# Writerly Arrogance



## Garren Jacobsen (Jul 28, 2015)

This is all kind of stream of consciousness right now so if I am unclear I apologize. But I have been bouncing around here and other sites that deal with writing. Something I have noticed, especially among novice, amateurs, and those barely entering the writing scene, is that writers have a sense of arrogance. That arrogance is expressed in two ways. First, and most troubling, is that they seem to believe their readers are idiots. Second, they believe any writer that is either popular, a writer of a certain genre, or makes a few "mistakes" in their writing is a hack.

Before I begin the body of this post let me express I know that there is a fine line between legitimate criticisms and this kind of behavior and it is difficult to find that line. My purpose is to not draw that line, I've already posted something similar to that earlier. Further, I am not accusing any one person. In fact, I believe all of us are prone to this kind of arrogance from time to time. So, I do not intend this to be a call out of sorts.

I think the first manifestation is the most problematic because it is by far the more untrue of the two arrogance expressions. First, readers are generally intelligent. They are usually fairly well accomplished in their field. Problem is, they do not have the same expertise as writers do. Most writers I know could not navigate the legal system against a lawyer successfully (barring those writers I know that are lawyers [I'm looking at you Russ and Steerpike]  ). Does that make the writer stupid? No, just untrained. Similarly, a lawyer that doesn't know all the technicalities and nuances of writing good fiction is not an idiot, just untrained. As writers we spot things most people don't even think about and get bugged by them. Similarly, a lawyer is trained to spot different problems in a law or legal opinion that may seem to the untrained eye to be no big deal. Again the difference isn't the intelligence, it's the training.

The second is also problematic, but not as much as problem 1. Much of writing and story telling is subjective. Storytelling especially needs to have a certain x factor to be successful. We see time and again that not technically perfect books stand up and hit the stratosphere because of their story, despite the imperfections. 

I think giving into these arrogant expressions too often is actually harmful for as writers because it gives us a false sense of pride. This sense of pride can eat at us until we turn into this. We turn into someone that believes with every fiber of their being that if given a shot they would make it; when in reality it is our lack of development that is holding us back since we are not realizing our own flaws.

So, I ask, what are your thoughts and how can we help eliminate this sense of arrogance?


----------



## X Equestris (Jul 28, 2015)

Well, nothing crushes someone's arrogance like a series of rejections.  That can crush anybody, arrogant or not.  

I think a certain amount of pride is to be expected.  If you don't believe in yourself and your work enough, you won't ever get to the point where your work gets published.  But that can be a problem when someone starts expecting the world to bend to their whims.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 28, 2015)

I think that it takes a lot of arrogance to ever put a work of fiction out there and say, "Hey, you're going to like this. I guarantee it."

I think that it takes a lot of humility to finally admit, "Hey, maybe I need to learn what the heck I'm doing before I try to guarantee that I'm going to entertain you."

I also think that I had to go through a process of determining what worked for me. While determining what worked for me, it helped to divide all writing into two categories:

Cat A - Good Writing (that which appealed to me and I could incorporate into my work)
Cat B - Crappy Writing (that which did not appeal to me and I couldn't incorporate into my work)

Now that I've figured out the basics of what works for me (hopefully!), it's easier to say, "Hey, that isn't really my thing, but it doesn't necessarily suck."

So is this arrogance harmful or just part of a natural progression?  I've read some writers who are legitimately terrible who think they should be awarded some kind of prize for their brilliance.  Those people are hurt by failing to realize their shortcomings.  For most, though, I think it's probably just a step along the path.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 28, 2015)

I'll address the second point first. 

I don't feel you're describing a trait restricted to writers. Rather, it's a common human flaw I see constantly. I even feel it myself from time to time until I recognize it for what it is. There's this perpetuated notion that another's success is somehow a comment on ourselves, or our lack of achievement. That common, flawed thinking often blinds us to our potential...meaning, if someone else can, why can't I? It's easier to blame success on luck, who you know, or other factors instead of looking at baser reasons why someone achieved. While extraneous aspects certainly may play a role, that doesn't mean we cannot reach similar levels of success. It also doesn't mean there aren't commonalities we may all share if we're willing to work hard and make sacrifices. But, it's easier to complain, gripe, moan, and tear down than it is to work, sacrifice, and create.

Now onto the first point...idiot readers.

If you're writing to readers thinking they're stupid, or may not "get" what you mean, you're doing it wrong. It's your job as the writer to convey information in a clear and entertaining way. There's loads of ways to accomplish that feat, but if you're incapable that's on you, not the reader. 

