Aptitude for fiction writing...

Discussion in 'General Writing' started by D-Doc, Nov 8, 2012.

  1. D-Doc

    D-Doc Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    16
    Location:
    Vista, CA
    Here is a definition of aptitude, for what it's worth-

    An aptitude is a component of a competency to do a certain kind of work at a certain level, which can also be considered "talent". Aptitudes may be physical or mental. Aptitude is not knowledge, understanding, learned or acquired abilities (skills) or attitude. The innate nature of aptitude is in contrast to achievement, which represents knowledge or ability that is gained.

    Have at it, folks.
     
  2. Gallowglass

    Gallowglass Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,615
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Loch na Seilg, Alba
    When I was nine, I was told I had the writing ability of a forty-three-year-old.

    Reading the stuff I wrote when I was nine, I think the forty-three-year-old is question was illiterate...
     
  3. peachalulu

    peachalulu Member Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    4,620
    Likes Received:
    3,807
    Location:
    occasionally Oz , mainly Canada
    I knew of a totally illiterate boy age 12, truant at school. He was abused, his mother did drugs. Yet
    this kid could pick up a Bic pen and make the most amazing art. Nobody taught him. He wasn't even what you'd
    call self taught because the only art he did when I met him was graffiti lettering. I said why don't you try
    something more challenging - he did a portrait and my jaw dropped. That's talent - that's a gift.

    Not everything can be explained or given a title or a niche - no matter how hard we try.
     
  4. Mckk

    Mckk Member Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    Messages:
    6,541
    Likes Received:
    4,776
    I thought better of my response and have deleted it. Suffice to say I think Shadow Walker said it better than I did. And I totally agree with James' post below me too :)
     
  5. JamesOliv

    JamesOliv Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2012
    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    New York
    We may wish to consider the future of this discussion. I think we are circling here. There are clearly differences of opinion on the matter. I don't see why it important to try to sway everyone to one viewpoint. If we all had the same views, beliefs and opinions, I think we would be a terribly boring group. I imagine our writing wold be rather homogenous too. Diversity is a good thing.
     
  6. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    Sure, they may be talented, but that does not automatically mean they have natural talent. We only get to see the final product and don't realize how much work actually went into finishing the book. Take Tolstoy for example. He wrote 9 drafts of Anna Karenina, and the book has about 350,000 words. Assuming each draft had about the same number of words, that's more than 3 million words of writing for just one book.

    I believe people are born with an innate interest in some things, but that doesn't mean they have innate talent. Everything has a learning curve, and the problem, like I mentioned above, is that we always see the final product and not the work that went into it. Child prodigies may be an exception to this, though I haven't read enough about them or how their brains work to say much about it.
     
    Thumpalumpacus likes this.
  7. Lemex

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,704
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Location:
    Northeast England
    So there is no difference in your eyes between talent and hard work? I'm sorry, I don't agree. There are plenty of people who have worked really really hard and in the end created absolute rubbish. There are plenty others that have barely worked at all to create masterpieces. The amount of work put in is a factor in the quality of a piece (say a novel) but an entirely relative factor, talent is also an entirely relative factor.

    The best way I can think of putting it is: which is the better album? Chinese Democracy by Guns n' Roses or 10,000 Days by Tool? A CD twenty years in the making by a chronically overrated band (Chinese Democracy) or a CD carefully worked on over, I think, five years by one of the most interesting and intelligent bands working (10,000 Days).
     
  8. peachalulu

    peachalulu Member Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    4,620
    Likes Received:
    3,807
    Location:
    occasionally Oz , mainly Canada
    That might not be a question of talent. That could be more self doubt or trying to nail his theme. ( writers
    can be horrible perfectionists! :) )

    But to be honest it's a little hard to argue the talent thing with writing because writing takes a lot of time -
    and it seems to be the longer you take on something what the less talented? the more work. Maybe , maybe
    not.

    They're a lot of factors in creating a story - people change while writing, politics and world events
    change - which can affect a need to voice an opinion or alter a stories mood. The changing
    world can actually shift your story.

    I know someone who is a hugely talented artist but he battles depression which affects how often he can produce his work.
    Doesn't diminish his talent - but it does diminish the production.
     
