Are some writers too good for their readers?

scarletpeaches said:

Some people are just thick and should stick to picture books.

I've been accused of 'using big words' by people in my social circle so should I dumb down my vocabulary just to please them, or should they try to improve their vocabulary to give themselves a wider range of tools with which to communicate?

I don't believe in dumbing down at all - yes, it's the duty of an author to communicate effectively, but not at the cost of his own literacy. If someone doesn't 'get' what he's trying to say, sometimes yes it is the reader's fault. But then - are those the sorts of people you want as readers anyway? There are plenty more people out there who are willing to improve themselves.

Mediocrity, and people who are satisfied with superficiality really rip my nips, especially when it comes to literacy. If someone's that shallow I couldn't give a flying f*** what they think of my writing. Or anyone else's.

Click to expand...

I'm with scarlet on this, even if it means Mr. Ferret hates me, too.

Some may say it's the duty of the author to communicate effectively and know his or her audience. Well, yes, kind of: as a writer I write for my own intended audience, but that doesn't mean another reader won't pick up my work and read it. If he doesn't "get" it--well, then I really don't care. He wasn't who I wrote it for. Might he have enjoyed it anyway? I hope so. I try to make my work enjoyable on many levels. But if he just didn't get it while most of those other people I'd intended my writing for did get it, then it's his own fault, and he won't read my next work.

Not always the most marketable move to hope to be a Jonathan Safran Foer or David Foster Wallace over a Dan Brown, but that doesn't matter to me. I don't enjoy Dan Brown anymore. Many of the people who do, wouldn't like DFW. But I would cry if DFW tried to be more "marketable" or "accessible" at the expense of his great writing.

scarletpeaches said:

Some people are just thick and should stick to picture books.

Click to expand...

scarletpeaches said:

Never, never, never talk down to the reader. The ones who don't get it won't care and the ones who do will feel patronised. Write to your own level.

Click to expand...

Look a that, SP, I'm quoting you twice.

If people get it, shiny. If they don't, whatever.

Was Faulkner at fault because I didn't "get" As I Lay Dying the first time I read it? No. I'm at fault. But I walked away from that book (giving it the finger as I did), read a lot of other books, remembered that book, re-read that book, and found myself moved by how amazing it was.

Who's to blame in that scenario? Me, and me alone. I had to get smarter to "get" the book. And it was worth it.

Of course, if no one gets your book, you're not being too obscure. You're just a bad writer. Most people may be too thick to get it, but I doubt the universe at large is too thick to get it.

People are quoting me.

People are agreeing with me.

The universe has tilted.

I'm scared.

Hold me.

Are you having a confidence issue maestro?

scarletpeaches said:

People are quoting me.

People are agreeing with me.

The universe has tilted.

I'm scared.

Hold me.

Click to expand...

You've finally been accepted into the clan!

kuwisdelu said:

I'm with scarlet on this, even if it means Mr. Ferret hates me, too.

Click to expand...

Why would I hate you? I've never said any writer should dumb down their materials so I can understand it.

I believe I said, and now I'm too lazy to go back several pages, is I choose to read what I enjoy and I'm not in it to get any deep meaning or philosophy out of it.

If you've got a rip roaring good story, I'll read it, but I'm not going to sit and digest it, break it down, and interpret everything to find out if you have any subtle hidden meanings about life in it.

I tend to think in the opposite direction - if they don't get something when it's mentioned the first time, I don't mind, they'll find out about it later if it was important. Rarely is missing out on one line of information going to impact on their reading experience. However, if they do pick up on a subtle detail, I'm happy.

The only exception to this, is a recently, when I felt I'd let people down by being too subtle. Dorian Gray is in my serial (there's a much more complicated explanation that isn't important for the purpose of this post). For the first few episodes, he's only referred to as Dorian (though he makes reference to stories in his first appearance), but later on, another character referred to him as "Mr Gray" - and a couple of people (mainly non-writer friends who I send it over MSN to), completely missed it.

A throwaway reference to the Portrait though, that got their attention.

I write for myself, not for others. The only time I'll ever "dumb" something down is a technical explanation - though that's mainly for another character's benefit. It's not like a conversation between engineers on Star Trek that's done for the audience's benefit (as logically, they wouldn't have to explain themselves). More like when Carter or Daniel Jackson has to explains something to Jack.

A writer can't be held responsible for how someone reads their books. I believe we even had someone here in another thread say they skipped parts of the book they thought were boring.

