What does it mean to be a good writer?

[BEL6]

I've been reading thread "How to improve writing skills?". I understood the need to learn, read and write but I wondered were the improvement stops or is it even possible to reach the point in which as author I can say "okay, that's my perfect style, I should go into it, I can show it to the world".

Most people I've met untill now told me to write orignal piece of art. But when comes to writing, the main rule is to write the way everyone could understand and to use writing tricks that are arleady known. As a vanguard lover it's hard to me not to write as I'm used to, but I see that it's making me haters not readers.

In my surroundings I have two friends that loves McCarthy's (in Polish translations his books seem to be even more rule-breaking than in English) and about ten that literally hates him. Also all of them - lovers and haters - stands that if I want to write something simillar, I have free way and it surely will be great lecture. When I'm copying McCarthy's style (I am able to copy the style of everything I see or read) readers complain on dialogues and non-emotional heroes. Last time I wrote the story in which I marked that main hero has divorced and his wife took childrens. I mentioned also that he resigned from electricity in his house as most time he spends in work or city, walking aimlessy. Because of that my hero was spending hours in car, looking into the darkness of night; he had no intrest in talking with others or spending time with them. And the main complaint was that he's too wooden and there should be written monologue in his mind to prove he's somehow broken inside. I just felt like he punched me. There are words to describe his state of mind. Didn't he read them?

Before that I had written a lot of small novels when the same people were talking to stop explaining heros this much. I should rather show his actions. Well...
Now I'm thinking what does it even mean to be a good writer when McCarthy, Jonathan Carroll, Steinback, Lovecraft, even Rowling are always hated because of something. Some stupidity usually or things that aren't bad to me.

Should I write as I would like to and wait until I find someone that likes my writing or just write because I like it. Or maybe try to write in the way readers would like to read? (Wow, thinking twice - that's hard to find out that way. It's some kind of abstraction).

To me it's like McCarthy were writing way he would like to and for example Rowling tried to write a story that everyone would like to read. In my opinion both of them suceed. That makes me think there's no such a thing as good writing and there's no ideal definition of good writer.
What do you think?



Of course - sorry for my English, I still need to learn. And for chaos between my words, it's hard to find my toughts in another language.
And I tried to find if there was same thread, but there wasn't. Or I just am not a good looker. :P

[Pompey Bum]

Should I write as I would like to and wait until I find someone that likes my writing or just write because I like it. Or maybe try to write in the way readers would like to read? (Wow, thinking twice - that's hard to find out that way. It's some kind of abstraction).

It depends on what you're trying to do and how you see success. If you want your work to be published you're going to have to consider it from a publisher's point of view. Publishers need to make money, so of course they are going to value what readers want. That doesn't mean you can't write what you want, too. But if you want it published you're going to have to define an audience and write with it in mind. Cormac McCarthy can get away with talking like that. You can't. Sorry.

Forgive my presumptuousness but I think you are young. I am old. I have read all my life, but I had no thought of writing until I retired. Now I write whenever I'm not picking fights here. I am leaving a book to my nieces and nephews with the request that they continue it after I'm gone, and that they give it to their descendants with the same instructions. (It's not fiction but a history of our family going back about 350 years). I write as if I had an audience (which I do), but I wouldn't try to publish a word because who would want to read it? The book will be published for historical interest in a few generations, I'm sure (believe me, even farm inventories get published eventually). J.K. Rowling will have been forgotten, but who cares? J.K. and I will be sipping lemonade in Valhalla by then and Cormac McCarthy will be fetching the ice. So I don't worry about it.

But the young are more ambitious so maybe that's your curse. Keep notebooks or computer files and write the way you like. If something looks good to you, try adapting it to a consumer audience. If no one will publish you (and they probably won't) you can always self-publish online. As I said, it depends on what you want and how you define success. Powodzenia!

[BEL6]

Sorry for late answer; I've read your comment earlier but had no time nor place to properly answer.
Yes, I'm young and maybe because of that I have so many troubles with finding my way of living and creating. But thanks to literary forums I can read older's or smarter's advices and look from other perspectives. Thank you, especially for story about your writing and for first sentence which made me think harder about myself and how I should treat my time on the world. I wrote this sentence on first page of my beloved notebook.
I need to re-think my priorities. And care less about other's opinion if it's more destructive than constructive.
Dziękuję!

