I don't know if its this way with all writers, artists or aspiring ones but why are many so obsessed. The idea came to me because I am currently working on this piece right now and I find that no matter how much revision I do, no matter how much additions in any form I am not ever satisfied with the outcome. It weighs down upon me like the sins of the entire world and I think "I hate my writing and am a failure".

I'm related to a famous Botonist painter "Dr. Robert Thornton"; whose paintings can be found on ebay for a few thousand dollers. He was OCD and had to have each work perfect; complete nut job for detail. Of course he reached that venture but lost everything (finances, family, etc.; couldn't even afford a proper funeral). Many artists and writers are that way and I don't want to get caught in that same trap.

I am becoming more well read and with each artist I read (Bierce, Wilde, C.M. Eddy JR. Arthur Machen, Mary Shelly, Poe, CAS and even amatatuers such as myself). I find every work better than mine. No matter what I write it just fails to achieve the true "Effect" (buried in my heart) that I meant for it to have. I don't know if this is normal, probably not, but what should I do. Don't want to turn into Virginia Woolfe saying, "I can't write" and stick the old head in the oven. Poe, Vangough, Woolfe, not good role models. lol.

Dear OConner, CD:

Don't stop writing. Ever. I'm not a great writer, so take the advice that follows with a grain of salt.

If everything you read seems better than what you can write, you haven't been reading enough crap. That's commendable, but let me assure you, you are not the worst writer in the world. How can I be so certain of this, when I haven't read any samples of your work? Easy. A really bad writer would not be critical of his work at all--he would think it was pretty damn fine, even in first draft.

If no amount of revision seems to improve your work, perhaps you need to let more time elapse between revisions--weeks, months, or even longer. This may also help your objectivity, to come back to your story after working (and thinking) about something else for a while.

Try not to obsess over your immortal forebears. Their work may have stood the test of time, but they all wrote their fair share of clunkers as well. Ray Bradbury wrote (and burned) a million words of bad fiction before he found his own voice.

Has this ever happened to you? You read an author's self-chosen "favorite" story and find that you prefer another of his. Or the author disparages a story that you've always loved. Who's right? Well, both of you, of course, or perhaps neither of you. It's all a matter of taste. The point I'm trying to make here is that a writer is not necessarily the most objective judge of his own work. Other readers may find more of value in it than you do.

But you must keep writing, and finishing your pieces. Finish them even if you aren't satisfied with them, because if you don't write them, no one else will. Remember, perfection does not exist.

Ken,

Thank you very much for your inspiring words. Good to know that I am not the only writer in the world who feels this way. I guess it is all part of the territory. Some days better than others type deal. I am currently revising something and am in a calmer mood and it just now seems to flow. Yea, perfection is always an ideal or goal humanity wants to reach in general. Either way, hard or easy, the outcome is worth it.

Thank you very much for your kind and reassuring comments.

Ken's reply was on the money. I tend to be pretty critical of my own work, but now and again I'll pick up something I wrote some time ago and it will strike me as much better than I remembered it.

I've found I have better success if I just write all the way through and then go back and edit later, rather than giving in to the critical urge too soon. I've cut out too much from the beginning and mucked up a good story that way.

We're generally always hardest on ourselves. Give it time to breathe, then approach it like a reader picking it up for the first time. Most of what needs to be done comes to me with that approach.

I'm new to this forum, by the way. I'm looking forward to reading through the threads this weekend. Clark Ashton and Ray Bradbury were huge favorites of mine back in the day, and I remember searching through shadowy used bookstores as if on a treasure hunt seeking Smith and Lovecraft tomes. An old poem of mine dedicated to CAS was recently added to the tribute page here. I wrote under the pen name Morgan Griffith back in the '80's.....

Time flies.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11 Feb 09 | 07:25PM by Arkanthis.

The advice about letting the grass grow under your feet after putting something aside is quite sound. Meantime, I suggest you read something outside the genre - way outside - I recommend works in translation by Nikos Kazantzakis - Of course, Zorba the Greek, then see the movie - again if you've already seen it - Anthony Quinn took it on stage for years after it's release as an adapted screen-play.
After that taste and far more important for your purposes, read The Fratricides, and The Greek Passion. In translation, Kazantzakis is better than most writers in English, but what I want you to see is the manner in which a writer steeped in the Greek Epic tradition, is able to build on that in a modern tale, set in the Turkish occupation of Crete, and write a sweeping epic in a style that is moving, gripping, and sometimes overwhelming in its power - yet captures humanity most intimately.
I want you to see a sustained narrative in a style probably foreign to you -
You will return from such a sojourn with your head seething with ideas that people will move aside on the street thinking Elijah has returned fresh from slaughtering the prophets of Baal, and outrunning the king's chariot. I am not suggesting that you attempt his style, rather, that an infusion of inspiration from an outside source may plunge you back into your own work at a new angle - in my own experience, this has often resulted in a near total rewrite - and that is of
academic works exploring new ground - generally boring stuff, but still desperately needing to be alive enough to hold the reader. On that side, I must say that Prof. Tolkien gave similar advice in the master class I had with him in the spring of 1963.

