# Is it wrong for me to be a Writer



## srebak

Is it wrong for me to try to be an author if i've never read a full chapter book? Thanks to the internet and occassionally TV and Movies, i've managed to get a certain amount of information about certain books and the authors that wrote them. I know about the books written by R.L. Stine and J.R.R. Tolkien but i've never actually read them. I have read parts of the Redwall books but i got most of my information about them from either looking online or watching the TV adaptation. Is it wrong to try and be a writer myself?


----------



## W.k. Trail

I don't know about "wrong," but I admit I don't know how well you'll fare.  Writing a book is harder and requires a much longer attention span than reading one.  You also aren't likely to have a good understanding of pacing or how stories are structurally laid out.

A big part of writing is understanding what does and doesn't work for you, out of books you've already read.


----------



## Leif GS Notae

Well, you can certainly write. Being a writer and an author are two different things. Anyone can write and should to their hearts content. In order to capture your voice and be an author, you will need to accept that you will have to read something. Even if it is short stories, flash fiction, poetry, etc.; putting the effort into reading what others do will help you know the direction you need to go.

You wouldn't expect to know what the greatest trend is in television without really watching it. Sure, you can get the sterile moments captured on the web in a wiki or forum, but that is different than actually feeling the moment. 

As I said, that should never stop you from writing.


----------



## Jess A

Read some books. Read widely.


----------



## Xanados

You need to read just like film directors/reviewers need to watch a lot of films and game designers have to play and dissect a lot of games. I will admit I haven't read LOTR yet, but I have read The Hobbit and a whole bunch of other books.


----------



## fleamailman

("...to post is to publish..." mentioned the goblin, adding "...oh yes, though mentioning that often lands me in hot water but it's the truth none the less, with more readers turning up on forumland each day than that bookworld then, so now, you want to be a writer, well why not for example do a post, noting the hitcount to it...", whereupon the goblin wondered how to proceed here, knowing that the hitcount equated to the readership, but he just continued anyway, saying "...so you continue posting, but instead of doing what the majority of posters do, that is simply _post and discard_ each time, you actually saved your better posts for another forum/venue where you then reposted it again but in an edited form for feedback and safe keeping, in other words air/edit/backup here, and where if you are really really good the practice might just turn you into a _livewriter_ eventually, and what is a livewriter you're asking, just someone who can do one post and get hundreds of hits by it, and on forums my dear srebak the livewriters are the most sought after posters going, where I can think of three or four of them, but their readership is amazing...")


----------



## mythique890

I agree with Xanados, anyone who works or wants to work within a field will always do better if they keep up with what's been done and what's currently popular, and writers do that by reading.  And don't forget that in editing your own book, you're going to have to read it several times over.   The nice thing about reading is that it's never too late to start.   But out of curiosity, if you don't like to read books, why do you want to write one?


----------



## srebak

mythique890 said:


> But out of curiosity, if you don't like to read books, why do you want to write one?



It all started when i began writing stories for no particular reason and soon, writing just felt right for me.


----------



## Dreamhand

Here's another question: why did you start this post?  Why even ask the question "Is it wrong?"  If you want to write, you certainly don't need our blessing.

Do YOU feel it's wrong that you enjoy crafting something that you've never actually experienced?  Do you see something amiss in the idea of a mechanic that doesn't drive or a chef that doesn't eat?

I would hazard a guess that most people in this community are voracious readers because we love to read.  We love the language and experiencing the rush of a well-crafted tale in words, not pictures (not the same thing at all).  Many of us what to share in that legacy of creating a character or a story that engages someone, that inspires or entertains or intrigues one other person.  Some of us just want to master the art of language in the crafting of something that's longer than 140 characters.

So, by all means... write.  Explore the wonder of the written word.  People write journals, letters, emails... writing is everywhere.  Most everyone does it, in one form or another.  Some of them are very good at it.

But make no mistake... there is a vast difference between writing a good Twitter post and writing a good novel.  That's not to say you can't be the next Ernest Hemingway or Neil Gaiman.  But then... they read books.  They drew on the craft and wisdom of masters who in turn also read and were inspired by those who wrote before them.

So write!  Explore!  It's a marvelous adventure!

But here is a simple truth... if you don't read, then you'll be (quite literally) trying to rediscover on your own what humanity has been exploring for thousands of years... how to preserve, ennoble, and enrich life through words.


----------



## Taytortots

First off, no. It is not wrong for you to be an author.
In saying that, you may find the task difficult. Reading teaches you about, well, books. In reading you'll learn pacing and description and get a general feel of how a good book should be. You'll learn a lot more too.
I'm not saying it's impossible for you to be a writer if you've never really read, you just may find the feat a lot harder than those who have read books.


