Elitism and the Writer

By Irish87 · Dec 13, 2009 · 582 · 11
  1. Winter has finally come to Sacramento. Usually it is a very dull, uneventful few months with little rain and nothing remarkable to speak of. We haven't any snow, it is rare that a day begins with the sun behind clouds and ends in the same fashion, and it's a city seemingly built upon the backs of rude individuals who strive to make your life and your holidays that much more miserable. Nevertheless, for the last week it has been cloudy and rainy, and even snowy at one point. Granted, the day that it snowed only about a half inch stuck to the ground and it disappeared as soon as the sun came up.

    Anyhow, the reason I bring all of that up is because recently I was driving around with a friend and listening to music. As we drove through the sheets of rain and I looked out over the city of Sacramento I could feel my mind beginning to churn. I've had an idea for a while about a story I want to write and inspiration suddenly hit me. When I told my friend, who is also a writer, he informed me that I was being too artsy. For a good fifteen minutes I rambled off some inane idea, much of it based around the weather.

    In theory it is an archaic and overly used device: the weather reflects the mood. Whenever you see the storm clouds brewing in the distance you immediately think of bad events to come, though if you're from Sacramento, where it rarely rains, it's a strange feeling of refreshment. Well, for me anyhow. Nevertheless, if I were to introduce a story with the weather I would be blasted. And yes, yes, I know, if I do it well then nobody will complain.

    NOT TRUE!

    There exists in our community a group of elitists who refuse to accept certain ideas. Whether it be overly describing a persons facial features or talking about the rain, they tell us that we are not doing the job of a proper storyteller. Instead, we are waxing poetic, we've got our heads in the clouds and we're too busy describing the shape of one of them to proceed with the story.

    It seems that this is the same group of people who refuse to evolve. They use the same old cliches and recycle the same old plot lines. Yes, yes, I know, every story idea ever thought of has been written. Nothing is original. Nothing is new. Why? Mostly because we are told not to go into that territory, that we would be risking being labeled a bad writer by the writing community because we spent a paragraph describing a man's face in exact detail. Or, if we use words which would otherwise be considered too strange. Instead of talking to our audience as adults, we are forced to assume they are unable to understand words with four syllables. On the opposite end, we can no longer be simple and use the word "said" a bit too much.

    And the odd thing with all of this? Some of the most popular books are written with these flaws. Simplicity is not an insult to intelligence, nor is intelligence an insult to simplicity. In many circles you will find people who still, despite their success, insult these writers because they gave in and used a certain style that is otherwise thought poorly of. And no, I won't be the one to laugh it off as jealousy - it goes beyond that. It is a strange inability to find confidence within yourself, so instead you must tear apart the work of others to make yours seem so much better.

    I wonder how many writers write for the enjoyment of the process. I wonder how many writers actually enjoy the process. Yes, yes, I know it is a cliche to ask this, but has writing turned into a job? Sure, all things that we do professionally is a job in the most basic of definitions, but if you knew you would never receive a single scrap of money or recognition from writing, I wonder if you would ever bother.

    And here I am, speaking ill of those who spend their lives speaking ill of others. In truth, I am not an amazing or great writer. My grammar is terrible and often I forgot whether I should put the apostrophe in its or not. Hell, half of the time I forget how many S's are in disappearance or how many R's are in reference. Nevertheless, I am a writer who writes for the enjoyment of it. Most of the time my stories begin with the setting, with the world around the character. I also tend to enjoy describing and fleshing a character out, though my greatest offense is using the word said.

    In the end, I am a writer for the sake of writing. I don't do it because I want to. At times my obsession to write actually harms me emotionally. I've lost friends, I've spent much of my youth in a bedroom typing, and I'm unable to have a single night of proper sleep because I think so much that I cannot find enough energy to close my eyes and shut up. I write because I am a writer, simple as that.

    -Irish

    EDIT: I forgot to clarify that when I say our community I am speaking of the writing community as a whole, not just these forums.

