I am not sure it's anything to be disappointed about really (referring to your sigh at the end). I think it speaks much more about your love for the craft that you keep writing and have found a sustainable way to do it. Passion is all great - like the honeymoon period in young love, but that won't be enough to fuel a marriage. It's the daily plodding, keeping on in the hard times when it isn't fun anymore - that's what proves your passion and commitment, that's true love. The same goes for writing. The writer who keeps writing and finishes her work is worthy of admiration, and can hope to be successful. The one who is passionate and feverish for writing who then eventually fades away won't get anywhere. I guess we are now delving into the question of: what is the true meaning of the word, "passion"? Why do we value crazed, often unsustainable and fleeting obsession as "passion" and something to strive for? I think it is much healthier - and your writing richer for it - when you have found a way to make writing part of your life. Often, that looks a lot more like the slow steps of a long marriage rather than the fires of young love. And isn't that passion too? Doesn't it take passion to keep on going when there are things in the way and other commitments to think of? And isn't that a whole lot more lasting, and therefore valuable? You can write better when there are other things you care about because those riches inform your writing. The fire that just burns and burns without a care for anything else will eventually run out of things to burn, out of ideas, out of anything real, and turn into void.
Because it's fun? Because it makes life exciting? If I had the choice, I'd go back to my days of feverish writing, for sure. I don't agree with the posters who are saying people who write with passion won't complete projects - I finished four or five novels in less than a year when I first started out, and they were all good enough to get published. I was excited, I was engaged, the actual act of writing was fun--not like now, when I take satisfaction from writing, am glad to have written, but don't really enjoy the actual sitting and doing. It was a good time. Sustainable? Apparently not for me. But that's about the only negative I have for that time period. None of the rest of the criticisms I'm reading here seem to apply.
I don't want to write for a living. There, I've said it. I write because I feel more alive than I've ever been. If that ever goes away - and I don't think it will because it hasn't gone away in the about 25 years since I wrote my very first story as a 13 year old - I would probably turn to other avenues and search for this feeling. Writing is not always fun. Sometimes it's hard, and uncomfortable, and a whole lot of other things. Sometimes I sit down and hate the words which don't want to come. As said before, what I write when I don't want to write is better than it feels in this moment, so I do it anyways. And I get amply rewarded, next morning
I know exactly how you feel! I felt like that for 5 years, while I was writing my novel. I wrote every day I was allowed to write, and wrote as long as I could each day before having to go and do other things. Even social life felt like a chore to me. I hated having to go to work. I hated going on holiday. I wanted to be writing all the time. The story just kept coming, until it was done. The editing phase which has taken more than twice as long as the primary writing phase is also fun, but not jumping out of bed fun. It's an entirely different process. I am hoping that once the novel is out there, I can resume primary work on the sequel and feel that excitement coming back. Now that I'm retired I've got more control over my time. Also my research is now done, and so I'm hoping it won't take another 5 years to finish!
I definitely write faster when I'm in a 'MUST WRITE' mood. I definitely get that feeling of resentment when I'm in the mood but have to go to work or go out or do anything but write. If only we could bottle it and drink it at the perfect time.
Oh, I've never advocated losing sleep, even though I used to set my alarm and get up at 4am to write. I also, during that period, was going to bed at 8pm. I just find I write better just after I wake up, and at that hour nobody (much) hassles me about other things. But I could never pull an all-nighter or anything like that. 7-8 hours' sleep per night is my requirement! But try to get people to stop phoning at 9pm? Not easy!
I fall somewhere between @BayView and @Mckk on this. Writing does need to be something sustainable. It's a long process. No matter which way you slice it, it takes a long time and a good deal of that time isn't going to be throbbingly exciting. Even for me who gets borderline sexually aroused by writing complex, slow burning character pieces it's still not all that fun to just write a series of minor connecting scenes that prod the plot along to the next big beat. The story needs those scenes to get the right pace; to have some relaxed, light, low-tension stuff before the rollarcoaster goes back up-hill but that's not something I care about all that much. You have to push on through and that's how you get stuff actually done. Passion alone doesn't mean that someone will burn out. I never have. I've never even had a day when I didn't know what to write and it's been nearly three years. But equally I think we have all been in situations where we didn't see through something we were passionate about because our passion wasn't enough to drive us alone. I think it's silly to say, even as someone who is utterly driven by passion (and narcotics) that passion is enough. Passion makes me want to write but I had passion for years. I always wanted to be a novelist. It takes something more than just passion to get to the finish line. The term we are looking for here is the very grown up concept of deferred gratification. That's something that you learn, not something your naturally have. And that brings together the idea of sustainability with passion. We learn to not let our enthusiasm get the better of us and stay focused on what we really care about; the finished article not just the one awesome thing that we imagined. That's why we warn against simply being passionate; not because passion is bad. Quite the contrary, passion is absolutely critical. But man cannot live by passion alone. Unchecked passion makes for tunnel vision and a lack of self-awareness. And at times when that passion is lacking it makes many creatives feel they are failing, that they simply cannot work without 110% dedication to something. Healthy passion is a passion for finishing the project, or for writing your kind of work, or for getting your work published. That's something the naturally leads you to see things through and to strive for quality. It makes it satisfying to proof and edit and make your work the best that it can be. But passion for your character? Do I need to spell out the problems with authors who are too precious about their characters and stories? We all need passion, absolutely, but we all need perspective too. We need to see each day of writing and editing and proofing in the context of a larger whole. Sometimes we need to shrug and say 'it's not quite there; I'll get it next time' instead of obsessing over a sentence all day. Sometimes other things come up and we have to down tools and deal with them even if that means losing the flow. Perspective is what allows you to give yourself a break and to act with confidence; to recognize that there is more than just what you are doing right this second. We all need passion. We all need perspective. We need to merge these two things; we need to learn how to defer gratification and be passionate for the larger goal not just passionate for what is in our head right now.
