Quote:
Originally Posted by Worldwalker
I think the biggest problem is authors who can't separate themselves from their writing. They see their writing as part of themselves. They see sharing it as having a one-on-one conversation with their best friend (or, as suggested elsewhere, their therapist). A collision of expectations ensues when readers see their writing as a commercial product, expected to meet certain standards of merchantability and usability, and if it doesn't, they react as they would if they bought a broken chair.
[...]Somehow, certain writers feel they're exempt from this. They're not.
|
I think it's the writers who call it "art" who feel they are exempt. After all, who can judge art? Yes, but it's
also commercial product, and readers expect certain things (like proper grammar). If a writer wants to make money writing, they have to be able to accept criticism from the masses. Liking or hating a book is still very subjective (storytelling certainly
is an art form), so people will hate your book for the same reason another person liked it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Worldwalker
Actually, I think it takes one of several certain mentalities to be a writer, and one of those possibilities is seeing writing as a way of making the voices in one's head a little more real. Combine that with unfettered access to the whole wide world, and you get ... this.
|
Absolutely. That's where the Laurell K. Hamilton's of the world come in. I've read part of her outburst (and Diana Gabaldon's), and I didn't think they were
that crazy. Just creative people being... well, creative people. Trying to explain why they do what they do, and why they think what they think. You can disagree all you want with their
opinions, but I don't think they sound like crazy people in context. Bad analogies, sure.