So, it turns out I'm a bit of "book snob".
Now, this is another one of those "randomly-generated-blogs-as-I-was-falling-asleep" sort of things, so I don't want anyone to take offense. Blogging, to me, is often like thinking aloud about a variety of things. As such, I sometimes don't have my filter on, and it's also hard to judge folks' tones over the 'Net. So, that having been said, no offense is meant by this post, just my random, unfiltered thoughts.
Anyway. I'm a freak of nature. I understand this.
Ever since elementary school, I've consumed books like air. I was the kid who got to walk over the 'big' high school library to check out books in sixth grade, because I'd exhausted all the options in our elementary school library. By senior year, I'd done the same.
Now, I read three books at a time. One in the morning for breakfast, one at night before bed, and one for lunch (usually what I'm teaching). And, hey, I'm an English teacher. Figure it's sorta my job to read a lot.
And I know that for some people, reading - especially fiction - just isn't their thing. Especially as an English teacher, I know that.
But I find two things I have less and less patience for as a I grow older:
1. people who say they want to write fiction but hardly ever read it
2. people who say they write horror but hardly ever read it
Again, I understand I read more than the average person. This isn't exactly a compliment, it's more like an admission of an addiction, or that I have no life. And I definitely believe in a standard of quality for books, especially as a writer. In many ways, I've drawn a line in the sand over the kinds of books I'll spend my free time (when not reviewing) reading. But even then, I read LOTS of different things.
And, as a horror writer, I realized a year ago that my "horror palette" was pretty narrow, so I decided to intentionally widen it. I'm chronicling that journey over at The Midnight Diner in a series of posts labeled "A Modest History of Horror", under Diner Recommends.
But I see SO many people posting on Facebook and twitter about their new releases and the fifteenth novel they've self-published this year, and see nothing about what they're all reading. And okay, maybe they're not as big a Goodreads freak as I am. Along with being a reading freak, I'm a little of a bibliophile, also.
But still.
I know I'm being judgmental, but the idea that someone is dead serious about being a writer but isn't dead serious about reading fiction just doesn't. Make. Sense.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe one has nothing to do with the other, and I'm just bragging about how much I like to read (and, maybe I sorta am. A little.) And I know this is the clarion call of old fogeys who fear the future and everything in it, claiming we're only two steps away from Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, because hardly anyone - apparently even authors - read fiction or even poetry anymore.
But I sometimes feel that way. Even about being an English teacher. As a teacher, seems like our days are filled with SO many things and tasks we're supposed to do. I often stop and think: "Wait. A HUGE part of my job is teaching literature, and the critical interpretation of it. Shouldn't a large part of my job be reading, then?"
And it's the same with being a writer. In laboring to produce a craft, shouldn't a large portion of our time be spent studying said craft? Again, slipping into judgmental mode again, probably, but I HATE the following argument with a BURNING passion: "I don't have time to read. I'm too busy writing. If I read more, I certainly wouldn't be able to write NEARLY as much!"
No offense, but in my mind, unless there are hefty advances from legacy publishers riding on you finishing that novel, your argument is invalid. And, no offense, but if some writers read more, forcing them to maybe write less...
Maybe that's a good thing. I know it happened with me, regarding short stories. Once I really started diving into the great short stories written by some of horror's giants, I SERIOUSLY slowed my writing down...because I realized what utter garbage most my short story ideas were.
Anyway, I'm going to end this rant with the following quote. Found it recently on Katherine Coble's blog, and I stole because I love it, and I think it's the best advice for all writers in every genre:
"Read, read, read. Read everything -- trash, classics, good and bad, and
see how they do it. Just like a carpenter who works as an apprentice
and studies the master. Read! You'll absorb it. Then write. If it's
good, you'll find out. If it's not, throw it out of the window."
William Faulkner
So, that's it. Stop reading this blog.
And get reading some fiction.
I absolutely agree with you, Kevin. I don't always post about what I read because if I'm going to write I'd rather write fiction than a review, but I know that just isn't the case with many people and they don't read at all. That said, there's another category of writer I love: "I retired from 50 years at IBM as a bean counter. Now I'm going to be an author" (notice, no mention of "write" or "craft"). Really? Hey, how about, "I spent 50 years as a writer, but I know I can build a house if you just show me the plans! May I build yours?"
ReplyDeleteIt's important for writers to read in their preferred genre, sure, but I think it's even more important for those same writers to branch out into other genres. To you horror, as an example -- you can tell many horror writers only read horror, and limited horror at that (read: small press). Reading great works is of course helpful, but I think reading completely awful works is helpful too. I know coming up reading slush helped me become a better writer, so every once in awhile I try to read a not-so-great book to help me put things into perspective.
ReplyDeleteAgree completely with everything you've said, Robert. I guess to clarify: I definitely believe writers should read OUTSIDE their genre. Good storytelling is good storytelling, and I've often felt very thankful that my chosen profession keeps me in the classics and other works of literature BESIDES horror on a regular basis.
ReplyDeleteBut what I mean is this: a year ago, I decided that, as a horror writer, I was attempting to write in a genre that, past Stephen King, Dean Koontz, Peter Straub and the latest Leisure offerings, I knew nothing about. So I sort of went on quest to explore all the horror writers before me. And what I found - especially regarding short stories - is that all these ideas I thought were fresh and original had already been done. And this caused me to really consider what I was writing, pushed me further to develop my own voice.
Totally agree. It's one of the reasons I joined the 50/50 challenge this year (50 books and 50 movies in a year) even though I know I probably can't hit that number. I figured it'd help me keep my focus on reading. It's easy when under tight publisher deadlines to spend any free moment writing, but I find when I stop reading, my words dry up. You can't empty the well day after day without replenishing it. And I'm trying to make a valiant effort as well to read outside of my genre though that's a little harder (because I so love romance) but other genres handle words differently and can help you not start sounding like everyone else in your own genre.
ReplyDelete"I stop reading, my words dry up."
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. Some mornings, in fact, when I can't seem to make the words come at ALL, I just go with it and send the morning reading, doing exactly that: filling the tank back up.
"but other genres handle words differently and can help you not start sounding like everyone else in your own genre."
Very, very true - especially in the horror genre. Which, once again, makes me eternally thankful for my teaching position, which require me to explore the classics every year.
Thanks for posting!
come see my narnia post http://savoriesoflife.blogspot.com/2012/05/narnia-good-or-bad.html?showComment=1336730670311#c5918116946192498081
ReplyDelete