We should also consider what readers want. I don't mean pandering to some commercial audience, but rather, seeking to understand why a reader liked a certain book. I've seen and read tons of criticism leveled at readers that loved Twilight, or The Hunger Games, or any number of other YA-geared books. There's wisdom there, to be gleaned if we want it.... These readers liked the easy, unassuming prose. They wanted entertainment, not work. Writing that's simple, clear, and entertaining for the reader is hard work. If you don't think that's true, then you don't understand the craft (even that sounds somewhat arrogant, I suppose). The style and story may not be your personal cup of tea, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have merit. It certainly doesn't mean the success was not earned by the author, or that the reader is unintelligent or doesn't understand what good writing is. It is earned. Readers do understand, on a visceral level.

Last point.... 

No story or book is perfect. Perfection itself is subjective.


----------



## Nihilium 7th (Jul 28, 2015)

I think almost all writers fluctuate between arrogance and self-loathing; the former is what is often seen by the public while the latter is only let out in the confinements of one's own home.

  I do agree with you though. Many writers do underestimate their readers. As a writer one has to be a Jack-of-all-trades which feeds into that writer's arrogance. I also believe that many writers tend to think themselves wiser and morally superior than their readers. I think that, is more dangerous than anything else.


----------



## Snowpoint (Jul 28, 2015)

There is this annoying idea people have that accuracy must be absolute to tell a good story. Technical Manuals are accurate, but you don't read those for good storytelling, do you? Such people are quick to point out flaws as if it invalidate the premise of the novel.

As for the hate against certain popular novels seen as "low quality"... Anything that tricks people into reading is a good thing. More opportunities for those people to find good books.


----------



## Penpilot (Jul 28, 2015)

I think every writer goes through similar phases at the beginning. The difference is the amplitude of things.

There's nothing wrong with having confidence that your writing is good and that you're getting better. The rub for me is when one is confronted with criticism. Does one look to figure out what the problem is and try to fix it, because you know you can do better, or does one automatically think the reader just didn't get it, because my writing is great?

If it's the latter, then that formula for failure and delusion.

I think part of it comes from the fact that most people can write. What I mean by that is most people can string together sentences and describe things and events. And there's no real metric that one can use to say this sentence/paragraph is better than that one.

In sports, it's easy separate the average Joe from elite athlete. The elite athlete can go faster, jump higher, throw further, etc. And that's easy to measure and see. Not so much with writing, for the writer and the reader.

There's just what works for most people and what doesn't. And for the minority, who can tell them they shouldn't be enjoying something or should be despising it? If it speaks to them it speaks to them. 

I think a part of it is about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. Some learn a little about writing and they think they're experts. They read the "rules" of writing and without actually understanding them just take them as gospel and think anything that doesn't follow the "rules" is automatically crap. To me, it's the difference between knowledge and wisdom. 'Cause the like in any field, the more you know, the more you realize you don't know. And you realize every "rule" is followed by a "but", a big but or butt, a big Santa Claus level one, that opens many things up a larger realm of possibilities.

Another point is that people see a flaw in a story and they latch onto it because there was an obvious solution to it. Because they can see and solve that flaw, they automatically think they could do better. Maybe they can and maybe they can't, but there's a universe of difference between spotting and fixing one issue versus creating a whole story from scratch.


----------



## Incanus (Jul 28, 2015)

Doesn't this concept of an attitude of arrogance, and the analysis/comparison of similar works, apply to any and all art forms (or those practicing them)?  Or even to anything that is a learned skill?  I mean, I imagine you might find similar dynamics among architects, and wannabe architects.  I think this has a wider application than to just writers.


----------



## psychotick (Jul 28, 2015)

Hi,

For me your OP lacks a word - "some". Yes some writers are arrogant. Some treat readers like idiots and denigrate the commercial successes. But I don't think it's fair to place all writers in that category. Not even most in my view. Most I suspect are just like everyone else - middling it. And most I suspect waver between confidence - perhaps even over-confidence in their work and a complete lack of faith in it.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Trick (Jul 28, 2015)

I'm a pretty arrogant person in some ways... but I think my writing is nowhere near good enough. I also think that about some other people's writing. Is that arrogant or honest? I don't think I'm a very worthwhile judge of others' writing but if someone asks me, I'm going to be honest. As long as I try to be just as critical of myself, if not more so, and I admit that it's just one person's opinion, isn't that ok? 

Here's an arrogant thought I had recently while reading reviews on Audible: Most reviewers can't spell to save their lives. If you can't spell, should you really be reviewing a book?

Then I thought, you don't have to be a good speller to have good reading-comprehension so I'm just being a jerk. Still hurts me to see someone review a book and say "grate story" though.


----------



## cupiscent (Jul 28, 2015)

I've been distracted by musing on the comparison between lawyers and writers. I think it's a stronger link than might be immediately apparent. After all, if you're the greatest legal brain of your time, but terrible with clients and no one wants to work with you, how many cases are you really going to get?

