Category: Writers on Writing

Writers on Writing: Yiyun Li

Happy Manic Monday, everyone! I think the best way to start this crazy week is with some words of writing wisdom from another well-praised author. Today, I want to switch gears to Chinese American writer Yiyun Li.

Yiyun Li is a novelist and short story writer, winner of such awards as the Frank O’Connor International Short Story Award, the PEN/Hemingway Award, and the California Book Award. In 2010, she was named one of The New Yorker‘s 20 under 40 and a MacArthur Foundation fellow. Her best-known works include her short story collections Gold Boy, Emerald Girl and A Thousand Years of Good Prayers and her novel The Vagrants. For more information, be sure to check out Li’s Wikipedia page.


Image retrieved from Writers Write

The reason I’ve chosen to focus on some insight from Li is twofold:

  1. My Master’s program just read and discussed The Vagrants.
  2. I had Li as a professor for a short story literature class when I was getting my Bachelor’s degree at UC Davis.

One of the most striking elements in Li’s writing is her characters. They’re raw, real, and all a little bit ugly yet, somehow, relatable. That’s why I think it would be a good idea to focus on how she views the development of good characters:

Writing fiction is this kind of staring, too. You have to stare at your characters, like you would a stranger on the train, but for much longer than is comfortable for both of you. This way, you get to know characters layer by layer, until any dishonesty is stripped away.

–Yiyun Li

This quote, part of a longer article comprised of several writers’ advice, presents an interesting perspective on character development. It suggests that characters are not just constructs of our minds. Rather, they have a sort of life and consciousness of their own. They can lie to us, hide their pasts from us, and mislead us about their stories; it’s only by watching them and spending an inordinate amount of time with them that we can find the truth and write the real story.

Admittedly, as I type this, it sounds a little crazy. After all, characters are fictional. They shouldn’t have lives of their own because they aren’t real. Of course, there’s a reason that a lot of writers joke about being bombarded by the voices inside their heads. (Or, during writer’s block, the voices in their heads not speaking to them.) But is there any validity to this approach to character development?


Image retrieved from Writers Write

Many people would argue that the characters they create are composites of many different people they know, that they are based on historical figures, or, in some cases, that the writers are the characters. These claims might be right. All writers, I think, slip some traits of friends, family, bosses, etc. into characters, even if it’s subconsciously. However, does that mean that we don’t “stare” at our characters to get to know them better? Do we just passively put together some traits in the hopes that a realistic character will come out on the page?

I cannot vouch for every writer, but I lean towards Li’s way of thinking. Our characters may be an extension of ourselves, historical figures, or people we know. Still, that does not mean we don’t have to get to know them. Personally, my stories evolve the more time I spend “observing” my characters. My current fantasy WIP has been in the tube for years, and it’s only thanks to the time I’ve spent with the main character that I finally know in which direction the story needs to go.

My only problem with Li’s assertion is that it implies the characters begin as strangers. While logically that should be the case, I never feel that way with my characters. Even new characters feel very familiar to me. It’s a bit like when you make friends as a child; you have a lot to learn about them, but from the first moment you play together, it’s as though you’ve known each other your whole lives.

Either way, I doubt that most characters pop up fully-developed in the writer’s mind. It takes time and patience to get to know them. Often, it takes multiple drafts of one story to figure out who they really are. Even then, even after publication, you might find yourself returning to that story in future years and realize that you had a character entirely wrong. If they do appear to you fully-developed, you’re either very lucky or have the brain of a super computer with Artificial Intelligence. In the latter scenario, you might have something bigger to worry about than character development. (World domination, anyone?)

What do you think about Li’s insight? Do you have to “stare” at a character in order to get to know them better? Or should you be able to understand them rather quickly? Are they strangers when you first think of them? Or do you have the nagging feeling that you’ve met them before? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

Update 11/25/2022: This article and other pieces of my writing, from The Writer’s Scrap Bin articles to original stories and poetry, can be found on Vocal.


Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Neil Gaiman

For today’s “Writers on Writing”, I’m turning to another contemporary genre writer, Neil Gaiman. Gaiman is a popular English author, best known for his novels Stardust, Coraline, The Graveyard Book, and American Gods, as well as his comic book series The Sandman. He has won the Bram Stoker, Hugo, and Nebula awards and the Carnegie and Newbery medals. His novel, The Ocean at the End of the Lane, was even voted Best Book of the Year in the 2013 British National Book Awards. His book Stardust was adapted into a film in 2007, and American Gods has been adapted into a television series by Starz with Gaiman himself as an executive producer.