----------



## Ravana

mythique890 said:


> But out of curiosity, if you don't like to read books, why do you want to write one?



What I was going to ask.

Basically, what they said: there's nothing wrong with you wanting to write. If you want to write _well_… read. If you want to avoid doing what's been done to death already (or at least recently)… read. If you want to have endless sources of new ideas… read. If you want to be _successful_ (in the commercial sense) as a writer… you'd _better_ read.

Substitute in any other art or craft occupation for "writer," and see what happens to the question. If you wanted to paint, should you look at other paintings? If you wanted to be a musician, should you listen to music? Yes, you could simply pick up paints and brush and start doing your own thing; you can self-teach on at least some instruments (such as keyboards) in a fairly straightforward manner, and work out the rest eventually through trial and error. But what kind of painting or music would you expect to come from such a person? A vanishingly small number of persons in human history have been almost entirely self-taught–perhaps two or three in each field, as far as Western culture goes, and I can't see it being any different in any other. Nor did they work in complete isolation even then–not _one_ of them, to the best of my knowledge: they still saw pieces of art or heard music. They still had examples to draw upon, react to, improve upon or diverge from.

Same goes for writing. If you can't imagine wanting to attend a concert by someone who's never listened to music (or, more parallel to your example, never listened to a song from beginning to end), except, perhaps, out of sheer curiosity regarding what they might possibly produce… then I think you have your answer. No, it isn't "wrong" for you to want to write; your present approach, however, probably is. At any rate I can't see it taking you very far, and getting there will be a lot harder than necessary.

Doesn't mean you should stop writing and read novels for the next ten years prior to starting again: by all means, keep practicing. But if you're serious about writing… read.


----------



## srebak

1. I'm not saying i don't read, i do (vaguely) remember hearing the words in some books and reading parts of others. I'm just saying i've never really read an entire chapter book from beginning to end. I have read though, I've read a few Dr. Seuss books and a few other shorter books. It's just that once i've gotten the jist of some stories via movies or television, actually reading the books just seems, i don't know, redundant.

2. Tell me straight, are you saying i'll never be a famous writer?


----------



## sashamerideth

I don't know where to begin really. The idea that you can understand a book from watching the movie, that is just insane. Movies simply cannot express to the audience what is written on the page. So much is lost in the making of the movie. Seriously, get a grip. I wasn't a huge Harry Potter fan, but those books got kids to read, and the movies relate so little of what was in the books. Entire plotlines and characters were left out, the movies were less magical than the books, I even imagined better special effects than what was on the screen. 

I studied to be a librarian, and that's a job that requires a love of books and learning. As evidenced by you, there are people that want to write without actually having a solid grounding in reading. Illiteracy is the bane of my existence, and I simply cannot understand what drives people to not want to pick up a book and read. 

As for the last point, fame is not well defined here. Everyone knowing your name, highly doubtful. Getting your book published, chances are not good. Making a modest living from your books, not in this day and age. This is all if you are a stellar writer and a good reader. If you don't have both of those things, you are missing some essential tools of the trade, like a doctor that has never been to school.

Sent from my Blade using Forum Runner


----------



## fleamailman

> Tell me straight, are you saying i'll never be a famous writer?



("...what if I were to tell you that writing is actually a type of madness then, would you still wish to become mad for all that fame and fortune..." replied the goblin, adding "...I mean have you ever stopped to think that *what one writes to a page in its turn writes itself back to the back of one's mind*, yes that's right, it's just a _practice of schizophrenia_ if ever there was one, where first one feels for the vision playing all the parts, seeing everything too, and then in the next instant one portrays that vision down within typed words as faithfully as possible, again and again and again, without let up now, so writer's live this shared life between their visions and its portrayal, and that muse does not go back into her bottle those works all written...", in fact, readers often dreamed of becoming authors like this, where those authors in their turn, who had fallen for that _fame and fortune_ carrot, just wound up with a _journey to self_ instead,  no not exactly short changed as such but hardly what they bargained for either)


----------



## The Blue Lotus

"Tell me straight, are you saying i'll never be a famous writer?" 

Well dear, that depends on you. 
If you give yourself a little kick in the pants and pick up a few thousand books, you have just as much chance as anybody else. 
That does not mean that you can never write a good tale, I know of at least one example of a very famous author who is in effect a functional illiterate. 
This person is the editor's kryptonite to be sure, so much so that once that this persons' editor was promoted, she refused to ever even so much as look at any MS that person submitted again. 

