Calling all serious writers (#writing #SFWA)
So Kyle Aisteach recently pointed out to several people an editorial by Ryan Boudinot about serious writers vs non-serious writers. It's ... an interesting read.
You know what they say, "The politics in academia are so cut-throat because the stakes are so small." I know a lot of teachers, and most of what he's written sounds more like teacher fatigue then outright hatred. But still, he has apparently rubbed several people the wrong way with his post. I can take or leave most of what he said, but one thing bothers me.
"On a related note: Students who ask if they're "real writers," simply by asking that question, prove that they are not."
This statement, whether in context or out of context, kind pisses me off. Since when does one man get to define the concept of a "real writer"?
So let's start with some of his complaints.
Ryan says "Writers are born with talent." He's not entirely wrong. People who cannot visualize their characters, their world, and their story just aren't going to be able to write a cohesive narrative. Getting the grammar and punctuation correct will not make one a great writer. On the other hand, having talent without the ability to spell, punctuate, or put down a clear sentence won't get you very far at all. Raw talent does NOTHING for a person without the skills to back it up. Plus, writing can generally be taught to people who really want to learn it. Whether it's technical writing, travel writing, non-fiction writing, essay writing, genre writing, etc., writing is writing and it Can Be Taught.
Ryan says "If you complain about not having time to write, please do us both a favor and drop out." Hmmm. Now this entire section is teacher bitching. He really wanted to be the teacher who got all the wonderful students who did what they needed to when they needed to do it, proving that he was just the best teacher in the world. When he found out that people were taking his classes for the easy A or because of requirements or because they had a dream without a realistic understanding of the requirements, it broke his heart.
On one hand, I sort of agree with this statement. If you want to write and you don't have time to write, you haven't looked at your schedule closely enough to figure out what other stuff you're doing that you don't really need to do. On the other hand, you might have kids or family obligations with the the support structure needed for you to take time to write. If that's the case, I totally feel for you. I also advise getting with a time management consultant that might help you squeeze out those necessary few minutes / hour a day for your writing fix.
Ryan says "You don't need my help to get published." No, we probably don't need his help. And, after that comment, I really don't want his help. He does, however, miss one of the important realities about the publishing industry. Networking, getting people's names, numbers, email addresses, are a vital part of continuing to get published. If he doesn't want to network, then he doesn't have to. But new writers especially should be networking with anyone who will let them. Because that's how we hear about work that doesn't get publicized through other channels.
Ryan says "It's not important that people think you're smart." Hmmm. Okay, he's specifically referring to writing style and the easter eggs people stuff into their works, not how people come off in industry conferences or in their cover letters. At least, I hope that's what this comment means. Hmmmm.
Ryan says "If you aren't a serious reader, don't expect anyone to read what you write." First, what defines "serious reader?" Second, some amazing writers don't have time to read. On the other hand, writers do kinda need to know their market and if you don't read at all, you probably won't have a good concept of story structure or the things that appeal to readers. Reading is how most writers find the genre and the stories they want to tell. But as the reading experience is undergoing rapid evolution these days... Again, Ryan, define "serious."
Ryan says "If you didn't decide to take writing seriously by the time you were a teenager, you're probably not going to make it." I call bullshit. Where is this metric he speaks of? And how does a teenager take ANYTHING seriously for more than 30 seconds?
I may have mentioned this before, but I've been writing since the age of 10. My dad was always writing poetry, fiction, horror, and even a screen play and I wanted so badly to be just like him. I loved reading and kept trying to sneak into the adult section of the public library (apparently I wasn't old enough to read Tolkien or Bradbury, according to the librarians). So I started off with a one page short about a magic penny found on a sidewalk that granted wishes. I graduated to flash fiction (though it didn't have that name then) that got published in the local newspaper, wrote several fanfiction stories, and even in the ninth grade convinced my English teacher to let me spend a semester in the library working on a childrens mystery book (ala Trixie Beldon). But did I take writing seriously?
I wanted to be a writer, but I didn't read books on structure. I didn't take writing courses. I didn't devote every hour of every day to writing. Sure, I had a Calvin & Hobbes (comic strip) type imagination and was constantly telling myself stories in my head. But is that being serious about writing?