  9. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    I never said that working hard will guarantee talent. What I'm arguing is that people with talent worked hard to get where they are. How you practice makes a big difference, too. I think we can at least agree on that much.

    I know that our definitions of "barely worked" and "masterpieces" might not be the same, but can you provide any specific examples?
     
  10. Lemex

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,704
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Location:
    Northeast England
    Well, Jack Kerouac basically farted out On the Road and look at the influence that's had. Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow is amazingly complex and ingenious and has really been worked and thought about. Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged is also highly worked and no one will convince me that Atlas Shrugged is as good as Gravity's Rainbow. Kurt Cobain was a much better musician than ... say ... Bruno Mars. There was just something about Kurt Cobain that was different and there is no getting away from it. William Wordsworth I really hate, I find most of his work is waste paper, John Keats is one of my favorite poets despite the fact that Wordsworth lived much longer than Keats, and had much longer to read and write.
     
  11. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    The first draft of On the Road was written in 3 weeks, but it went through many revisions before it was published. It was a successful book, but I wouldn't consider it a masterpiece. And Keats began writing when he was 13, which gives him about 6 or 7 years of "practice." Granted, he wrote most of his poems in the span of a year (it may be 2, I'm not certain), but I have no doubt he revised heavily.
     
  12. Lemex

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,704
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Location:
    Northeast England
    In 2007 Viking Press released a lightly edited version of the original draft that many people have called better than the initial publishing, but even without this, On The Road was a book that did not take long to write when considering it's influence. A Clockwork Orange is another book that was very quickly read and is a classic, even to it's author's dismay. My point remains.

    Keats writing for 10 years in all (from writing his first words of poetry to his death in Rome) is nothing compared to the decades Wordsworth worked as a professional poet, and still, Keats is I feel objectively better in every respect than William Wordsworth, who I think is nearly worthless to be brutally honest.

    I hate Harry Potter, I mean really hate it, and I honestly think J.K. Rowling is evil. But Rowling is a talented writer (as much as it pains me to admit it). She has something that has pleased a lot of people, and that is a clear sign of talent of some kind. Talent is something that objectively exists, outside of my own personal feelings.
     
  13. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    I never knew they published the first draft. Guess I'll have to check it out.

    I don't consider influence or popularity as an indicator of talent because there are several factors, such as marketing and accessibility, that go into determining how successful a book is.

    There are people who will disagree with you on who's the better poet, but just to reiterate, my argument isn't that more work equals more talent. I've read only a handful of poems from each of them, and I don't think either one is better than the other. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, so for me they're on equal footing. This opinion may change if I get a chance to read more of them, but let me just say that I'm not really a big fan of the Romantic poets.
     
  14. Lemex

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,704
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Location:
    Northeast England
    I know lots of people really like William Wordsworth, but Keats had a better writing philosophy and handle on form, structure, symbolism and imagination. Wordsworth, I liked what he tried to do, but he wasn't ever good enough or clever enough to do it. I suppose one way of putting my perspective by comparing two things that are good (which might be better) I'd rather listen to Radiohead than Ocean Colour Scene. I love both bands personally and both came at around the same time, but Radiohead were just objectively better; they are a more intelligent band, have a larger scope, and have better song writing abilities.

    I'll not be able to properly explain myself without a long-ass essay. :p
     
  15. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    After a certain point, it just becomes a matter of taste and opinion I suppose. I really like Wordsworth's simplicity. He gets straight to the point without overly complicating things, but he becomes repetitive because of his limited subject matter. So I will agree that Keats' imagination is one thing that makes his poems great. Like I said, I haven't read much of Keats, but I will say that I really like his Odes (especially "To Autumn").
     
  16. Selbbin

    Selbbin The Moderating Cat Staff Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    4,243
    Location:
    Australia
    Hang on. First, I thought On The Road was written in two weeks not three, and second, it may have been written in a short time, but he had 3-4 years worth of notes, and been planning it in his head for that long. Also, it's based on his true experiences; it was hardly a fictional story that he had to create from scratch (and it didn't have a plot). There's an epic difference. Let's call oranges oranges.
     