Both tasks require a specialised set of skills and knowledge. Both tasks ostensibly have an "objective" measure of success - winning the case or getting sales. But for both tasks, "success" can also be measured much more subjectively through the relationship between practitioner and client (or reader). Different clients may have different goals for the same process, and need to have a clear understanding of what is and isn't possible depending on how a legal process is run. Similarly, different readers want different things from books, and you'll never get a satisfied reader if you promise one thing (say through cover or summary text) and deliver another entirely.

In both, a matter of key importance is the management of relationship with client, and of that client's expectations for the process. Keeping the client happy isn't just about doing what they want, or even winning the case, but also about laying the groundwork and maintaining communication so that they are more likely to want what you can deliver. So much of a writer's craft - foreshadowing and payoffs, proper pacing and clever dialogue - is geared towards making a story overall satisfying. That's the real measure of success: satisfaction.

Not sure how all this ties into the arrogance thing, but I found it interesting to think about.


----------



## Philip Overby (Jul 28, 2015)

I notice layers with this kind of concept.

Layer 1: Literary fiction
Layer 2: Genre fiction
Layer 3: Erotica or so-called "trash" fiction 

There seems to be this feeling that the layers below are doing "something wrong." That's where I see the arrogance come in. It usually has something to do with the following:

1. It makes a lot of money, so I hate it because I'm not making that much.
2. It has poor writing mechanics, so I hate it because I don't have poor writing mechanics.
3a. It has no artistic value, so I hate it because my work has artistic value. 
3b. It focuses too much on artistic value, so I hate it because my writing is entertaining. 

I see it as a combination of jealousy, snobbery, and non-acceptance which in turn breeds this arrogance that what they're doing is better. As we all know, "better" or "best" is subjective. There may be a person who loves Harry Potter, but doesn't like Lord of the Rings. Does that make one better than the other? I don't think so.

I've always seen the core of fiction to be a mixture of entertainment and artistry. Despite what some people think, it takes creativity to compose any kind of fiction, whether or not they think it sucks or not. Instead of writers turning their nose up at others, it's best to just stay in your lane and enjoy what you enjoy. Ranting about who is making money off "trash" doesn't do anything for you. 

For example, I like K-Pop music. Someone who likes classical music may scoff at that, but it's what I like. On the other hand, I don't like some of the newer pop from the U.S. Does that mean it's bad? No, I just don't like it. I may shake my head and wonder why people like it, but it does me no good. 

Same goes for writing. Worry about yourself and what you're doing first and foremost. If anything, you can use your distaste (if you must) to make sure you don't replicate the things you hate. Overall, I think writers should worry less about what everyone else is doing, or not doing, and try to do more writing. 

I've learned more writing my own fiction than I've ever learned from hating someone else's.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Jul 28, 2015)

I can only speak for myself, because I'm intimately familiar with how my own brain works...but for me, I'm really proud of some of my writing, the hard work I've put in over the years, and the general quality I KNOW I can accomplish.  BUT, I'm ashamed at how dismally I seem to apply my knowledge as I continuously fine tune work for agents.  I just haven't found the winning combination yet, and until I'm genuinely and thoroughly proud of a novel, I won't publish anything.  

Now, that being said, some of the reasons I'm proud of the work I'm doing is based upon beta reader's opinions and feedback.  Every time I get a comment like, "Wonderful scene.  Tension from beginning to end!" I celebrate in my head and smile.  It makes me feel like I might not be completely hopeless at this thing.  But I've critted for a few folks who were awful beyond words, and their attitudes were less about improving their craft (as I quantify my own personal success), and more about self-indulgence and entitlement in a way.  They felt they "ought" to be awesome because their idea/ concept/ character/ whatever was simply the best thing ever.  That's the kind of confidence I think is quite toxic, not only to the individual, but we've seen it here, too--some jackass spouting off what everyone should be doing, when he's got nothing backing up his sometimes unsolicited advice.  They usually don't hang around long before moving on.  

Anyways, my point is that while I think confidence is a grand thing to have, I think yes, a large number of newer writers think themselves particularly brilliant, and they fail to miss the bigger picture--that this world is full of much better writers who coincidentally all have brilliant ideas and concepts.  Who does it benefit to cast aspersions at others?  It doesn't benefit the struggling writer, except maybe giving him some small justification for feeling smarter than the whole rest of the world...

Arrogance, to me, is pretty unattractive.  I love the way Chuck Wendig puts all his thoughts in a no-nonsense, call 'em like I see 'em kinda way, but when a green writer tries on those pants, I think he sometimes just looks like a clown.  

