Search Results for: intertext

Genre-ish – Open Book Blog Hop #263

March 1, 2021 By Captain Maiel

♦Welcome to another edition of the Open Book Blog Hop!♦

Topic #263
Is ‘genre-bending’ and ‘genre hybrid’ a reality or a fallacy?
Has plot changed since Shakespeare or the Bible?

Welcome back to another Open Book Blog Hop! The authors included in this ongoing series wish to thank you for your reads. We appreciate, even more so, when you share our writings with your friends. If you’re new to the series, welcome aboard. The authors engage and impress weekly. Prepare to become a regular reader.

Genre exists. It’s a defined term decided long before I ever came on the scene, and respected for many decades since. That said, does it matter as much as people think? Are there absolute rules? How has genre evolved over time? Do we still write like they did in ancient times, or even the more recent Elizabethan times? And, if not of it matters, why are there degrees in the study of writing and literature?

Artists have always defied consensus on the words used to define their respective works. Pushing the boundaries of acceptability is often where we find the magic. It isn’t just tempting. This is how we become great. Not everyone will be able to make it, though. Our perceptions of what is worth defying and exploring are individual, based on every intertext of our lives. Whatever we come up with not hit with the kids. But, trying teaches an artist a great deal about themselves and their work. That is the entire point.

These journeys can’t be taught in school. Yet, we study literature to enrich our lives and teach us skills we can’t learn elsewhere. For instance, human empathy greatly improves with reading. This might be why people respond to ignorance with: read a book! There’s much to say about ignorance and bigotry as the purview of the not-so-well read.

Although reading improves our understanding that others have feelings about their experiences and lives, does the study of literature matter? It does. Just like other artforms, studying literature teaches us a great deal about the human condition: experience and thought. However, how much does this matter to the individual looking to create literature?

Literary theory exists to explore all aspects of literature, including genre and plot. Genres help organize written works by type. It sets expectations for what the book generally contains. Genre also guides a writer in the elements of what to include in their work.

Writers often go to college and university to learn how to write well and understand the art of writing. Very often, others don’t respect the learning undertaken in this journey. What they forget is that these individuals learn how to analyze material and suss out meaning. This is integral in problem solving, leading, administration, and management. It’s integral to life (think about the empathy factor).

What writers also learn how to do in this study is how to creatively push the boundaries of accepted writing convention, by looking over what others have done before them. They often get to test out their theories about it in papers and discussion with peers before they send a work out into the world. It’s an advantage because it’s done in a short period of time with the guidance of writers that have experience. Skipping this step could make the journey exponentially longer and less effective.

This kind of opportunity costs money, whether you go to it through a higher learning institution or via independent workshops. I’d not trade a day of college. I only wish I could have afforded some of the workshops out there to add to my journey. Great benefits are gained from organized study. For one, you gain the advantage of better writing from reviewing great writing with mentors.

Figuring out what the boundaries are and how to push them in interesting ways is the single most important thing that we writers do. The reason being: all of this has been written before. We could get caught up in tropes and risk wasting our time. Although the story sounds great to us, we may not realize that it’s been dredged for all it has by hundreds of other writers.

When I first started writing, back in high school, this was where I was at. I fell in love with an idea and wanted to make it my own. Writing of that kind at that time wasn’t yet called fan-fiction, but that’s essentially what it was. Fan-fiction isn’t bad. It serves the writers of it in multiple ways, the most important being making them happy, the next is that it teaches them what to write.

We learn to write well by failing to write well and getting feedback from multiple sources on that bad writing. Fan-fiction, for instance, connects people to an existing fanbase in which they can test out their skills and hone them. Some people might wish to mock that journey, but it served me quite well. I’m still writing, after all, and I’ve been writing my own stuff since my early 20’s.

This points to the idea that really getting to know an idea is the best way to dismantle it. Why would you want to dismantle an idea? Well, stretching the boundaries of writing (i.e. genre and plot) requires knowing the boundaries and what they contain thoroughly. The more you know about genre and plot, the better you’ll be at hybridizing and defying them.

If you don’t know what parameters genre contains, how can you include it into your writing in anyway (changed or unchanged)? If you don’t test out your theories and get feedback, how can you figure out what will work? Do you just go ahead and write the thing, and think that those who don’t like it just don’t understand you? Or, do you listen and adapt?

There are rules for genre, but writers should know that bending them can create immense joy. The more experience in writing we gain, the more we realize this. David Bowie says it best in this interview from the 1990s. To summarize, go out into the water just beyond where you can touch bottom.

Yes, writing has rules and genre is defined. It all exists. However, we exist to bend the rules and stretch the definitions. We paint with words. How we mix them, the mediums we use must compliment one another, but that doesn’t mean that the process is as rigid as it sounds. Genre-bending and hybridization are reality. It’s been done for many decades.

My series is the best example that I have of hybridizing or bending the conventions of genre. It is a dark fantasy, but it also contains horror aspects in the paranormal vein. Beside that, there is technology that could be defined as science fiction (nano-tech armor and weapons, aliens, space travel, wireless bio interface machines (BIM), and interdimensional travel). The world building is immense, yet contains historical elements. Because I have to apply a genre label to the series for marketing and sales, I go with Dark Fantasy, but that doesn’t do the work any justice. None at all. It also leaves me confounded on how to define it amply to a would-be reader. That’s a tough place to be in.

It’s Sci-fi-ish, dark paranormal, fantasy horror. Genre-ish. I’m not alone. Of that I am absolutely certain. There are others out there writing the same as me. I’d be interested to hear what they call their works!

In the end, remember: the things we write now could be studied by literary students later. Regardless, our works will grow their own lives and inspire ideas beyond our intentions. If we do our jobs well, they will have amazing lives. Just remember not to let the critics slow you down. They might have something you can use and, then again, they likely won’t. Again, I refer you to the wisdom of Bowie…

Hop through the other writer posts by clicking on their links below. They have insights on this topic and more…

Going to the Dumps – Open Book Blog Hop #258

January 25, 2021 By Captain Maiel

♦Welcome to another edition of the Open Book Blog Hop!♦

Topic #258
What’s your best technique for working around backstory dumps?

Welcome back to another Open Book Blog Hop! The authors included in this ongoing series wish to thank you for your reads. We appreciate, even more so, when you share our writings with your friends. If you’re new to the series, welcome aboard. The authors engage and impress weekly. Prepare to become a regular reader.

J.R.R. Tolkien is my introduction to the epic fantasy genre beyond the childhood fairy tales that I enjoyed immensely. He was a historian and linguist. I cannot speak to if the grandfatherly Englishman was a good person. However, I know that he survived the Great War and this framed his work. I also know, Tolkien has some dry slogs.

Regardless of the tough haul you may find when attempting one of his works, that same work still has a big appeal for readers. He ranks high to this day. Part of that slog contains information dumps. What would provide a better way in which to disseminate the information this author felt was integral to the narrative he was dropping the reader into?

neon sign that reads: All we have is words. All we have is worlds. — Photo by Alexandra on Unsplash

Some sight Star Wars for building the lore of the fiction’s universe throughout the story, instead of information dumping (I wish I had the article that said this, but it was in 2020). Yet, we still have that notable read through at the start of each film. An information dump. Are information dumps just necessary in some cases? How can you tell if you have that case?

The modern answer is to avoid it at all costs, if you ever want to get published. That is actually no answer at all. It just repeats the question in other words. Let me be completely honest: I have had to use information dumps. For example, Trailokya contains universe lore. If I had attempted to unpack that lore throughout the novel, those references may have disappeared in edits as superfluous writing, and the understanding of the universe lost. Thus, I chose a prologue in which to place these few pages, and I placed it at the start of the first in the trilogy.

In OP-DEC, the matter went quite differently. Readers find themselves in a flashback. In writing the script, that scene could easily move to another scene. Although I haven’t done so yet, it is on my to-do-list. Flashbacks are a nice tool that allows an author to release information in scenes. Using this tool only makes sense when the character reasonably could reflect on the moment, it answers a question, and/or it shows impetus and shapes the character more clearly.

Flashbacks can be abused. Some writers lean too heavily on the tool, as if the character relates every move to something that happened in the past. This is not something that goes on in real life. Although our actions are definitely framed by our knowledge, we aren’t always pausing at every moment to think back when. The list I made above is a good test to ensure you’re using them correctly. The more boxes it ticks, the better!

Information dumps often take the form of description. Whether the description is of the character or an object, know that your reader doesn’t require a rundown of your main at the start of your story. Take that information dump you’re feeling tied to, place it in a notes file, and start over. You might want to say, but it’s imperative they know she’s a redhead. Ask yourself why. Is this about controlling what your reader sees? If so, what power does the hair color have (and this is only one of many examples I could use)? Does it contribute in important ways to the plot?