You tell me. What is your idea of a serious writer? What do you think of his article? What do you think of my response?
You know what they say, "The politics in academia are so cut-throat because the stakes are so small." I know a lot of teachers, and most of what he's written sounds more like teacher fatigue then outright hatred. But still, he has apparently rubbed several people the wrong way with his post. I can take or leave most of what he said, but one thing bothers me.
"On a related note: Students who ask if they're "real writers," simply by asking that question, prove that they are not."
This statement, whether in context or out of context, kind pisses me off. Since when does one man get to define the concept of a "real writer"?
So let's start with some of his complaints.
Ryan says "Writers are born with talent." He's not entirely wrong. People who cannot visualize their characters, their world, and their story just aren't going to be able to write a cohesive narrative. Getting the grammar and punctuation correct will not make one a great writer. On the other hand, having talent without the ability to spell, punctuate, or put down a clear sentence won't get you very far at all. Raw talent does NOTHING for a person without the skills to back it up. Plus, writing can generally be taught to people who really want to learn it. Whether it's technical writing, travel writing, non-fiction writing, essay writing, genre writing, etc., writing is writing and it Can Be Taught.
Ryan says "If you complain about not having time to write, please do us both a favor and drop out." Hmmm. Now this entire section is teacher bitching. He really wanted to be the teacher who got all the wonderful students who did what they needed to when they needed to do it, proving that he was just the best teacher in the world. When he found out that people were taking his classes for the easy A or because of requirements or because they had a dream without a realistic understanding of the requirements, it broke his heart.
On one hand, I sort of agree with this statement. If you want to write and you don't have time to write, you haven't looked at your schedule closely enough to figure out what other stuff you're doing that you don't really need to do. On the other hand, you might have kids or family obligations with the the support structure needed for you to take time to write. If that's the case, I totally feel for you. I also advise getting with a time management consultant that might help you squeeze out those necessary few minutes / hour a day for your writing fix.
Ryan says "You don't need my help to get published." No, we probably don't need his help. And, after that comment, I really don't want his help. He does, however, miss one of the important realities about the publishing industry. Networking, getting people's names, numbers, email addresses, are a vital part of continuing to get published. If he doesn't want to network, then he doesn't have to. But new writers especially should be networking with anyone who will let them. Because that's how we hear about work that doesn't get publicized through other channels.
Ryan says "It's not important that people think you're smart." Hmmm. Okay, he's specifically referring to writing style and the easter eggs people stuff into their works, not how people come off in industry conferences or in their cover letters. At least, I hope that's what this comment means. Hmmmm.
Ryan says "If you aren't a serious reader, don't expect anyone to read what you write." First, what defines "serious reader?" Second, some amazing writers don't have time to read. On the other hand, writers do kinda need to know their market and if you don't read at all, you probably won't have a good concept of story structure or the things that appeal to readers. Reading is how most writers find the genre and the stories they want to tell. But as the reading experience is undergoing rapid evolution these days... Again, Ryan, define "serious."
Ryan says "If you didn't decide to take writing seriously by the time you were a teenager, you're probably not going to make it." I call bullshit. Where is this metric he speaks of? And how does a teenager take ANYTHING seriously for more than 30 seconds?
I may have mentioned this before, but I've been writing since the age of 10. My dad was always writing poetry, fiction, horror, and even a screen play and I wanted so badly to be just like him. I loved reading and kept trying to sneak into the adult section of the public library (apparently I wasn't old enough to read Tolkien or Bradbury, according to the librarians). So I started off with a one page short about a magic penny found on a sidewalk that granted wishes. I graduated to flash fiction (though it didn't have that name then) that got published in the local newspaper, wrote several fanfiction stories, and even in the ninth grade convinced my English teacher to let me spend a semester in the library working on a childrens mystery book (ala Trixie Beldon). But did I take writing seriously?
I wanted to be a writer, but I didn't read books on structure. I didn't take writing courses. I didn't devote every hour of every day to writing. Sure, I had a Calvin & Hobbes (comic strip) type imagination and was constantly telling myself stories in my head. But is that being serious about writing?
You tell me. What is your idea of a serious writer? What do you think of his article? What do you think of my response?