For more information on this well-received author, be sure to visit his Wikipedia page.


Image retrieved from Buzzfeed

Unfortunately, I haven’t read much of Gaiman’s works. In fact, I’ve only read Stardust. I haven’t even watched any of the movies based on his work or the American Gods TV series. Even so, I admire the man and I wouldn’t be doing the fantasy, science fiction, or horror genres justice if I didn’t talk about him.

Gaiman, like most writers, has commented on the art of writing. In this post, I want to focus on a remark he made about handling feedback/criticism.

Remember: when people tell you something’s wrong or doesn’t work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.

–Neil Gaiman

I find this quote very interesting as I believe it can be interpreted in two slightly different ways:

  1. Writers should be open to criticism because they very likely see something that you don’t. However, if they try and direct how you fix the problem too forcefully, their interference won’t really help because it will get in the way of your creativity and art.
  2. When critics say something is wrong or doesn’t work for them, they’re right because it’s their own opinion. You have to choose whether to act on it or not. However, if they try and force their revisions onto you, they’ll be wrong because it’s not your vision if you just follow their suggestions blindly.

No matter which of these interpretations you agree with, the second half of the statement remains the same: do not take critics too seriously if they insist on pushing their specific revisions on you.

Writers can be horrible about receiving feedback. Even if we don’t show it, we take it all pretty personally. I know I do. Feedback, even that with the best intentions, can discourage writers from that work or the craft altogether. Or worse, we ignore good feedback because we’re too attached to what we wrote originally.

Still, we need to know how readers receive our writing. After all, once it’s written and published, it no longer matters what you meant to say; all that matters is what readers think you said. It’s better to know ahead of time and adjust accordingly if we don’t like how our beta readers interpret it. More importantly, they can let us know where we make mental leaps that do not seem like leaps to us. Often we just don’t know when something isn’t as obvious as we see it.

Unfortunately, following feedback too closely could lead to a big mess of writing that even we can’t stand to read anymore. In particular, if we blindly believe when someone says that this is wrong with the draft and that we should do exactly this in order to fix it, we could be making a huge mistake and not realize it. Specific advice for how to fix a specific problem is too rigid for writing. Your writing is a growing piece of art, almost alive, in a way. If you let someone else to tamper so closely without any boundaries, they might coerce you into snipping off a life-sustaining root that only you knew about.

Of course, I don’t think Gaiman means to ignore them entirely. After all, he said that they are almost always wrong when they tell you exactly what is wrong in your writing and how to fix it. You should always keep your mind open to feedback. Regardless, take the second kind of feedback with a grain of salt. The critics cannot know your whole vision for your work; only you do. You know what it should grow into, and so you should follow your instincts about the work and use feedback more as…guidelines.

What is your interpretation of Gaiman’s advice? How should we handle feedback that points out specific problems and gives specific solutions? And where exactly is the line between being open to feedback and being pliable? Leave your thoughts in the comments below!

 


Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Ursula K. Le Guin

Happy Monday! It’s been far too long since I last published a “Writers on Writing” post. Who better to revive it than the late, great Ursula K. Le Guin? As a prolific writer in many forms, she was also prolific in her writing advice and observations.

I don’t think I need to introduce Ursula or explain her work any further. I’ve probably done that enough lately. In case you don’t know who she was, you can check out this post in her memory and her Wikipedia page.

Her quote which I want to focus on today is about a much-debated topic in writing, show vs. tell:

Thanks to “show, don’t tell,” I find writers in my workshop who think exposition is wicked. They’re afraid to describe the world they’ve invented.

–Ursula K. Le Guin

I’ve discussed this issue before, particularly the necessity of personalizing the well-worn advice to your writing. With Ursula’s words in mind, I want to discuss it in the context of popular genre fiction such as fantasy, science fiction, and historical fiction.

Wanting to show readers your world through vivid descriptions is fine and dandy; in fact, it will enhance the reading experience. But what about those fictionalized details which are harder to describe? Names, dates, histories, laws, languages? How do you convey those when you’re “afraid to describe the world [you’ve] invented”?

World-building is the source of all life for science fiction and fantasy. Even historical fiction requires tremendous amounts of world-building; you’re working with real historical documents, but you still have to bring the past to the present for your readers. Yes, this means vivid sensory descriptions–showing–but it also requires exposition–telling.