This is one of the reasons we have to reach out to someone else to do the editing. When we are so tied to the details that don’t matter, we can lose focus and our writing loses focus, too. Attributes are fun ways to help readers relate and/or like a character, or even despise them, but they are too often overdone. While they provide details that are intertexts, they’re not so necessary that your writing should suffer a dump.

It’s okay to take your time describing a character’s appearance, or the setting (room, office, street, forest…). However, a lot of what is dumped is unnecessary. Conserving your words on these matters gives you more space for important plot points. It is just better writing.

Think of your work as a pan in which you’ve collected water. The water represents the contents of the story, every drop combined to fill it up. It’s obvious that your pan can only hold a specific number of drops, so you must decide which drops to include. First, don’t make a bigger pan. Instead, collect only the drops of water that matter to create the perfect pan of water.

Or, envision your work like a recipe. In this example, the writer will more clearly see the superfluous (wordiness/information dump). For example, you don’t write a recipe with the organic compound descriptions, nor the chemical names. Instead, the use of familiar terminology leads the way, along with precise/concise words for both ingredients and directions. (Think of those blogs with a huge side-story ahead of the recipe. When you have to scroll too far, you’re more likely to walk away than keep reading. You’re not there for this side-story. You’re there to cook!)

Another example: resist going into detail about the forest–unless you’re describing something completely new to humanity, which can be the case in science fiction or fantasy. Please–don’t get carried away. There will be things familiar and unfamiliar. Resist rehashing the familiar. Spare your reader. Highlight what is different. Be concise. Be calculating. Why does it matter?

A writer does see the scene like a film in their head. That doesn’t mean they will ever be able to convert that view to written word. In other words, adapting a vision has disappointing results for many reasons. Much of what is seen just doesn’t translate, or it bogs down the narrative too much. Writers have to be ok with that and resist trying to control every bit of what they want to convey. You’d be surprised how close to your vision that your reader’s is.

Writing well is a skill that comes with time and practice. Editors are there to help you achieve your best writing. Resist those information dumps. Just to recap, when you find it impossible: ask yourself the important questions about them to troubleshoot. Also recall, they’re not always avoidable.

That’s all for now! Let’s check out what the other authors on the hop have to say on the topic. Click on their links below to read through how they manage information in their work:

open book blog hop, camera and a notebook on a vintage map

Book Boss – Open Book Blog Hop #254

December 28, 2020 By Captain Maiel

♦Welcome to another edition of the Open Book Blog Hop!♦

Topic #254
Who’s the boss, you or the story?

Welcome back to another Open Book Blog Hop! The authors included in this ongoing series wish to thank you for your reads. We appreciate, even more so, when you share our writings with your friends. If you’re new to the series, welcome aboard. The authors engage and impress weekly. Prepare to become a regular reader.

Bossing a story isn’t wiser than letting a story boss you. Although that doesn’t definitively answer the question, you know I’m going to get into it! So here we ago about who’s the book boss. Ready?

employees discuss an issue around a table, book boss — Photo by Tim Gouw on Unsplash

As in business, so with writing. A writer needs to learn how to be an effectual supervisor. A writer has to know what their process is, and thus the goal. They also need to know how to adapt throughout the process in order to reach that goal. Being the book boss is indeed one of your hats. That said, what the book needs is what rules how you’ll accomplish that goal.

This essentially means that your role and execution of the role will adapt, if you’re going to be successful, to each publishing endeavor. It’s as easy as that–on the surface. Some writers think that letting their character rule them and tell them where to take things is the ultimate justice to a story or, in the least, the best practice for getting characters to play along. They protest against being the book boss–like parents who see their role as their child’s friend instead of their parent.

Does letting your workers do whatever they feel necessary to accomplish their tasks work in real life? It doesn’t. That’s why there are supervisors, and all of the other internal controls within a business. If you see your book as a project (work), you’ll start to see the similarities. This way, you assure yourself that your workers (characters) will get their tasks done, and you’ll have a well-written work by your deadline.

What if your characters aren’t cooperating? What if they demand that they know better than you and can lead this charge, if only you’ll get out of their way? Well, this is one place where you need to be flexible. Like in business, good supervisors hear out their supervisees. They work discrepancies out with their help. If that character (worker) does in fact know what they’re doing, you let them take charge of their assigned tasks. However, you need to make it clear that they’re wholly responsible should something fall apart, and will need to work with you to a solution.

