• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

So you want to be a writer

Man, Charles Bukowski ain't the boss of me. He can't tell me what to do.

Honestly, that's one of the most uninispired and pretentious things I've ever read. Which, you know, is pretty ironic. It's true writing isn't for everyone, and that it's not easy to create great literature, but you don't need to suffer a goddamned manic episode every single time you want to write something. We aren't all lucky enough to have hypergraphia - some of us are normal people with normal ambitions.

This guy had some serious gall to tell the majority of the world's published authors that they shouldn't even have bothered, when most young writers who try their best never even get that far.
 

Ghost

Inkling
I almost relate to some of it, but I think it goes too far. And it's not a good poem.

There are writers who've written one awesome book. There are plenty of hacks who can hammer out novel after novel without once doubting themselves, without ever sitting for hours or searching for words. I support encouraging writers to write from the gut and to do some soul-searching so they can find what moves them. But all this stuff about rockets and burning guts is a bit much.

What's wrong with sharing your work with your loved ones before anyone else? What's with the "if you have been chosen" and "there is no other way" stuff?

I've heard of Bukowski vaguely, but I don't know the guy enough to say whether the poem is written from the perspective of an opinionated, elitist narrator or if it contains his real opinions. I've seen this poem a few times, and each time I see it I like it less.

:frown2:
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
It seems to stir strong opinions (mostly due to a mis-reading of it, in my view).

It doesn't say there is anything wrong with showing your work to loved ones before anyone else. It simply says if you "have" to do that, then there's a problem. I think that's right. If you can assess your work by yourself but require validation or feedback from loved ones before you know whether your work is good, then I think you haven't developed as a writer yet. So I agree with him on that.

I'm not even close to inclined to agree with everything about Bukowski or what he says, but I don't over-react to it either. It's a viewpoint. I like the poem better than many I've read.
 

Sparkie

Auror
S'okay, I guess. I don't hate it, but I don't like it very much either.

I like that it incites the reader to examine (or re-examine) his/her motivations for writing. Other than that, I'm not sure how insightful the piece really is. I'll have to think about that for a bit.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
S'okay, I guess. I don't hate it, but I don't like it very much either.

I like that it incites the reader to examine (or re-examine) his/her motivations for writing. Other than that, I'm not sure how insightful the piece really is. I'll have to think about that for a bit.

I wouldn't put too much into a literal reading. If you think about it, Bukowski could have presented this as a letter or essay if he wanted to make a literal statement. Instead, he chose the form of poem. Why? My feeling is that is was probably with reason, and should be read with an eye to what it is meant to do as a poem. In essence, I think it boils down to the idea that if you want to be a writer, it should be because you can't not be a writer. I think that's good advice, in general. A guy I know who has made a good living writing science fiction said something similar when I first started talking to him about writing. He pointed out that if you're interested in making a living, almost anything you could choose to do would be both more certain and more lucrative than being a writer. So unless you have a compelling urge or need to write, there's not much reason to choose that path. This applies to people who are writing to be published as sell work. If you're just writing because you like it and are content to stick your writing in a drawer afterward, that's a different story.
 

VanClash

Scribe
I really disliked it. In my opinion it is trying to say how much passion goes into writing, which is a good thing to say, but it was executed very poorly. Throughout the poem I was thinking "do I do that stuff" and it generally made me feel down. I have no intention of giving up writing and I don't think that poem should be able to tell people what they should and shouldn't do with such harsh words.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
... I don't think that poem should be able to tell people what they should and shouldn't do with such harsh words.

That's Bukowski for you. I'm guessing not that many people on the site are familiar with him. He's well-known in the U.S., with widely differing perceptions of him, but I'm not sure how well known overseas. I'm not sure he was entirely sane, either.
 
Hi

So I thought I'd want to be a poet,
But then one day - wouldn't you know it,
I thought to myself I might just blow it,
So I became a writer instead having a jab at the big but-out-ski who annoyed the heck out of me with his silly poem!

Cheers, Greg.
 

Ghost

Inkling
The poem really isn't my cup of tea in terms of style or content. It's one of those prosy styles that, for me, lends itself to being read literally.

If I go with your interpretation, that a person should write because they can't not be a writer, I still don't agree. People should write because they want to. I fall between the "anyone can write" and the mystical "you must be chosen" camps. While I don't think everyone can write, I don't believe muses descend from the heavens to grant their favorite mortals the gift of storytelling and everyone who isn't possessed by the fervor of creation should quit.

I don't think I'm alone in this, but I read books without knowing authors' motivations. What do you make of authors who write for money or authors who look at writing as hard work? If your favorite authors turned out to be folks who wrote to make bank (haha) or folks who hated the actual process of writing, does their work somehow become less wonderful?
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
I don't think there is any universal rule, Ghost. And when you look at any successful author in hindsight, there's no way you can really question the decision to have a go at making a living through writing fiction. But I do think the odds of making a successful living writing fiction are extremely long. As I noted above, almost anything else you could think of doing is going to lead to a more certain and lucrative future. When we're talking about whether someone wants to be a writer, we're necessarily looking at things prior to any success or disappointments they might have. Given that the vast majority of those who make the attempt will never make a living writing, I think the sentiment is that unless you really feel compelled to write you're better off doing something else. That's because writing is likely to turn out to be a long, hard road that never provides you with a living. Of course, most of us hope that we'll be among those who can make a living writing stories, and for those who achieve that goal it will, looking back, have seemed like a wonderful idea. But there's no harm being realistic about it. Unless you just love writing stories, it seems like you should look at (reward (financial))*(probability of achieving, even if you work your tail off). Looking at it from the standpoint of someone who hasn't made it yet, it's a grim picture. So if you don't love it, what's the motivation?
 

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
I've always liked Bukowski because of his honesty in his writing. His language was always "non-poetic" which was sort of refreshing for me reading so much traditional poetry in my younger years. I can't say this is my favorite of his poems, but I can see what he's saying (as Steerpike suggests): don't write unless it's ingrained in you. If you have to write for some kind of satisfaction you're going to get from the attention it brings, then that's the wrong reason. I think that's what he's getting at here.

For me there's not a day that goes by without me writing something nowadays, so I try not to think of advice, interviews, and quotes when I'm writing that may derail, inspire, confuse, infuriate, encourage, or discourage me. I just write. But I say, get your inspiration or motivation wherever you can get it. As long as it helps you keep going, that's all that matters.
 

Aravelle

Sage
... I hate the poem.
Stories don't come roaring out of me, only tiny pieces of them... but I want to be a writer so bad...
 
Interesting approach. I'd say it's intended as an overcorrective. Most people who want to write won't usually (maybe ever) meet the criterion of "if it doesn't come bursting out of you in spite of everything, don't do it." That doesn't mean it's not a good idea for them to write. As usual, I'll point out that it has to do with goals. If your goal is to be a professional author, then you need to be writing constantly, whether or not there's something bursting out. (The skill is in knowing when to throw away what you wrote.)

Anyway, I say "overcorrective" because it's not intended to make people only write if it's "bursting out," it's intended to edge people more toward that place, even though it's not feasible or plausible for everyone to only write when they're in the place. Imagine you're negotiating, and what you really want is X, so you ask for double X, and then when they talk you down to X, you grumble and agree but secretly you're thrilled that you got exactly what you want.
 
Top