How this person is able to do what they do is beyond me, mainly because I'd kill and or Maim someone over any of my books, but that is just me. 
In either case, idiot savant, or hardened student of the craft, for most of us simply finishing a WIP is all the "Fame" we need.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

srebak said:


> 2. Tell me straight, are you saying i'll never be a famous writer?



Let's just say the odds are not in your favor.


----------



## Ravana

srebak said:


> 2. Tell me straight, are you saying i'll never be a famous writer?



Essentially, yes–_if_ you continue present practice. I probably exaggerated a bit when I said that there have been examples from history who were entirely self-taught, in the sense that I implied that there were _authors_ who have managed this. In fact, while I've seen references to one or two painters and musicians who have accomplished this feat, I'm not actually familiar with a _single_ author who has–and, again, those painters and musicians who did manage to self-teach still weren't isolated from other works in their field: they all did the equivalent of "reading" for their fields. The only reasons I didn't use the word "impossible" was because I generally hate to call anything impossible, and because I don't have a comprehensive knowledge of every single writer throughout history. To say that your chances would be somewhat less than one in a billion would in all probability be an understatement. 

Clearly, you are _not_ illiterate–far from it: your sentences are better constructed than some of those who've responded here. I ask you: where did you learn to do that? It wasn't from watching television and movies. It wasn't even from reading newspapers, nor, for all his brilliance, was it from reading Dr. Seuss. (If anything, it was in spite of that, since you don't write in his style.) You didn't learn the word "redundant" from any of those sources, either, I'd hazard to guess. (I can think of one or two newspapers that would use it, but I doubt most people here read them. If they read any newspaper.) It's possible you picked it up reading on the internet, but only if you spend your time hanging out on sites like this one. But wherever you picked it up, it was from reading _something_. 

Nor, I feel fairly confident in speculating, did you learn these from your English teachers. And don't even try to tell me you had English teachers that didn't require you to read. Ever wonder why they do that? It isn't to bore you: it's because providing examples teaches better than anything that could possibly be presented through mere explication. 

Those are just purely technical examples: vocabulary and sentence structure. Do you really think the need for technical knowledge ends there? I suspect you can handle paragraphing as well, though I can't be sure from what you've posted: I'd need to see something longer. Even at that point, what an English teacher would tell you is "proper" and what fits the needs of a given type of writing begin to diverge. (Actually, they begin to diverge at the vocabulary level, as you should have guessed from my comments on the word "redundant.") Constructing discrete sections of action (scenes, chapters) is yet another step: a short story may only have one scene, but even that will be rare; in longer pieces it is unheard of. Then you have to connect them. Then you have to be able to integrate all of them into the overall plot… and likewise have to be certain your plot is fully illustrated by the actions. And what of the plot itself? Something that can be sustained for the length of a 60-80k word novel is far different from what is required for a 3k word short story. Characterization changes as well: for a short, you aren't going to get into much depth for any single character (unless that's the only thing you do, at least); for a novel, characters must be well-developed, display depth, and change over time. 

All that is at least shared between writing and audiovisual media, no matter how great the differences are (and they are). What about the rest of your text, though? The "visuals"? Do you have the first idea how to render something you watch into something that can be read–and that can produce a similar effect? I say "similar," not "the same," because if you try to make it the same you'll fail utterly: it can't be done. that one I _am_ willing to throw an "impossible" on. A complete description of a single frame of a movie would exceed short story length all by itself (at least if the cinematographer is any good). For some, this constitutes the motivation for going into cinematic production in the first place: they can display far more than can ever be included in a text. For writers, the opposite is true: we're the ones who seek to reduce that oft-cited picture-to-words ratio. Even if you think you can get away with nothing but character and action, _you still need to be able to describe those_. Well. Well enough that your readers will be able to visualize for themselves the "who," "what" and "how"–and, honestly, you're going to want to be able to cover "where" and "when," too. Along with "why"–which, for quality writing, should be illustrated through the characters and their actions: it's the one you _don't_ get to simply state outright… whereas in screenplays, it often is. (Weak screenplays, at least.)

I won't even start in on trying to replicate the effects a good soundtrack can produce.…

"Getting the gist" of stories from movies and television may allow you to write screenplays–possibly excellent ones, for all I know. But the skills involved differ immensely from those required to write good text. (You need not take my word for it: ask any successful author who's turned a hand at writing screenplays.) You might be able to successfully handle short pieces, avoiding the complexity, depth and integration required for a successful novel… even there you're going to do far better if you read shorts extensively.

Besides, it takes a special kind of attitude to want to produce things you aren't interested in. Consider what would happen if everyone took your approach: no one would read. In which case, I can _guarantee_ you would never be a "famous" writer… because _nobody_ would. 