Nope. You're talking as if this is universal, and it just isn't. When I'm passionate about a project, I don't need to worry about deferred gratification because I get immediate gratification. It's fun to write right then. Fun to write all the scenes, not just the big splashy ones. That doesn't mean I'm immature or precious about my characters or have tunnel vision or whatever else you've come up with. I mean, I accept that YOU need to do what you say you need to do. But I don't accept that I need to do what you say I need to do. Writers are different. Universal statements are generally unworkable.
I don't know how many idea that have been lost to my lazy butt in the middle of the night or even drifting off to sleep. The idea will pop into my head and every time I will think that I will remember it in the morning and of course the idea is gone not even having the decency to leave cab fair.
No, just fuck you for extending your point to cover others as well as yourself and couching it in terms that make it sound like a fact rather than a point of view. Or, alternatively, don't fuck you at all. But if it has to happen, it should happen for the right reasons!
I started leaving a pad of paper by the bed for a while, and I'd force myself to wake up enough to jot down whatever my brilliant ideas were - and then the next morning I'd look at them and they'd be completely nonsensical. "A talking giraffe? What?"
I guess I didn't word it quite right. While the crazed passionate spells are indeed fun and exciting and have value in themselves, I don't get why it seems it's the thing to strive for, like it's the only thing. I guess I'm going back to the OP's way of asking, "Shouldn't it be this way?" (paraphrase) Do you know why you don't enjoy the actual sitting and doing? (I assume by that you mean the process of actually writing) While I don't agree being crazy passionate is something to strive for or that it's the only correct state of being, I do think that the act of writing should be fun and exciting. Not so much that it gets you up at 3am necessarily, but it should definitely make you feel refreshed and, to some extent, it should excite you enough that you look forward to doing it again. From the way you describe, it sounds like an enjoyable task that you could do without.
The actual writing now just seems like a lot of work. I'm not as excited about the characters or the stories anymore. I still want to have them written down, but actually doing it? No longer exciting. It's kind of like gardening (my other big task today!) It's fun to plan my garden, and I get a sense of satisfaction at the end of a gardening session when I look back and see what I've done, but if at any point a magic fairy came and offered me a wand that would do the actual digging and weeding and mucking about for me? I would absolutely want that wand. Same as for writing. Five or seven or however many years ago when I first started writing, if I'd been offered a wand that would do my writing for me I would have said, no, there's no need--I enjoy doing it myself! But now? I'd definitely take the wand. I like it when my ideas are on the page, but I no longer really love the act of getting them on the page.
That's a pity. Do you think you would actually keep writing then? Did you burn out? (Maybe due to having to meet publishing deadlines and having settled into a more formulaic way of writing, since you write for a specific genre? Do you write anything else besides your MM romance? ) I think i get what you're saying. This happened to me with art. I grew up loving art. I could draw for hours and have been drawing since i could pick up a pencil. As a child i dreamt of drawing for Disney. Now? No way. Yes of course i get satisfaction from seeing my work. I love the finished product. But the actual drawing? If it's something that takes 15min then yeah, sure, maybe even up to an hour. But anything longer is just kinda dull. My mum wants me to draw a sheep for her and i haven't got past the pencil outline because i find it so boring
Yeah, I can relate to @BayView and @Mckk 's perspective on losing interest or impetus, or whatever you call it. That's the downside of doing what used to be pleasure, but then becomes a 'requirement.' There are a few lucky people out there who never lose interest in what they do for fun, and don't mind earning a living at it, but unfortunately I'm not one of them. It's why I've always resisted demands on my creative work. I did non-creative work to earn a living, and I liked it that way. As soon as I 'have' to write or 'have' to draw or paint, I don't wanna! I found it a lot easier to write when nobody knew I was doing it. And I never like to show a picture I'm working on to anybody until it's done. I hate dealing with expectations from other people, even if they are positive ones.
