Writing what you love vs. writing what is recommended

[Amanita]

This came into my mind while reading Michael's article on openings for the homepage but it's a more general thing as well.
With the exception of a few worries turning up in my head from time to time (which I then share with you ), my first and foremost goal is to write the story I really want to read but can't because it hasn't been written yet.

My general feeling is that writing what I want to read is the best way to write something good. I'm also aware of the fact that many books that are good by objective standards aren't what I like to read while I like many things which don't seem to be too popular and aren't recommended. Beginnings with plenty of exposition and a character who slowly learns and "info dumps" about history, magic and family background come to my mind. If I like a book, I want to know as much as I possibly can.
I'm aware that I shoud keep the latter to a minimum but with the first I'm still unsure as my thread on this topic shows.
Still, beginnings starting in the middle of the action don't do anything for me. Yes, they're fighting Orcs/Zombies... but why should I care? It's like zapping into an action movie which doesn't interest me either if I haven't been following it from the start.

Taste varies greatly as we all know but I see some technics which are definitely more popular at the moment than others. Do you read through such advice threads or articles and follow the advice given there if it's contrary to what you would write on your own? Just curious.

 

[Telcontar]

I'm also aware of the fact that many books that are good by objective standards aren't what I like to read...

I'm not sure I believe in any such 'objective standards.' There is only what you do like, and what you do not like. Just because your own tastes happen to lie outside the general boundaries of the majority's tastes doesn't mean that their standards are objective in any way. It just means they are more common.

Recommendations tend to focus on money. The most successful people cater to the largest audiences. However, one would assume they are also a part of that audience - they really do like what they create. They aren't just pretending to cash in.

If you don't happen to be a part of that large audience, then you probably shouldn't try and create what it wants. Your own audience is composed of people like you. There may be fewer of them, but they're still out there. They're wishing someone like them would create something they love.

So get on it.

As to the explicit question: No, I generally don't read advice threads anymore. Every now and then, if a certain comment seems particularly insightful, I'll keep reading. In general though I've found most advice I read these days simply rehashes things I already know.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

Write to meet your goals.

If your goal is to be a popular, successful writer, then it may serve you to focus on what the market will buy rather than what you'd enjoy writing or reading.

My goal is to be "successful enough," that is, to have published works and at least a small fan base. With that in mind, I write exactly what I would want to read; I have no interest (and no need) to try to pander in the slightest.

If you aren't certain what your goals are, then focus on figuring that out, first.

 

[Devor]

It depends on what those recommendations are. To be frank, the moment you leave the planning stage and start writing, you're no longer writing the story you want to read. You now have the pressure of making one decision after another with every single word you write. You're too close to it to enjoy it as a reader, and that's why this is hard.

You need to find ways to harness your enthusiasm throughout a writing project, and some of that means writing what you want to write and having fun with it. But it also means being flexible and adaptable. If you planned out the story you want to write and didn't make changes through the end, a few years later you'd probably realize that you wouldn't want to read it. There's a learning curve when you're on the writing side of things. Art is about matching content and style to deliver an impact on your readers. Writing a novel-length story is complex work, and you shouldn't go in thinking it's as simple as "I like this, it should be good." I think a healthier attitude is, This is good, I like this.

I believe that there are rules - complex rules, so personalized and nuanced that they may as well not exist - but I think there is a right way and a wrong way to tell the story you want to tell. There's something magical, for instance, when seemingly disparate pieces connect in surprising ways.

That said, most of the specific advice you receive will be absolute rubbish, no matter who gives it to you - unless maybe you've established a strong collaborative relationship and spilled the beans at length about what you're trying to do. Even good and seemingly universal advice, like "open with curiosity," won't apply to everyone. They call me Ishmael doesn't invoke a great deal of curiosity, yet it works very well for Moby Dick.

 

[Shockley]

There are two important things to remember, I think:

1. If you want to write and write well, you have to write what you love. That's where fantasy is born.

2. Stories are not meant to be written. They are meant to be read and told.

Finding the middle ground is the most important part.

 

[Steerpike]

I agree with Benjamin.

I think many of us chafe at the idea of writing as a commodity, but you can certainly make a living with that approach. I see quite a few authors on the shelves who appear to be doing so, writing books that are largely planned by a publisher or rights holder (look at all the gaming tie-ins and shared world fiction). You can approach writing as a job where you are producing a commodity for people to buy, and even if you're not passionate about your stories you can make a living if you are good enough and lucky enough to get the gigs.

Or you can approach it more as a personal art form and go with what speaks to you, and let an audience find you, or not, as the case may be.

 

[Penpilot]

Beginnings with plenty of exposition and a character who slowly learns and "info dumps" about history, magic and family background come to my mind. If I like a book, I want to know as much as I possibly can.
I'm aware that I shoud keep the latter to a minimum but with the first I'm still unsure as my thread on this topic shows.

