Can you be a writer that also isn't an avid reader?

[Naomasa298]

Having a good story to tell is one skill, but actually telling it well is a different skill.

"Paris stole Menelaus' bird and they had a big fight over it" isn't quite Homer.

 

[Trish]

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.

I don't disagree with any of that (and yes, in Appalachia oral history was most of what existed and boy do they like to talk ).

My point was that I think the majority of humans have a story to tell that someone would want to read. Just deciding one day oooh, author sounds good as a career, with no love of stories of any kind is never going to go well, but even that wouldn't mean the person doesn't have a good story in them. It's just not the one they're writing. Which would be the most likely scenario if they want to be successful so they're jumping on the trend train instead of writing what actually resonates with them, or that they've found a way to resonate with. When it's passionless - it shows.

 

[Trish]

Having a good story to tell is one skill, but actually telling it well is a different skill.

Of course it is. But which of us started out not being shitty at telling a story? Certainly not me. Most days I still am

 

[Naomasa298]

Of course it is. But which of us started out not being shitty at telling a story? Certainly not me. Most days I still am

Yes, but I think the point of reading is so we learn how to tell stories. We learn the techniques of doing so from other people who are better at it than us.

In fact, that's one of the issues with writing courses and even forums - they try to teach the craft of writing, but not the art of storytelling.

 

[Trish]

Yes, but I think the point of reading is so we learn how to tell stories. We learn the techniques of doing so from other people who are better at it than us.

What makes another writer better than you? How do you define that?

In fact, that's one of the issues with writing courses and even forums - they try to teach the craft of writing, but not the art of storytelling.

I think they do. At least from what I've seen in forums though that's limited to this one a long time ago. I never stayed in any others for more than a week or two. I've never taken a writing course so I can't comment on that.

You can teach someone art. To memorize rules, structure, the brush strokes so to speak. You can teach them to emulate the greats. See what they did there? Wasn't that magical?

What you can't do is teach someone to be an artist. To stop copying and emulating and just be themselves. How to shine. That comes from confidence and that confidence kicks in when they finally understand the rules, the pacing, etc. When they stop focusing on those little bitty pieces that cause them anxiety, embarrassment, and decision paralysis. When the rules are just there in the background, a gentle guide not a goal post. That comes from them, and you can't teach them that. You can only guide them toward it until they find their artistry, whatever it may be. Most of us never make it that far.

 

[Naomasa298]

hat makes another writer better than you? How do you define that?

Very easily. Does the writer manage to evoke emotions well, whether that be sadness, excitement, a sense of grandeur etc. better than you can?

Stephen King can raise tension and build anxiety just through his writing far better than I ever could.

 

[Naomasa298]

I think they do. At least from what I've seen in forums though that's limited to this one a long time ago. I never stayed in any others for more than a week or two. I've never taken a writing course so I can't comment on that.

I'm afraid, from what I've seen on various forums - including, but not limited to this one, I disagree. They tend to concentrate on the mechanics and effects of the writing, rather than the actual storytelling. Not exclusively, but they tend towards that. It's valuable as well, but it's not the be all and end all of being a good writer.

You can teach someone art. To memorize rules, structure, the brush strokes so to speak. You can teach them to emulate the greats. See what they did there? Wasn't that magical?

You can teach someone to draw or paint. But can you teach them to paint a *great* painting? Many people can paint really well. But not everyone is a da Vinci, Picasso or Michelangelo, even if they are better technical painters.

 

[Trish]

Very easily. Does the writer manage to evoke emotions well, whether that be sadness, excitement, a sense of grandeur etc. better than you can?

Stephen King can raise tension and build anxiety just through his writing far better than I ever could.

I agree with your first paragraph. And I'm really happy to hear that. Often people answer that with "they're successful!" or their book stats, or "they're taught in school! Of course they're the best". I agree with what should be strived for.

 

[Trish]

I'm afraid, from what I've seen on various forums - including, but not limited to this one, I disagree. They tend to concentrate on the mechanics and effects of the writing, rather than the actual storytelling. Not exclusively, but they tend towards that. It's valuable as well, but it's not the be all and end all of being a good writer.

I fully explained my position on this in my last paragraph (that you didn't quote).

You can teach someone to draw or paint. But can you teach them to paint a *great* painting? Many people can paint really well. But not everyone is a da Vinci, Picasso or Michelangelo, even if they are better technical painters.

Literally what I said after what you quoted. Just different words.

 

[JT Woody]

There is a celebrity child who "wrote" a book (with a ghost writer).
they were famous for saying something to the effect of "i dont read because books are boring. i'd rather write the story that i want to read"
.... and then goes and writes a historical fantasy that negatively characterizes an entire REAL ethnic group.
The book was supposed to be published, but after an onslaught of bad reviews about how the author didnt do ANY research, was pulled from publication.
the book did end up getting publish a year or two later, im assuming after massive rewrites and revisions. the reviews were still bad, though.

my point is... you can still be a writer if you dont read and/or are not an avid reader. To be a good storyteller reading is involved! I believe any form of creative outlet needs some sort of imagination and stimulus. And, you can get that stimulus from all around you. HOWEVER, Reading allows you to enter different worlds, cultures, eras outside of your own comfort zone. It sparks curiosity which leads to research and learning new things (like, for example, that ethnic group the author vilified. Where did the author hear about that group? what was the context? where was the research? where was the curiosity to know more before writing?).
With the exception of "potato chip books", I always learn something new from the things I read, not just style and writing mechanics. Ways of thinking, concepts, people, places, etc. These things inspire my writing and the stories I tell.