Many authors find characters running rough-shod over their vision, and it’s important to regulate and temper that energy. You know those book-boards that you see writers using–the one’s with the colorful postcards that remind you of a CSI Suspect map? Those are excellent for reining in those unruly individuals.

A young person sits before a giant chess board contemplating it, book boss

The fact is, you cannot just let your book do whatever it will however it will do it. It may seem that you do, but choices are made all along the way that flesh out the book. Not all decisions are those of the characters and not all your decisions will dominate the story. Writers find stories leading them in other directions they had not predicted when they started. How do you keep things on track?

No one answer will fit all projects. One solution would be to outline, but for pantsers like me, that’s too binding. The issue is, I know writing isn’t always easily controlled, because there are many variables ahead that I have yet to surmise. Those variables require on the spot decisions, and sometimes they require deliberation. Then, there are those instances when your writing opens up questions, reveal plot holes, and demand resolution before the structure tumbles to the ground a failure. Books require someone to be in the role of book boss from time to time.

Don’t sweat it. You haven’t hit the publish button yet. This is a good thing! You want to find the problems before you present the work to the public. All of those questions require a boss and their team to work together for a brilliant solution that strengthens the work. This is part of the job!

If you decide to let one character or even a few run the show, you’ll get chaos. That chaos may work for some narratives. I’m not going to tell you it always fails, because that would be lying. However, you must be quite skilled to manage this successfully. Controlled chaos isn’t for the faint of heart. It can cause anxiety and poor decision making, because constantly responding to problems and cleaning up messes is taxing! It saps your mental energy. Besides, it risks showing a lack of focus.

A lot of writers think it’s cool to attempt to controlled chaos. That writing in this manner proves they have brilliance. Yet, the reviews that come back are scathing. Controlled chaos is actually deftly planned, not pantsed. It requires a great deal of focus and the ability to multitask (all those variables are out there requiring reasonable resolution). I don’t recommend it without a lot of experience under one’s belt that makes you qualified (and no, it doesn’t have to be in writing and publishing).

Interior of a cathedral dome is superimposed with a night sky and graveyard. A broken rainbow iris eye stares down as a hand reaches up, Deadly Sins Writing, book boss

My best advice, and how I manage my own work, is to step into the role of supervisor. Listen well to your workers, and keep the end goal in focus. Be flexible, but discerning. Not every solution is the solution you need.

In addition, you also must be flexible enough to try again when you fail, not repeating the mistake that led you down the wrong path in the first. Let those workers who know what they’re doing have their space to do their work. (Training in supervisory skills is actually a fantastic intertext to have for writing.) Just as important: know when you need to be hands on/off, or even gently lead (leadership/supervisory skill). Some characters will require a firm hand. Others will bristle at their fate. Some cannot be inspired to do anything at all. Recognize the worker type, and use their strengths to support the project. Take weaknesses as clues for where attention is needed.

Let’s hop on over to see how the other authors see themselves in relation to a book boss. Not every author accomplishes their projects with the same style. What works for them won’t be exactly the same as you or anyone else. This is the beauty of art.

Click on the links below to continue…

The Humor Element – Open Book Blog Hop #246

November 2, 2020 By Captain Maiel

♦Welcome to another edition of the Open Book Blog Hop!♦

Topic #246
Is humor an important element in your stories?
Do you ever laugh at something you’ve written??

Welcome back to another Open Book Blog Hop! The authors included in this ongoing series wish to thank you for your reads. We appreciate, even more so, when you share our writings with your friends. If you’re new to the series, welcome aboard. The authors engage and impress weekly. Prepare to become a regular reader.

Humor is an important part of life and thus it is an important element of storytelling. Even dramatic pieces benefit from a well placed, appropriate piece of humor. Humor is how we cope with difficulty and often how we celebrate life. Comedy is a relief. Scientific studies have even shown how laughter can improve health.

Writing comedy is far more difficult than most realize. Having a sense of humor is only the beginning. Unfortunately, would be jokers usually fail, because they mistake the grotesque for humor. Shock can be a reaction to some jokes, but it should not be the defining emotion one gets from a joke. How many times have you been witness to a teenagers dirty joke?

Not everyone who wants to write comedy can. Not everyone who wants to be comic can. Comedy requires sensitivity and understanding, mostly of one’s fellow humans. When a person cannot sense the emotional response that they are getting from their attempts at humor, they cannot tell, either, if it’s working. Similarly, are the troll humorists. They’re not doing it to amuse the audience. It’s about themselves. That’s not comedy.