To me it's more about making the info dumps interesting. Long info dumps can be interesting and funny depending on how they're writen and if they belong where they occur. Neal Stephenson is known for the big dumps, and from the instances that I've read and recall, they were interesting enough and relevant to the story at that moment.

Bad boring info dumps is what I hate, not info dumps in general.

Still, beginnings starting in the middle of the action don't do anything for me. Yes, they're fighting Orcs/Zombies... but why should I care? It's like zapping into an action movie which doesn't interest me either if I haven't been following it from the start.

Action isn't just fights, pow-pow and bang-bang. To me it's as simple as one person wanting something and an obstacle getting in the way. Action can be a tense discussion with two people sitting in a diner booth arguing about whether the chicken was dry, or someone trying to get their Frisbee off the roof.

Taste varies greatly as we all know but I see some technics which are definitely more popular at the moment than others. Do you read through such advice threads or articles and follow the advice given there if it's contrary to what you would write on your own? Just curious.

Yes, I read advice, but I read it like a student reads a text book, and I don't always used it. I consider reading about techniques that other writers use as a way of potentially adding another tool to my tool box. I may never use a tool. I may even dislike it, but at least it's there because you never know when you'll find a use for it.

I reread things I find useful after a certain time too. I find that sometimes I get even more from reading a writing book a second time around because the first read only scratches the surface of understanding. I've read writing advice where I though, 'oh yeah I got that' only to read it a second time and realize I only understood a small fraction of what the book was saying. Same with a third reading. I think it's like when someone graduates from school. They're young and think they know it all but as they gain experience they realize they didn't know as much as they though. For me, there's too much I still have to learn, and I don't think it'll ever end. When it does, it's time for the dirt nap.

 

[TWErvin2]

I believe most writers write the books they'd like to find on the shelves if they hadn't written them, which is what you're apparently interested in doing, Amanita.

You're going to spend a lot of time with the novel. Planning and researching, outlining, writing the first draft, revising and editing multiple drafts, beta readers and more revisions, touching up and proofing...sending off to editors/agents. Then, if accepted, editing and revisions will be on the way again. Thus, it'd really help if you enjoy the novel you're writing.

That said, audience (beyond the author) is an important factor. If it's written, who--if anyone--will read it? Others already touched upon this topic above, but I just wanted to mention it again. It's important to me because I think I have interesting stories to tell. I'd like for someone to read them. Sure, there's money involved--and I've never failed to cash a royalty check--but readers enjoying the tales I tell--thinking and talking about the novels and characters, rereading and getting more out of the experience the second time. That's what motivates me more.

But, I wrote the story I wanted to tell, Amanita and although it isn't exactly like anything else out there (part of the reason my publisher picked the first novel up), still the novels have some conventions common to other popular works out there. Is that a 'sell out' of art vs. commerce? No, the reason I know that there are some common conventions in my works is based on my reading (and enjoying) a lot of novels by established authors out there.

 

[Jabrosky]

My general feeling is that writing what I want to read is the best way to write something good. I'm also aware of the fact that many books that are good by objective standards aren't what I like to read while I like many things which don't seem to be too popular and aren't recommended. Beginnings with plenty of exposition and a character who slowly learns and "info dumps" about history, magic and family background come to my mind. If I like a book, I want to know as much as I possibly can.

I don't really mind a lot of "info-dumps" either. I keep them to a minimum, if not outright avoid them, in my own writing because of their current unpopularity, but as long as they're only a paragraph or two long I don't cringe when reading them. I wonder how many of the guidelines modern writers have to deal with are based on actual readers' preferences or simply conventions originating from a completely different source?

 

[Rullenzar]

Like all things in life sometimes the medias influence means success. That in mind it's like a song writer doing what he's told to do instead of what he loves to do. The only advice I can give on this is when your heart is in it, you enjoy it, and you do it your way there's a high chance others will enjoy it too. An example of this is look at Eminem in the rap business, he writes from his own experiences and makes each song his own. Because his songs have heart and character people enjoy his type of art more. It may not work for everyone but it definately works for him.

Some people use the term sellout for people who change their work to fit what the company heads believe the public want. Sometimes they make good points, other times they don't. Marketing a product can be complicated and unless you know how it works you may have to listen to the experts.

However, me personally, I'd rather tell my story my way and find a publisher who sees the heart in the story and dopesn't want to change large ideas. You need to find your own reasons for writing and then you will be able to answer this question for yourself.

 

[Jabrosky]

There's another issue about "writing what you want" that I'm concerned about.

I have Asperger's Syndrome, so I have a tendency to obsess over a very narrow variety of subjects which feature repeatedly in my stories. One of my greatest fears is that people will tire of my autistic obsessions and dismiss me as a one-trick pony. Most writers may be able to write what they love, but what if they love what they write about too much?

 

[Ghost]

Do you read through such advice threads or articles and follow the advice given there if it's contrary to what you would write on your own?

