Generic Human
New Member
As asked, can you be a writer/good writer but also not devote hours a day to reading?
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Can you be a writer that also isn't an avid reader?
- Thread starter Generic Human
- Start date
yes... but your writing may suffer from it... in general if you don't read you won't have the context and appreciation of how stories are pout together unless of course you learn that in another way
You can learn how to write up to a point from books and courses.
What you will struggle to learn is how to be a good writer. Courses and books teach technique in isolation. What they don't teach you is how to tell stories, or how to engage readers. You might learn "show, don't tell", but going through a work and removing all adverbs does not, in itself, make a story a good story (and isn't usually a good idea anyway).
You learn how to engage readers by seeing how successful authors have done it. By reading, you learn the narrative tricks they use, the way they control perspective and pacing, and how they make their writing emotive. And once you know how that's done, you can practise it in your own writing and develop your own methods.
You don't have to spend hours a day. But you do need to read, or have read fairly widely, and more importantly, deeply. Understand what an author has done and how, don't just learn the surface elements, by which I mean, the fact that a story has vampires or space marines, or vampire space marines does not, in itself, make it a good story. Cool concepts don't make a good story, the execution does.
What you will struggle to learn is how to be a good writer. Courses and books teach technique in isolation. What they don't teach you is how to tell stories, or how to engage readers. You might learn "show, don't tell", but going through a work and removing all adverbs does not, in itself, make a story a good story (and isn't usually a good idea anyway).
You learn how to engage readers by seeing how successful authors have done it. By reading, you learn the narrative tricks they use, the way they control perspective and pacing, and how they make their writing emotive. And once you know how that's done, you can practise it in your own writing and develop your own methods.
You don't have to spend hours a day. But you do need to read, or have read fairly widely, and more importantly, deeply. Understand what an author has done and how, don't just learn the surface elements, by which I mean, the fact that a story has vampires or space marines, or vampire space marines does not, in itself, make it a good story. Cool concepts don't make a good story, the execution does.
Last edited:
I am an involuntary slow reader. Maybe 1 book every 2 years, sadly. I feel that this does hold me back from being a better writer. But still, some feedback on some of my stories indicate that they are decent.
The most important thing, I believe is to read as much as you can without overdoing it, if that makes sense. You still need time for the most important part of being a writer, the writing. That is where you develop, write, get feedback, then write some more!
The most important thing, I believe is to read as much as you can without overdoing it, if that makes sense. You still need time for the most important part of being a writer, the writing. That is where you develop, write, get feedback, then write some more!
Yes. You can be. I don't read much in terms of fiction. Because I get in a space where I have to write and have no space in my brain for other people's stories. I am also a very picky reader and always have been. So, finding something to read I like is difficult. I have found though that classic books tend to a safe bet, most of the time. Don't know why, but I think it's because I am promised a good time and not going to be hit with a plot twist that makes me mad.
Yeah. I'm an emotional reader. I get mad at writers for not choosing what I think is 'the best path' for a story. I'm weird.
But non-fiction is easier for my brain to enjoy, like Ancient Roman history or whatever. Also, I enjoy fanfic more than most published books, which is strange. But I also think THROUGH writing, you learn HOW to write better. You can read all you want, but writing is a skill itself. Like, reading a bunch of cookbooks, but never touching the stove. Working the stove is way different in reality, than on paper.
Yeah. I'm an emotional reader. I get mad at writers for not choosing what I think is 'the best path' for a story. I'm weird.
But non-fiction is easier for my brain to enjoy, like Ancient Roman history or whatever. Also, I enjoy fanfic more than most published books, which is strange. But I also think THROUGH writing, you learn HOW to write better. You can read all you want, but writing is a skill itself. Like, reading a bunch of cookbooks, but never touching the stove. Working the stove is way different in reality, than on paper.
I'm a voracious reader, and have been since I was a child. I have taken several many-years-long breaks over the years because, frankly, my bank account can't keep up with my appetite for books. For instance, I have read or listened to (audible is my friend, which is weird because I never thought I would be able to deal with that) 37 books since the beginning of March. And I prefer obnoxiously long books because I like to get my money's worth (If it's not over 600 pages or at least 27 hours on audible I have a hard time justifying it). Sadly, there aren't a lot of those available, so in that case I like to jump into series.