If you were looking for affirmation that you don't have to read to write–or absolution for not doing so–you're definitely looking in the wrong place.

Or, as this excellent quote from a Salon.com article on the subject puts it:



> Wanting to write without wanting to read is like wanting to use your imagination without wanting to know how.


----------



## fleamailman

> [no parse]Tell me straight, are you saying i'll never be a famous writer?[/no parse]



("...if you write for a reason, you'll end up trapped by that reason then, and swayed by those externals..." replied the goblin, continuing "...whereas if you write through _force of habit _ without reason you'll be a writer because it is you by your nature then...", merely the goblin was pointing out that what with the bookworld in decline, in part due to the fact most people didn't have the time in their day to read at length, anyone who wished to write, moreover someone who felt that _becoming famous_ actually meant something too, should look around and take into account where the growing readership is, but where the bookworld is so desperately trying not to notice, or to deny its existence even, so the goblin cleared his throat and then just said "...welcome to forumland and forum readership too, oh yes you laugh at me now, but you won't once you look more closely at forum readership...")


----------



## Jess A

srebak said:


> 2. Tell me straight, are you saying i'll never be a famous writer?



I cannot understand why you are asking this ludicrous question of us. Are you truly concerned? Is this a joke - or are you attempting to provoke a response? If the latter is the case, then you appear to have succeeded in that.

Nobody can tell you what you will and will not be. 

I will repeat myself. Read books. Read widely. You will never become 'a famous writer' if you don't read widely and critically and you most certainly will not become famous if you only write to _become_ famous!

As Ravana has mentioned, you are certainly not illiterate. However, it takes more than a good vocabulary and good grammar to construct a story.


----------



## mythique890

Even the best of us aren't likely to be come famous writers.  There are thousands of published authors, but only a tiny percentage make enough money to quit their day job, and it takes years from the time your book is written until enough people have heard of you that you make any money to speak of.  If you're looking at writing as a quick way to make a fortune or get famous (not saying you are, but if so) you're looking into the wrong hobby.  I think you'll find while most of the people on this forum would _love_ to get published, most of us are doing this because we have a deep passion for (or obsession with) the written word, not to get famous.  Once again, not saying you are.


----------



## Devor

I'll say, if reading is such a chore for you, you could probably get away with reading smartly and selectively.  How much you write, how much "good taste" you have, and how effectively you self-edit (improvement per time spent) will be more important to being successful than how much you read.

But yes, you really do need to read.  That's not really a question.


----------



## Xanados

The more I think about, the more simple it becomes: if reading is a chore for you, don't become a writer. That's pure logic. How can anyone not read, but want to be a writer?


----------



## Sparkie

I don't think it's ever wrong to write, but if you want to be a _good_ writer then reading isn't just a luxury.  It's a requirement.  Reading can only help your written communication skills.

Don't be intimidated by people who tell you that you must read a hundred books per year if you want to be a writer.  Just read all you can, and you'll be fine.


----------



## Erica

Nothing is 'wrong' when it comes to writing, but I am wondering who someone who dislikes reading fiction (I assume that's why you've never read a full length work of fiction with chapters) would want to write works of fiction. If reading an entire book seems redundant to you after you've skimmed it, then writing one would certainly seem tedious.

Some areas of human endeavor seem to produce prodigies of sorts. These are people who have some kind of innate talent that allow them to intuitively grasp rules and techniques that most intelligent people struggle to master (but even naturals hit a ceiling where improvement doesn't come without hard work and coaching). Music and mathematics seem to get prodigies sometimes. I have never heard of true literary prodigies though (as in the literary equivalent of Mozart who was composing concertos at the age of 5). Maybe it's because language has such complex rules and subjective nuances that it takes years of practice for even a gifted person to master it.

So I don't think there are shortcuts to becoming a writer.

Most 'experts' on writing feel you need to have done a lot of reading in order to have a feel for the different ways you can use language to create works of fiction. In addition to works of fiction, most writers are intellectually curious people who are interested in and well read in a wide variety of non fictional topics (which can inform their stories). Reading (and writing) are like exercising muscles. The more you do it, the more easily they come to you.

If you prefer movies and TV as storytelling media, then perhaps you should try writing for those media instead. Of course, you should probably read books about how to write screenplays and so forth, since what you see acted out on screen is derived from written material.

The odds are against ANYONE becoming a famous writer. There are too many random factors that play into whether someone will even get published, let alone attract a following. Most people who start writing do so because they have characters and worlds and stories inside them that are screaming to get out and they are willing to spend hours each day doing so even if they can't even get their mother to read their stories.


