Five Writer’s Flaws You Absolutely Need to Have
How
are your New Year’s Resolutions coming?
I
think about mine often, feel bad for failing them, good for achieving them,
enjoying seeing how I changed over the years based on what I want to be true for
me and my life. It’s starting to get closer to my birthday, and though January
is way behind us and October is still some months away, I start to think about
how I can make next year better.
But
what I find interesting, what I question, are the common things people think
they should alter about themselves. As I hear people complain about their life,
I sometimes find myself thinking, “But that’s what I like about you,” or, “But
don’t you know the good of it?” As writers, we all know that balance is key,
but I’ve found that some of the things that we wish would go away to be very
vital to the process.
The need for praise.
For a short period of time, I
once didn’t need praise. I wasn’t very productive.
In
the months when I was fully confident in my writing, when I knew that I had at
least some of the skills to write something to my own tastes, that, at least a
book could eventually get where I
wanted it to be, I stopped working. I stopped trying to improve.
And
there were times in which I wasn’t happy with myself, but I didn’t take praise
seriously either. In fact, it actually kind of hurt. It embarrassed me, forced
me to question the sincerity. I refused to let my hopes get up. That made it
very hard to convince myself writing was enjoyable when I damn well knew it
wasn’t.
On
the other hand, when you do let yourself enjoy the compliments, you can look
forward to them. It can motivate you through the bad times. Getting praise is
about getting a little thrill of happiness. Those small moments of validation
are important to an otherwise unforgiving, painful, and slow process. You have
to feel joy at your own accomplishments, feel good when someone likes your
work.
More
importantly, it is one option to gauge quality. If you never cared what anyone
ever thought of your books, you wouldn’t know when to push yourself harder, or when you need to stop criticizing yourself and appreciate what you've made. It
becomes very difficult to admit to yourself if your manuscript really is what
you want it to be when you would really like
it to be over with. A lot of writers claim they don’t care about praise in a
fit of self-doubt, but I often find that if, instead of shaming themselves for
wanting something they “shouldn’t,” and instead of avoiding self-analysis out
of fear, they might realize that by asking why they’re not getting praise might
be the very thing that improves their novel.
When
it goes wrong:
But
yes, seeking praise does not always encourage good writing. In fact, we all
know it can do the exact opposite.
Problems
arise when a writer wants everyone to
like his book, and so constantly makes changes, turning it into an
inconsistent, homogenized mess. Manuscripts like that tend to not be unified in
thought, take the thrills out of its risks, or just read like the writer is
pandering to a hypothetical (dumber) audience. People are excited by
confidence, they trust it.
Plus, many times, what will garner verbal praise isn’t always what will garner meaningful reaction. Keep in mind that people’s compliments and criticisms aren’t always indicative of what they’re actually reading, or what honestly affected them. We can say we love Hemingway, but be tucked away with Fifty Shades.
Notable
works were not immediately complimented because something genuinely new will
get a response of trepidation (even rejection) before people trust it enough to
invest their emotions.
There
is nothing wrong with seeking praise, and it’s a good idea to at least reflect
on why you’re not getting it, just so long as you don’t let it overcome what’s
really important to you and who you really are.
Impatience.
So the big controversy
stirring since the popularization of ebooks and self-publishing is writers who
are pumping out books much faster than the traditional publishers. Why is it a
point of contention? Well, there’s the honest factor that motivation strongly influences
results, and so when an author is impatient, the book will read like the author is impatient. Some books are rushed in pace,
aren’t very well edited, and just not brought to their full potential. There’s
also the unfortunate factors of jealousy or a feeling of being handicapped by your
trained patience or slower methods, and of course fear that the standards of
protocol and production are changing, and it may very well become expectation
that someone is ridiculously prolific and fast.
Both sides have their
points. As I say, there are no right answers in writing because someone will
tell you you’re wrong no matter what.
Yet I bring up impatience
as an important flaw to have because it pushes writers to actually do their
work.
For many authors,
especially debut ones, especially for the first draft, there are no deadlines.
You are on your own. It gets done when it gets done. But if you’re a
procrastinator like me, this can be problematic. Waiting until the last minute
doesn’t work if there is no last minute.