Image retrieved from Now Novel

In world-building, you cannot rely on show or tell on its own. If you show the prince’s contempt for his younger brother through scowls and body language, you best back it up by telling your readers how the royal hierarchy works. If you tell them that an alien race was chased underground thousands of years ago, you should follow that up by showing their reactions to seeing the sun for the first time. By excluding tell or show out-of-hand, you’re only giving your readers half of the world you’ve created.

Do I agree with Ursula that “show, don’t tell” has turned writers against exposition? Yes, to a degree. Some writers show too much, some writers tell too much. Some, however, have reached the point where they know their own voice, their own rhythm enough to be able to adjust the advice based on what they are writing. I’d like to think that I have reached that point as a fantasy writer, but there’s always room for improvement.

Genre writers, how do you handle “show, don’t tell?” Have you reached the point where you can adjust your strategy based on your work? Or do you still struggle with this balance? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

 


Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Toni Morrison

It’s been quite a while since I last wrote a “Writers on Writing” post, so I’ve decided to revive the series with a special double-quote post on Toni Morrison. Morrison is a celebrated American writer who has won the Pulitzer Prize, the American Book Award, the Nobel Prize in Literature, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and many, many more accolades. She penned such classics as The Bluest Eye, Song of Solomon, and Beloved, the last of which was made into a movie starring Oprah Winfrey and Danny Glover. For more information as this influential writer and activist, be sure to check out her Wikipedia entry.

I’m more than a little ashamed to admit that I’ve never read any of Morrison’s work. I haven’t even seen the Oprah Winfrey movie. I plan to remedy that sooner rather than later. Still, I do know Morrison as a black feminist activist, someone who has worked hard for equality for African Americans and women alike. While I would love to discuss her contributions in those regards, I don’t feel like I’m the right person for that. Instead, I will be focusing on two of her quotes on writing.

Here’s the first:

If there’s a book you really want to read, but it hasn’t been written yet, then you must write it.

~Toni Morrison, retrieved from BrainyQuotes

 

This quote is so well-loved and well-shared by writers that you’ve probably seen it floating around Twitter and Facebook in meme form. Why not? It’s very true and, after reading it, seems a bit obvious. If the book you want to read hasn’t been written yet, why don’t you write it? Odds are if you want to read it, other people will want to read it, too.

 

There’s a catch to that. Once you’ve written it, others can judge it. Heck, while you’re writing it, others can judge it and try to influence its final form. If you’re not careful and don’t filter which readers you listen to, you may find that the book you write is not at all the book you originally wanted to read or even the one you want to read now.

 

That’s where the second Morrison quote comes in:

 

I’m not entangled in shaping my work according to other people’s views of how I should have done it.

~Toni Morrison, retrieved from BrainyQuotes

 

Morrison is essentially saying that she doesn’t let other people’s opinions what she “should” write hold too much sway over what she actually writes. If she had listened to what other people thought when she first started writing, she wouldn’t be the prolific writer we praise today. If she listens to what people tell her now, she might as well stop writing because her voice will be drowned out.

 

The world wants to hear your voice in your writing, not the same old voices it’s heard a million times before. What would be the point in writing the book you want to read if you don’t write it the way you think it should be written?

 

Many books we deem “classics” today were heavily-criticized, if not flat-out failures, during their first rounds of publication. Moby-Dick certainly wasn’t well-loved, nor was The Catcher in the Rye or The Lord of the Rings trilogy. J.K. Rowling’s agent even told her not to quit her day job. That’s not counting all of the works by minority writers trying to give a voice to non-Caucasian, heterosexual, cisgender, Christian males. We still have a problem with these works being criticized just because they don’t fall under the norm.

 

Morrison could not have hit the nail on the head with any better precision. Writers shouldn’t only write the books they want to read; they should write them in their voices with their visions. Yes, it’s important to listen to constructive feedback. After all, that’s how we learn as writers. Nevertheless, if advice feels so against the grain of our vision and our voice, how much credence should we give it? If we let others have too much say over how and what we write, it won’t be our writing anymore.

 

What do you think? Should we write the books we want to read or only the books that we “know” will sell? How much influence should other readers have on how we write? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

 

Know of any writers or quotes I should feature in a future “Writers on Writing”? Drop a line here or e-mail me with your suggestions at thewritersscrapbin@gmail.com.

 


Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Anne Rice

Well readers, it’s almost Thursday. Two days stand between us and the weekend. To help you pull through it, I’ve decided to discuss a rather encouraging quote on writing by beloved Gothic and supernatural.paranormal writer Anne Rice.

