anyone else cringe at anything you wrote like a month+ ago? Are

I knew they were bad at the time, it's just ideas and first drafts.

File: image.jpg (201KB, 760x596px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 760x596px

Absolutely. Sometimes there's stuff that I remain proud of, but part of it is sharing it with people I respect and having them enjoy it. But I just wrote something which I'm proud of

>>7996297
I had a shitty idea and wrote it down a few weeks ago, now I changed it and made it better and more appropriate. I'd probably cringe at what I've wrote, it's gone now, deleted.

>>7996297
I mean I cringe at literally everything from a month+ ago

conversations, thoughts, stuff I've written, my priorities/interests/lifestyle in general, all of it

I'll probably cringe at the thought of writing this within a couple of weeks

Looking at some writings even as recent as yesterday makes me cringe enough to clench my whole body like a sphincter pushing out stuck shit. How's that?

>>7996297
my dairy desu

>>7996297
Yes, absolutely. That's why I've retreated to a writing style that's incredibly subtle and mostly expressionless.

I'm cringing at something I wrote last night. I rewrote it this morning knowing that I will be unsatisfied with it in a matter of hours.

The feeling is both valid and a part of art and creation. It is perhaps the most important part, because it forces me to look at my work critically and to dissect what it is I am trying to achieve. They are valid feelings because when you are writing something and when you are reading something are two very different experiences.

>tfw re-reading your stuff and its decent

File: 1462338330484.jpg (45KB, 508x600px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 508x600px

For the most part I feel validated in my development as a writer. I figure that, as long as I always strive to incorporate better technique, my style is worth appreciating. I'm actually quite proud of most of my work.

>>7997271
Decent isn't really good enough though, is it? Would you like to be known as 'decent'?

>>7997317
Wrong way of thinking. I always try to improve and get better and challenge myself as well - but that has the consequene of only being proud of some parts of my work. That forces me to get even better.

>>7997334

kek okay buddy, didn't realize this was a "critique how other people feel about their work" thread.

>>7997322
I'd much rather read something I've written and feel it's decent than feel like it's the worst thing ever created by a human being.

Such feelings are not parts of art or creation but parts of the process of how you perceive the aesthetic worth of your prose over time. Cringing at time t2 at something you wrote at time t1 is a foolproof signal that your taste is evolving, improving, progressing--call it whatever you want--and that you should keep doing whatever you're doing.

They are valid, they mean you're progressing. Even as you get more experienced, there will always be those moments of adjustment and correction. I've been writing seriously for about sixteen years, and I still get some moments of 'how could I have thought that worked?'

>>7998175
Are t1 and t2 elements of an ordered set?
If so, which one comes after which?

I cringe at things I wrote a day ago.

I've managed to save most of my longer notes and ideas, and just general writings, from about 07-08 till now, and they're just beyond awful some of them, but I like to keep them to remind me of my personal progress, because some days I feel stuck, or that I haven't changed at all, but I really have.
That and some of them have very interesting kernels, even if the presentation is crude.
So I usually never delete things.

>>7998305
I had hoped that the indices, plus the context and how I phrased the scenario, would be self-explanatory in this respect.

But in any case, to put it somewhat semi-formally, what I meant was:

Let 'op' name OP of this thread, 'e' name an essay OP wrote at time t1, and let 't1' name some date or time that happened in the past. Now, define a predicate 'W' to be a ternary relation roughly read as "__ wrote __ at __", and let it take the terms op, e, and t1 as arguments to form the following uninterpreted sentence: W(op, e, t1). Transcribed back to English we can read it as "OP wrote such-and-such essay at t1".

Now, the short answer to your question as to whether t1 and t2 are elements of an ordered set is 'no'. Rather, the term t1 belongs to a particular ordered pair which itself belongs to a particular, but different, ordered pair: <op, <e, t1>>; and this ordered pair, is a member of the extension of 'W', which, when interpreted, is another way of saying that W(op, e, t1) or that OP wrote such-and-such essay at t1.


Also! Sets aren't ordered; pairs, that can be reduced to sets, are. The indexes, 1 and 2, belong to the index set, the set which is equivalent to the set of ordinals, although for our case, {1, 2} suffices just fine. Obviously, when interpreted, what matters here is the fact that t2 > t1, where the contents of 't1' and 't2' are dates or times or both and where '>' is the familiar 'greater-than' relation.

>>7996650
are you me

I feel very strongly about anything that i write almost as soon as its finished that i would like to burn it. Reading through this thread makes me wonder where my insecurity starts and where my self development ends. Anybody got an interesting take on this?