Comments

Sort Comments:

Sort Comments By

  1. Nonnie
    I haven't been here but a few days so I may not have the best grip on how this site functions as far as who believes what about others writing but I have realized from reading reviews that others have given that everything your saying here is true; and I am very pleased to see someone actually saying something about it too. Perhaps this place isn't so hopelessly unamiable afterall. No ones ideas are going to be accepted by everyone, write what you love, the cliche'd, odd and all.
    Nonnie, Dec 13, 2009
  2. Irish87
    I actually have a high opinion of these forums. I was speaking mostly of the high and mighty friends I know in college who, unfortunately, have fallen into the trap of the elitist writer. In truth, however, it has permeated the whole of our community - that is to say, all groups of writers are strongly opinionated and have become shockingly strict with what they believe to be a valid form of criticism.

    In truth, we are all welcome to our opinion and we should all share it freely, which counts even for those that offend us. However, it is incredibly disheartening to see that as a community (in all, not these forums) we have made writing an exercise in acceptance and not an exercise in imagination and an ability to properly tell a story.
    Irish87, Dec 13, 2009
  3. Nonnie
    I see. I actually just finished a creative writing college course and though it was small, I noticed a distict seperation in writing styles and the critiques they gave. I guess it's really only a nuisance that some poeple. . . take it so seriously? That isn't a very good way to put it but basically, I agree that alot of people who really are good at writing, do it as more of a means to an end (money and acclaimation mainly) than actually as a fun thing to do. Which is sad =/
    Nonnie, Dec 14, 2009
  4. Destin
    I've had the same thoughts myself. Lately I've been afraid to review people's work for anything other than SPaG and obviously confusing sentences for fear of culling all of the author's natural style from his writing.
    I fear I may have fallen victim to Elitist Writers' Syndrome (henceforth known as EWS) already!
    It's hard to draw the line when it comes to writing for an audience and writing strictly in a professional capacity. What falls under which heading?!
    Destin, Dec 14, 2009
  5. Nonnie
    I've been having trouble with finding fault with peoples poems, 'cause I have a natural respect for how people write and if I like it I like it, ya know? If I don't see anything wrong with grammar or the general flow of something, I don't think there is much i can say. . .
    Nonnie, Dec 14, 2009
  6. Delphinus
    Writing is actually incredibly painful for me, because the writing I have in my head is olifactory, visual, etc. - everything that a page of prose can't be. Inevitably, and no matter how good the writer is, it's impossible to recreate what's in your head on paper. I absolutely despise the physical act of writing because it always results in something 'subpar'. Subpar to my daydreams, anyhow.

    And, yes, finding faults with work is the province of either the comedian or the critic, and ninety percent of the critics are hacks. If you've ever read a paper with a review where the critic says something along the lines of 'but this book didn't seem to know if it wanted to be a fantasy or a horror novel', then that critic is a bad critic. The best critics, in my opinion, are successful writers. Too bad that most critics become critics because they failed to ever get published.
    Delphinus, Dec 14, 2009
  7. Nonnie
    I kind of enjoy the challenge of getting my thoughts as best as I can on paper; it's frustrating, sure, but there are those times when someone reads what you've wrote adn they seem to see it exactly how you did. It's mind blowing.

    I'm such an awful critic, though I'm careful to never claim I'm a good writer either XD
    Nonnie, Dec 14, 2009
  8. Coldwriter
    That is a good point. I'm new on the forums as well and have slowly developed my reviews. It's hard to suggest alternative sentences to other writers because it is their voice and style, not mine. I think carefully explaining this is a suggestion and just another way to look at it is important. However, other suggestions allow writers to grow, I feel. For example, I have an opinion that reflects who I am but it may be shallow or confined. Someone else may come along with different thought and while I might not agree, I have experienced a new POV and that only adds maturity in understanding. Same applies to writing. This is my thought process anyway. And yes, I am bias towards my style as well
    Coldwriter, Dec 15, 2009
  9. In Antarctica
    What do you want out of the criticism of your writing? That's as important a question as the one you've asked about what writers want out of their writing. If all you want is to bask in the pleasure of writing for yourself, then why does the elitist perspective matter? If you want to become a better writer, then you need to pick and choose whose perspective matters to you.

