Reading is important but I don't agree it makes you a writer or that it is easy to copy the writing style of your favourite writer. If it only were that simple.
When it comes to your text, there is no need to say that it is random talking since that is what freewriting is all about. You let your hands type while you think about whatever pops up in your mind. That's all, and everyone can do that. There's even no need to edit if you don't like it.
We (who is we?) do not always go back to writing. Most Steemians never read not even what they wrote themselves and the same counts for everyone on social media. Careful readers are rare and here isn't the place where you find those who love to read.
I wish you wouldn't write the disclaimer underneath it isn't very pleasant and not inviting to comment.
Well, it doesn't make you a writer and I agree with that. But, there is a difference between a writer who reads and who doesn't.. You can see that in writing. Some people would repeat themselves over time. I don't mean repeating themselves in the sense of saying the same thing over and over again only. They repeat using the same style in writing over the years. If you see those people who read, their style of writing becomes more engaging and it is an enjoyable experience to read.
I think you know more than I do. But, if we include social media users. I can say the same thing about the people that I follow. Most of them barely read.
I believe, it's easier for someone to change their views or ideas over time when they read and that is a sign of growth. Their ideas become more solid. Still no one is perfect.
About the disclaimer..
I had no idea that it wasn't pleasant and I don't feel that way when I see them. But, thanks for letting me know that some people might find that unwelcoming.
Thanks for passing by...
There are storytellers people who don't read but are very entertaining like in the old days. There's no need to reed piles of books with the result you start copying the words or sentences of someone else. Next to that I agree with @grebmot that writers have their own style and why should that change? If they or the readers are satisfied there's no reason to.
Once a week there's a free "news paper" - village edition - where a guy in dialect writes a column. It might not be perfect but I like to read him once in a while (though I don't speak that dialect). He has his own style, and choice of words and is liked for that. Why should he change his style, write Dutch change his anecdotes into medical articles or write like Rowling (not a great example)?
At times a bit of variety of words make a story more catchy but it depends on what you write. I feel more annoyed about repeating the same sentence 15 times in a different way.
Views can change but a good writer is a good writer and why should that change? Plenty of writers are forced by editors to change their writing style or niche which is not what an author should do. Writing is art, a part of yourself and the artist should not represent an editor. Besides if reading does the trick how come editors and teachers are not among the top 3 of writers?
thanks for the talk.
Well said!
To an extent, I agree to what you have said that writing is an art. If someone's writing is good, then why does he need to change that. Plus, some people might be talented storytellers without being an active readers.
However, let's hypothetically take a random group of people and ask them to write a story.
Now, if we ask this group to read everything they could from poem writers over a year and then ask them to write a story again. Do you think that some of them may have a more poetic touch to the story?
In addition, there is no reason to read for someone who is trying to copy someone else (e.g. Shakespeare). You'd just read Shakespeare's books instead.
tagging @hefestus @grebmot
There's a writing guide I once read. Something 'On Style'. Either way, there's definitely somewhat universally truths regarding composition. Principles of efficiency, basic grammar, show don't tell and being evocative, or just not using too many ingly words. He wasn't runningly speedingly, he just ran. He wasn't running fast either, because the act of running already implies speed. That's redundant.
If you insist on attributing extraordinary speed, why not say: He ran like hell. Or, he was running like a dog trying to catch a car. Actually he was running so fast his already torn shoes started to disintergrate leaving a trail of burning bits and pieces. Or, if you're into ancient movie references: He ran like Harrison Ford on that poster of 'The Fugitive' he used to own as a kid. Or, like the T-1000 in Terminator 2. And so on.
My examples aren't perfect either, I barely speak english, but I think that's the type of stuff that's generally no bueno. But there's exceptions to every rule and someone like H.P. Lovecraft might fire a constant barrage of ten dollar words and every ingly under the sun, but it just works. It might even make the atmosphere. So who knows. I assume a good editor just helps you realize your potential, rather than molding you into something which you're not.