I have found impatience to
be the greatest reason for me to get shit over with. “I want this book to be finished!”
It often takes me much longer to do what I want than I think it will, and by
giving myself a pressing and sometimes unrealistic deadline, I have the
motivation to work on it, where as if I let myself off the hook, I’m more
likely to leave it alone, even abandoning it.
In my experience, patient writers who give themselves a long, reasonable timeframe never complete it. I am, of course, speaking of specific individuals and assume there’s a lot of people who go against this generalization. Yet, I stand by my belief that impatient people tend to be far more productive, and those who don’t pressure themselves to get it done take much longer than they even scheduled themselves for.
Also, for writers like me,
a manuscript is never good enough, never completely really, and sometimes the
only thing forcing you to actually put it out there is being so goddamn sick of
it that you’re wondering if Belgium is far enough.
When
it goes wrong:
It’s
not the impatience but the priority of it that cases mistakes.
When the author starts to cut corners, refuses to analyze results, and doesn’t allot themselves time to do it right, that’s when this flaw becomes a huge obstacle.
Impatience
bleeds through a novel. Everyone can tell when something is truly written in
haste. Impatience works when it forces you to sit your butt in the chair to get
it done. It backfires if it encourages you to call it done before it’s ready.
Delusions of grandeur.
Every
writer has dealt with some deluded asshole at some point. Probably me, if
you’re reading this. It can be so frustrating to have someone, an unhappy someone
at that, proverbially plugging his ears to every piece of advice simply because
he believes he is too good for it.
However,
I find that some sort belief in being “The Chosen One” is one of the most effective
philosophies in not getting discouraged.
I’ve
met people who genuinely recognized their insignificance in the world. They
were logical about the statistical unlikelihood of being a successful artist and accepted it. If I was lucky, it just caused them to aim low. In most cases,
it made them stop creating all together.
These are talented and intelligent people, mind you.
But
like the seeking of praise, motivation requires hope for some sort of reward.
It doesn’t have to be superficial—rewards can mean good memories, changing the
world, etc.—it just has to be something that 1) means something to them, 2)
outweighs the pain, and 3) could possibly happen.
To
be clear, not all artists want fame and fortune. I know people I genuinely
believe would hate that.
When
I say “delusions of grandeur,” I am referencing a powerful belief in yourself,
a belief that you can do something that will mean something despite a lack of irrefutable proof. That belief
doesn’t come from logically analyzing the reality around you, just a strange
sense of faith in your own abilities.
Ever
wonder why most successful people seem batshit crazy? It’s because those who do
something do it because they didn’t know they couldn’t. Reasonable, rational
people aim for what they know they can get. Deluded people have no idea what
they can get, and so aim for what they want.
When
you aim higher, you get higher.
When
it goes wrong:
Delusion
becomes a problem when it either prevents the person from actually working,
gives them unrealistic expectations, or entitles them to poor behavior.
In
one severe case, I had a screenwriter who so strongly believed God would give
him a career, he thought that someone would happen across him and ask for his
script. He did, at least, write them, but he never submitted them anywhere,
refused to even type copies of his handwritten screenplays, and when a friend did bring him an offer of
10,000 dollars for one, he said, “This script is worth 100,000 dollars.”
(That’s the kind of money you’d make if a company like Paramount or Universal
got into a bidding war over it, for comparison’s sake.)
Yes,
there are a lot of times in which people are so deluded in their abilities they
don’t bother to ever write anything, put themselves out there, market their
books, or take any actual actions. They think their work is so fantastic—even
the hypothetical kind—they once they do get around to writing it, it will
immediately be picked up and become a bestseller. They are those who admit to
slapping up a book online with no intention on telling anyone about it and
expecting it to go somewhere. (Though, of course, they claim, “I don’t care if
it sells or not.”)
Unrealistic
expectations are different than just aiming high and having big dreams. When it
starts to become a series of restrictions on those dreams, without any
foundation in what typically happens, the Grand Writer sets himself up for failure
and the overwhelming demoralization that comes with it. Instead of researching
how to go about it, what to expect, and paying attention to what those around
him are doing, he makes ridiculous demands or decisions believing he will be
the exception. Fate or luck will put him in the right place at the right time.