[YesNo]

Should I write as I would like to and wait until I find someone that likes my writing or just write because I like it. Or maybe try to write in the way readers would like to read? (Wow, thinking twice - that's hard to find out that way. It's some kind of abstraction).

To me it's like McCarthy were writing way he would like to and for example Rowling tried to write a story that everyone would like to read. In my opinion both of them suceed. That makes me think there's no such a thing as good writing and there's no ideal definition of good writer.
What do you think?

I have not published anything (except blog posts). Nor do I read many novels or short stories, so I don't have any authoritative advice to offer.

However, I would write with the intention of getting the reader to react in some way. It would be like writing a letter or a post in this forum. Of course, I would be the first reader and whatever I wrote would have to pass through my internal censor (who is often sleeping on the job) before I submit it. But the main readers in the back of my mind are those others whom I am either trying to please (or occasionally annoy). If I get the expected reaction out of them I count it as a success.

[Pompey Bum]

Sorry for late answer; I've read your comment earlier but had no time nor place to properly answer.
Yes, I'm young and maybe because of that I have so many troubles with finding my way of living and creating. But thanks to literary forums I can read older's or smarter's advices and look from other perspectives. Thank you, especially for story about your writing and for first sentence which made me think harder about myself and how I should treat my time on the world. I wrote this sentence on first page of my beloved notebook.
I need to re-think my priorities. And care less about other's opinion if it's more destructive than constructive.
Dziękuję!

Well, you make the youthful mistake of confusing older with smarter. Youth is better in almost every way--especially in creativity. But the young make terrible mistakes because of inexperience. We old like to pretend we are smarter when in fact we just know better (because our mistakes were worse). Still, I'm only middle aged. No doubt there are a few terrible mistakes still left to make.

In any case, I wonder if you know of a book called What It Is by the American cartoonist Lynda Barry (who later did a well respected seminar in creativity). The book is a little Zen--it's definitely not pedantic instruction; each page is an illuminated and unanswered riddle, that's maybe the best way to look at it. I mention it because she addresses notebook keeping and writing without fearing destructive opinion. If you haven't read her already you may want to check out the book. Here's a link:

https://www.amazon.com/What-Lynda-Barry/dp/1897299354

From talking to you so far, I think you would get something from it. (Don't fork out your money on my account, though--it's just a suggestion).

[BEL6]

YesNo
I think that all advices count. Some may be good, suitable to the person, others not, but I belive on some level of communications all are worthy to be spoken and considered. Therefore thank you for your voice in discussion! (Don't know if there's such phrase in English, sorry, I hope you get what I have in mind).
I didn't think that way. I must admit that "getting the reader to react in some way" should be obvious to - even a beginning - writer. Maybe because of advertisements I'm a little skeptical about reader's emotions... Well, I was wrong rejecting the fact someone can read and feel something as pleasure or annoyance. Actually any kind of react would make me glad. I for certain should try this kind of writing you describe in which I write at the same time for myself and for readers. But first I shall raise my internal censor. If yours is sleeping, then mine doesn't even exist at the moment...
Again - thank you for refreshing thoughts! I will use them for my personal improvement.

Pompey Bum
I'm not confusing older with smarter. I try not to. Seems that I don't understand the use of "or", in my language it's more hm... divisive? I guess. Well, my English speaking is far worse than Polish. Sorry for misunderstandings because of that!
Thank you for the link to the book! I know tons of handbooks about good writing, but all in Polish, so I find that really useful and when I get more time (already I have exams on my university, I need to repeat lot of material), I will read that "Zen".
Yup, I checked "or" it's "lub" or "albo" which in Polish means two things different in deeper meaning. Yh, that's so complicated.

Why answering take me so much time...

[Pompey Bum]

[B]I'm not confusing older with smarter. I try not to. Seems that I don't understand the use of "or", in my language it's more hm... divisive? I guess. Well, my English speaking is far worse than Polish. Sorry for misunderstandings because of that!
Thank you for the link to the book! I know tons of handbooks about good writing, but all in Polish, so I find that really useful and when I get more time (already I have exams on my university, I need to repeat lot of material), I will read that "Zen".
Yup, I checked "or" it's "lub" or "albo" which in Polish means two things different in deeper meaning. Yh, that's so complicated.

Why answering take me so much time...