I think there's a lot to talk about here, and I can agree with most of what either of you three said (@wakeupkitty , @ronnie10 and @grebmot). I think reading helps in many different ways, especially, it helps you to think and to consider different manners of exposing an issue. It's unthinkable and unreasonable to expect that someone that reads Shakespeare or Hemingway will end up writing as any of them, still, one can learn a lot from any read. As a friend of mine who is a really admirable teacher of my native language keeps telling me, the important thing is to find your own voice. Once you reach your literary maturity, your writing, no matter the language, subject, length or form, will carry a distinct personality that represents yourself and is often inimitable. That's what we should strive for as we practice our writing, and, for the lucky ones, it will come.
It's weird. That whole idea of developing your own voice and reaching some sort of literary maturity seems great, yet something about it doesn't sit right. Not because I was disagreeing in principle, I've been saying some of that stuff myself, but... How should I describe this? I feel like the detective from 'The Usual Suspects' during that infamous coffee mug scene. The mug doesn't drop though. Instead I keep staring at a bunch of pinned warrants and newspaper articles - edging on a realization that never comes.
I'm not trying to be cryptic either. It's just strange. I'm squirming around in my seat making a lemon face and sucking in air through my teeth. Again, logically speaking it should make perfect sense, but then I feel like not seeing the forest for the trees. Whatever the magic sauce might be, the bulk of aspiring writers seems to be missing the point. Me included. Maybe it's infinitely more complicated, maybe it's hidden in plain sight. Something so obvious acknowledging it makes you feel dumb.
Best example I can give is someone travelling the world looking for glasses that were on top of his head all along. Just that, but in terms of your own voice and the things you want to say. Eric Clapton for that matter, one of the greatest guitarists of all time, supposedly doesn't even know how to read musical notes. I figure that's an indicator of something going on beyond common notions of formalism. Maybe it's the exact opposite of being mature, but doing it with confidence.
Yeah! It confuses me too and I'm not a sucker for educational formalism, nor do I confuse a commercial work with art. Most of what you aim to has not even to do with yourself but with the other's perception of what you do... And that, I feel is valid for most human efforts. Some times you just rry too hard and fail while the guy next to you steps on a piece of dog poo and gets noticed...
Maybe that's just life!
Definitely!
I don't like the idea of just being lucky, but as with everything luck seems to be a factor. Despite of that I guess you could argue luck is when preparation meets opportunity. Don't know if it's learning how to play by ear, knowing the right power chords, or whatever it might be in context of that musical anology. Either or, seems to be more than just mere talent.
Half related. I like playing scrabble with a buddy of mine who keeps crushing me. Here and there I catch myself thinking about luck, but he seems far too consistent for that. He just knows how to use the multipliers effectively, has a decent vocabulary and keeps cock blocking me from using my own words. Which double fucks me because I can't let go of whatever I'm trying to lay down.
Guess writing, or any art in that sense, isn't just having a perfect set of stones but leveraging them effectively. A good vocabulary probably helps though. Eric Clapton isn't a great guitarist because he doesn't know notes, but despite of that. But then that "despite" more than makes up for not knowing notes.
I like the scrabble analogy, and, as you can see, it probably works for life, too, as most of the time you'll have some dumbshit that knows how to play the system blocking your way or getting himself riding on your horse.
I have the feeling that there needs to be the grouping of a critical mass of like-minded people with enough selflessness to support eachother, instead of beating the others down for you to surpass the barrier of average assholes that stand in your way.
And I guess you can find those groups of people in most artforms that saw the rise of their members to eventual stardom. You can see the example in the group of musicians that mingled with Clapton during his ascension, but you can also see it in Hemingway, Picasso or Albert Einstein. In the end, it all goes around who you join forces with to beat the system of mediocrity.
Aren't those repetitions what makes you identifiable? Take someone like Christopher Walken and those millions of impressions reducing him to a recognizable type of commonly accepted shorthand. Everybody instantly knows who's being impersonated, no matter how varied and nuanced the man might be.
I agree with what you are saying. But, I was saying repetitions in the sense of repeating the same information.
🍀♥️
Yes, Kitty,
but he is right in the sense that having read a lot of books does make it easier to get yourself going. In the least you are more knowleageable about what you need to do. Of course, a number of books written with the speeches of illiterate popular authors do prove that you don't have to read anyhing to contain a book within yourself, but those, are more the exception that the rule.