----------



## srebak

1. I'll be frank, i'm not sure why i write. Sure, part of me is probably doing it for the kind of fame J.K. Rowling, HCA, Mary Shelley and Roald Dahl all have. But at the same time, i think this is just what i want to do with my life

2. Maybe it's just my ego or just my need to get this out of the way, but i still think that my book writing skills are rather good for someone who hasn't read a full chapter book from beginning to end

3. The real reason i made this thread was because i saw the new J.R.R. Tolkien video on Brainpop and watching it got me thinking of this topic

4. As i said, it's not that i don't read, i just haven't read a full chapter book from beginning to end, consecutively.


----------



## sashamerideth

srebak said:
			
		

> 2. Maybe it's just my ego or just my need to get this out of the way, but i still think that my book writing skills are rather good for someone who hasn't read a full chapter book from beginning to end



I look forward to seeing your stuff. Sorry about earlier comments, I hope the following edit is better at getting across what I meant. 

There's this concept from psychology, the Dunning - Kruger effect (
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect), that I really like, unfortunately it's really common among self published authors, we just don't know what to call it. I know I suffered from it when I first started. 

What this means is that people often over estimate their own ability when doing something they don't know much about, as they haven't developed the skills yet to evaluate their own performance. It's an easy trap to fall in to. But it doesn't take long to get past when writing. Just write more, get feedback, and be willing to take constructive criticism. We have a showcase section that is good for getting feedback or just putting stuff up for others to read. 

The flip side of the Dunning - Kruger effect is the ones that do know their stuff also feel that they are less competent than they really are, and are too critical of themselves, losing confidence in themselves. 

Sent from my Blade using Forum Runner


----------



## Xanados

srebak said:


> 1. I'll be frank, i'm not sure why i write. Sure, part of me is probably doing it for the kind of fame J.K. Rowling, HCA, Mary Shelley and Roald Dahl all have. But at the same time, i think this is just what i want to do with my life
> 
> 2. Maybe it's just my ego or just my need to get this out of the way, but i still think that my book writing skills are rather good for someone who hasn't read a full chapter book from beginning to end
> 
> 3. The real reason i made this thread was because i saw the new J.R.R. Tolkien video on Brainpop and watching it got me thinking of this topic
> 
> 4. As i said, it's not that i don't read, i just haven't read a full chapter book from beginning to end, consecutively.



So you're telling us that you've never read a book in your life, you think you can write with some skill AND that all you're doing it for is FAME?

...Nice one, man. Good luck with that.

Edit: Please, for the love of the Gods, capitilize the personal pronoun 'I'.


----------



## Philip Overby

It's perfectly fine to have never read a book and still want to be a writer, especially if you're young.  Maybe reading books isn't your thing, but I would suggest reading as much as you can if you want to be a writer.  Writing short stories or articles would be more applicable if you've never read a whole book before.  What kind of material do you want to write?  What are your goals?  

It's good to have confidence in your writing, but it is really recommended that you find material you want to write and read similar subject material.  The two best ways to improve your writing are to read and write.  That's about it.  Good luck!


----------



## Black Dragon

*The Guiding Principle*

Everyone,

Please remember the following item from our site guidelines:

*4.  The Guiding Principle*

_The guiding principle is to treat others with respect and dignity, and  to foster a positive, welcoming and family-friendly community.
_

Also, please be aware that snide or derisive comments are a direct violation of this principle.

Thank you.


----------



## srebak

Xanados said:


> So you're telling us that you've never read a book in your life, you think you can write with some skill AND that all you're doing it for is FAME?
> 
> ...Nice one, man. Good luck with that.
> 
> Edit: Please, for the love of the Gods, capitilize the personal pronoun 'I'.



I'm not saying I don't read, I have read stories before and I do recall reading parts of Chapter Books (even if I only remember them vaguely) I'm saying I've never read a Chapter book from beginning to end, consecutively. I do read, just night not nonstop


----------



## Lepton

It's not "wrong" for you to be a writer because you haven't read a book.  Reading isn't a requirement, heck, there aren't requirements to being an author.  Reading is helpful, though.  You begin to understand what people are interested in, what you enjoy writing, and ways to improve the way your write.


----------



## srebak

You know, maybe i did start this thread because i wanted reassurance for my problem. But, if only to end all of this arguing, I'm going to be writer, with or without reading. Maybe i'm being obstinate, if fact, that's probably exactly what i'm being. But someway, somehow, i'm going to reach the goal that got Rowling, Tolkien and Jacques the reputations they have today, somehow, my books will be on the shelf, it's my calling.