He doesn’t take the path right for him, he takes the easy one.
Being critical.
People
say to read great books when to improve your writing. I say read a lot of crap.
The classics are fantastic, but the reasons for their successes aren’t limited
to just what is written. There is an important backstory to every well-known
novel that factors into their popularity. Who they know, who they
were being compared to, how much publicity had they received beforehand, when
in their life they actually became successful, what politically and economically was going on around them…
all of it factors into why their writing was noticed, why the style worked for
the people when it did. Bad writing is fairly limited to the actual words on a
page.
I’m
the first to say that giving criticism can be empowering, that despite what
many will tell you, it can be completely self-serving. But even if you get a
high out of it, for most there’s still that horrible, bittersweet feeling. Even
when you say nothing to the person in question, being critical can be
exhausting, dirty, overwhelming, and infuriating. For this reason, I sometimes
wish I couldn’t be so critical.
Yet
it’s extremely important for everyone involved.
Now,
I don’t believe in giving criticism to people I don’t know without their
request. I think it’s extremely rude. Also, I do sometimes get off on it, so
I’m extra careful to avoid it being that it's hard for me to gauge my intentions. But not actually stating criticism and
not thinking it are two very different things. Even when you have no interest
in being negative, when you have an honest reaction to something, it’s best to
let yourself reflect on it.
Being
critical of other authors is how we define our own personal philosophies and
goals, how we determine the best and worst tactics for ourselves. Being
critical of ourselves is how we learn to take control over our lives. Judging
someone else’s decisions is the best way to make better decisions for ourselves
in the future. I've learned the most about writing by reading books I didn't like and really analyzing what about them didn't work for me.
The
other thing to remember is that being critical effectively is a learned skill.
It takes time to train yourself to notice your feelings, dissect them,
understand them, and then articulate them. When someone wants your opinion,
which they will eventually, having practiced criticism for yourself will better
enable you to give it to someone else.
When
it goes wrong:
When
you don’t know when to keep your mouth shut. Including when you’re talking to
yourself.
Criticism
has a time and place. Sometimes it’s a good idea to put your critical eye aside
and let things be free to grow as they will. Being too critical can inhibit the
creative process. It can also lose you friends, fans, or even just peers.
Speaking it too much will come off as insecurity; thinking it too much will
cause insecurity.
While
critical thoughts is an important part of the process, so is knowing when to
speak them and when to keep them to yourself.
Jealousy.
I can’t stand being
jealous, especially if it’s a writer I wish the best for. Envy is a painful,
exhausting, belittling feeling that does no one any good.
Or does it?
Or does it?
While I would gladly give
away my ability to be jealous, I have found two good things come from it. One,
it is a great motivator.
A friend of mine got
picked up by an agent… right after he had sent me some notes on my manuscript
no less. Now, I really like him, want the world for him, think he’s a very
talented writer, but this bothered me. Of course it did. I hated that it
bothered me. Yet, on seeing that someone who I had been writing partners with
manage to get an agent, it motivated me to buckle down and get to work. It
reminded me that it was possible for me to do it, and my competitive side
demanded that I rise to the occasion. And I did.
Jealousy is a great way to
tell you what you want, that you can get it, and force you into action.
Jealousy also makes me a
better person. Mostly because I demand it to. I realized as I was not completely
happy for someone I very much should have been, I needed to do something about
it. After that, I made it a point to always support an author who had good
news—even if I hated them. I would do so subtly, an action of the same
magnitude as my feeling. It ranges anywhere from a comment on a blog, a like on
a Facebook page, buying their book, or even donating money to their project.
This enabled me to feel
better about myself, brought us a little closer together, and even by just
acting supportive, I felt supportive.
When
it goes wrong:
It’s fairly obvious.
Jealousy tends to make asses out of us all. It taints our view, warps our
ability to be objective, causes us to be mean, and in the worst scenarios,
brings out our insecurity. It goes wrong when we let it control our actions,
when it festers inside us. It goes wrong when we treat others like dirt. ‘Nough
said.
If you liked this post, want to support, contact, stalk, or argue with me, please consider...
Liking Charley Daveler on Facebook
Following What's Worse than Was