As someone who writes well when I can bring myself to do it but struggles TERRIBLY to do it heh, I feel the pain of writer's block, and insist on being called an editor not a writer. That said, I do genuinely believe everything is interesting, if you're willing to learn how things work and what makes people tick, and you're willing to ask questions and poke, and also willing to say ah okay, that's too much detail, let's stop now, thanks. I think stories lie everywhere, a concept that has been brutalized by marketing, and if you are willing to look for them, you can find them. Of course, the person you're talking to has to be willing to answer questions too. But that's from a finding out about things perspective, not a telling people about things perspective. But I do also think that if you can approach anything as a finding out about things exercise, it can be interesting to write about, even in fiction.
Cordially, Ameya Nagarajan (she/her) <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ameyann> On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 19:06, Bruce Metcalf via Silklist < [email protected]> wrote: > On 4/4/24 17:06, Udhay Shankar N via Silklist wrote: > > > I found this perspective (from a newsletter on, of all things, Brit > > politics) fasinating. Basically, "everything is interesting." > > > > What are the group's thoughts on both the process of writing, and the > > specific hypothesis that "everything is interesting"? > > > It reminds me a bit of a lesson I learned at the knee of the late Ray > Bradbury, "Writers write! That's how we know we're writers. I sit down > at the typewriter every morning, put in a sheet of paper, and put down > words. Some days they're great and I keep them; some days they're shit > and I toss them. It doesn't matter, I keep writing, because if I don't > write, then I'm not a writer, and then what am I?" > > He was talking about fiction of course, but I don't think non-fiction is > much different. I've been writing professionally for nearly half a > century, and I can't say I've had any trouble from "writer's block." > Yes, some days what I write is junk, but I can generally come up with > something better the next day ... and the next if needed. > > As for the argument that "everything is interesting," I call BS. Bad > writing (or bad teaching) can make any topic the most boring and > off-putting subject imaginable. Good writing (and good teaching) can > often do just the opposite. This is how you test for good writing -- is > it interesting? > > I think people romanticize writing. It's a task just like building a > house. You can build a beautiful or ugly building, a sound or rickety > building, a building that suits it's purpose or one that frustrates > those who use it. Writing is the same. To those who claim the existence > of plans and building inspectors makes carpentry different, permit me to > introduce them to the concept of task definitions and editors. > > Is writing easy? Is carpentry? You can learn skills to make both easier, > you can use what techniques help produce good product, and some people > just aren't good at one or the other. > > Is everything interesting? Better to ask if writing on a given topic -- > and reading the results -- is interesting, or fun, or informative, or > inspiring, or whatever end you're going for. "Interesting" isn't an > inherent quality of the topic. > > Cheers, > / Bruce / > -- > Silklist mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist >
-- Silklist mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist
