Writerly Arrogance

[DeathtoTrite]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

Sounds a bit arrogant...

 

[Penpilot]

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]

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]

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]

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.]

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.]

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]

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.]

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.