I feel very appreciative of everyone who's ever helped me out, by reading, by sharing their story, or by just being a friend.  I think the more one appreciates the toil of other writers, the less one can feel arrogant.  Even those famous writers who people say are crap...man, they got there, didn't they?  I mean...it takes something, some luck, some work, some creativity, some connections, whatever, but it takes something, and most of us aren't there yet.  Maybe we'll never be.  And that's okay.  Arrogance, it seems, stems more from a place of jealousy, because the ones I hear talking loudest on blogs or whatever, are the same folks who simply haven't put in the work.  That work humbles you.  Seriously.


----------



## skip.knox (Jul 28, 2015)

I'm with psychotik on this one. It may well be there are many wannabe writers who are arrogant, but most authors I respect are thoughtful, considerate and not in the least arrogant. They do not look down on their readers. I can think of a couple of exceptions, but I rather think if I had met Ernest Hemingway or Harlan Ellison, I wouldn't much like them, however much I respect their writing. But I could name twenty--maybe fifty--others who appear to be kind and humble. 

Perhaps the OP just ran across a rough crowd?


----------



## Philip Overby (Jul 28, 2015)

I think professionalism certainly is a factor. Most writers I like, I think I would also like them personally because they come off as humble and respectful. There are surely some big name authors that let success go to their heads, but I haven't come across them very often. I do find that this kind of phenomenon of writerly arrogance is seen more in people who are just starting out. I mean, I've never seen, Brandon Sanderson for example, say, "Geez, I hate so-and-so's work. It's so shitty." That's because he's busy writing and reading stuff he likes. Like most professionals, he's too busy trying to do his own work and help out others (from his classes and podcast, for example).


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Jul 28, 2015)

skip.knox said:


> I'm with psychotik on this one. It may well be there are many wannabe writers who are arrogant, but most authors I respect are thoughtful, considerate and not in the least arrogant. They do not look down on their readers. I can think of a couple of exceptions, but I rather think if I had met Ernest Hemingway or Harlan Ellison, I wouldn't much like them, however much I respect their writing. But I could name twenty--maybe fifty--others who appear to be kind and humble.
> 
> Perhaps the OP just ran across a rough crowd?


Let me clarify the arrogant audience, it's most of the time, not published authors. Usually the student writers, those who are writing but have yet to actually publish. I also may be more prone to pick it out since I avoid gunners (people in school who do their best to further themselves while undercutting their peers) while I am in school because I hate them. The students I refer to writers those published I refer to as authors.

Next, yes I believe that only some writers are arrogant all the time, however, we are all susceptible to this arrogance some of the time.


----------



## skip.knox (Jul 29, 2015)

Ah, that's different. In that case I do believe that what comes across as arrogance is an unfortunate blend of insecurity and inexperience. Writing is hard. Commenting about writing, however, is easy. There's no reason to take that any more seriously than you do someone who makes comments about movies or music or painting. It's bar talk. Smile, nod, and have another drink.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jul 29, 2015)

Brian Scott Allen said:


> Something I have noticed, especially among novice, amateurs, and those barely entering the writing scene, is that writers have a sense of arrogance.



Oh, I remember going through this stage. I used to go to Waterstones, open random books in the fantasy section, and laugh at the intros. 

I even once had the gall to tell David Gemmell, in person, that I didn't like the opening of one of his books. I'm surprised now that he didn't punch me. Perhaps he should have. Or maybe he recognised that he was just talking to a complete novice who didn't have a clue.

Either way, _Lion of Macedon_ has since become one of my favourites by him. Go figure.


----------



## Incanus (Jul 29, 2015)

I'm still convinced that this issue falls into the catagory of 'human nature', and is not at all limited to 'student' or amateur writers.  Is there even one learned skill that this would not apply to?  Can't think of one.


----------



## Trick (Jul 29, 2015)

Incanus said:


> I'm still convinced that this issue falls into the catagory of 'human nature', and is not at all limited to 'student' or amateur writers.  Is there even one learned skill that this would not apply to?  Can't think of one.



Maybe writers just... write about it more?


----------



## DeathtoTrite (Jul 29, 2015)

To the idiot reader comment, I think this is a problem with basically an artist receiving negative feedback. The misunderstood genius is really quite tiresome at this point, especially when they're genius tends to be quite... lacking.

To the "He's a hack" that's just envy and bitterness. There is legitimate criticism, then there is the splitting hairs that is simply an effort by the critic to stroke their own ego.


----------



## Incanus (Jul 29, 2015)

Trick said:


> Maybe writers just... write about it more?



It's quite possible.  But I guess I'm not understanding the point of this thread.  If the conclusion is that everyone on the planet is occasionally arrogant about one thing or another, I'd call that a truism.  It's something we all already know.

Is there something specific about writers that sets them apart on this issue somehow?  I'm not seeing it, but if it is pointed out to me I'm perfectly willing to acknowledge it.