----------



## Jess A

srebak said:


> You know, maybe i did start this thread because i wanted reassurance for my problem. But, if only to end all of this arguing, I'm going to be writer, with or without reading. Maybe i'm being obstinate, if fact, that's probably exactly what i'm being. But someway, somehow, i'm going to reach the goal that got Rowling, Tolkien and Jacques the reputations they have today, somehow, my books will be on the shelf, it's my calling.



Then don't sit here telling us about it - go and do it!


----------



## The Blue Lotus

Little Storm Cloud said:


> Then don't sit here telling us about it - go and do it!



Yeps, but anytime someone goes into something they don't know about with the intention of gaining fame... well... let's just leave it at good luck.

Dear OP you have chosen the hardest of all paths, most writers toil away in near obscurity, never wishing for anything more than to see their work in print, somewhere... anywhere for that matter. 

You cite JKR as an example of what you want for yourself. 

She is pretty amazing IMHO, but you do know that she was a very well educated person who taught for a living, ended up living on welfare for quite some time while she worked on her masterpiece. After all that she was rejected countless time before someone took the risk. 

Publishers and agents are the gatekeeps in this game, and they are really tight about whom they allow into their circle.

Does that mean that it can't be done? No, but I can tell you from experiance that it is going to be a whole lot harder. 

You told us your age, which leaves me scratching my head endlessly. Because when I was in school reading was not optional, we read books, plays and other items daily. My English Lit class required no less than 8 classic novels be read and reviewed, discussed and a writen book report turned in for each. We also had a notebook in which we were required to find a news story (daily) that we found interesting and highlight why we thought so, as well as write "follow ups."  And that was just Jr. High...

How did you miss even one full book? If you utter "Clifsnotes" I will drown myself here and now. 

Life is not a shortcut, there are no second chances, you only get one go, might as well find about about everything you are able now. 

Watching the idiot box is great for filmmakers, not so great for Novelisit, playwrites, and screen writers. You miss how to structure a story, how to build amazing words, and oh so many other things. 


With that I wish you well, I hope that you will take what others have said to heart. 
No one wants to see you fail, but with the path you have chosen success is going to be hard won.


----------



## Xanados

srebak said:


> You know, maybe i did start this thread because i wanted reassurance for my problem. But, if only to end all of this arguing, I'm going to be writer, with or without reading. Maybe i'm being obstinate, if fact, that's probably exactly what i'm being. But someway, somehow, i'm going to reach the goal that got Rowling, Tolkien and Jacques the reputations they have today, somehow, my books will be on the shelf, it's my calling.


Even the best of us will never become as famous and well known as those authors you mentioned. I'm being serious. If you aspire to be Tolkien... you best start by reading. That is my final stance.

@TBL: You have the right idea, but I got a warning for making a comment that made the exact same statement. I guess it was rather snide, though.


----------



## The Blue Lotus

Sasha, 

Your last posted reminded me of this... 

If Average people think they are not, and brilliant people think they are not. 

That leaves us wondering if the ares are not, and the are nots are. Are we in fact what we think we are?


----------



## fleamailman

"...ah but it's so simple now..." went the goblin seeing that srebek had posted that text here too, explaining "...well, if you actually want to became a writer, then you will fail because you already are one, a writer that is, and you were a writer the moment you opened that slot in order to post something to it...", and how that point often seemed overlooked by so many members on these writer's forums where the goblin just continued by saying "...in fact, each post you do is writing, where I have met so many of you humans by now that I can tell all I really need to know about someone's works just by first looking at their posts...", it was as if one's posts beckoned the reader to one's works or away from them, where each post had to meet a benchmark of self perhaps, repeating "...for the muse comes to one, and one writes out her vision as best one can too, and that's all then, for one never becomes a writer now, no one just writes, forgetting the rest entirely, as it is ever just something between you and your muse here, the rest of us are just onlookers aren't we..."







102


----------



## Jess A

> Life is not a shortcut.



This is indeed very true. I cannot agree more.


----------



## Leif GS Notae

*shrugs* My last comment on this is that there are many people out there these days who think they can do this. It isn't our job to point out if they need to read or what they need to do based off our reading experience alone. It is our place to read what they write, show where they can improve and if they have promise, steer them toward the real routes they need to go.

If you think this is the "strange case" that a non-reader wants to write a book, check back in two years. The way things are going, with all the scluff out there that counts as an ebook, there will be many a soul who will release some pretty bad things. If we have any conscious as a writer, we will do our part to shepherd those who desire to learn and teach them what we know, if we can.

Pointing at a book and saying "READ" is not action. Some people don't learn by reading, they learn by doing. It is our jobs to accept this and adjust to the new generation that wants to "DO".