Image retrieved from Anne Rice’s Facebook page

For those who don’t know, Anne Rice is a popular author best known for The Vampire Chronicles and the iconic Lestat, known lovingly by fans as the “Brat Prince.” She also wrote The Witching Hour and other books about the Mayfair Witches, The Wolf Gift Chronicles, the Sleeping Beauty erotica series, and Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt, on which the 2016 film The Young Messiah is based.

I hate to admit this but I have yet to read any of Rice’s books. I know, I know, how can I be a fan of the supernatural/paranormal and Gothic genres in this day and age if I haven’t read The Vampire Chronicles? I could defend myself by saying that I’ve seen both Interview with a Vampire and The Queen of the Damned but I know as well as every other reader or writer that the movies can never hold a candle to the books. I plan to read and review Memnoch the Devil before the summer is over, and my mother is a huge Anne Rice fan.

I do, however, follow Rice on social media for the interesting news articles she posts and her invaluable advice on writing and succeeding in the publishing industry.

I decided to focus on the following quote, advice which she has posted many times and re-posted on her Facebook page the other day:

In your writing, go where the pain is; go where the excitement is. Believe in your own original approach, voice, characters, story. Ignore the critics. Have nerve. Be stubborn.

–Anne Rice

We all know that, at its core, writing is an act of courage. Writers dig deep into their psyche, their emotions, and harness that raw power to create something that, hopefully, someone will want to read. All writers put a chunk of their souls into their work, no matter the subject matter or genre. That’s how all creative types do, whether they’re writers, painters, architects, or even scientists. That’s why we take negative feedback so personally.

It takes courage to experiment in writing and to continue writing what you love. Step too far outside the box and the work will be pushed aside, sometimes ridiculed. Stay too far inside the box and the work will be ignored and labelled “cliché.” If readers have become accustomed to you writing in one genre, stepping outside of it may alienate them (which is why some writers opt to use pen names). If you stick with your preferred genre too long, you’ll be called a one-trick pony and forever associated with that genre, for better or for worse.

People will judge you so long as you’re brave enough to put your work out there.

That’s why Rice’s words are so potent. Writers must dig deep and go where they have the most passion, whether that passion be pain or pleasure. I know from personal experience that it’s hard–I often freeze up at the thought of going into the more…passionate areas of my psyche–but the effort pays off.

This Vampire Queen knows very well how to go where the pain is and come back out alive and healing.
Image retrieved from Anne Rice’s Wikipedia entry

More importantly, writers have to let themselves use that passion without worrying what others will think. That first draft is for you alone. Tap into the pain, pleasure, depression, anger, and excitement and let it lead you where it may. After that, rewrite it into something you would want to read. You will want to keep an audience in mind but don’t censor yourself because you’re worried that some critics will throw their two cents in. Remember, some of the biggest literary classics started as failures during their first run.

With that thought in mind, I release you to your writing endeavors. Just remember the key theme of this blog as you move forward: write for yourself first.

Thoughts? Questions? Suggestions for future “Writers on Writing”? Drop a line in the comments, and don’t forget to follow our new Facebook page.

Update 11/25/2022: This article and other pieces of my writing, from The Writer’s Scrap Bin articles to original stories and poetry, can be found on Vocal.

Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Ray Bradbury

Quote retrieved from BrainyQuote

In the spirit of the “All Summer in a Day” writing prompt, today’s “Writers on Writing” will focus on prolific science fiction writer Ray Bradbury. An American author and screenwriter known best for Fahrenheit 451 and The Martian Chronicles, Ray Bradbury worked in science fiction, fantasy, horror, mystery fiction, dystopian fiction, and many other genres. He received the Prometheus Award for Fahrenheit 451 in 1984, was given the National Medal of Arts by President George W. Bush in 2004, and the Ray Bradbury Award from the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America organization was named in his honor. Needless to say, he’s a fantasy/science fiction icon.

I’ve honestly only read two short stories by Bradbury (at least which I know were written by him), “All Summer in a Day” and “Mars is Heaven!” I’m also fascinated and amused beyond all belief by the fact that Fahrenheit 451 is among the most challenged books of recent decades. He also gave writers–and human beings overall–many gems of wisdom, including the one I am discussing today:

Don’t think. Thinking is the enemy of creativity. It’s self-conscious, and anything self-conscious is lousy. You can’t try to do things. You simply must do things.

