One writer's relationship with the reader

[MacAllister]

Was just perusing King's Skeleton Crew, and came across this passage at the end of the introduction. I think it says something really interesting about the relationship King feels as a writer, to his reader:

I owe just about everybody, and I could name them, but I won't bore you with any more. Most thanks are to you, Constant Reader, just like always--because it all goes out to you in the end. Without you, it's a dead circuit. If any of these do it for you, take you away, get you over the boring lunch hour, the plane ride, or the hour in detention hall for thowing spitballs, that's the payback.

Okay--commercial's over. Grab onto my arm now. Hold tight. We are going into a number of dark places, but I think I know the way. Just don't let go of my arm. And if I should kiss you in the dark, it's no big deal; it's only because you are my love.

Now listen:


Which brings up an interesting question: How do you feel about your reader, as a writer? What is your perceived relationship to the reader?

[Craig Shaeffer]

Mac, that's an interesting question. My feelings toward my readers are evolving, and will probably continue to do so for as long as I write.

To be completely honest, I don't think much at all about readers when I'm writing. I write what I think is the best story I possibly can. I do that by allowing the story to come to life. Then, I just hang on and ride to whatever places the story takes me.

It is only when I edit that I think of a reader at all, and in this case, it's basically just me again, only with a harshly critical eye. Then, I go back again and again with variation of slightly different critical lenses and work the tale until it's as tight as possible.




After that, when other people actually read my stuff...this probably sounds corny, but whether they like it or not, I'm just grateful that they took the time to read my work. It really is a compliment, even if one of my tales left a specific reader cold. The worst feeling is to not be read.



So...maybe the best way to describe my relationship with the reader is that of a restaurant owner/chef to his customer. They may not like my food or the ambience of my establishment, but heck, at least they came through the door and gave me a chance.



Does that make any sense?

[MacAllister]

I zapped the double-post, btw, Craig. :)

The thing is, horror has to be so evocative--and draw the reader in on such a visceral level--that I wonder if writing from a mindset of intimacy wouldn't make a slight-but-discernable difference in a story's effectiveness.

[Craig Shaeffer]

Thanks, Mac. I often require cleaning up after--something to which my wife can attest.

Your point is a good one, and part of me would like to get to that point. It is an intimate thing, but trying to be as objective as possible about the phenomenon to which you're alluding, where I'm concerned...I think it might come with more self-assurance. Right now, I still feel somewhat self-conscious at times, which helps immensely in the editing stages, but sometimes stunts a train of thought prematurely in the creation stage.

Hopefully, I'll get to that "intimate" place eventually. I'm confident with my writing, but I'm reasonable enough to acknowledge the ways in which I need to grow. Being confident enough to think more of my reader(s) than myself might be a few stages away for me on my own special evolutionary chart. ;)

[Fractured_Chaos]

Personally, I think Stephen King's on the right track...the love affair with his readers. Love him or hate him, it's very clear that he knows what he's doing, because even people who don't read horror, will read Stephen King. And his love of his readers shows through quite often.

[maestrowork]

I think there's a balance in everything. As writers we need to know ourselves and write something WE enjoy, but as published authors we need to keep a close relationship with our readers. Your story does have a contract with the readers, and that's why we have all these techinques like "show vs. tell," "POV" etc. They help to engage the readers -- it's hard to do that well if you don't have the readers in mind... hmmmm... I was thinking of an analogy and I thought of "architect." Take someone like Frank Lloyd Wright. He's a master. His houses and buildings are works of art. He designed and built what moved him... but look, these houses and buildings are tremendously people-friendly. His houses are very livable. If he hadn't had an intimate relationship with the people who were going to live there (including himself), he would have failed. Looking at Falling Water makes you realize how ingenious he was. It was art, but it was also practical and livable...

[Jamesaritchie]

Was just perusing King's Skeleton Crew, and came across this passage at the end of the introduction. I think it says something really interesting about the relationship King feels as a writer, to his reader:


Which brings up an interesting question: How do you feel about your reader, as a writer? What is your perceived relationship to the reader?

I love receiving letters from fans telling me how much they enjoy someting I've written, but in all honesty, the reader has no part in my writing. I've found that the moment I think about what a reader might or might not like, I compromise the story I'm trying to write.

I assume I am an average reader, and as an average reader, if I please myself, I'll please others.

As a writer, I believe my duty is to be true to the story, not to any perceived reaction to the story.

[MacAllister]

...my duty is to be true to the story, not to any perceived reaction to the story.

I think I'm gonna put that on a sticky, and plant it right at the top of my monitor, James.

Cool philosophy--because if we're true to the story, the rest falls into place.

[Craig Shaeffer]

Well said, James. You said it better than I did, but that's basically how I feel. I just felt guilty about feeling that way for a little while there. It isn't that I don't *care* about my readers--it's just that they really have no role until the story is out the door.

Our school athletic secretary read one of my tales the other day, and she was shocked (in a good-natured way) that I could write such "disgusting" stuff. I wasn't at all taken aback. To the contrary, I was happy she'd read it. The story, as I was writing it, wrote itself. Then, I edited it to please me. I didn't think about any possible reactions to the tale because the reactions aren't as important as the tale being true to itself.

How about THIS analogy...

Writing is like parenting, with its attendant prelude:

1. The original thought, the spark from which the story comes--that's the come-hither look you get from the gal across the room.

*we'll skip the courtship, the engagement, and the marriage, as those things screw up the analogy*

2. The writing is the conception. You're not thinking about anything while you're writing because the story is unfolding according to its own internal logic. It feels wonderful, natural, and you sure as heck aren't thinking of a mass audience during the act.

3. The editing is the parenting. Here, you're still not thinking, "Oh, I've got to train my child to do this, so this person won't be offended." You're training your child and editing your story because you want both to be the best they can be. Both editing and parenting are painful, but both are as important as the conception.

Okay, so the analogy isn't perfect, but you catch my drift.

Sigh.

I still like James's description better. Damn him!