----------



## Erica

I would say that if you want to write then do it. I'd strongly suggest trying to read as much as you can, but you'll have to decide for yourself if that works for you.

What concerns me about your post is that you have a very lofty goal without a clear sense of the process you need to go through to achieve it. 

Now there is nothing wrong with goals, but in general, people who set goals for themselves that are related to actions they have control over rather than outcomes they don't, will be happier. 

You are pretty young, and there's nothing wrong with having dreams and hopes. I don't think there are very many writers who don't dream of being published and having a book receive awards, fame and acclaim (and bring in money). But if you hang everything on the outcome of the things you do in life, rather than the process of doing them, I am worried that you will have a lot of disappointment and unhappiness.

Goal 1: To become a famous writer. You have little to no control over that because you could write good stuff and not find an agent or a publisher or readers. You can't control what other people do or how they perceive your work, and the assessment of brilliance is always somewhat subjective when it comes to art.

Goal 2: To write the first draft of a novel (or a short story even ) about this wonderful character/situation that's been knocking about in your head and start soliciting feedback from other writers on how to polish it up for submission somewhere.

I'd really suggest that you have goals that are more like #2. Not because they are easier to reach, per say, but because they allow you to enjoy the journey you are taking as you reach them. With goal 1, you can write this wonderful novel and not enjoy the process a jot because you're so focused on the outcome (fame) that you won't allow yourself to be happy until you achieve it.


----------



## Ziggy

Of course it's not "wrong".

But I can't imagine why you would want to write a novel if you can't even bring yourself to read one.

Writing inevitably involves reading.


----------



## fleamailman

> Is it wrong for me to be a Writer



("...if you find yourself asking "do I love her", it means that you don't love her for your not knowing the answer..." replied the goblin)


----------



## myrddin173

I don't know if any of you have seen the movie Sister Act 2 but here is a very relevant quote from it.  (Whoopi Goldberg is talking to a girl who wants to be a singer but the advice she gives is applicable to writing, in fact it is advice for writing that she applied to singing



> I know you want to sing.  See. I love to sing.  Nothing makes me happier.  I either wanted to be a singer or the head of the Ice Capades.
> 
> Hey. Do you know who the Ice Capades are?
> 
> Don't roll your eyes.  They were very cool.I went to my mother.  Who gave me this book... called Letters To A Young Poet.  Rainer Maria Rilke.
> 
> He's a fabulous writer. A fellow used to write to him and say:
> 
> "I want to be a writer.  Please read my stuff."
> 
> And Rilke says to this guy:
> 
> "Don't ask me about being a writer.  lf. When you wake up in the morning.  You can think of nothing but writing... then you're a writer."
> 
> I'm gonna say the same thing to you.  If you wake up in the mornin' and you can't think of anything but singin' first... then you're supposed to be a singer. Girl.



So, when you wake up can you think of nothing but writing?


----------



## grahamguitarman

Oh dear, could be worse I suppose - he could want to be a writer based solely on his experiences of playing world of Warcraft!

You don't have to read 100 novels a year to be a writer, but if you don't read a few entire novels how will you know what makes a good novel work.  Thats a bit like saying "I want to be a film-maker, I've never watched an entire movie - but I've seen a few trailers so I know how they work".


----------



## Xanados

grahamguitarman said:


> Oh dear, could be worse I suppose - he could want to be a writer based solely on his experiences of playing world of Warcraft!
> 
> You don't have to read 100 novels a year to be a writer, but if you don't read a few entire novels how will you know what makes a good novel work.  Thats a bit like saying "I want to be a film-maker, I've never watched an entire movie - but I've seen a few trailers so I know how they work".


For a minute I thought this post was aimed at me! (I'm a writer of WoW fan-fiction)

Exactly, Graham. That comes back to my earlier point that you have to study the previous works of your chosen medium. Want to be a film-maker? Watch/study films. Want to be an animator? Watch/study Disney classics/learn the techniques. It's the same for writing.


----------



## Dark Huntress

If you want to be a writer, be a writer. You don't need anyone's approval. Just do it. You have a dream. Take that dream and make it a reality. It's all up to you.


----------



## grahamguitarman

Xanados said:


> For a minute I thought this post was aimed at me! (I'm a writer of WoW fan-fiction)



But I know you wouldn't try to be a writer based purely on your experience of WOW - you still needed to know about writing real stories in order to write WOW fan fiction, because in game storeies are different from novel based stories.


----------



## Xanados

grahamguitarman said:


> But I know you wouldn't try to be a writer based purely on your experience of WOW - you still needed to know about writing real stories in order to write WOW fan fiction, because in game storeies are different from novel based stories.


Indeed, Graham.