----------



## Trick (Jul 29, 2015)

Incanus said:


> It's quite possible.  But I guess I'm not understanding the point of this thread.  If the conclusion is that everyone on the planet is occasionally arrogant about one thing or another, I'd call that a truism.  It's something we all already know.
> 
> Is there something specific about writers that sets them apart on this issue somehow?  I'm not seeing it, but if it is pointed out to me I'm perfectly willing to acknowledge it.



I honestly don't know a perfect answer but, I think it might be true that writing, as a hobby or career, does seem to have a lot of amateur practitioners who have the arrogant attitude more often associated with experts in other fields. Although, any field could have amateurs critiquing masters/experts or just plainly successful members of said field. The difference might just lie in how publicized that criticism is. For instance, there are not easily accessible lists of reviews/critiques of carpentry work done by amateurs on masters/successful carpenters (or maybe there are, but none I'm aware of). But anyone can critique a book online and the most arrogant critiques seem to come from would-be writers. Those would-be writers may be quite good but it rings false to hear them harshly critique someone who is published.

Regardless of that, I do agree that this form of arrogance exists in any field that requires work to achieve success.


----------



## Incanus (Jul 29, 2015)

That's a pretty good answer.  Makes me want to go look at a carpentry forum.

Another thought strikes me--do any of us really know the motives behind an individual criticism of a popular work?  They are all coming from exactly the same place--arrogance and envy?  How can you tell for sure?  To presume such (not that I'm saying anyone is) might come across as... well... a little arrogant.


----------



## Trick (Jul 29, 2015)

Incanus said:


> That's a pretty good answer.  Makes me want to go look at a carpentry forum.
> 
> Another thought strikes me--do any of us really know the motives behind an individual criticism of a popular work?  They are all coming from exactly the same place--arrogance and envy?  How can you tell for sure?  To presume such (not that I'm saying anyone is) might come across as... well... a little arrogant.



I doubt anyone is saying all of the criticism going up the writing ladder is arrogance and/or envy. Some of it is easily seen that way because of tone. I've seen reviews saying things like, "-insert author name- is just terrible at characterization." Such things might be taken to imply that the reviewer understands characterization better than the author. That seems arrogant. Doesn't mean it is though, the author might be bad at it and the reviewer might be really good at it. But if they're not also a published author, there's no proof so... arrogance is assumed, I guess?


----------



## Incanus (Jul 29, 2015)

Trick said:


> I doubt anyone is saying all of the criticism going up the writing ladder is arrogance and/or envy. Some of it is easily seen that way because of tone. I've seen reviews saying things like, "-insert author name- is just terrible at characterization." Such things might be taken to imply that the reviewer understands characterization better than the author. That seems arrogant. Doesn't mean it is though, the author might be bad at it and the reviewer might be really good at it. But if they're not also a published author, there's no proof so... arrogance is assumed, I guess?



Totally with you.  I think this is a pretty nuanced subject.  Not at all black and white--there's at least 51 shades of grey to this (d'oh!)


----------



## Amanita (Jul 30, 2015)

Well, I've never really seen much of problem one, at least not beyond the normal frequency of annoying online behaviour. 
I did get the impression that the things readers care most about are not the things considered most important by advice in writing forums. Take the Harry Potter-fandom for example. Lots of people who want to know every little world-building and backstory detail and find all the holes in there but hardly anyone who criticises the use of adverbs which are considered a no go in writing advice.
Noting this doesn't have anything to do with arrogance in my opinion. Writers need to be work on the technicalities of writing but readers are interested in the story itself if the weaknesss aren't too glaring. At least those readers who aren't language teachers or otherwise care greatly about this subject.

I have to admit that I'm slightly taken aback by the idea that only writers of best-selling novels have the right to criticise any novel. Every reader judges the books they read and has reasons to like some books and dislike others. In my opinion it's perfectly acceptable to voice this and help other people with similar tastes decide if the book in question is for them.
In case of overly-critical aspiring writers, I think the fact that there are so many published books which do the very things they're called out for by people reading their works leads to some sense of frustration as well. If someone is constantly told that starting the book with a description of the scenery is bad, makes himself cut out the beloved scenery description after internalising this and then comes across a best-selling book starting with scenery description will be quite likely to jump at this. 
I tend to read fantasy for pleasure rather than work but I still notice the things which are commonly critisised and many popular books are full of them. Rules are not set in stone...
I don't really understand where hatedoms  works such as Twilight have come from though. If I don't like something, I don't tend to want to spend time on it or try to ruin other people's enjoyment.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Jul 30, 2015)

Amanita said:


> I have to admit that I'm slightly taken aback by the idea that only writers of best-selling novels have the right to criticise any novel. Every reader judges the books they read and has reasons to like some books and dislike others. In my opinion it's perfectly acceptable to voice this and help other people with similar tastes decide if the book in question is for them.
> In case of overly-critical aspiring writers, I think the fact that there are so many published books which do the very things they're called out for by people reading their works leads to some sense of frustration as well. If someone is constantly told that starting the book with a description of the scenery is bad, makes himself cut out the beloved scenery description after internalising this and then comes across a best-selling book starting with scenery description will be quite likely to jump at this.
> I tend to read fantasy for pleasure rather than work but I still notice the things which are commonly critisised and many popular books are full of them. Rules are not set in stone...
> I don't really understand where hatedoms  works such as Twilight have come from though. If I don't like something, I don't tend to want to spend time on it or try to ruin other people's enjoyment.



It's not criticism in and of itself. It's criticism that does nothing productive. It's the difference between a golfer watching a golf game and saying, "If I had that driver I would hit it twice as far" or "Haw haw he duffed the drive" and doing nothing to improve their game versus a golfer who watches the same match and says, "Look at that wrist action. That's how I close my wrist to get the ball straight" or "Hey, he raised his head too much and caused him to top the ball. I think that's what happens to me. I gotta work on that at the range tomorrow." One is using the criticism, however valid, to make tear down the pro. The other is learning from the pro.


----------



## Russ (Jul 30, 2015)

I have seen a rise in arrogance in general in the last few years (particularly online) and a general desire to tear down people who are very successful without any great reason or positive purpose to it.

I might suggest it is not just a writerly problem, but something broader.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen (Jul 30, 2015)

Russ said:


> I have seen a rise in arrogance in general in the last few years (particularly online) and a general desire to tear down people who are very successful without any great reason or positive purpose to it.
> 
> I might suggest it is not just a writerly problem, but something broader.



I think that you're right. This is more than just a writerly problem. But, I figured since this is a writer's forum it would be better to address being an arrogant writer than just an arrogant person.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Jul 30, 2015)

> But, I figured since this is a writer's forum it would be better to address being an arrogant writer than just an arrogant person.



For the record, I'm the most humble person I know ...


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jul 30, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> For the record, I'm the most humble person I know ...


Sounds a bit arrogant...


----------



## Penpilot (Jul 30, 2015)

BWFoster78 said:


> For the record, I'm the most humble person I know ...



Really dude? Hi, I'm John. Now you know someone much more humble than you. You might call me the great and grand humble. Cower before my humility and be in awe.


----------



## WeilderOfTheMonkeyBlade (Jul 30, 2015)

When you say neewb writers are arrogant  . . . yeah. They are. They really are. 

When I started writing, 3 years ago, fresh off from my first reread of asoiaf, I was as arrogant as hell. More. Looking back, I was writing a convoluted, if mildly original plot populated with world building and character cliches. 

And I was CONVINCED that this was the single best piece of writing EVER (apart from maybe the Malazan Book of the Fallen). 

You'll be pleased to hear that story, world and characters have been rejected by yours truly, and that I am no longer convinced of my own writerly superiority ( even thought I have become WAY better).

But as a writer, you have to be inherently arrogant. You have to be convinced that you are one of the best people in the field at writing. And that takes arrogance. Arrogance is crucial to writing. 

Only you also have to be humble as well. Arrogant when writing, and very humble when editing. 

Who said writing was easy??


----------



## Russ (Jul 30, 2015)

WeilderOfTheMonkeyBlade said:


> But as a writer, you have to be inherently arrogant. You have to be convinced that you are one of the best people in the field at writing. And that takes arrogance. Arrogance is crucial to writing.



I would disagree. Most of the best writers I know, when you really get to know them, are often profoundly humble about their writing.


----------



## psychotick (Jul 30, 2015)

Hi,

I stand with Ozymandias - "Look upon my works ye mighty and despair!"

Unfortunately also like him I sometimes feel as if I've been cut off at the knees!!!

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Ronald T. (Sep 29, 2015)

Since wood-working and other professions have been mentioned, I'm going to share a few things that may come across as arrogance, although that's not the reason I bring them up.  I have a point to make that I hope I have the skill to achieve with my writing, which is only what I would consider an acceptable level.

For the past thirty-five years, I've been a professional building contractor building one home at a time on multi-acre country properties and doing all the work myself.  That includes everything from the ground up: the tracker work for driveways, building-pads, and foundation footings; framing, plumbing, electrical, heating and air, sheetrock and special panelling, cabinetry, fireplaces and other rock and brick masonry; and final wood-working details -- to the point of handing the front door key to the new owners.

I was a professional artist for years in both two and three-dimensional art-- painting in both oil and watercolours, including landscape and portraiture; stone and wood sculpture (I won the highest award for wood-carving twice at the best-of-the best competition in California back in the '90s).

