In 1825 there was a banking crisis in the UK (sound familiar?) and Sir Walter Scott lost a bleep load of money and owed a huge amount to creditors. He had to write lots and lots to claw back money to repay the debt. It worked but the debt was not paid off until after his death in 1832. So did writing like a crazy person do him in???
I often believed that was the reason some of the stuff we had to read was written. The guy couldn’t hold a regular job so he wrote poetry of stupid books to make students suffer a few hundred years later.
Does anyone else feel that books penned before 1900 are immeasurably better written than modern books? The manner of expression was so much richer and more skillful in authors like Edgar Allan Poe.
Supposedly this was why Dickens wrote “A Christmas Carol.” He needed the money. He had a lot of children to support. You’d think a book that was hurriedly written with the writer under stress, the story wouldn’t be very good but it’s become a classic. If he’d known how many films they’d make from it, he’d never have worried about money.
I write to leave information behind, not for money. Maybe it shall inspire others to seek, to experience,to share and yes, most importantly to understand.
Bills have been known to inspire all forms of writing; it’s why Dickens wrote “A Christmas Carol,” and why countless writers grind out material every day for every medium. Been there, done that, cashed the check.
That’s why I hate literature studies. They psychoanalyze the author’s intent for writing, parsing every phrase until they wrung out all the joy of reading it. What’s left is a dried up carcass of what was once was an enjoyable read! While in college, there was one professor that seemed to have a penchant for extracting sexual connotations out everything we read. My thoughts were that he was getting his kicks out of discussing this while in the presence female students.
Back in high school one of the guys got in trouble for suggesting to the teacher that maybe Shakespeare didn’t really put a lot of hidden meaning in his plays; that he was just writing what sells.
My (cynical) 10th-grade English teacher taught us this gem: “Authors write for two reasons—they either need the money or have something to say.” Some of us asked him why not both.
Patty is not so dumb after all. ;) I tend to agree with the person above who wrote that writers could both “have something to say” and “need the money” at the same time, but you can’t go wrong with the latter point. For as Luke wrote, “the labourer is worthy of his hire.”
This actually happened in one of my college classes. The teacher chastised the student, of course, asking “What would you know about that?” Her answer: “He’s my father.”
Asharah 9 months ago
Possibly
knutdl 9 months ago
“Dear Sir or Madam, will you read my book?
It took me years to write, will you take a look?
It’s based on a novel by a man named Lear
And I need a job
So I wanna be a paperback writer"
(The Beatles)
ronaldspence 9 months ago
a universal purpose!
loreleianothername 9 months ago
In 1825 there was a banking crisis in the UK (sound familiar?) and Sir Walter Scott lost a bleep load of money and owed a huge amount to creditors. He had to write lots and lots to claw back money to repay the debt. It worked but the debt was not paid off until after his death in 1832. So did writing like a crazy person do him in???
WaywardWind 9 months ago
I often believed that was the reason some of the stuff we had to read was written. The guy couldn’t hold a regular job so he wrote poetry of stupid books to make students suffer a few hundred years later.
Argythree 9 months ago
That makes sense to me…
jaydogg187 9 months ago
I’d give her full marks for that answer.
mccollunsky 9 months ago
That’s a smart answer.
Hazelnut King 9 months ago
Does anyone else feel that books penned before 1900 are immeasurably better written than modern books? The manner of expression was so much richer and more skillful in authors like Edgar Allan Poe.
cdillon85 9 months ago
Her answer is refreshingly honest.
Macushlalondra 9 months ago
Supposedly this was why Dickens wrote “A Christmas Carol.” He needed the money. He had a lot of children to support. You’d think a book that was hurriedly written with the writer under stress, the story wouldn’t be very good but it’s become a classic. If he’d known how many films they’d make from it, he’d never have worried about money.
Lucky Bear 9 months ago
So, finally we see the spark of intelligence in Patty! And btw, what was Mr Schulz’ purpose in drawing peanuts cartoons?
Decepticomic 9 months ago
To bore students to death. Mission accomplished.
F-Flash 9 months ago
PP could be right, we think there might be a purer motive, but even writers have to eat.
The Reader Premium Member 9 months ago
Wrong! He was just hanging out in a boring class and it just sorta happened.
bmckee 9 months ago
Wasn’t it Heinlein who said that the only reason to write was to make money?
gantech 9 months ago
She may have been more correct than she herself realized…
Ellis97 9 months ago
Peppermint Patty was actually supposed to have her own strip, but after much persuasion, Sparky was convinced to make her a character in this strip.