–Ray Bradbury

The last two lines of that advice immediately put Yoda in my head. “Do or do not, there is not try.”

You could argue that Bradbury’s remarks expand on Yoda’s advice. Bradbury explicitly explains that which Yoda alludes to: overthinking something like a creative act disrupts the flow, which brings the entire act to a screeching halt. You cannot think too much on what you’re doing because you’ll start to imagine all that could go wrong and doubt yourself; when you doubt yourself, you almost certainly fail.

While I am horrible at following this advice, I know from personal experience that Bradbury and Yoda are right.

Most of my writer’s blocks come from thinking too much. I’ll start wondering, “Does this dialogue mesh with the character? If I do [blank] to [blank] character, will the readers hate me? Will anyone even read this? Why should I bother?”

You can see how that sort of train of thought can kill the creativity. If we think too much, we become too self-conscious. When we grow too self-conscious, we doubt everything we do and then nothing gets done.

In addition to the self-conscious inhibitions discussed by Bradbury, thinking can get us side-tracked. If you’ve ever watched The Big Bang Theory, you’ll remember this scenario from the episode “The Focus Attenuation”. Leonard, Sheldon, Howard, and Raj take a weekend away from the girls–and, theoretically, all other distractions–to try and focus on their work to make a breakthrough. They get to work but, unfortunately, thinking as they worked led to many tangents, including watching pigeons play ping-pong and determining if Bill Murray misuses “negative reinforcement” in Ghostbusters. Needless to say, the characters didn’t get any work done.

Image retrieved from Ray Bradbury’s Wikipedia page

Thought seems important for creative acts. After all, where do these ideas come from but our thoughts? Still, we have to be careful to not think too much. Figuring out the logistics of a fight scene or deciding if dialogue is working or not is best left for the editing/rewriting stages. Before all else you need to just get the ideas out and then you can make sense of the babble later.

Writing doesn’t work this way for all writers. Anne Rice is pretty open about how, in her process, she won’t move on to the next page in a book until she’s perfected the one she’s on. Perhaps you, as a writer, need to think enough to work out how exactly your character gets from scene A to scene B before you can continue to write.

For many writers, like me, Bradbury’s words ring true; once pen touches paper or fingers touch keyboard (after the initial outline/notes stage), the conscious mind needs to shut off and let the words flow. Otherwise we become self-conscious, doubt ourselves, and/or go entirely off-track. There’s a time and place for everything, and often the time for thinking is not when you’re writing.

Do you have any additional insights? Comments on Ray Bradbury’s advice or the writer overall? Start a discussion in the comments section below. And if you want to stay informed on the posts of The Writer’s Scrap Bin, sign up for email notifications in the menu to the left.

As always, feel free to contact me with any ideas for or questions about this blog at thewritersscrapbin@gmail.com.

Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Junot Diaz

I keep this image in the rotation for my laptop background to remind me that I just have to keep writing.

Image retrieved from Pinterest

For this “Writers on Writing”, I want to discuss Dominican American writer and MacArthur Fellow Junot Diaz. Diaz is best known for The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, the novel for which he won the 2008 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. I know him for his humorous story “How to Date a Brown Girl (Black Girl, White Girl, or Halfie)” and his strong political voice on Facebook. Based on what I’ve read, I think he’s a talented, hilarious, and very opinionated man. I’ve also found his writing advice and discussions on his writing, editing, and teaching experiences to be incredibly valuable, especially for struggling writers.

The advice I’m going to focus on is more about uplifting fellow writers than approaches to writing and its difficulties:

You see, in my view a writer is a writer not because she writes well and easily, because she has amazing talent, because everything she does is golden. In my view a writer is a writer because even when there is no hope, even when nothing you do shows any sign of promise, you keep writing anyway.

–Junot Diaz, Becoming a Writer/ The List, O Magazine, November 2009, retrieved from Goodreads

This quote, as an image I found somewhere on Google, serves as part of the rotating background on my laptop. I keep it to remind myself that it’s OK that not everything I do is perfect. I’ve especially needed these words recently. It may sound obvious–no one’s perfect, after all–but artists overall don’t typically remember that the world won’t end if they make a mistake. Writers are no exception.

It’s no secret that writers are perfectionists. One of the most common reasons for writer’s block is a paralyzing fear of not creating anything worthwhile. I know that my writer’s block, no matter what the superficial reasons seem to be, always boils down to being afraid that my work is going to be utter crud. It’s the barrier that separates aspiring writers from actual writers.