I was an auto mechanic for a couple of years right after getting married, until I realized how much I dislike the profession.

And for the past thirty years I have been studying the art and craft of writing, and have invested myself in whole-heartedly in writing and editing a series of epic fantasy over the past eleven years.  I have Book 1 (at 155,335 words) ready to try my hand at e-publishing. I 'm putting the finishing touches on Book 2 (at 197,386 words). And I am still working on Book 3 (at 420 pages, so far).

As I said at the beginning, there is a point to all this.

I agree with B.S.A. -- it seems that those who are most critical, those who are most cruel about it, are the ones with the least ability to show their own proficiency.  I have absolutely no problem with constructive criticism.  But, criticism out of envy or anger has no place in any field, including in a field as difficult as writing.

But what do I know?

I'm just a hermit in the woods.


----------



## Ronald T. (Sep 30, 2015)

I'm going to finish what I was posting yesterday -- I had a dental appt. to replace a damaged crown -- and ran out of time.

Again, my point was to agree with all of you who recognize that criticism is a part of all professions and endeavours.  And of course, it comes in both types...that which is helpful and constructive...and that which is filled vitriol and cruelty. 

During my years as a woodcarver, for a fifteen year period, I was the featured carver at the Capital Woodcarvers Show in Sacramento, California.  And I can assure you, I received compliments from most people.  But there were always who felt a need to be negative, either about my style, quality of workmanship, or about the subject matter -- which was almost always about some form of northern European subject -- primarily, busts of mythical kings and queens, wizards and warriors, and of course, a few dragons, as well. 

What I found during that period, was that the people who were most critical, were those who had done very little carving, or none at all.  

I realized that was true in most aspects of my professional life.  So, I eventually developed a mentality in which I take all criticism from those I don't know with a large grain of salt.  I'm more than happy to take constructive criticism.  I think we all are.  That is, if it's done with a gracious heart.  For me, helpful criticism is a treasured gift, whether it concerns house-building, art, or writing. 

When someone offers a demeaning criticism, it makes the statement, to me at least, that they believe they can do better -- and perhaps they can.  But my attitude has become, if someone has the skill and experience, I'm more than happy to listen.  It may be true that they have a better way...but if so, they must prove it.  They must show me.  Because until they do, why should I believe what they say?  Words that can't be backed up are merely opinions.  And you know what they say about opinions...they're like ---holes, everybody has one.  

Our job is to listen for the ring of truth in those opinions.  Because there's often a gem of great value behind a well-stated and well thought-out opinion.  It is up to each of us to find the gems amongst the many piles of bull----.  

Writing is particularly difficult, because we lay our hearts open to the world while telling our stories.  It's not an easy thing to do.  And it's only made more difficult when people choose to be cruel, rather than helpful.  We all need help at one time or another, and how much more affective is that help when it comes from people who have a generous attitude -- people who have actually been there and know the difficulties?

From reading these posts, I've already learned many things I was unaware of, and I want to thank you all for the time and effort you've put into it.  All I can say is...keep up the good work.  Because, when it's done without vitriol, as it is here, it is a gift to the world. 

My best to you all.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Sep 30, 2015)

Ronald,

I don't disagree with you, but I think there's a distinction to be made between cruelty & blunt honesty.

At times, blunt honesty can be confused for cruelty. That's most often true with a beginner, but it certainly isn't limited to the inexperienced. I'm not saying that people can't hide malicious intent behind a label of honesty, but I've yet to encounter someone who's taken the time to read and review a piece of my writing with malicious intent. That's in a decade of writing & about four years with critique partners, live groups, & online groups (hundreds of critiques given & received)

I've had people give cursory reviews where I could tell they weren't reading carefully. Those bother me the most, but those opinions are easily discarded. However, I've never had a reviewer spend a considerable amount of time reading, and then writing out detailed opinions on craft principles or storytelling concerns out of a desire to inflict some measure of cruelty for some sadistic pleasure. 

What I have discovered in that time, is that people who spend hours reading and reviewing my work ALL want to help me get better. It's not altruistic. It's a partnership where I'm also aiding their growth (most of the time), and of course, some are more skilled than others. 

Your experience may be different. I'd also venture a guess and say there's a difference between people leveling opinions on a carving at a fair, which can be spoken with little thought or time, & another writer who not only offers an opinion, but also backs that opinion up with examples and detailed reasoning in writing. Someone who simply wishes to express jealousy or sadism probably wouldn't take the time to read and review in that manner. Truthfully, if the opinions delivered in critique aren't supported, they aren't worth a great deal to me anyway. 

