find. Articles that trash those cheesy articles are harder to find. But then, who picks articles without some random bias? It's all a matter of choice, and, as cliched as it may sound, we live in a world where most things are relative.
Ok that was all flowery, no?
@Dev - Jabs at my beauty huh? And it had absolutely no post script. They just didn't want me. The schemers. Hmph!
@VP - Flowery, yes. But the intention of that comment died out somewhere between the first and second word of that speech itself. What were you trying to say again?
Dawww..!
Umm... I wasn't trying to say anything. Just came up with something that sounds all high funda but really isn't. And apparently, I couldn't sneak it past you.
Which goes to show that (most) people these days usually fall for stuff that seems relevant and important. It's all word play. Darn word play.
PS : The college mag didn't pick some of my stuff last year. Guess we're in the same boat!
Awesome blog!
I agree that a writer has to think like a reader. When I write, I wanna make sure I can read and like the same, days later.
As for the getting published thing, editors are under pressure not to publish certain content, and hence the propensity to publish decent articles with content that the supervisors-of-editors would consent to, rather than awesome writings which have mentions of hOt wOmen, backside orifices etc.It ain't proper for a good writer to write wanting to be published. It is, however, perfect for one to post the same on a blog for people like me to comment: "Dude!Why do you even need a publisher when
you have Google?"
@VP - Word play, yes she can be quite a pain sometimes. Intriguing yet incomprehensible. Glad to know we're soothing wounds of the same blow. My condolences are yours.
@Anand - Thank you there, fellow money man.
@Harish -Yes, I understand the pressure that editors go through. I just expected too much perhaps. As for Google, it's God on the web. I bow down to it. Amen.
Nyehehehehehehe! I love!
There is nothing more painful than the inability to write!
Very interesting article!..;)...your train of thought is very interesting indeed..:)
Post a Comment