Don't worry. I was just making a joke against myself (or against old men in general). English uses a lot of irony and it can be hard to tell what a person really means sometimes. (Plus my jokes aren't very funny ).

I'm not sure which sentence you meant but "or" in English can have a divisive or inclusive sense. You can say: "That's some kind of rock or stone," which is just repeating the same thing, or you can say: "Take it or leave it! It's now or never." Which present unlike choices. I take it Polish uses "lub" and "albo" to express the same difference. No, not complicated but it is very interesting. Nothing gives another perspective as much as someone else's language.

I share your skepticism of writing for reaction. But I find my first drafts are too pedantic. They are like television documentaries; and the dramatic parts are too shrill and exaggerated--like sensational (and bad) fiction. But on the first rewrite (usually) I find I can synthesize these elements into a believable human voice that uses measured suspense to sustain the drama. I really admire writers who can find their good voice the first time. Maybe I'll get it eventually. I do find the more I write the better I get.

[BEL6]

I get it now! The use of "or" and your joke. So it's just like in Polish. Don't worry, I'm rather naive person with strange sense of humor. I'm convinced that when I get relaxed on new language- and being- environment, I will catch the irony. Until that day please don't laugh at me... to much.

I know that exaggerated writing! Although I always have been writing a little too boring way - time is my friend in developing story and I feel really bad whenever I'm getting too tragic, dramatic or heroic in narration or when I force things to increase faster than they should. When I was younger I had read many books which taught me mature writing and now I see from the start in what style I'm going to read or write. Sometimes I even don't consider typical excessive epicness as something bad, criticising many novels on websites where was tendency to abuse literary treatmens taught me to make use of any form, because if there's original plot, people forgive exaggeration. If it's used for parody, that is even more likely to read than normal-narration-parody.
But when comes to poetry that's easy to become too pathetic and there's no exuse or explanation of overdrawing thing. In short forms there's no time to buy reader's sympathy so authors need to be little more terse.
Sometimes to me writing is like boiling eggs. Of course I tried to throw them to the boiling water and keep until they're done (which was quick), but they wasn't too tasty. Now I'm giving a try to cold water and patience. Waiting whets the appetite.

I share your opinion that writing improves by writing. And reading. Conscious reading may be a mile stone in someone's improvement.
Again - the voice you mention is surprising and obvious at same time. Surely it gives me another perspective to consider writing as my own creation.

[Pompey Bum]

I know that exaggerated writing! Although I always have been writing a little too boring way - time is my friend in developing story and I feel really bad whenever I'm getting too tragic, dramatic or heroic in narration or when I force things to increase faster than they should. When I was younger I had read many books which taught me mature writing and now I see from the start in what style I'm going to read or write. Sometimes I even don't consider typical excessive epicness as something bad, criticising many novels on websites where was tendency to abuse literary treatmens taught me to make use of any form, because if there's original plot, people forgive exaggeration.

Yes, I think a reader who is invested in the journey will forgive a lot in an author (I know I do). I have the advantage to be working with an epic plot in the first place--one with plenty of heroics and tragedy--but my disadvantage is that I neither created the story nor can I change or add to it. For example, part of the story I'm telling involves a woman who was married for six years and had six children, only one of whom long survived. Her final birth was to twins, both of whom were dead in a year; and she died a few days after their birth. She was 27.

Now I have many dozens of pages about some of the people in my story, but as it happens that is virtually all I know about this woman. I could write an effective short story about her, I'm sure; or I could write a historical novel and just fill in the blanks. But I want to tell her own story--only as much as I have found--as a testimony to her. And I have to keep a reader engaged, too. In that situation voice becomes more important than plot as a way to bring the reader along. Figure of speech can help, too, since people will strain their eyes to see a flickering ghost, but they will turn their heads away from somebody else's dead ancestor. A reader has to be enticed.

Incidentally, I'm sure the author of the book I recommended would say I am wrong not to give this young mother's lost life meaning through fiction. Perhaps she's right. But my belief is that a forgotten life has meaning, too. And I feel that I have this history to write.

Sometimes to me writing is like boiling eggs. Of course I tried to throw them to the boiling water and keep until they're done (which was quick), but they wasn't too tasty. Now I'm giving a try to cold water and patience. Waiting whets the appetite.

Yes, you get the kitchen smelling like scrambled eggs, then when your reader says, "Hey, how about those eggs?" you just wink and say, "What eggs?