I'm #reading a book by #Hemingway at the moment and, gather round, I will tell you a little tale:

There was once a writing competition that I was looking at and the judges' descriptions of what kind of writing they were looking for made me puke. They kept saying how they liked direct writing and not too descriptive.

I mean, telling writers how they should write when they enter a competition is disgusting if you ask me. I mean, either they will like what you write or they won't, but telling people to write a certain way is not on.

Anyway, one of the judge's statements said something about them not liking flowery language, and then telling potential applicants: 'you're not Hemingway.'

And that's another shitty take if you ask me. How the fuck do they know how good you are at writing? They are literally telling the applicants 'Don't get too big for your boots! You not a great writer you know!' Horrible. How do they know?

But from that moment I assumed Hemingway was a great poet of a writer who wrote with great detailed descriptions and I was always curious about his work.

So I'm reading To Have and Have Not I got from a charity shop and so far it's good but I really do not like the use of the N word in the first chapter. It's written in first person so you could say the N word is the main character's way of speaking but I could do without it.

Anyway, the first chapter sets up the story immediately which I like. I know where it's going and for that it's very readable.

But the prose is nothing special. In fact, it's very simple. It reminds me of Stephen King or something. It's simple and readable.

So what the hell was that judge saying when they said 'you're not Hemingway?'

It seems to me like everyone can write like Hemingway.

#Books