|
United States15275 Posts
There's nothing more saddening than comparing one's veneration of writers to their lives.
When you grow up alone with chronic depression, writers seem like the best thing ever. They don't judge your failings, they can't threaten to abandon you. They are always available when the world threatens to swallow you up. They seem more knowledgeable and more assured in their perception of the world, which can be gifted to whoever understands the depths of their works. And one develops a dialogue with them that seems deeper and more profound than anything expressed within conversation. For a time, they substitute effectively for real people.
Then you read how they lived. Not all writers are condemned to terrible lives, but it seems like most of the ones whose prose I admire were deeply fucked up people. Nietzsche was left to languish in a mental institution, barely cognizant of his surroundings (and we still don't the cause of his breakdown), but he was deeply isolated and angry prior to it. James Tiptree killed her husband and committed suicide. Ditto for Montherlant, except he died alone and blind with a cyanide pill down his throat. Mann lived his entire life holding back his bisexuality; Maugham deprecatingly turned in back on himself. Capote was a pathological liar who wasted his life with alcohol, betrayed his friends with glee, and ultimately paid for the former with liver cancer. Let's not even talk about Wittgenstein.
Mann believed for great writers, sickness was often a prerequisite for great work. The mediocre writer would be subsumed by these obstacles while geniuses would find something within their suffering and use it to transcend their current state. I'm not eager to contradict someone of his stature, but garnering adoration in exchange for regret seems like a Pyrrhic victory at best. Everyone sublimates desires and hopes into other channels, and his words have a certain ring of truth to them. But if you asked me whether I would sacrifice all the prose work I've done in exchange for stability, I wouldn't know what to say. Was it worth losing everyone I ever cared about through neglect and self-loathing? Did I really have to go through some agonizing internal struggle to write something more meaningful than airport trash and self-help hokum?
I've been writing a series for about 10 years and sometimes it feels like a waste of time. I frequently procrastinate, get stuck on plot points, wipe the entire board clean to rewrite, invent new characters only to banish them to the abyss a few months later, get rid of whole reams of dialogue that slightly irk me. Often it feels like the whole process of writing is a deliberate act to distract me from other things. It doesn't make me happy; it consumes my attention and thought to the point where the question becomes moot. And then I finish, and the cycle of self-hatred and doubt begins anew. What joy. At this point I don't know if it can be fulfilling for me. Maybe the love of writing has to be born from instinct, like how salmon can find the path back to their birthing grounds. Or willful ignorance.
Choosing a path and defining one's self through it is the only thing that can solve this ambiguity. I don't know which path to choose though.
 
|
It seems to me that there are two types of writers: There are those that write because something needs to be said or because they need to say something. Which one do you think you are?
|
TLADT24920 Posts
hmm well, the desire to be heard. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. For you, it really depends on why you are writing though you did mention it in your post. You said that you feel no joy from it and from your blog, seems like you're pretty much saying that it's time wasted but I guess you should be asking yourself: did it help you in some way? It doesn't have to bring you joy so long as it doesn't bring you sorrow either otherwise I would question why you are doing it. There's nothing wrong with doing something neutral.
I also disagree with that statement that the love of writing has to be born from instinct. Maybe you want to share your imagination, your stories, experiences and other parts of yourself with other people and only decided on that after you went through the experiences. Maybe you just wanted a challenge so you're trying your hand at writing a story? Maybe you're interested in the writing process, much like being interest in some other profession outside your own? I guess what I'm trying to say if I didn't somehow contradict myself lol, is that there's more than just instinct to writing.
If you have been writing your book for 10 years now and keep changing things, I suggest you try to find a safe point and work from there. At this point, your thoughts about the story's progression are probably muddled up from all the changes that you have made to it and it'll only get worse. Decide on what you feel should remain static despite the story's progression (maybe some character will always remain hardheaded for example) and only change things if you feel that they need to be changed. Also, the writing process is supposed to be very complex so it's not surprising to hear that you are constantly changing things.
If you have ever heard of Kerouac, you should take a look at his book, The Dharma Bums. I vaguely remember it being both heavily praised and critical in how it was written (or submitted or something) so you can at least see that there are no boundaries when it comes to writing (or there may be for yourself, I dunno lol).
|
The more you will struggle to do what you are doing, the more rewarding it will feel once you're done.
|
If it makes you feel better, I've been working on the same project for the better part of 8 years.
|
I'm pretty sure anything you could have been doing for 10 years would feel the same to you regardless of what it is. If you didn't have this for sublimation purposes or to distract yourself with, it would just be something else. It's our lot. We're not destined for greatness. We're also not exactly wired for happiness. So, comparing yourself to "happy people" or the great minds of history is an error.
To me, the idea of procrastination in writing is silly. I've always felt that one should write only if it is absolutely essential to oneself that one does -- out of great necessity. If one doesn't feel the need -- the urge -- to write something down, to get it out, then one shouldn't write anything.
|
Read In Search of Lost Time, the answer to your question lies at the end.
+ Show Spoiler +I'm just not sure what it will be for you, but I suspect you'll find it comforting. Also god, Nietzsche and Wittgenstein, please 
Edit : also expected from the title a rant about the genre sucking, I'm sad
|
I don't know if this post will make you feel any better ( I hope it does ) but I this is how I feel.
Even thou I never have been a writer and have experienced almost any hardships in my life, I do not feel very content will all the hundreds of hours I have devoted to my skills. The times I feel happy I feel like I have wasted all the time to get there, and just dismiss everything as a failure.
My problem is that I can't be rational to my self about the success and progress I have made, either by not giving any to myself or giving way to much to other people for no reason besides the fact that their not me.
Best of luck!
|
It is no small blessing that I am not a self-conscious, reflective writer. I write as words and phrases please me, and as the moment inspires me. The written word is merely a thought abandoned and left behind. No anxiety, no pressure, no struggle for perfection.
|
|
|
On February 19 2015 07:00 bookwyrm wrote:
nobody LIKES writing
Depends on what you mean by LIKE.
|
for all values of LIKE 
|
being productive artistically sucks you dry. but you can't stop, because it's the only thing that makes sense.
|
Seems like you are in the mood to read Suicide Note by Mitchell Heisman.
|
I am of the opinion that only people who have had traumatic lives are the ones who make for great: Comedians, artists, musicians/singers, writers, and even actors. And if you look up the data on almost anyone, the majority of them fit this model.
It's not necessarily an emotional thing, but just their life experiences that they tap into that makes for the most interesting 'art'.
And it's not just that either, these people are dedicated hard working strugglers for most of their lives as well. There is always some constant recreation of their traumas throughout their lives in various forms that keeps them interesting. Or else people just forget about them again.
I mean it's sort of obvious that the most entertaining/exciting/interesting things are the most extreme. Which is why 'reality tv' stuff is so popular etc.
It's like a catch 22 maybe. Like if they realize this and fix their problems, then they may be healthier mentally and in their interpersonal relationships, but then they will not meet their needs in their craft or financially which inturn can restart the cycle.
|
I once got some advice that all projects should have a relatively short term pay off. In this case it might be one book in your series, or even just a small novelette which is part of the bigger story. The pay off not only gives you the sense of satisfaction which can keep you going, but more importantly you get feedback as to how successful what you are doing will be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