It doesn’t matter a lick that you’re the most talented writer in the world if you don’t let yourself write something horrible. Conversely, you could think that that 90% of your work is the worst thing ever produced. However, if you keep writing through this 90%, you will reach the 10% that’s gold. You will hit roadblocks, you will feel discouraged, but you will find your masterpiece because you don’t stop. That’s when you stop aspiring to be a writer and start being one.

Junot Diaz, image retrieved from his Wikipedia entry

In addition to sifting through the muck, we have to keep writing when we have no hope because we’re the worst judges of our own work. We may think something is horrific but our readers eat it up, or we think something is genius but it falls flat once it’s out of our hands. There are plenty of examples from famous writers, including Edgar Allen Poe and Herman Melville. Our views are biased either for or against our work, so we’ll never know what’s actually worth the effort until after the effort has been made.

Yes, it can do you and your work a load of good to step away for a while. Sometimes our batteries need to recharge. Nevertheless, that doesn’t mean that we should give up entirely when things get tough. In my opinion, writing is about 10% talent, 10% luck, and 80% effort. The more we create, the more likely we are to succeed. That’s why, even when nothing we do shows any promise, we can’t give up. All we can do is continue to write. Remember, this career–this lifestyle–isn’t about publication and success; it’s about doing what we all love, writing.

Any thoughts on Diaz’s words? Have quotes and/or writing advice from famous writers that you think I should discuss? Leave your thoughts in the comments below or contact me at thewritersscrapbin@gmail.com.

Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Sandra Cisneros

Quote retrieved from BrainyQuote

I’ve been spending a lot of time with Sandra Cisneros’s work lately. Last week my Master’s program discussed her short story collection, Woman Hollering Creek and Other Stories. Overall the stories are captivating, unique, and spiced with Latinx–particularly Chicana–charm and passion. “Woman Hollering Creek” and “Never Marry a Mexican” depict striking moments of female empowerment, but “Remember the Alamo” has stuck in my mind. Given the timing, I think it’s fitting that I write about Cisneros for this “Writers on Writing”.

I’ve chosen a quote by Cisneros which hearkens back to Virginia Woolf:

For a writer, for the solitude to write, you don’t need a room of your own, you need a house.

Sandra Cisneros

She has many quotes on writing, her early life, culture, etc., that are worth reading. You can find several on BrainyQuote. I picked this quote because I find her expansion on Woolf’s original comment to be thought-provoking.

As I discussed in a previous “Writers on Writing”, Woolf’s comment originally applied to effects that women’s duties and financial/legal dependence on their husbands have on their writing. Cisneros may also be referring to female writers, particularly those from cultures similar to hers, given the subjects of several of her stories.

Honestly, I don’t think there’s much “may” about it. Many of her works highlight the oppression and discouragement of speech towards women in Mexican cultures. It’s been the subject of several academic essays, including Jacqueline Doyle’s “Haunting the Borderlands: La Llorana in Sandra Cisneros’s ‘Woman Hollering Creek'” (which is available to read on JSTOR).

Cisneros’s suggestion about needing a house of one’s own to right is not too different from Woolf’s original comment. Rather, it’s an extension. Cisneros is implying that it’s not enough for female writers to just have a room of their own. Instead, they must have their own entire house, they must be in charge of their entire households.

I can’t disagree with this extension, especially after reading Cisneros’s stories. A woman can have a room that appears to be her own in the house but, in reality, it’s a ruse. If she does not have a house of her own, one which she can at least claim as much rule over as her partner (particularly a husband), even “her” room is not truly her own. Therefore, to have only a room of her own is not enough freedom and independence–spatially, financially, emotionally–for a female writer to reach her potential.

I also explained that while Woolf’s initial intent still rings true today, the sentiment can be expanded to include all writers. With this interpretation in mind, Cisneros’s words suggest that all writers need an incredible amount of space, seclusion, and independence.

This idea is one with which writers have wrestled for a long time. How much space is enough space? How much independence do we need to write?

All writers need a space where they can retreat and write without interruption. It can be a room, an office, a rented house. We’re all different and so we all need different zones of personal space to get work done. In regards to space, then, Cisneros’s words could be true or false depending on the individual writer.

The financial aspect, however, is not such an easy or pleasant answer.