All of that said, the more I read, the more I want to write. When I am able to do so it helps things even out for me.
When I am writing I rarely read at the same time unless I'm proofreading for someone else or something. Previously, when I was writing, I could knock out a rough draft novel in about a month. I tend to be consumed by whatever I am doing at the time.
Do I think I could be an effective writer without reading? Probably. Do I think I have a better eye and feel for things because I do love reading so much? Absolutely.
This is not to say I am a "good" writer. I'm definitely not. So take all that with a grain of salt.
All of that said, the more I read, the more I want to write. When I am able to do so it helps things even out for me.
When I am writing I rarely read at the same time unless I'm proofreading for someone else or something. Previously, when I was writing, I could knock out a rough draft novel in about a month. I tend to be consumed by whatever I am doing at the time.
Do I think I could be an effective writer without reading? Probably. Do I think I have a better eye and feel for things because I do love reading so much? Absolutely.
This is not to say I am a "good" writer. I'm definitely not. So take all that with a grain of salt.
Set2Stun
New Member
In my view, reading is the best training one can have for writing. But there's also movies and TV shows where you can pick up on what works well and what doesn't re: plot, character development, arcs, twists, etc. Stories in any medium can be useful. One need not read all the time, but it's good to read through a few books every year even when you're writing. These days it can be tough for me to read new books as pure entertainment and ignore "editor brain," but if a story is compelling enough, I can keep out such thoughts and just enjoy the story. That's when I know it's good.
I don't read as much as I'd like to these days, but I've read hundreds of books over the years, and the basics of what works just kind of becomes second nature after a while. I have studied almost zero theory and don't care for it at all, and I've been doing okay over the first few years of my writing journey. I think you can get by as a writer without reading too much as long as you are still being exposed to storytelling in other ways. But it's definitely important imo.
I don't read as much as I'd like to these days, but I've read hundreds of books over the years, and the basics of what works just kind of becomes second nature after a while. I have studied almost zero theory and don't care for it at all, and I've been doing okay over the first few years of my writing journey. I think you can get by as a writer without reading too much as long as you are still being exposed to storytelling in other ways. But it's definitely important imo.
aside_dish
New Member
As mentioned above, of course you can write if you don't read, but reading expands both perspectives and skills.
When I first got into this 'writing' business, one of the first things I read was that you are a writer if you write a sentence! I found that hard to believe, but in this world it is full of exaggerations so I've broadened that somewhat to say that lots of people are writers, but there are degrees in how 'good' they are. To explain this point I will need to rephrase the OP and title to:
Can you be an impactful writer if you are not an avid reader?
I think this is a much more difficult question.
I use the word 'impactful' and not 'good' or 'successful' because 'good' has a wide range as it is different through everyone's eyes and sales success doesn't necessarily mean you have a good product. I have met some wonderful writers along my journey, who have stories that moved me, not always 100% perfect, but impacted me to look at my writing in a different light and how I am as a person, and I think that is more powerful than being 'good,' or whatever people classify good as.
To answer this rephrased question, I believe you have to read as much as you can, and if you don't, you lose the reactions, the spark that will help you with your writing. It is not reading for the sake of reading, as reading can be research, it can be articles and not simply just novels and shorts, because if you are writing, you will naturally pick up and structure how a news article becomes a click bait, or how some reporters or writers exaggerate and focus on certain words in a story to make a mundane piece into this sensationalized rubbish that you don't like, but you can learn from. This is what I mean by reaction and spark and you can't do that by simply writing.
But, above all else, you need to find the right balance for yourself. If you only write you will become sucked into thinking advancement in your story is progress, is brilliance when you have nothing to compare your writing to. It is why showcasing can lead to harsh reviews as own expectations differ from reaction. Striking a good routine of reading and writing and rest will create better writing and that will lead to better stories, which can leave a lasting impression on a reader.
Can you be an impactful writer if you are not an avid reader?