  17. psychotick

    psychotick Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,526
    Likes Received:
    477
    Location:
    Rotorua, New Zealand
    Hi,

    I think when we talk about talent here, we're talking about degree rather than a presence absence thing. Most if not all have 'the gift'. It's more a question of how much. And in fiction writing we're talking about several aptitudes. Reading and writing comprehension, and the ability to tell a story. I'm sure there are many good story tellers who could spin a yarn and never write a book. And likewise there are probably many people who could write a book, but have no story to tell.

    Now there may be a few who have so much talent that they can simply spew out a book first time and have it be recognised as a literary masterpiece. But I suspect for most of us hard work is the road to success.

    But success is also a strange word in this debate. What is it? Being accepted by the great critics as having written something worthy of praise? In which case could someone please explain modern art to me, and in particular how a blue cross on a white canvis, or a picture of a can of tomato soup can be a masterwork. Or is it writing a work that people love and buy in the millions? Success like beauty it seems to me is very much in the eye of the beholder. (Yes, the floating ball with lots of eyes in dungeon and dragons!)

    I used to have an English teacher who told us regularly that the difference between a genius and anyone else was that a genius got to the wrong answer quicker. And I think there's some truth in that.

    We all start somewhere on the scale of literary ability, but to get anywhere further we have to work for it. There aren't a lot of short cuts.

    Also, as to the OP, when do you know you have it? Hopefully never. Its when you think you've got all the talent in the world that you get lazy.

    Cheers, Greg.
     
  18. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    Wikipedia says 3 weeks.
     
  19. Selbbin

    Selbbin The Moderating Cat Staff Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    4,243
    Location:
    Australia
    That's why I am confused. My book says two in the intro.
     
  20. Lemex

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,704
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Location:
    Northeast England
    It was written in a very short space of time, and yes, it was the result of a long period of note taking, but I think that writing is organic; that everything a person does is affected and influenced by their entire life in small ways, not just whatever consciously inspired a novel. So then why stop at the 1930s for the inspiration for On The Road? Why not say that the novel started much much earlier, because it reflects Kerouac lost of faith in every day American life. By this you can say he started writing On The Road when he first learned the idea of what every day life is. At some point you have to have a 'cut off' point so for convenience I referred only to the writing process, which wasn't long at all.

    Talent is not just hard work but something separate.
     
  21. shadowwalker

    shadowwalker Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,258
    Likes Received:
    847
    I don't think how long it takes someone to write something is an indication of talent, nor is commercial success. The same level of talent can produce a short work in a short period of time - or a 'door-stopper' over an extended period of time. And a great many talented people never even try to 'go commercial' within their area - it's what they do for enjoyment and relaxation, not as an income-producer (re: my niece, the doctor). And even age - how many of us have discovered our vocation after many years of doing other jobs? I think talent can work the same way; it isn't always discovered early. People have to be given the opportunity to try something first.
     
    Thumpalumpacus and Selbbin like this.
  22. Thumpalumpacus

    Thumpalumpacus Alive in the Superunknown

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Likes Received:
    165
    Location:
    Texas
    Great points here. System wouldn't let me rep this, but it's certainly deserving, imo. Talent can take many different forms, and speeds of expression.
     
    1 person likes this.
  23. Selbbin

    Selbbin The Moderating Cat Staff Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    4,243
    Location:
    Australia
    I'll rep it for you.
     
    2 people like this.
  24. Selbbin

    Selbbin The Moderating Cat Staff Contributor Contest Winner 2023

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    5,160
    Likes Received:
    4,243
    Location:
    Australia

    I believe that making notes and planning on how to write the work is part of the writing process. He designed the book long before he 'built' it. His writing was just constructing it after he planned it. Some people do the planning while they write, and hence it takes so long. And I was just referring to his specific planning and not his vague interest in a concept.
     
  25. Lemex

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,704
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Location:
    Northeast England
    If you think note taking is part of the writing process I'm not going to argue, but I also don't agree. My point is that the time taken to actually write something is not relative to talent or quality, talent is something else.
     

Share This Page

  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.
    Dismiss Notice