Unfortunately, society’s views on writers and their financial independence can vary based on many things, including age, race, and, yes, gender. My post on #ThingsWomenWritersHear revealed that female writers still hear such comments as “oh, aren’t you lucky that your husband supports you so you can write” (even if they don’t have husbands). It’s assumed that female writers have to–or just do–rely on their husbands for money while they write. However, they need financial independence so that they avoid being scrutiny for being a “bad” wife and/or mother for focusing on their writing. That’s without mentioning that many, many female writers just don’t have husbands and support themselves anyway. A dependence on a husband, partner, parents, or even a day job financially can detract from writing time, and so tremendous financial independence is necessary for a female writer to succeed in actuality and under societal criticism.

There’s another side to this coin for male writers. Men are still seen as the breadwinners, no matter what their situation actually is. If anyone finds out that they don’t make much money or contribute the most financially to their families, the men are ridiculed. Writing, quite truthfully, is not seen as a high-earning job. The resulting income is unreliable at best. If a male writer with a family focuses on his writing, he will be considered selfish for not bringing home more for his family or weak because his wife or partner provides the primary income. They’re considered failures. Financial independence–i.e. a bachelor life in which no one depends on them and they don’t depend on anyone–appears to be the only solution.

Image retrieved from Pinterest

I realize that this post has presented society as horrible and writing as a lonely career path. The sad thing is that such scenarios cannot only happen but are common. Complete financial independence seems to be the only way for anyone to write without distraction, judgment, or societal restraints. (That last way probably still isn’t true as negative stereotypes and expectations follow us so long as we are who we are and society remains the way that it is.) However, I don’t think that you should walk away from this post in total despair.

A “house of one’s own” is not necessarily a physical house that you control, alone space, or even complete financial independence. Instead, it is a state of life in which you feel free, confident, independent, and supported. It can be a house out in the suburbs with a white fence and a nuclear family, only the husband and wife run the household and their lives together and support each other’s ventures. It can be an apartment in the middle of an overpopulated city where a single woman writers with student loans still looming over her but a secure job with flexible hours and parents who live nearby and will always support her and help her no matter what. It can even be a mobile tiny house parked in a field, the owner a writer who writes all day, is debt-free, and whose only family are pets and friends. A “house of one’s own” is the perfect set of circumstances, whatever those may be for you. It is wherever and whenever you can write without life, burdens, and societal expectations weighing you down.

I doubt that Cisneros and Woolf intended anyone to have this interpretation. But hey, so long as it gets us writing, does it really matter?

Did you like this post? Be sure to leave your thoughts in the comments and sign up for email alerts. Also be on the look-out for my post on the tangled web that is writing and politics.

Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Mark Twain

Quote retrieved from Twain Quotes.

I adore Mark Twain. Everyone needs humor in their lives and I find his writing refreshing. I’ve never read The Adventures of Tom Sawyer or The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. I have, however, read several of his other works: “Advice to Little Girls”, “The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County”, The Prince and the Pauper, Pudd’nhead Wilson, and more. My favorite is A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court. Time travel, the Knights of the Round Table, and satire that pokes at the romanticized image of the Middle Ages? What’s not to love?

Today I’m going to discuss one of Twain’s quotes on writing that has been very encouraging for me during the editing process:

The time to begin writing an article is when you have finished it to your satisfaction. By that time you begin to clearly and logically perceive what it is that you really want to say.

~Mark Twain, Mark Twain’s Notebook

It sounds paradoxical but also makes sense. The meatiest, most taxing part of writing is not the writing itself but the rewriting. We don’t know what we’re trying to say until after that first draft.

I know what a lot of you might say: I meticulously plan my (novel, short story, poem, whatever) before I pick up the pen; I know exactly what I want to say before the first draft.

Let me ask you this: how often is the first draft also your final draft? How many revisions do you go through before you and your beta readers decide that the work is finished (well, publishable)? How drastically does the piece change before you’re done?

We know generally what we want to say in the first draft but specifics are blurry. Sometimes even that “big picture” takes a turn in later drafts. It’s the nature of writing. We spew everything in our heads onto the page during the first draft and then we figure out the direction in which we really want to go.

The good news? This process means that it doesn’t matter if the first draft is crud. It’s supposed to be. All that matters is that you revise the work until you realize what you want to say and accomplish that message, even if you have to write it all over again. I’m learning this lesson slowly but surely as I edit stories for my end-of-year portfolio.

This photograph of an older Mark Twain was taken by A.F. Bradley for the purpose of helping poet laureate Ina Coolbrith, who lost her home in the San Francisco Earthquake.