----------



## Anders Ã„mting

srebak said:


> Is it wrong for me to try to be an author if i've never read a full chapter book? Thanks to the internet and occassionally TV and Movies, i've managed to get a certain amount of information about certain books and the authors that wrote them. I know about the books written by R.L. Stine and J.R.R. Tolkien but i've never actually read them. I have read parts of the Redwall books but i got most of my information about them from either looking online or watching the TV adaptation. Is it wrong to try and be a writer myself?



Look, I admire anyone audacious enough to challange the odds. But speaking from personal experience, reading a novel is _nowhere near_ as demanding as writing one. 

Disregarding ability, what makes you think you have the will? What strange confidence drives your heart, I wonder?


----------



## Weaver

If reading isn't your thing, at the very least you should reconsider whether it's books that you want to write.  What about learning to write screenplays, since you have an interest in movies/TV?

There is more to writing than being able to make up a story.  You need the skills for putting that story into words, and the skills for putting those words together well.  You're not going to get most of that from a movie adaptation, even a good one.  

Movie novelizations tend to be a bit thin in the way of plot and detail, compared to a novel that has been later made into a movie.  That's because there is only so much room in a two-hour movie, and if the novel came first, a lot had to be cut or compressed from the original.  On the other hand, if the movie came first, there is only so much story there for the person writing the novelization to work with - thus the comparative lack of detail.  The point is, if all you know is the screen version of your favorite story, you've missed the richness of the written version, and you haven't seen just how much story normally gets packed into a written work.

That aside, I think it is... dishonest for someone who doesn't like to read to write fiction - or anything else, for that matter.


----------



## ascanius

ok I have not read the entirety of this post however...  Yes it is wrong, from what you have divulged it is very wrong.  If you have no knowledge, nor willingness to understand 2+2 would you call yourself a mathematician?  I cannot explain my abhorrence to you request that I do such.  No I can not... however to say you have yet to come upon 2+2 or any "chapter book"  in your "musings" is beyond reproach.  how would you feel if I called myself an engineer without knowledge of physics or a chemist without knowledge of ,even the most simplest of chemical ideas?   To assume one is to assume the other.   All I can say Is how dare you, how dare you presume to understand what music is without knowledgef of harmony, nigh melody nor proportions.  To presume such ideals are noting but presumptions that you have no right to hold as truth and are foolish to hold otherwise.
Senti, preggiamo che legi qualche libro nella tua vita> I pray that you read, at l least one book, in your life time (Besides the fact that your are missing out upon intellectual gold).  And yes I am offended that you would dare call yourself a writer.  How dare such person call themselves a sculpture without observing hand to chisel nigh a sculpture.  Or painter without ever seeing a painting?  having never seen a paingint/sculpture how dare you presume such title.  I care not for such assumptions that so called "modern art" ascribe too.  Bad writing is bad writing, no matter the facade is it concealed within.  Better to comprehend such differences than to presume such errors in self ascribing judgment.  In closing I ask you this.  How dare you, especially as an intellectual being, can one call themselves a musician without ever hearing music?  The chaotic ramblings of discordant and nonsensical notes do not make music, how can you with the self presumption of concordance presume to make anything but shit.  Would you ask a surgeon to operate without knowledge the human body?  No...Speriamo (I hope), you ask such?  to appease your own self righteousness perhaps, but how dare you, all I can say is I pity, ye who are unable to fathom such.
Read... Learn.  Be rid of such laziness that ye seem unfit to finish such simple task as the completion of such, and yes in all cases, the very simplest of works.  How dare you presume otherwise?  save to appease your own miss-guided notions (Yes condemn such arrogant acts without worry nor anguish, save the hope that others understand; with intelligence, what I explain.)  
And misguided they are, for a multiple of such arguments I can provide a single that is beyond your simplistic notions.  I only hope that I am not the only one that needs such clarification and/or neigh enlightenment (where such cases may be).  why should I care if I offend you?  Should the master ascribe to the mediocre?  Would you ask an athlete of anything less?  If so I truly do pity you.  Please for something beyond simplistic self appeasing notions ascribe to something greater.


----------



## JCFarnham

@weaver and Ascanius: This thread has been idle for a while. In future, before launching into a discussion (_heated_ or otherwise) check first the time stamp on the thread, and then wait a while. Temper a helpful post does not make.


----------



## Ravana

This thread should have remained dead. The original question was answered–thoroughly–so addressing it is of minimal value. If you wish to continue a discussion of the topic in general, you are invited to create a new thread. Ideally, in "Writing Questions," where this ought to have been in the first place. I'm not going to bother moving it at this late date, though, because.…

This thread is now closed.


----------

