You can find all of my EXO fanaccounts from Korea on the link on the side. :)

This blog is mostly Jongin feat. other Kpop, other things, and my complaining. I am completely and undeniably biased and now you've been formally warned~

My Kpop biases: ♥Jongin♥, EXO, Super Junior, Various individuals

I'm also a huge fan of AKB48 so expect to see them here every once in a while.

Artist: 폰부스 ft. 서승택
Track: "붉은 책"

(Source: hongdaenights)

(Source: oursoulsareone)

just-the-fics-maam:

just-the-fics-maam’s tips for getting unstuck with your writing.

These ideas have helped me when I have gotten stuck. I hope they help you, too!

mockingday:

Watch Emma’s speech and take action

ravine:

you never realize how much you love sleeping until you have to wake up in the morning 

(Source: ohxing)

deadmartells:

there are people in this world who have already got copies of blue lily and i am not one of them *lies on the floor*

teenifies:

zisnap:

image

 

(Source: beauziful)

Against self-indulgence in fictional prose

herself-nyc:

The wonderful author and teacher Meredith Sue Willis, with whom I’m currently in a writers’ group, does an email newsletter called Books For Readers. In the current issue she’s penned a short essay about self-indulgence in fiction writing.

Her thoughts really resonate for me; I’m a writer who likes rich complex prose (Henry James is GOD), and I’m currently writing a novel set in the first half of the 19th century which gives me an excuse to write complex sentences and use words that wonderful put fairly obsolete in current usage. But at the same time, I share Sue’s opinion that there’s a lot of stuff coming out lately that’s just full of … well, what Truman Capote said of Jack Kerouac’s prose: “That’s not writing, that’s typing.” Type type type all you want, but then, cut cut cut. It’s the cutting, not the typing, that makes you a writer.

Here’s Sue:

"I’ve done a lot of reading this summer, on my e-reader, in paperback and hardcover, and even on my smart phone— more than I will report on in this issue. My reading has run the gamut from genre books like Alice Boatwright’s new "cozy" mystery (see below) and Robin Hobb fantasies to Helen Benedict’s searing Iraq war novel Sand Queen and an excellent nonfiction book on the history of the Comanches.

But I want to begin with a book I have not read.

My sister-in-law Ann Geller read Donna Tartt’s The Goldfinch for her book group this summer. Ann told me that she also read some reviews of the book, and found that about half the reviewers thought it was a modern classic and the other half hated it. She said her own opinion is that “It was 800 pages long and should have been 200.” I think it’s important to note that my sister-in-law is not intimidated by big books. She reads a lot: fiction for pleasure, but she is also a Ph.D. in philosophy and a student of Talmud, so she has no intrinsic difficulty with large, dense books.

The problem, according to her, was what she calls self-indulgence on the part of the author: “The main character walks down the street, and there is an elaborate simile describing each person he passes.” To repeat, I haven’t yet read The Goldfinch, so I can’t comment on it directly, but Ann’s remarks started me thinking about a kind of writing that I come across too often in novels praised as brilliant and beautiful. (In fact, for comments on one of these books that I have read, see below). It is a kind of writing that depends on thick layering of figurative language and sense description and aggregation– that is, heaps of detail and metaphor and sometimes also multiple flights along tangential story lines. When this kind of writing gets out of control, reading it is like eating rum-soaked fruit cake with pecans and currants and candied cherries, and then topping it with both hard sauce and full-fat vanilla ice cream.

This is not meant to be against richness, or against imaginative flights of language or experimentation. What it is against– and very much against– is doing these things lazily or ineptly, or self-indulgently. The longer I read, the more I have become demanding of quality and precision in long sentences and long books. This may have something to do with a cultural restlessness that has come along with visual media and Twitter and e-mail and blogs. I also spend a great deal of time reading student writing. But whatever the reasons, I am impatient with sloppy prose.

All of us who write ought to do a lot of cutting and polishing, of course, but the kind of revision I am talking about here is not only out of respect for the reader’s time. It is also essential for the writer’s own art. The initial foray into the material you want to write needs to be drafted with whatever tools work for you. If long pages of extremely detailed sense impressions or similes help you feel the texture of the world you’re creating, write that way. If you are an outliner who has to get the plot down first and then fill in the details, do that.

It’s what comes next, however, that moves the writing to another level. I’ve called this Deep Revision, and it’s the time when you refine and make choices, but also the time when you make new discoveries and come up with new ideas and material. In fact, long before I start polishing, I cut whole characters and scenes, add new scenes, move scenes, and try to face the fact that a lot of the material that helped me reach my characters and their world is a kind of scaffolding that should be taken down. For me as a writer, these second and third and thirteenth go-throughs are where the value is added. I don’t want to denigrate the wonder of initial inspiration: if you’re a writer, you live for inspiration. But for me, equally satisfying and probably more important are the times when I am discovering what underlies the initial vision, when I am adding more, going deeper, diving under— and then, when that’s all done, cutting away the metaphors that don’t fit anymore, getting rid of everything that isn’t necessary to express what I’ve discovered.

Do some writers get it right the first time round? Of course. Do some truly need to polish the first paragraph before they can write the second? Is the style of some writers all about metaphor to the exclusion of almost everything else? Yes and yes.

There are such writers, but probably not as many as claim to be. What infuriates me is the grandiosity of believing every word you write is sacred and should be displayed for admiration and/or worship.” — Meredith Sue Willis

Sue’s whole newsletter can be accessed here.

englishsnow:

 sarah L

alisieck:

When you play a video game with really good graphics

image

Artist: John Paesano, Peter Anthony & American Federation of Musicians
Track: "Finale"

*FAINTS*

(Source: veriloquentmind)

chan-soo:

Make me choose meme:

blssms & yourbiaswantsmemore asked:
Sehun or Kai

rklipman:

greencarnations:

spacethefinalfuck:

mehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh:

Female BAMFs Throughout History

this is fab BUT WHERE ARE THEIR NAMES?

I’m always wanting to read more about these posts immediately and I have trouble finding the sources.

reblogging again for names/sources