Picture retrieved from the Mark Twain Wikipedia Entry.

The other good news? Mark Twain, the writer of the “Great American Novel”, didn’t always know what he wanted to write until after he started writing. He knew not to stop if the first batch was rotten. And you shouldn’t give up during or after finishing your first draft. You’re just getting started.

Do you have any thoughts on Twain’s advice? Do you have a writer whom you want me to write about in a future “Writers on Writing”? Drop a line in the comments or contact me at thewritersscrapbin@gmail.com.

And watch for the next “Writers on Writing” in which I’ll turn to Latin American writer Sandra Cisneros.

 

Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011

Writers on Writing: Virginia Woolf

Quote retrieved from Bloomsbury Literary Studies
In this post I’m going to switch gears from Ernest Hemingway, the “man’s man,” to renowned author and feminist Virginia Woolf. Admittedly I’ve only read one of Woolf’s works, To the Lighthouse. I believe I’ve read “The Evening Party” as well but it was in a collection with several other writers that I read for an undergraduate short story class, so I’m not certain that’s the right story. Nevertheless, I find her very intriguing, both as a writer and as a human being. (We don’t always treat the former as the latter, so I feel it’s necessary to make that clarification.)

The quote I want to focus on is the title quote from her book-length essay A Room of One’s Own:

A woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction.

Things have changed since Woolf’s time, in the writing world and society overall. We allow women more independence and more financial success in their own right. Does that make Woolf’s words any less true? Not necessarily.

Society still pressures women to be “good” wives and mothers. To add to the stress, everyone’s definition of a “good” wife and mother differs and some include the need to earn money. Kids, a significant other, a job–it’s no wonder many female writers have to put off writing until the kids have gone to bed. More women have their own money, but a “room of [their] own” can still be hard to come by.

What if you’re a single woman? A childless female writer? A male writer? Do Woolf’s words still apply? I would argue yes.

Whether we’re in a relationship or single, a parent or childless, man or woman or gender-less, we all have responsibilities bearing down on us. Household chores, self-care, paying jobs–writers have to eat, too–and much more can slow our writing progress. That’s before we add in our social lives (those of us who still have one), our immediate family outside of children and significant others, and our pets.

The best solutions to these obstacles? Money and a room of our own.

We may not be dependent on someone else’s money but we still need more money in order to free up time for writing. More money means fewer work hours needed, and fewer work hours are more hours for writing.

But do we really need a room of our own? It can mean seclusion and privacy, which begot focus and freedom. No distractions, no judgment. Just us, our ideas, and our writing. It’s why many writers withdraw into bedrooms or home offices, especially when their household is buzzing. Some even go to the extreme of renting offices outside of the home. Now that is the epitome of needing money and a room of one’s own to write fiction.

Portrait of Virginia Woolf

Photograph by George Charles Beresford, retrieved from the
Virginia Woolf Wikipedia entry

I know Virginia Woolf’s original statement wasn’t supposed to have this exact meaning. From my brief stint into her essay–please forgive me for using SparkNotes to research this post, I was pressed for time–I have come to understand that Woolf was trying to explain that women’s heralding duties and financial/legal ties to their husbands can affect their writing. As I said before, this interpretation of the quote maintains resonance to this day. Women may be more independent but society still pressures them in ways that men don’t always realize. However, the broader interpretation can aid all writers, no matter their gender.

You may not be able to resolve the money aspect of this issue, at least not for some time. It happens and we all have to face it at one point or another. You can only trudge through the daily work muck and hope for the best.

If you find yourself distracted by duties and losing time, you may be able to do something about it. Find a time and a place where you can set everything else aside and write. Set it in stone. Tell everyone–friends, family, your significant other–that that time and place are for writing and only writing. Some people may be mad but really, you have to write. A writer who doesn’t write is just a dreamer. Also, they can’t pester you about when your next story or poem will be published if they won’t let you write.

I digress. By carving out the time and place for writing, you are giving yourself a private writing nook that no one can take from you. You are creating a “room of [your] own”.

That’s it for this “Writers on Writing”. Keep an eye out for the next installation. I’ll be covering a personal favorite, satirist Mark Twain.

Until then, do you have anything to add to this post, either about the quote or Virginia Woolf? Do you have any writers/quotes on writing that you think I should discuss? Leave your suggestions in the comments or email me at thewritersscrapbin@gmail.com.

 

Designed by Stephanie Hoogstad circa 2011