'IndyMan' 9 months ago
Patty, join ‘Skylar’ in the remedial class ! ! !
JïllDérs(TOMGF) 9 months ago
Those questions are some of the most annoying questions to answer in English class, Peppermint Patty
Man of the Woods 9 months ago
Bingo!!!
ah-hee 9 months ago
I write to leave information behind, not for money. Maybe it shall inspire others to seek, to experience,to share and yes, most importantly to understand.
6foot6 9 months ago
I mean, it’s not a wrong answer…
jagedlo 9 months ago
Even PP has those moments of brilliance!
ken in tx 9 months ago
No one but a blockhead ever wrote but for money.—some famous guy from history said.
preacherman Premium Member 9 months ago
You know, I vaguely remember answering that same question, that same way when I was her age. It’s logical.
Can't Sleep 9 months ago
Bills have been known to inspire all forms of writing; it’s why Dickens wrote “A Christmas Carol,” and why countless writers grind out material every day for every medium. Been there, done that, cashed the check.
Angry Indeed Premium Member 9 months ago
That’s why I hate literature studies. They psychoanalyze the author’s intent for writing, parsing every phrase until they wrung out all the joy of reading it. What’s left is a dried up carcass of what was once was an enjoyable read! While in college, there was one professor that seemed to have a penchant for extracting sexual connotations out everything we read. My thoughts were that he was getting his kicks out of discussing this while in the presence female students.
jarvisloop 9 months ago
In a former life, I taught Shakespeare, and I was forthright about his reasons for writing plays: It’s all about the shillings, baby.
charles9156 9 months ago
genius Patty!
Paul D Premium Member 9 months ago
Just like the people on street corners with a sign saying “Will work for food.”
Who doesn’t?
ladykat 9 months ago
Not a bad answer, Patty.
ms-ss 9 months ago
Back in high school one of the guys got in trouble for suggesting to the teacher that maybe Shakespeare didn’t really put a lot of hidden meaning in his plays; that he was just writing what sells.
minute_of_decade 9 months ago
This actually a very correct answer. Balzac for example used to extend the lenght of his books because he was paid by the page.
WCraft Premium Member 9 months ago
As an amateur novelist/writer, I can tell you with certainty that is not the way to make money for most of us!
John Jorgensen 9 months ago
Normally we’re supposed to laugh at Pep for saying dumb stuff in class. But in this case there’s an excellent chance she’s right.
andersjg Premium Member 9 months ago
College prof…Publish or Perish…
[Unnamed Reader - 14b4ce] 9 months ago
pEPPERMINT GETS AN “a PLUS” AT LAST!!
socalvillaguy Premium Member 9 months ago
My (cynical) 10th-grade English teacher taught us this gem: “Authors write for two reasons—they either need the money or have something to say.” Some of us asked him why not both.
Brilliant_Birdie 9 months ago
It pays the bills.
oakie817 9 months ago
right?
ekke 9 months ago
Bing and Go all at one moment!
mindjob 9 months ago
Or maybe it was to teach society a lesson so they mend their evil ways
sugordon 9 months ago
Patty is not so dumb after all. ;) I tend to agree with the person above who wrote that writers could both “have something to say” and “need the money” at the same time, but you can’t go wrong with the latter point. For as Luke wrote, “the labourer is worthy of his hire.”
C wolfe 9 months ago
Nothing stimulates the mind of an artist or author like the need to pay the bills.
raybarb44 9 months ago
Always of course but what was sellable in his topic?……
Robert Nowall Premium Member 9 months ago
It’s a strong secondary reason.
L Dash 9 months ago
Well, she’s not wrong!
Boise Ed Premium Member 9 months ago
This actually happened in one of my college classes. The teacher chastised the student, of course, asking “What would you know about that?” Her answer: “He’s my father.”
eddi-TBH 9 months ago
A practical and sensible answer. A+
Otis Rufus Driftwood 9 months ago
Happens more often than you think.
paullp Premium Member 9 months ago
I always thought that; never had the opportunity to say it out loud.
Ed The Red Premium Member 9 months ago
Anyone who’s ever read Charles Dickens knows that he was being paid by the word for most of what he wrote.
As for both Arthur Conan Doyle and Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain), it was a job. It was a job they liked, but they were doing it for the money.
Beowulf 406 Premium Member 9 months ago
A+ for P.P. pretty much sums up all Literature classes in 5 words.