There are times when I want to be contrary because I hate being told what to do, but I rarely think to apply the advice to my current projects. I'm grateful for the few crumbs the muse throws at me and for the few moments when I'm motivated to write. I just write what I see without worrying about rules or advice. The revision stage is when I actually try to pull it together. I can't allow myself to lose momentum by worrying about rules before then.

I read all the threads in the writing forum here. I google for advice about certain aspects of writing. I read a couple of blogs. I check out creative writing books at the library. There are a few gems sprinkled throughout those places, but most of it is irrelevant to me or the approach is too narrow for what I want to achieve. Besides, for every piece of advice telling you you must use a certain technique, there is another person saying you must not. Rules are broken successfully. Whether the success is in the art or in the consumption doesn't matter. What is important to remember is that not every method works for everybody. Advice is a starting point, not the finish line.

I like blogs, threads, articles, and books about writing. I can glean a few useful scraps and toss out the rest. It doesn't help me to view them all as edicts. They're simply tactics that worked for other people, and if I can't make them work for me they're not worth worrying about. Here's the way I see it: if you know how you want to tell a story, then you're ahead of the game.

 

[Poppy]

I'm in the love camp everytime.

 

[Ireth]

There's another issue about "writing what you want" that I'm concerned about.

I have Asperger's Syndrome, so I have a tendency to obsess over a very narrow variety of subjects which feature repeatedly in my stories. One of my greatest fears is that people will tire of my autistic obsessions and dismiss me as a one-trick pony. Most writers may be able to write what they love, but what if they love what they write about too much?

I know how you feel. I've been worrying about that lately myself. There are certain characters that I use in RPs and stories who just seem to dominate every plot they're in, even if they're only supposed to be side characters. It gets frustrating, but I just love those characters so much because I write them the most and I know them best. *sigh*

 

[Ophiucha]

I have a background in more... literary fiction - from the classics to Vladimir Nabokov, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, and Cormac McCarthy. I've read books that were neither character nor story driven, but *theme* driven. I've read books where none of the characters had a name. Where the entire novel is written in diary entries and letters. Where the main character is static. I also read a lot of fantasy. From Tolkien to Mieville. I love the settings of fantasy. I love dragons and worlds unknowable (a word I doubt exists)... but I hate epic quests and impending apocalypses. I hate orphan farm boys and wise old mentors and little sisters with a knack for healing and damsels in distress. I know not all fantasy is like this - as I said, I like China Mieville - but I also still like the medieval dragons and swords and sorcery setting... I just kind of want to see that setting used to tell Love in the Time of Cholera.

As such, all of my novels border on completely unmarketable. But hey, that's why I'm doing culinary school.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I have a background in more... literary fiction - from the classics to Vladimir Nabokov, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, and Cormac McCarthy. I've read books that were neither character nor story driven, but *theme* driven. I've read books where none of the characters had a name. Where the entire novel is written in diary entries and letters. Where the main character is static.

I know some people dig those kinds of books, I just can't stand them. I get bored. I feel that if an author wants to convey something explicit about a theme, or about the human condition, they can do just as well in nonfiction prose. (Or in a more traditional story structure, where things happen, and it isn't a challenge just to keep track of what's going on.)

Maybe I had to read too many novels like that in high school and now I'm ruined forever.

 

[Steerpike]

I know some people dig those kinds of books, I just can't stand them. I get bored. I feel that if an author wants to convey something explicit about a theme, or about the human condition, they can do just as well in nonfiction prose. (Or in a more traditional story structure, where things happen, and it isn't a challenge just to keep track of what's going on.)

If you ever get hold of Nabokov's Lolita, which I've brought up in other threads, it is well worth the read. The writing itself really makes the story. Great book

 

[Anders Ämting]

Well, on one hand I exclusively write stories I would like to read myself. I don't even know how to write any other way. On the other hand, I do want my stories to please a lot of people. I'm not self-centered enough to claim I write only to please myself.

Thing is, I am very interested in writing as a craft, and writing popular stories is a part of that craft. So if I see something that is extremely popular, I become interested - I want to identify the mechanics behind it, figure out what makes that story popular and then see if I can incorporate it into my own writing.

 

[Ivan]

I don't write what I like- I write what I am good at writing.

 

[WyrdMystic]

If writing for others, write what you've been asked to write. If writing for yourself or writing an indpendent piece such as a novel, i would always write what I love. Even if it doesn't follow the current trends. This my opinion because of a few important points - 1. Trends don't last forever. You write to a trend and you could miss it by the time you're finished. 2. New trends pop-up seemingly at random. You could end up setting one off if you're very lucky. 3. Motivation comes easiest when you are enjoying your creation - that's hard to do when you are writing something you're not convinced by yourself. 4. Your best writing will flow when you are enjoying your work. If you are not, then it can seem forced and won't be as brilliant as it could be.

I would like to make it clear though - this is just the way I look at it. You should always go with whatever works best for you as an individual. Take advice with a pinch of salt - read, record, use, discard. Take it all in then make your own mind up.