A contrary example:
Phil Overby (another MS member) and I exchange work often. If something in my writing has a negative effect, he tells me and tries to ascertain and express why. He's said in past reviews, "This part bored me. I think it's because the description is overwrought. Unless it's important to draw the reader in here, I recommend keeping the action and pacing high. The description slowed that down."

Thats blunt truth. It bored. That's also valuable to me, and in the end, I decided he was correct. That piece needs a rewrite. Still, that doesn't mean you should take any critical opinion as truth, or even a complimentary opinion for that matter. 

As the late Ray Bradbury said:
"You have to know how to accept rejection and reject acceptance."

Too much concern for an author's feelings can also be destructive. That's the reason most family members and close friends make poor critique partners. They're too invested in our happiness to deliver the straight dope. 

I want honesty from my critique partners above all other concerns. At this point, I've received enough critical opinions that my feelings aren't going to be hurt. My feelings shouldn't even come into play if I'm serious about improving my craft. 

Does critique still sting? Sometimes, for a brief moment, but it fades quickly. Usually I just need to consider the comment for a moment. Many times, after some consideration, I understand why a comment was given. Often, I'm elated when someone points out bad writing I'm blind to , or an error in logic. Why? Because my writing can't improve if I can't see the flaws.

If I bristle at honesty and lash out defensively, all I'm doing is attacking people who want to help me. Maybe I'm lucky that I haven't run into these mean spirited people flocking to critique groups, but I just don't think they exist near in the numbers others claim. 

The last point I'll make is that we must also understand that opinions given in critique are given through reading with a CRITICAL eye. We aren't reading as readers (for the most part). We're looking for issues. We're digging for problems that most readers may never notice. My most valuable partners are those who apply a level of detail and attention that make my work better for even the most astute consumer. 

TAS


----------



## Ronald T. (Sep 30, 2015)

TAS,

I agree wholeheartedly with pretty much everything you said here.  So, I suppose our issue is in my inability to state a clear message with precise terminology. 

After reading your last post, I see that I failed to make a strong enough distinction between constructive and vitriolic criticism.  You are absolutely correct about there being a difference between criticism for cruelty's sake and blunt honesty.  Blunt honesty is what we all seek, especially from our peers.  Although it might be painful for a short time, as you mentioned, it is the greatest gift we can get from each other if we truly wish to improve our writing skills.

Perhaps I was a bit prickly and side-tracked by some of the book critiques I'd just read while searching Amazon for books I might want to read.  TAS, I'd like to assure you and everyone else here, that I wasn't referring to critiques in this forum, but to what comes across as cruel critiques of completed books by people who have never made the effort we've all made in our desire to be better writers.  That was my distraction, and I apologize for it. 

I think it comes down to the honesty aspect you mentioned earlier.  Without the input provided by an honest critiquer, we have no hope of getting better.  And I think you have a great gift in your interaction with Phil Overby.  In fact, that's my point.  When criticism comes from a peer, someone who has done the work, it is welcome even if it is temporarily painful.  

I guess my issue is with cruel critiques from those who don't actually know what they're talking about, whether it is in regard to art, construction, or writing.  I never have a problem with constructive criticism, I promise you.  Not even when it hurts.  In fact, it's that pain that makes us work harder not to repeat a mistake.  As hard as it might be at times, that pain points out the very areas we need to work on.  I couldn't agree with you more.

So if I've been unclear, or it seemed I am unwilling to accept constructive criticism, then, as I said earlier, I apologize to you all.  I have only respect and admiration for all the years of work you have each put into your writing.  Like you, I've spent years of study and practice on my own writer's journey.  And I know we can only be helpful to each other if we are honestly blunt in our assessments.  

If I still leave you wondering what the hell I'm talking about, then my journey is even longer than I anticipated.  So it's back to work.  

TAS, I want to thank you for pointing out how my post came across to you.  In the future, it will make me more conscious about being concise and staying focused on issue at hand.  Thanks again.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Sep 30, 2015)

I understood and agree with everything you said in your previous post. I consider my reply to you an "addition to" what you posted, not a correction.   

You made your points well and clear. These forum posts have a way of adding together different angles of the same topic.

There was certainly no offense taken as you spoke from your experience as an artist, which is always relevant. I certainly didn't feel attacked in any way or defensive of these forums. No apology is necessary.


----------



## Ronald T. (Oct 1, 2015)

Now, see, that's what I'm talking about, TAS.  

It's that generous and openhearted spirit, which you have just shown me, that makes this sight so enjoyable. 

I thank you, and I'm so relieved to hear that I hadn't offended you, as I feared I had.

Having been married to the same woman for 46 years, I know how easy it is to say something in a way that comes out wrong.

And, to all of you...if I ever do say something hurtful or offensive, I want you to know I am always open to you expressing your feelings on the issue.  Causing pain is never my intention.

So, thanks again, TAS.


----------