The writer has no control of that and really shouldn't even worry about that kind of thing when writing the book.

A writer's responsibility is to write the best damned book they can, at the reading level they think is appropriate to tell the story. And it's not his responsibility to hold each and every reader's hand to make sure they understand it.

A Beta on my Science fiction project has called me out for using big words a few times and I am very glad she did. Big words can draw the reader away from a story. Simplicity isn't a bad thing, it really isn't.

Too lazy to open a freaking dictionary is what it is.

Sometimes big words draw people out of the story because the words are poorly applied.

Sometimes big words draw people out of the story because people are dumb.

cethklein said:

A Beta on my Science fiction project has called me out for using big words a few times and I am very glad she did. Big words can draw the reader away from a story. Simplicity isn't a bad thing, it really isn't.

Click to expand...

Simplicity, yes.

Dumbing down, no.

Shadow_Ferret said:

Too lazy to open a freaking dictionary is what it is.

Click to expand...

^^^What the hairy guy in the striped sweater said.

dempsey said:

Sometimes big words draw people out of the story because the words are poorly applied.

Sometimes big words draw people out of the story because people are dumb.

Click to expand...

The meanings of many of these big words should be gleaned from context.

The moral: people on other forums are stupid. Stay here with the smartiefarties, Ray. That's the hidden subtext of your OP.

And many writers are too good for me. I couldn't make heads or tales of any given work of Shakespeare, much less catch the subtexts. But now I'm warming up to the notion that it's really his fault as a writer.

As a writer, I write for people on my intellectual level. I hope that those who are less intellectual than I can still enjoy the story and those masses who are more intellectual can enjoy the charm of my writing. But if there's someone out there at my intellectual level, man, they're gonna love it. (And no, Ray, I don't write children's books.)

ClaudiaGray said:

No.

Some readers may be idiots, but that's just life. Nobody's too good to be understood by someone -- even James Joyce has a few people who could read Ulysses.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the last person who understood Finnegan's Wake died in 1987. (Although there's a rumor of another somewhere in northern Canada.)

But some readers are simply not interested in anything more complex than the Hardy Boys. Description? Boring. Dialogue? Boring. Character exploration? Boring. They just skim through the book to the part where something blows up.

maestrowork said:

That's an interesting point. Why do you believe that is? And what should the writers do, or is there anything he could do? Maybe not necessarily dumbing down, but perhaps using more straightforward explanation, adjectives, etc. so there's absolutely no ambiguity? Or is ambiguity, open to interpretation, actually a virtue in literature (like you said, the Bible)?

Click to expand...

I think the world would be a really dull place without a little ambiguity. And so would literature.

L M Ashton said:

See, and I was thinking about the Bible as an excellent example. Never mind that everyone interprets what they read in the Bible differently from each other, but one person who reads the Bible over and over throughout their life will see different things each time. I think it's much less the author's "fault" and much more that a person will see something when they're ready for it. It all depends on where the reader is at that point in their life. What's the reader's history? What's their experience? Is the reader looking for answers to particular problems (not necessarily from that specific book, but just in life in general)? What are they bringing with them to the book? What are their built-in filters?

Click to expand...

Yeah, we all bring baggage to what we do in life.

HeronW said:

There are subtle meanings and overt ones that people miss all the time in every book, even when it seems 'obvious'.

Dr Seuss's 'Yurtle the Turtle' is about the little guy, Yurtle, opposing the head turtle who has more than a passing resemblance to Stalin.

I've had readers complain about the words I use, 'too big'? As a fantasy writer, I make words up, and I will explain them either directly or indirectly by association. I also use archaic terms for autheticity and give those meanings as well.

If readers read carelessly, it ain't my fault. If they take away meanings not intended, that's based on their life, their experiences, their likes, beliefs, personal mythos etc.

I do not and will not take responsibility for that.

Click to expand...

Me either.

cletus said:

For fiction, I think the writer's number one priority should be to entertain the reader. Anything else the reader picks up on is a bonus.

Click to expand...

maestrowork said:

I am not talking about hidden messages or symbolism that you're not aware of. I am talking about things that you, the writer, actually deliberately wrote in (including subtexts that YOU, the writer, actually put in). Things that one only needs to pay attention to notice. That's why I made that distinction in my OP.