    Pathetic fallacy can be extremely useful. And in truth it's derived from ordinary human experience. As you pointed out, the weather can make us feel certain things. Pathetic fallacy just flips this around and suggests that maybe the way we feel affects--or at least symbolizes--the way we feel. This is rooted in the old Ptolomeic cosmology of the pre-1600s, a system that suggested that the entire universe was a carefully ordered heirarchy of influence. If something was wrong in the order of the universe, that wrongness would manifest itself in myriad ways. This is why you see it in Shakespeare so often: Lear's storm or Macbeth's autophagic horses tell us something about the way people at that time understood the universe.

    All this is to say that if writing about the weather serves the truth of your story, then make it work. This is the governing principle of good writing: does it serve the truth? If your story wants to take a metaphysical position about the interconnectedness of internal selfhood and environment, you can probably make a good case for pathetic fallacy in your story. If you want to develop a sense of chaos in a really intense scene, then flashes of intense environmental descriptions of a massive hurricane that puts your characters into some kind of major crisis is probably going to work wonders as long as you approach it right. If you're going for psychological insight, you could tie a character's feelings to the outside world in a Seasonal Affective Disorder sort of way.

    Good writing reminds people that there is something real and common in human experience that goes outside of themselves. If your writing about the weather accomplishes that, then it's good writing and reactionary reviewers can go **** themselves. But you should also listen to those reviewers on occasion and seriously ask yourself if your ideas are working or not.

    Get truth and make it real for someone. Some people will help you with that, some people will hinder you. Hang on to the former and punch the latter.
    In Antarctica, Dec 15, 2009
  10. In Antarctica
    What do you want out of the criticism of your writing? That's as important a question as the one you've asked about what writers want out of their writing. If all you want is to bask in the pleasure of writing for yourself, then why does the elitist perspective matter? If you want to become a better writer, then you need to pick and choose whose perspective matters to you.
    In Antarctica, Dec 15, 2009
  11. In Antarctica
    What do you want out of the criticism of your writing? That's as important a question as the one you've asked about what writers want out of their writing. If all you want is to bask in the pleasure of writing for yourself, then why does the elitist perspective matter? If you want to become a better writer, then you need to pick and choose whose perspective matters to you.

    Pathetic fallacy can be extremely useful. And in truth it's derived from ordinary human experience. As you pointed out, the weather can make us feel certain things. Pathetic fallacy just flips this around and suggests that maybe the way we feel affects--or at least symbolizes--the way we feel. This is rooted in the old Ptolomeic cosmology of the pre-1600s, a system that suggested that the entire universe was a carefully ordered heirarchy of influence. If something was wrong in the order of the universe, that wrongness would manifest itself in myriad ways. This is why you see it in Shakespeare so often: Lear's storm or Macbeth's autophagic horses tell us something about the way people at that time understood the universe.

    All this is to say that if writing about the weather serves the truth of your story, then make it work. This is the governing principle of good writing: does it serve the truth? If your story wants to take a metaphysical position about the interconnectedness of internal selfhood and environment, you can probably make a good case for pathetic fallacy in your story. If you want to develop a sense of chaos in a really intense scene, then flashes of intense environmental descriptions of a massive hurricane that puts your characters into some kind of major crisis is probably going to work wonders as long as you approach it right. If you're going for psychological insight, you could tie a character's feelings to the outside world in a Seasonal Affective Disorder sort of way.

    Good writing reminds people that there is something real and common in human experience that goes outside of themselves. If your writing about the weather accomplishes that, then it's good writing and reactionary reviewers can go **** themselves. But you should also listen to those reviewers on occasion and seriously ask yourself if your ideas are working or not.

    Get truth and make it real for someone. Some people will help you with that, some people will hinder you. Hang on to the former and punch the latter.
    In Antarctica, Dec 15, 2009
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Accept Learn More...
    Dismiss Notice