 

[Trish]

To be a good storyteller reading is involved

I would say a love of stories is involved, but stories come in many forms.

HOWEVER, Reading allows you to enter different worlds, cultures, eras outside of your own comfort zone. It sparks curiosity which leads to research and learning new things (like, for example, that ethnic group the author vilified.

To be devil's advocate here - how do movies, songs, tv shows, articles, your neighbor talking about their life, etc. not do those things?

With the exception of "potato chip books", I always learn something new from the things I read, not just style and writing mechanics. Ways of thinking, concepts, people, places, etc. These things inspire my writing and the stories I tell.

What do you consider to be a "potato chip book"?

 

[JT Woody]

To be devil's advocate here - how do movies, songs, tv shows, articles, your neighbor talking about their life, etc. not do those things?

this is true. But i'm biased lol. My day-job hinges on people reading !
but also... dont these outlets make you want to know/experience more? using myself as an example... when i get fixated on something, I explore almost all avenues. I went through a period where I was fixated on the muslim identity after reading Underground Girls of Kabul. I sought out other books (Beneath the Tamarind Tree, The Bookseller of Kabul) and movies (Jodhaa Akbar (2008), A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (not necessarily muslim, but within the rabbit hole i went down)).
I know not everyone reads for various reasons (a curious person will find any/every way to sate their curiosity and there for stimulate their creativity), but i'm more so referring to the people who CAN read, but chose NOT to read because its boring ore lame.

What do you consider to be a "potato chip book"?

Books that are pure fun and wholly enjoyable, but have little "nutritional" value (to me). Most books leave me with a feeling of having learned something. Potato Chip reads leave me with "that was fun!" only

The "Ice Planet" series by Ruby Dixon (dont judge me ) was a "potato chip" read to me.

 

[Trish]

I know not everyone reads for various reasons (a curious person will find any/every way to sate their curiosity and there for stimulate their creativity), but i'm more so referring to the people who CAN read, but chose NOT to read because its boring ore lame.

I think some people just process things differently. Even if they can read, they find it difficult to picture a scene from words, but can put a scene into words. I don't know if that makes sense. It's like they can describe things exceptionally well, but the reverse image - things being described creating an image in their head just - doesn't. Like a one way street I guess. One of my kids is like this. It baffles me tremendously, but I can't deny their experience. For them, movies, shows, documentaries, etc. are how they primarily research, though they will read articles because "facts are facts, no image required" *shrug*

Potato Chip reads leave me with "that was fun!" only

I can't judge you on the series, even if I wanted to (I wouldn't ever) because I don't know what it is. I can say I don't think I've ever read a book that didn't impart something to me. Even if the thing it imparts is "forfuckssake I will never ever do that"

And I read a *lot* of what people would consider potato chip books. Depending on full definition - I even write them

Edit: Looked up the series you mentioned. Yep. One of my favorite genres to write minus the science.

 

[JT Woody]

I think some people just process things differently. Even if they can read, they find it difficult to picture a scene from words, but can put a scene into words. I don't know if that makes sense. It's like they can describe things exceptionally well, but the reverse image - things being described creating an image in their head just - doesn't. Like a one way street I guess. One of my kids is like this. It baffles me tremendously, but I can't deny their experience. For them, movies, shows, documentaries, etc. are how they primarily research, though they will read articles because "facts are facts, no image required" *shrug*

I know what you mean (i forget the name of it lol).
But that falls into my point of "not everyone reads for various reasons (a curious person will find any/every way to sate their curiosity and there for stimulate their creativity)"
There are various barriers that prohibits or inhibits reading. I'm not referring to those people. Those people (like your kid) find other ways and methods.

Edit: Looked up the series you mentioned. Yep. One of my favorite genres to write minus the science.

 

[Trish]

Exactly. Potato chips are good dude.

 

[Rigor Mortis]

Putting aside the crisps, I going to make one more go at this.

Context changes things and there are no absolutes, except for that one and even then I'm not sure.

What I don't get is people who want to become an "author" who say they're not interested or bothered to read other authors' work. I don't understand how they expect other people to want to read theirs.

But that's not everyone who doesn't read.

There's a collection of vignettes I read recently that emerged from a creative writing class in Mountjoy prison, each piece composed by a prisoner. I think reference was made to literacy deficits amongst the contributors in the intro, but imagine most were not widely read. They were bursting with stories to tell, though, their own stories, and the telling was potent, superbly facilitated by the tutor.

 

[That Guy Named Aaron]

I don't read anything other than company emails on a regular basis. Does that count?