For example, if you write about two lovers killing each other because they couldn't live without one another -- that was your intent, and you actually wrote it that way (without blatantly saying so, of course), but your readers say, "Wow, I can't believe they killed each other because they're so jealous." What would you take from that as the writer? Would you try to argue: "Wait, they weren't jealous... where do you get that? They killed each other because they loved each other too much." Or do you chalk it up as your own failure -- failure to communicate?

Click to expand...

Not my failure. Not the reader's "failure." Just a difference in interpretation. And no, I never try to argue with readers who think they know what I meant and get it wrong (from my POV).

brokenfingers said:

A reader has no obligation to read into every nuance the author chooses to include in their book. The majority of readers buy books to be entertained. They take away from a book as much as they need – no more, no less.

Now some readers may not see everything in a story but that happens all the time and shouldn’t diminish their own enjoyment of the book nor should it call for judgements upon them.

Ultimately, I don’t feel a writer is ever too good for their reader. Beyond their level of comprehension, maybe – but never too good. Vagueness and complexity have nothing to do with quality in my book.

Click to expand...

Yes. Agree.

maestrowork said:

But is it the author's responsibility if 100 readers read and get it, but 5 miss something or interpret it some other way based on their own biases? Is the author accountable for those 5 people who don't get it? Is the author too good for those 5 readers?

Click to expand...

Why are you trying to assign responsibility at all? (Curious.) If 100 readers get it and 5 miss or interpret it differently, that's just an audience.

scarletpeaches said:

God no, I can't tell you how much I disagree. If I'm beaten over the head with a big sign that says THIS IS A METAPHOR FOR JANE'S SEARCH FOR LOVE, it makes me feel patronised. I can understand that on my own, thank you.

Never, never, never talk down to the reader. The ones who don't get it won't care and the ones who do will feel patronised. Write to your own level.

Click to expand...

I'm agreeing with scarlet again.

And, yes, I'm afraid.

Shadow_Ferret said:

As a novelist, I too write to my reader. At the moment, that reader is me.

To thine own self be true.

Click to expand...

Yes. I always write for myself. If my agent and editor believe something isn't clear, I'll revise, but I know for a fact that there are often things both my agent and editor miss. And when I point them out later, the reaction is always, "Oh, wow, I missed that!"

I don't change whatever it was because they missed it. I only make changes if the response is confusion.

My responsibility as a writer is to be clear. Not to be obvious.

Shadow_Ferret said:

A writer can't be held responsible for how someone reads their books. I believe we even had someone here in another thread say they skipped parts of the book they thought were boring.

The writer has no control of that and really shouldn't even worry about that kind of thing when writing the book.

A writer's responsibility is to write the best damned book they can, at the reading level they think is appropriate to tell the story. And it's not his responsibility to hold each and every reader's hand to make sure they understand it.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

Did they read my book? Did they enjoy my book? Do they want my next book?

If all answers are yes, I see no problem with how they interpreted my book.

CheshireCat said:

I'm agreeing with scarlet again.

And, yes, I'm afraid.

Click to expand...

Stop it at once.

maestrowork said:

Precisely.

Click to expand...

Thanks for using a big word without any context for me to interpret it. Very classy.

I like books that I have to think about. If it's too easy, it's a let down. It should still be entertaining though. When I write, I write for myself with this in mind: would I enjoy reading this (find it entertaining) and would I enjoy thinking about it on a deeper level (like solving the literary puzzle created by the author)?
So I guess I agree with CeCe, who agrees with scarlet.

I am currently reading Gentlemen of the Road, the latest novel by Michael Chabon. Man...that guy can tell a tale! But he can also use any kind of vocabulary he wishes. I read some sentences and think, "Okay...I got it. You're smart." This book is the best example of his work for going over the top with vocabulary and plot devices, etc. I am not lost in it, but I could see how some could be. He has sentences that go on for almost a whole page at times. He is one of my two favourite authors, so I don't want to say anything negative about him. When I write, I prefer to write stories that are for everyone. I could see some people simultaneously reading Gentlemen of the Road AND Webster's Dictionary...just so they could figure out what half the words mean. I will admit that I am going to go back to page one when I'm finished and re-read it. One reason is because the guy is just so F-ing fantastic...the other is I KNOW I MIGHT HAVE MISSED SOME THINGS in the first reading. I feel this thread is more about story twists and turns than about big words...but Chabon is famous for both. He is just a writer who loves to flex...and one who has grown in popularity to the point where he is allowed to do so.