Endrael
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Posted: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 23:53:36 +0000
We, as writer's, are creatures driven by the desire to communicate an idea, even if it's just to ourselves. This issue has been raised in several threads lately (I forget what ones, but they're around somewhere), but I'm not going to beat it to death. Rather, I'd like to talk about a trap a lot of writers fall into that directly relates to that concept. Namely, that of caring too much what the readers will think about your work, and, stemming from that, caring too much about whether or not you should include a certain element or leave it out because some people will or will not like it.
Now, let it be clear that I am not advocating we should all just say ******** you to any and all individuals who give us a critique because it would mean we'd be listening to the readers. That's one of the stupidest things to do as a writer, because critiques help us hone our skills and improve our abilities. Rather, I'm saying that you should stop worrying about whether or not people will like your work or if you should or should not include something because the readers might not like it.
Why?
Let's examine each.
"Iz this gud!?!?!?!?" Syndrome
This is a matter of seeking validation of one's writing, and I've touched on this in another thread. As a beginner writer, this is understandable, and often desirable if one is serious about getting into writing. The ego boost it can provide can make the difference between giving up on writing altogether or sticking it out until one passes through the rough early stages of one's writerly development.
The problem, however, is that it is not a trait one wants to hold onto. Why? Because every piece does not need validation, and maintaining the "Is this good?" mindset is more indicative of an individual who is unsure of him/herself rather than of their own work. In effect, they are treating the piece as if they were that piece, when they are not. It is merely a product, and no matter how much of yourself has been put into writing it, it does not change that it is only, and forever will be, a piece of writing. It is therefore an essential step as a writer to stop seeking validation of your work and understand that, even if it's bad, it is not a reflection of you as an individual.
"Shuld I put this in mai story?" Syndrome
This is a much worse practice than the "Is this good?" syndrome, because it shows a (near complete) lack of faith in one's ability to write, to tell a story, or to come up with ideas. While this applies, to some extent, to the "Is this good?" mind set, in this case, the writer is relying entirely on other people to tell them how and what to write. This can, if just beginning, be a good thing, because it lets you get the hang of writing, but it's best to lose this habit as quickly as possible.
The biggest reason for this is because stories written from the desire to please as many people as possible invariably suck because they're so boring and watered down. All you need to do is look at network television to see this in action, where most of the shows have gotten to the point where most of them are almost indistinguishable from each other. What happened? The television writers go by formula and demographics, rather than story telling, aiming to please as broad a range of people as they possibly can. Because of this, you'll rarely, if ever, encounter an intellectual conversation about things like politics or physics or philosophy in something like Everyone Loves Raymond or CSI, and you especially won't see it in the "reality" shows.
Secondly, including something in your story just because your friends (or people on gaia, or whatever) think it's cool because it worked in Inuyasha or Trigun or whatever makes the story inconsistent. Inconsistent stories are painful to read (right after poorly written stories), because it's hard to follow what's going on and it's hard to understand the characters and their world. Why is Event X happening and how does it follow from the story that's already been set up? Why does Character #3209 have the abilities they do and does it make sense for them to have them?
So what works for curing these two syndromes?
First, ask yourself if you're making changes or including/removing something because someone said you should. Do those changes or inclusions/removals improve the story? No? Then don't listen to the advice you've been given. If it would improve the story, make the changes your way. It is, after all, your story.
Second, stop thinking in terms of pleasing the reader and start thinking about what would make the story a good story. Do you have a brilliant idea of your own that would fit the story perfectly (killing a well liked character is the best example of this)? Don't squash it just because some people wouldn't like it. If it fits the story and is a natural extension of what's been happening in the story so far, use the idea. Just don't, for the love of good story telling, undo whatever your idea later in the story unless you have a damn good reason for it. Robert Jordan is a great example of this, where no characters ever stay dead even when they rightly should.
In short, stop caring so much what your readers want, because most of what they'll tell you is not going to be appropriate for your story. It's your story, and you're the only who can tell it like it's meant to be told.
Now, let it be clear that I am not advocating we should all just say ******** you to any and all individuals who give us a critique because it would mean we'd be listening to the readers. That's one of the stupidest things to do as a writer, because critiques help us hone our skills and improve our abilities. Rather, I'm saying that you should stop worrying about whether or not people will like your work or if you should or should not include something because the readers might not like it.
Why?
Let's examine each.
"Iz this gud!?!?!?!?" Syndrome
This is a matter of seeking validation of one's writing, and I've touched on this in another thread. As a beginner writer, this is understandable, and often desirable if one is serious about getting into writing. The ego boost it can provide can make the difference between giving up on writing altogether or sticking it out until one passes through the rough early stages of one's writerly development.
The problem, however, is that it is not a trait one wants to hold onto. Why? Because every piece does not need validation, and maintaining the "Is this good?" mindset is more indicative of an individual who is unsure of him/herself rather than of their own work. In effect, they are treating the piece as if they were that piece, when they are not. It is merely a product, and no matter how much of yourself has been put into writing it, it does not change that it is only, and forever will be, a piece of writing. It is therefore an essential step as a writer to stop seeking validation of your work and understand that, even if it's bad, it is not a reflection of you as an individual.
"Shuld I put this in mai story?" Syndrome
This is a much worse practice than the "Is this good?" syndrome, because it shows a (near complete) lack of faith in one's ability to write, to tell a story, or to come up with ideas. While this applies, to some extent, to the "Is this good?" mind set, in this case, the writer is relying entirely on other people to tell them how and what to write. This can, if just beginning, be a good thing, because it lets you get the hang of writing, but it's best to lose this habit as quickly as possible.
The biggest reason for this is because stories written from the desire to please as many people as possible invariably suck because they're so boring and watered down. All you need to do is look at network television to see this in action, where most of the shows have gotten to the point where most of them are almost indistinguishable from each other. What happened? The television writers go by formula and demographics, rather than story telling, aiming to please as broad a range of people as they possibly can. Because of this, you'll rarely, if ever, encounter an intellectual conversation about things like politics or physics or philosophy in something like Everyone Loves Raymond or CSI, and you especially won't see it in the "reality" shows.
Secondly, including something in your story just because your friends (or people on gaia, or whatever) think it's cool because it worked in Inuyasha or Trigun or whatever makes the story inconsistent. Inconsistent stories are painful to read (right after poorly written stories), because it's hard to follow what's going on and it's hard to understand the characters and their world. Why is Event X happening and how does it follow from the story that's already been set up? Why does Character #3209 have the abilities they do and does it make sense for them to have them?
So what works for curing these two syndromes?
First, ask yourself if you're making changes or including/removing something because someone said you should. Do those changes or inclusions/removals improve the story? No? Then don't listen to the advice you've been given. If it would improve the story, make the changes your way. It is, after all, your story.
Second, stop thinking in terms of pleasing the reader and start thinking about what would make the story a good story. Do you have a brilliant idea of your own that would fit the story perfectly (killing a well liked character is the best example of this)? Don't squash it just because some people wouldn't like it. If it fits the story and is a natural extension of what's been happening in the story so far, use the idea. Just don't, for the love of good story telling, undo whatever your idea later in the story unless you have a damn good reason for it. Robert Jordan is a great example of this, where no characters ever stay dead even when they rightly should.
In short, stop caring so much what your readers want, because most of what they'll tell you is not going to be appropriate for your story. It's your story, and you're the only who can tell it like it's meant to be told.