I think this is a much more difficult question.
I use the word 'impactful' and not 'good' or 'successful' because 'good' has a wide range as it is different through everyone's eyes and sales success doesn't necessarily mean you have a good product. I have met some wonderful writers along my journey, who have stories that moved me, not always 100% perfect, but impacted me to look at my writing in a different light and how I am as a person, and I think that is more powerful than being 'good,' or whatever people classify good as.
To answer this rephrased question, I believe you have to read as much as you can, and if you don't, you lose the reactions, the spark that will help you with your writing. It is not reading for the sake of reading, as reading can be research, it can be articles and not simply just novels and shorts, because if you are writing, you will naturally pick up and structure how a news article becomes a click bait, or how some reporters or writers exaggerate and focus on certain words in a story to make a mundane piece into this sensationalized rubbish that you don't like, but you can learn from. This is what I mean by reaction and spark and you can't do that by simply writing.
But, above all else, you need to find the right balance for yourself. If you only write you will become sucked into thinking advancement in your story is progress, is brilliance when you have nothing to compare your writing to. It is why showcasing can lead to harsh reviews as own expectations differ from reaction. Striking a good routine of reading and writing and rest will create better writing and that will lead to better stories, which can leave a lasting impression on a reader.
Write so that others can feel as you do when you read the work of others.
Avid can mean a number of different things and not necessarily relating to volume. I do consider reading important to ones development as a writer. If nothing else, it's a reminder of the power of the written word. It also helps to formulate the methods needed to complete a written piece of work.
What I don't get is why people who write and don't read expect that others will want to read what they've written.
What I don't get is why people who write and don't read expect that others will want to read what they've written.
Generic Human
New Member
Humm.... Thought provoking.
I admit to being very picky about books and therefore have a harder time finding ideal reading material than some other readers, but I do believe you need some exposure to quality prose in order to write it. A lot of the writing I've encountered online is so poor that it makes me question whether the people who wrote it have ever picked up a book themselves. I suspect a lot of it comes from people who only turn to writing because they think it's easier than producing the kind of visual media they gravitate toward (e.g. movies, TV, video games, or comic books).
I get why media like that might inspire a lot of storytellers nowadays, but if you want to write prose literature, you got to know what prose literature looks like.
I get why media like that might inspire a lot of storytellers nowadays, but if you want to write prose literature, you got to know what prose literature looks like.
wearywanderer64
New Member
I would say it can hurt, especially if you want to write in a certain genre. For example, if it's a vampire book, going Bela Lugosi style will seem a bit old-fashioned. The words and phrases will seem odd. But Anne Rice's novels have a different take.
Older styles still work.
Bela Lugosi, of course, was an actor, not a character or writer.
I don't think you have to be a reader to have a good story to tell. I think about my great uncle when questions like this come up. He was raised in Appalachia and a coal miner at the age of 12, (as were most of the men in that side of my family back then) and he could barely read. Maybe 2nd grade level. The man could tell a story like no one else I've ever met. His creativity and world building were phenomenal. Even his vocabulary was epic. He couldn't spell it or read it on a page, but he knew what it meant and how to use it properly.
He was fundamental in fostering my love of stories. He told them constantly - to teach life lessons, to explain how machinery worked, to just make someone laugh. The world would have loved him as much as I did, given the chance.
I begged him - begged I tell you - to let me put some of those stories on paper for him in my early 20's but he didn't think he could compare to 'real' authors so he wouldn't let me. He insisted he would just embarrass himself. "A person who can't read shouldn't write" he said. Unfortunately, he believed that to the end.
I never tell anyone they don't have a story in them worth telling, reader or not. Will it need work at first? Will it be rough? Of course. But whose isn't?
100% agree, though would argue your example differs massively from someone setting out to do exactly what your uncle refused to do. There are natural story tellers and literacy isn't their primary attribute. I'll lay money down that your uncle loved to listen to others tell their stories, observed and learned and developed his own skills, which could be viewed as the equivalent of reading other authors within the oral tradition.
I'd also suggest that having a story to tell and wanting to be an author are two very different things.
Similar threads