Some people really do think comedy is only about the satisfaction they get from upsetting others. While that can be useful in rare cases, such as attempting to make others examine their dangerous choices, it’s mostly not useful at all. You may argue that satire does this, but I’d argue in return that satire is a fine art that reaches beyond upset.

Ill-timed humor is nearly as bad as humor in poor taste or victimizing humor. Fortunately, it usually only leaves those who experience it with bad taste they soon get over. Unfortunately, the writer or comic who committed the faux pas will be avoided in the future. Timing, after all, is key in humor.

A colleague of mine went to college with Andy Kaufman. She told me that he spent most of his time reading the newspaper and learning. When he had filled his mind, he attempted sets on audiences. She said he was very nice, as well. Kaufman studied humans, and he cared for them. His goal was making them laugh.

So, too, a writer who wants to use comedy will need to do just as much research as they would for any other project–perhaps more. I have had my share of pushback on the type of research I recommend for writers, because it requires a substantial time investment. What those who disagree miss is the payoff from that painstaking effort.

When you craft something with the intent of presenting it to a public audience, why would you short shrift that effort? That would be like taking a piece of clay to the wheel and making a lump of nothing, while expecting customers to marvel at your pottery prowess. If you’re unwilling to put in the time, it will show.

Preparing your humor writing will take time, but that pay off is immense. When writing any genre, elements of humor can help ease the tension. Humor can also display bonding between characters–bonding, even, between reader and characters. Of all the characters you’ve read, do you find the amusing ones the most endearing?

Humor ideally takes many forms. What one reader will find hysterical, another reader will barely titter at. Understanding common intertexts and cultural points can improve the reception, but ultimately the success of the jokes is going to rely on not only clarity but the reader’s ability to understand and connect to it.

Humor finds its place in all of my works. Evan from Blue Honor is a great source of humor for the readers. The tit-for-tat between Claire and Carsten is not just building tension and the relationship. It makes the reader connect with the humorous and familiar kind of back and forth one sees in friendly rivals. It eases the darkness of the work, and helps the reader see Carsten as human, not a monster, and thus someone Claire may rely on to get her through.

In The Trailokya Series, there are many moments of humor. The material is so dark, and the things the characters face are life-changing. Heavy material such as that can bog down a narrative if humor isn’t there to lighten the load at opportune times. For instance, depicting sexual assault is traumatic to a reader. If there was no humor to open the valve and take the pressure off, it would become overbearing.

Comic relief is a useful tool in writing. Just use it carefully. The grotesque, timing, and other points must all be appropriately gauged for your material. Don’t ham-fist the joke like a teenager trolling on Twitter. Your work should reflect your skill, not a lack of skill! It’s not easy. But, the payoff is worth the effort.

Click on the links below to continue the hop with other authors who answer this great question about their writing…

Rules Are For Fools – Open Book Blog Hop #231

July 6, 2020 By Captain Maiel

♦Welcome to another edition of the Open Book Blog Hop!♦

Topic #231
What generic ‘rules’ did you abide by when you
started writing that have gone out the window?

Welcome back to another Open Book Blog Hop! The authors included in this ongoing series wish to thank you for your reads. We appreciate, even more so, when you share our writings with your friends. If you’re new to the series, welcome aboard. The authors engage and impress weekly. Prepare to become a regular reader.

chalk board with know the rules written large — Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Rules exist for very good reasons. That never means they shouldn’t be questioned, revised, and outright challenged. If writing remained rigidly dogmatic in its execution, many of the great writers we enjoy reading would never be known to us today. The greatest writers have always challenged the rules and expectations of literature. It is our legacy, thanks to them.

This is not to excuse those who do whatever they please and fail. It is their right to do so, but no one should expect to be successful unless they are truly executing something with skill that questions the status quo of writing. Writer beware. Shakespeare totally made up words. He succeeded, and that made up stuff is common vernacular today. How did he manage that? It made sense and had meaning. That’s how it works. Literature may say you cannot make up words, but linguistics shows that is how words are made and thus language is a living construct. When you work within the general conventions, push the limits, you will be fine. If you flagrantly defy expectations, you set fire to your wings, Icarus, and you crash to the ground.

Yes, not all who dare will fall. Studying the things they have done, however, reveals a more calculated and skillful defection from the expectations of writing. In literature, we call it a device. Writing badly, such as ignoring grammatical rules and the like, is not a literary device. Writing phonetic dialogue is. A typo cannot be excused as device. If you don’t know and understand the rules you purport to break, then you are showing ignorance of the rule not defiance.

