Writing Books-- Perception and Reality

Last weekend I had an interesting discussion with a musician wherein I admitted that my personality was to be quite open, and to basically be just as I am--just as I seem.

To which this man replied: "We all are, it is something about being an artist."

Being an artist.  Writing is an art that marries the creative and the analytical in an odd mixture of things most artists would not assume go together.  With painting you certainly start with learning logic, but when I did the most painting in my youth, all those rules had already left an impression on my mind and things like shading came second nature in paintings, sketches. Only minor tweaks were needed after the painting was done.

With writing, no matter how many years you've been at it, no matter how deep into the subconscious the writing rules have imprinted, the rough draft is always a mess.  

Granted, the writing of it is the easy part.  The hard part, in my experience, has been revising the rough draft and polishing it into the book it was meant to be.  The analytical aspect to writing a book is definitely that second step.  

It is easiest to make mistakes in this step.  It is easy for the story to transform outside its narrow bounds and become a different tale all together, or to branch off into a series. My tendency to over-think has hindered many  drafts, and kept me working on them for years and years.

The perception of writing a book is that the writing of it is the hardest and most time-consuming part.  Perhaps, fore some writers, this is a true statement.  But certainly, for me, the writing is easy and the revising is hard.  And the lesson?

My guy is often fond of telling me when--in any number of areas in my life--a simple idea inflates to a full fledged enterprise, complete with steps and long term goals: "Drea, the K.I.S.S. method.  Don't get ahead of yourself."

But I'm so good at it!  And Keeping It Simple... in any fashion orb form is exceedingly difficult.  Thanks to nano, however, I think I can start charting the path through those woods.

So what step of writing a book is hardest for you?

Attitude, Literary Fiction & Genre Fiction, Networking

Writing is a solitary activity. Or so we would assume, as it generally involves a person planted in front of a screen or notepad typing/scrawling ideas on a page. But this is always only the first step in the writing process. Revisions are best done after the draft is seen by multiple eyes. The more solid a group of people you have to look at your work, the better. This doesn't mean you need a lot of people, but certainly a group of individuals you can trust.

I happen to believe that all writers deserve not only a group (either in the form of a critique group or a collection of independent readers/critique-rs) but a network of other writers from which to gain support. The wider network is for access to knowledge, encouragement and inspiration. Sometimes, I think this is half of the reason for conventions and conferences. While writers learn about the process at these events, we also gain acquaintances.

For this reason, networks like Facebook are very useful. Whenever I meet another writer -- even if their subject matter is not similar to mine -- I reach out to them. If people respond with snappy phrasing, they are electing to sever the potential networking opportunity. It is really easy to get into semantic debates online, and as writers I think we should be more flexible with our interpretations of words.

For instance, the definitions between "Literary and Genre Fiction." While the industry likes to pretend these are definite labels, their use indicates otherwise.

Literary Fiction has subgroups: Historical Fiction, Magical Realism, Fairytales, Psychological --mind, I don't spend a lot of time on these books as they don't tend to hold my interest, but I'm sure you can see that some of these are certainly pretending at a literariness because the author's agent/editor has seen the ability to market them so. I'll bet the individual writing "modern fairytale" owns a lot of the same non-fiction and mythology tests I have at home.

These are marketing terms. We have appropriated them both as writers and readers in order to define and describe our likes. It has become a sort of jargon, but jargon and semantics allow for the embedding of meaning that can divide groups. So we lump "genre fiction" together, despite its diversity and create a loaded term.

Loaded terms and semantics can lead writers of either end of the debate to think that their writing is more applicable to the world at large than is another. I would think that neither would be right. The difference is not content, but audience. Who do you speak too?

A lack of understanding in this regard allows people to sever themselves off from community. That might not be the intent, but it is the result of having a poor attitude.

All writers in your community are worthy of respect. Everyone is equally imaginative, but their manifestations differ. Our processes, like our minds, and interests are diverse. But and all forms of writing have literary value, at least as their most essential idea. The ability of the writer is to convince the audience of the impossible, experience the different, or gain a new perspective. Any of these goals rely on skill and communication, and can coexist.

So as wordsmiths we should be wary of the meanings of words and know that when we touch on loaded terms, our interpretation of an individual's intent and perspective are not necessarily accurate. We should be aware of the ability of a word to inspire an emotional reaction, and be conscious of that reaction. If possible, we should not take insult where insult may not be meant if semantic difference can be acknowledged.