Stephen King said it's the golden rule above all others and I am no position to disagree with a such a legend. Does everyone agree that to write novels for a living, you have to follow this rule always? I write for hours every day but I don't read much (I love watching films instead), but I can only assume I'm a fool for doing this and it's probably the reason it takes me about three hours just to write a few good sentences that serve my novel well. My vocabulary is very good and so far my book is awesome (according to my friends) and they can't wait until I finish it but it's taking me so long. I should read more shouldn't I?
Read a lot and write a lot?
- Thread starter RikkiKane
- Start date
- Status
Yup. The skills you acquire as a constant reader transfer to your own writing. If you choose well, a good book beats out a good movie. Seriously.
Although plenty of us love film, too. Maestrowork (Ray) is a critic, and many of us discuss film here, both good and bad. And of course we have screenwriters, carefully corralled lest they start writing novels, too.
Maryn, not really following you around here--you hope!
Although plenty of us love film, too. Maestrowork (Ray) is a critic, and many of us discuss film here, both good and bad. And of course we have screenwriters, carefully corralled lest they start writing novels, too.
Maryn, not really following you around here--you hope!
I think it's certainly a good policy to never write more than you read. It keeps you not only familiar with what works and what doesn't, it also keeps you familiar with what ideas have been done before.
I find it difficult to produce words when I'm not ingesting them. If you're a novelist, you need to read novels. If you're a short story writer, you need to read shorts. If you're a screenwriter you need to read screenplays.
I've been on a reading binge these last two years or so, and I feel like they've been my most creative years ever.
Read to know your genre. Read to know what's in the marketplace. Hell, just read to give your brain proper exercise that it won't get from watching television. Read as often as fits your lifestyle and your pace. Don't get discouraged if you can only fit in one novel a week, but Writer Z reads one a day. Everyone is different, and everyone has different demands on their time.
But if it ever came down to skipping an hour of television a night and not reading anything all week, I'd skip the TV.
I've been on a reading binge these last two years or so, and I feel like they've been my most creative years ever.
Read to know your genre. Read to know what's in the marketplace. Hell, just read to give your brain proper exercise that it won't get from watching television. Read as often as fits your lifestyle and your pace. Don't get discouraged if you can only fit in one novel a week, but Writer Z reads one a day. Everyone is different, and everyone has different demands on their time.
But if it ever came down to skipping an hour of television a night and not reading anything all week, I'd skip the TV.
I can relate to this 100%. It's not unusual for me to sit down for a couple of hours and come out with just a paragraph. Frustrating, but at least it's progress.
I can relate to this 100%. It's not unusual for me to sit down for a couple of hours and come out with just a paragraph. Frustrating, but at least it's progress.
I only write when I can. I think forcing yourself to write is like forcing youself to pee. But when you finally can pee, you just can't stop.
Plus, especially in genre, movies are way simpler and way behind the curve in where your genre is going. Generally.
I think reading a lot often translates into reading more nonfiction, too, though. Read to add fuel to the fire. Read to get new info into your fiction or to come up with new plots. I just came up with a new idea--mixing an old fairy tale (repunzel) with a new scientific discovery (a fungus that invades insects and takes over thier motor functions--forcing them to head to higher ground near water so when the fungus sprouts from the ant's insides, it's at the premium spot to reproduce more spoors.) Creepy but true! So what happens if *that's* the reason the witch isolated repunzel? Heh.
Never would have come up with that if i hadn't been reading science-mag sites online.
I think reading a lot often translates into reading more nonfiction, too, though. Read to add fuel to the fire. Read to get new info into your fiction or to come up with new plots. I just came up with a new idea--mixing an old fairy tale (repunzel) with a new scientific discovery (a fungus that invades insects and takes over thier motor functions--forcing them to head to higher ground near water so when the fungus sprouts from the ant's insides, it's at the premium spot to reproduce more spoors.) Creepy but true! So what happens if *that's* the reason the witch isolated repunzel? Heh.
Never would have come up with that if i hadn't been reading science-mag sites online.
I wish I were like that. I have to make a huge effort to get the words out (except dialogue, usually). I like the idea of writing a lot more than the actual act. But...I've got this story in my head that's been floating around for a few years, and it's time to get it out, whether anyone ever reads it or not. Know what I mean?
Yeah... well, if that's the case just go for it. I can only tell you to just write. At least until you get started. And don't care how it turns out to begin with, because you can always change it later. I know how terrible hard it can be to begin a story that you've had in your head for so long. You want it to be good now that you have spend so much time thinking about it. It would be a waste not to let it be good, right? I know how it feels, and I used to feel the exact same way when I begun playing guitar. But the best thing is to just play. In your case, write. Atleast that's how I feel. So sit down somewhere nice with a cup of coffee if you're into that, and take a shot. If you have some nice dialouges prepared that you like, start by writing them down. Hopefully the rest will get along too.
