<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>LAist: Has Hollywood Hijacked Our Novelists?</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/12/14/they_tell_us_ou.php</link>
<description>All comments for Has Hollywood Hijacked Our Novelists?</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2008 la_jeremy</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:00:00 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>jeremy.oberstein@gmail.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>jeremy.oberstein@gmail.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>Callie Miller</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/12/14/they_tell_us_ou.php#comment-1252424</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2007/12/14/they_tell_us_ou.php#comment-1252424</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 10:52:21 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;fabooj - totally agree with you that there are &quot;craptastic&quot; writers all over LA. but aren&apos;t there just as many awful scripts being written and filmed? what i should have made clearer is my frustration that this isn&apos;t the best connection woodard could have made. how bad is it if bad novelists turn to bad scriptwriting? 

there are MANY outstanding novelists in LA. some dabble in screenwriting with excellent results. others don&apos;t dabble at all. it seems a stretch to say that there are many talented novelists that would have written novels, but they&apos;ve been lured into writing for the screen instead and now turn out bad work.

more than anything, it seemed kind of crazy to say that screenwriting is &quot;easy&quot; and &quot;artistically negligible&quot; - i&apos;m not a screenwriter. never have been, never will be. so i&apos;m not defending my turf. it just seems a rather bold thing to say.

i also wonder about the &quot;lack of great novelists&quot; in LA though. as compared to where -- NY? is there a number that defines an appropriate amount? that defines what is considered &quot;great&quot;, as woodard mentions? it&apos;s all so subjective.

who do YOU consider to be among the &quot;great&quot; LA writers? &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>fabooj</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/12/14/they_tell_us_ou.php#comment-1252407</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2007/12/14/they_tell_us_ou.php#comment-1252407</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 10:14:41 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The thing that&apos;s funny about Woodward&apos;s premise is that it&apos;s not even original.  I had a professor who wrote a similar article back in &apos;71. I&apos;ve heard it several times over the last 20 years that it&apos;s close to becoming actual fact.  

This entry seems to be talking about two different things.  There is a lack of decent novelists in LA.  I&apos;m including friends in this; they can&apos;t write for shit.  Especially those who introduce themselves as writers.  They supersuck.  

But then you start talking about &quot;decent writers&quot;.  There are lots of decent writers in LA.  But is that so hard?  There&apos;s way more craptastic writers anyway.  And a just because you can write does not make you a novelist.  Right?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>gingerous</title>
<link>http://laist.com/2007/12/14/they_tell_us_ou.php#comment-1252301</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://laist.com/2007/12/14/they_tell_us_ou.php#comment-1252301</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 19:08:54 -0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;ad hominem attacks don&apos;t help your argument.  why didn&apos;t you post a comment on his blog?  he appears to reply frequently.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>