I don't think I burned out--I'm still producing, and still reasonably pleased with what I produce. (And, yes, I write in several different genres) I think the novelty just wore off. And I started working harder on producing words of a given quality--more disciplined, tighter writing. This isn't because of publisher demand, it's just it because that's the kind of writing I like to read, so it's the kind I want to produce. My earlier writing was more melodramatic, more self-indulgent, and, yeah, readers seemed okay with that, but I wasn't. I think I'll keep writing because I like the money. (And I don't even spend it--it all goes into my retirement fund! So there's the delayed gratification someone was talking about upthread!) If I stopped making money? I don't know. Maybe I'd go back to writing my fun crap, but I don't think I would--it's not satisfying to me any more.
So what you might say is that... You tempered your passion with discipline? And your earlier writing was, in your own words, melodramatic and self-indulgent and you needed to be better than just writing from passion? But I'm wrong for suggesting that tempering passion with discipline is a more sustainable approach that leads to better results? Are you actually fucking kidding me? You have re-stated exactly the position I took but you still want to call me wrong?
Can you settle down a little? I can review the parts of your post that didn't work for me, but I don't want to waste time by fighting about it.
Aw, what the hell. I'll post what I disagree with anyway, even if you can't settle down. I'm not really posting for you, anyway, right? So... your post, annotated... Writing does need to be something sustainable.[nope - writing doesn't need to be anything. It is what it is] It's a long process.[maybe? It takes me a few months to write a book. Is that long process?] No matter which way you slice it, it takes a long time and a good deal of that time isn't going to be throbbingly exciting. [Nope. In the first phase of my writing life, I was super-excited about every aspect of writing. Giddy, even] Even for me who gets borderline sexually aroused by writing complex, slow burning character pieces it's still not all that fun to just write a series of minor connecting scenes that prod the plot along to the next big beat. The story needs those scenes to get the right pace; to have some relaxed, light, low-tension stuff before the rollarcoaster goes back up-hill but that's not something I care about all that much. [I can't argue with any of this because it's all about your experience, and I trust you to be an authority on your own experience] You have to push on through and that's how you get stuff actually done. [Nope. Not necessarily. I got four or five books "actually done" with no pushing whatsoever] Passion alone doesn't mean that someone will burn out. [I guess? I don't know, but I'll accept it as a thesis statement which you then follow up with evidence] I never have. I've never even had a day when I didn't know what to write and it's been nearly three years. [Okay. Again, your experience, your expertise] But equally I think we have all been in situations where we didn't see through something we were passionate about because our passion wasn't enough to drive us alone. [Nope. I can't think of a time I've been in this situation] I think it's silly to say, even as someone who is utterly driven by passion (and narcotics) that passion is enough. Passion makes me want to write but I had passion for years. I always wanted to be a novelist. It takes something more than just passion to get to the finish line. [I would say you didn't have passion, you just wanted something. If you'd had passion, you would have done something. That's my definition of passion. Not yours, obviously. But it's another aspect of your post with which I disagree] The term we are looking for here is the very grown up concept of deferred gratification. That's something that you learn, not something your naturally have. And that brings together the idea of sustainability with passion. We learn to not let our enthusiasm get the better of us and stay focused on what we really care about; the finished article not just the one awesome thing that we imagined. That's why we warn against simply being passionate; not because passion is bad. Quite the contrary, passion is absolutely critical. But man cannot live by passion alone. Unchecked passion makes for tunnel vision and a lack of self-awareness. And at times when that passion is lacking it makes many creatives feel they are failing, that they simply cannot work without 110% dedication to something. [I don't really know what you're getting at here - it seems like you're elaborating on the idea that passion isn't enough to get a project finished. But that's not an experience I share] Healthy passion is a passion for finishing the project, or for writing your kind of work, or for getting your work published. That's something the naturally leads you to see things through and to strive for quality. It makes it satisfying to proof and edit and make your work the best that it can be. But passion for your character? Do I need to spell out the problems with authors who are too precious about their characters and stories? [I don't agree with your equation of "passionate" with "too precious". So the rest of the paragraph doesn't work for me.] We all need passion, absolutely, but we all need perspective too. [I'm pretty much out of passion now, but I'm still writing. So does that mean we all need it? Seems like no.] We need to see each day of writing and editing and proofing in the context of a larger whole. Sometimes we need to shrug and say 'it's not quite there; I'll get it next time' instead of obsessing over a sentence all day. Sometimes other things come up and we have to down tools and deal with them even if that means losing the flow. Perspective is what allows you to give yourself a break and to act with confidence; to recognize that there is more than just what you are doing right this second. We all need passion. We all need perspective. We need to merge these two things; we need to learn how to defer gratification and be passionate for the larger goal not just passionate for what is in our head right now.[I don't see any connection between deferred gratification and passion, either in a positive or negative sense. I also think it's weird to not classify "passionate for the larger goal" as "passionate".So this closing paragraph is meaningless to me.] You seemed to be thinking of passion as a fleeting thing, and something that only applies to... I'm not sure. As I said, I think "passionate for the larger goal" is absolutely a part of being passionate, or at least it can be. So possibly it's your understanding of "passionate" I'm finding hard to accept?