Also, I guess you can learn to just pee alot... it just takes practice and alot of water. Or coffee.
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2009
- Messages
- 530
- Reaction score
- 59
You definitely need to read a lot...and honestly, you need to read WIDELY. That means everything from genre sci-fi to short stories about a rock; you do this simply to see what works and what doesn't. Magazines, movies, books, short stories, newspapers, these are all good ways to enhance your writing in different facets--but you should never limit yourself to just one part if you want to be a decent writer.
I agree up to a point, but there are genres I've read that I don't enjoy and won't read again. I don't think that's necessarily limiting. If I have no intention of ever writing a YA urban fantasy romance, why should I read one?
agree, and disagree (but more agree, i think)
you're absolutely right that you need to read a lot, and to expose yourself to a variety of influences (I believe watching good films, good television, reading non-fiction, following (non-celebrity related) current events, all contribute to improving yourself as a story teller).
But I can't quite swallow the notion that you need to read from every genre. We all have our preferences, (and I'm not stupid enough to get into a debate over which are more valid) and I don' think it's essential to force yourself into reading things that fall massively out of your field of interest.
(of course there's an argument that it's still valid to read things you don't like in order to understand why you don't like them, but I think life's too short—better to invest your energies on grasping why you love the things you love)
There are writers, and even whole genres, that have no appeal to me. I'm not going to read shit*, just to broaden my horizons.
*'shit' being determined entirely based on my own opinions and preferences. Everyone is free to formulate their own individual definition.
I don't think a writer has to necessarily read every type of writing from every genre--or to force oneself to read what you can't stand. I don't think anyone here is advocating that (from what I've interpreted of these posts, at least). I think the general idea here, though, is to be willing to explore outside one's familiar comfort zone. And I think that can (and should) be done without causing oneself egregious suffering
For a while all I read was fantasy, but now I break it up with other genres, with poetry, and with the occasional non-fiction--all stuff I'm curious about and interested in, or even just saw in the library and thought, "Hmm, I wonder what that is all about?"I am far more disappointed with movies these days than I am with books (and yes, I HAVE read the Dan Brown novels, and even so, the above holds). So, I don't think watching lots of films is a substitute for reading fiction. Besides, writing isn't just about getting that great unique idea, it's also about putting words together, and I don't think you can develop a good personal style of prose and dialogue without extensive exposure to other works of literature.
Yes, I am aware. And self-discipline is a great thing when you need to learn things. For an example, when learning a guitar scale. I took six hours straight learning one, and now I know it like the back of my hand. But it only required self-discipline because I didn't feel like doing it; I did it because I saw the reward of it. Not because I thought it was funny. And that's a thing you learn as you grow older, to think forward. However, I never got something nice out of forcing myself to write. Either I am in the mood or I am not. And if I am not in the mood for writing, all that comes out of my head when trying to is dry and uninspiring. My creativity can not be fueled by self-discipline. I surpose I haven't learned to pee on command yet. Who knows, I might be able to some day.
The quality of my writing got about ten times better when I learned to "pee on command." Learning the skill will take many hours of writing stuff that's not good, but eventually you'll start hitting "the zone" when you do it.
It's worthwhile. It'll improve your writing and your self-confidence. It's very rewarding to sit down and write 2000 decent words when you don't feel like writing at first.
I guess this is the difference between people who believe in writer's block and those who don't. I don't let the muse or my mood influence whether or not I write. I just do it anyway.
Now I may feel differently about what I write but afterwards I see no difference in quality. Not that I see having self-discipline as 'peeing on command'. I'm master of my work; it is not master of me.
Now I may feel differently about what I write but afterwards I see no difference in quality. Not that I see having self-discipline as 'peeing on command'. I'm master of my work; it is not master of me.
If you are serious about pursuing publication--which comes with deadlines that have to be met, whether or not you feel like writing--then it's imperative to learn how to "pee on command."
If writing is a hobby that you do when you feel like it, then it's your prerogative to pee whenever you're moved to produce.
If writing is a hobby that you do when you feel like it, then it's your prerogative to pee whenever you're moved to produce.
I precisely with SP on this one. If writing is to become a profession, it must be approached professionally. That is to say, you may need to learn to write even when you don't feel like it.
My god. All these people agreeing with me in various threads!
Okay, what's going on hyuh...is this a plot?
*eyes horizon for other three horsemen*
Okay, what's going on hyuh...is this a plot?
*eyes horizon for other three horsemen*
Okay, I will try it out. You all seem to be saying that it's a good idea, and you're more experienced that I am. I can't deny that. Thanks for the advice guys and gals. I'll go write some junk when I had some sleep.
- Status