Defying the parameters of genre entirely is often a bridge too far also, unless one executes it with skill. That is why some authors seem they can do no wrong, while others who make the attempt fail so boldly. You can certainly try to push the limits and barriers, but if you ignore the expectations, you are likely to fail. You may say someone has to be first. Yes, they do, but they have to do it with skill and purpose. A display of open disdain for a genre will alienate the readers. It will create doubt that the writer knows their genre. It will fall out as ill-formed.

Certainly a writer can defy genre, cross-genre, and attempt to create something new. What that requires is skill. One must understand which bridges are too far just yet, and make the journey by routes navigable by the readers they intend to bring to their new city. You won’t attract any visitors when you make your work a crime against writing.

My rules were simply this, be defiant but within reason. Write the stories you have to tell. Understand how genre and writing work. How do you do that? You read. Devour other writers’ work. Study writing. Read criticism on writing. Ask why certain devices work and why some have become passé. Explore with the intent of gaining skills. Play the game with the confidence of someone who knows what they are doing, not the new comer who just doesn’t want to comply with well-established rules. If you have no good reason to defy, you risk looking foolish. That’s why Rules Are For Fools. Rules exist to prevent foolish and arbitrary acts in writing.

Why, though, do I back rules? Because comprehension requires meeting expectation. Miscommunication happens when the intertext is unknown, or the signs and symbols or language are unknown. When you mis-punctuate, you alter the meaning. When you use the wrong words, you change the meaning. Shakespeare had purposeful reason to do so and he did not do it across his work. He used it exactly in the moment he needed it to work for him. However, if the audience doesn’t understand this, the device fails. You must work within the expectations of the audience.

This is exactly why memes are glorious. They’re signs and symbols and intertext. An internet meme communicates an idea broadly, often mocking players behind the meaning. It exposes contradiction if not hypocrisy. It functions. If your attempt is dysfunctional, it is a failure and should be abandoned. So insisting is to the editor that points that out is foolhardy. Seek more information and a solution that will work for your writing. Obstinance doesn’t serve a writer, expanding and fine-tuning one’s skill does.

That’s another rule I have. Be open to criticism (not the kind that just declares you the worst writer ever or personally attacks you). Criticism should lead you to perfecting skills and your work. If it doesn’t do that, it’s just bullying. Writers, however, can be prickly on that topic. I get sensitive too! It IS tough to hear your hard work isn’t working out as intended. Should you get that news at the edit phase, you’re super lucky. You have an opportunity to perfect. How much stronger will your work become if you take that opportunity?

Pride is an awful destroyer of accomplishments. It either exposes the enlarged ego, or it prevents greatness altogether. Rules are for fools who cannot get around their heads to see the opportunities presented. Never make your writing about fame. By that I mean, don’t seek notoriety before you have earned it. Being a writer means being a skilled artisan. The works are the point. Absolutely, when skilled, you deserve to earn your living this way. However, seeking celebrity status puts you in front of the work that should be the point. It ceases to be about writing, turning authorship into a cheap device.

Successful authors manage to maintain their writing as the front of what they do, regardless of how they rise up. The works remain more important than them, along with the contributions to the artform. They do not treat literature cheaply. It is exactly what matters and is the point of why they exist.

My general rules, therefore are: obey grammar unless you have a specific purpose to do otherwise, which can be both defended and understood. Obey genre, but test the limits in ways that make sense. Learn from criticism, so you are the best writer you can be at that time. Do not seek validation for yourself in the public sphere; the books are the point. If you can monetize your art, remember the above rules to keep your work quality and contributing to the artform we love.

I’ve maintained these rules throughout my writing career. All that’s gone out the window for me is the idea of what a writer is and does as universal. I’ve abandoned the notion that I am not doing it right; that writing every single day to a certain number of words doesn’t make you better (but it can make you bitter). I’ve learned to listen instead of getting upset. Without listening and exploring we never improve our craft–criticism is a good thing (and now I know what it actually looks like–I’m side-eyeing the bullies). This adventure takes a lifetime, and the twenty-something prodigy almost always burns out before their 40s. Putting out multiple books a year may work for some but generally speaking it gluts the market with weak writing that pushes readers away shrinking the literary market exponentially.

One last thing…write what you know. If you don’t know it and want to write it, then learn it.

Now, hop on over to see what the other authors have to say about this topic. You’ll be thankful you did!