Trying to emulate your favourite authors is, of course, dumb. You really need to find your own voice. There can only be one Hemingway.
I always wrote and had over 50 penfriends (different languages/cultures) since I was 6 or 7 years old. I wrote on average 14 pages already at that age but was never able to write an essay. I did read, was fond of books and still have a few from my childhood but never learned writing because of what I read. If it comes to it I'm not even able to remember certain words or sentences. What I liked most was history class (and books) and the teacher telling about that time (and showing items, no idea where he got them). The teacher religion always uses one lesson to read out of a book. That was the best lesson ever. Everyone sat still and listened.
The penfriends program was great. I was actually part of a group called The International Friendship League that managed one of those and spent hours and hours every week reading and writing letters... That was the day. It brings back some very good memories.
BTW, what country are you from?
It were good times indeed. Kind of pity this no longer exist. All the penfriend programs disappeared only writing with prisoners is left. I am from the Netherlands.
Wow! The first time I went to Holland was for a Congress of the International Friendship League, in Driebergen, some thirty years back. The exact same association that did the penfriendship stuff. It's kind of a synchronicity, this theme. What a coincidence, the theme, and all... Still, I remember your country was one of the two or three with more penfriendship activity at the time, yes. :)
The activity still got an impulse with the first days of email, as people had still to be put in contact, but it totally died off with the appearance of social networking. I fear epistolary art, in what envolves the touch and smell of paper is on it's way out, unfortunately. No one can really spare the time anymore.
:))
We have some old never read newspapers. I use them fir the cat to check the urine. I said to my son this might be the last newspapers printed. Soon there are no newspapers, no books and what is left will be forbidden or burned.
It's a nice area Driebergen. My uncle lived there for longer till he emigrated to Lapland. There are still Dutch people writing but email killed a lot. By niw it is 1 topic per email otherwise people or AI cannot answer the question.
It seems as if the difficults if it comes to reading x understanding increase. It makes me sad. We face a nation not able to read, spell and write. Many do not even know how to use a pen.
Yeah! I loved Direbergen. Amsterdam is beautiful, but, somehow, I was attracted by the old part of Rotterdam. There was this cafe there that I still remember. All very pleasant people.
After thta, I've been to the Netherlands more times than I could count, as it was a usual stopover on my way to Lisbon while I worked in the UK.
About people not reading and appearing to be dumber than they used to be, It's worrying but not a Netherlands Exclusive. It seems to be happening everywhere. I can guarantee that, here in the South, we have the same phenomena and I could witness it everywhere on my travels. The most extraordinary example happened to me in Malta, in a supermarket, where the till had to consult the screen to check exactly how many coins make €0,45 for my change. It's got to a point where the situation is becoming absolutely ridiculous.
Enjoy you day. :)))
Cashiers not able to count or even recognize coins is one of the first things I noticed. If computers calculate everything why use the brain?
I had deep respect fir the cashiers of the first Aldi shops. They new barcodes and prices by head and were quick, they could calculate and if you saw them at first sight one would think they are low educated. They were trained to use their brain in different ways which is impirtant since using your brain actively is also a way to fight Alzheimer's Disease or at least try to slow down the progress.
.btw, there's no need to say sirry if you like to discuss further on certain topics.
A great Sunday
P. S if it comes to offereing your help it doesn't matter if you are new.
If it comes to ᔕᑕᗷ ᗰOᑎKEY ᗷᑌᔕIᑎEᔕᔕ it was a place meant to chat and an info bank. Here only topics are posted (no need they are all related to Steemit).
Next to that I like to add links to the topics discussed which are links of those who write about a certsin topic. This can be a post or comment.
The comment contest Monkey Business has a weekly topic. The outcome of this topic could make a post and the link to the contest can be added.
Not all tooics needs to be long. It is info about what is said, sharing some thoughts + link.
The first picture is always one word (the topic) and the coloured background usually stands for the type of topic. You can have a look.
It's not hours per day work and links can also be saved if you read and post and think this can be interesting to someone.
There is a noteboard where some info and a link could be left.
If time the community could welcome newcomers again.