> On that side, I must say that Prof. Tolkien gave similar advice in the master class I had with him in the spring of 1963.

Tolkien retired in 1959, but was lured back to teaching in C. L. Wrenn's place when Wrenn went on a sabbatical. Tolkien lectured on Beowulf in the Michaelmas term in 1962, and on the Freswael in the Hilary term of 1963. Wrenn was back in April for the Trinity term. I believe that was the last stint of teaching that Tolkien did, so you may count yourself as one of his last students. Please reminisce some more about this, for a Tolkienist like myself (ed. of The Annotated Hobbit; co-editor of the academic journal Tolkien Studies....) and anyone else who might be listening.

Thanks,

Doug

I must say thank you to each and everyone who answered my post with such kind, instead of judgmental, advice. I guess a writer is always the most critical of all beings (or is that supermodel's?) In my case I want my words to be a knife where I can cut the emotion from out of my gut and splatter it on the paper so that the reader can really feel what I feel in all its intensity. I know that is impossible, unless it it the book of Yib or Necronomican. Words to me cannot convey what I am trying to say on some occasions. Is there any mental thoughts a writer with my intensity can do- besides drinking. lol.

And thank you Dr. Farmer, I certainly will read extensively the titles you mentioned.

CD.

The opportunity to take the class with JRR was a complete surprise as he was sort of passing through as I understand it, and wanted to meet with a few of the "top" grad students - I got a phone call from my "professor/mentor" Dr. William Park Hotchkiss (his grandfather invented the "Hotchkiss" machine gun, so prominent in Lawrence' "Seven Pillars" -- dr. hotchkiss was a grad of Univ. of Chicago, and had studied with Albright et al, founders of the Oriental Institute) - so that's how it came about. At the time I was not as well versed in Elvish lore as now, but fell in love with the pipe - a custom I continue to this day. Side bar -- at a night out in '06 (I think) - we were in Washington for the dedication of the WWII memorial and had dinner at one of those fabulous "Medieval Times" restaurants between Baltimore and Wash, and their gift shop had a large "LOTR" section. I found, bought and wear (since we had a single-ring wedding - "a man's wedding ring should only go in his nose")in lieu of a wedding band, a pure silver ring inscribed in Elvish - it reads:
"One ring to bind them, one ring in love to entwine them" -- In a little town on the coast of Oregon, there used to be (may still be there) a woodcarver's shop (indeed that was its name), and he had a marvelous Chess set - Gandalf as King, Hobbits as Pawns etc, and the other side of course was Sauron, Goblins, Orcs, et al. -- I coveted it for years and always stopped when cruising the coast to see it. However, in those days I did not have the $ to acquire it - came with exquisite inlaid board and lucite cover - alas.
Re the class with JRR -- we didn't interact with questions too much because it was so amazing to just listen to him expound on whatever tweaked his interest. I remember certain rare gems as, what I guess I would call, a "consensus of wisdom" rather than direct quotable dicta. He was himself I think a mating of Hobbit and Elf-Lord, with a wizard grandfather - and, as I recall, very clear about his larger intentions in the writing of the Series - which may be why I, as a typical
sophomoric Humanist grad student, neglected him until years and their accompanying scars (as Zorba says, "all in the front,none in the back") made me much wiser - Or when I took Clark's advice: Let us deal gently with our illusions, in the hope that one day, they will deal gently with us. I was supposed to have had a chance to meet with Lewis also, but he died that year, I think in October if memory serves (which it does with less and less accuracy these days) - just had my 40th heart biopsy tuesday, apparantly the heart is good for another 100,000 -
I am very thrilled you wrote, and I shall see if I can find a copy of your Hobbit study.

Small correction and addition to last post -- It was me that was passing through, not JRR, and the event was maybe some sort of "open forum" in an evening for visiting grad students and others - I don't remember getting to know any one else who was there, aside from the usual idle banter - we were all pretty much young self-proclaimed intellectuals who considered it only our right that the famous should take notice of us - Tolkien (as indeed almost all the well-known folk I have met in my life) was a man of considerable grace and humility as I recall from the short 2 hours I was in his presence. It is probable (I would like to think) that he went off to a pub afterwards, but if so, I wasn't invited - that would have been the place to really get to know him. I think I learned more around Dr. Hotchkiss' kitchen table than in any classroom (usually with beer in hand)

I don't think this is an uncommon feeling among writers. It might be odd if they didn't feel that way on some level.

I corresponded for a while with the novelist and short story writer James Purdy, who made a splash in the 1950s through the '80s with controversial books like 63: Dream Palace, Malcolm, and Eustace Chisholm and the Works. I was totally smitted by his dazzling use of language and sheer narrative power, and I was in good company too, as he was wildly praised by Dorothy Parker, Edith Sitwell, Edward Albee, and other literary lights of the day.

But I remember in one of his letters he expressed almost crushing doubt about his abilities. He said, "Each book is a command to be written" but the writing process inevitably brought him to despair that he would never be able to translate what was in his head to the printed page: "I think everything I write is shit."

Scott, maybe striving for the true "Effect" you mention is the important thing, and all we can do. The world needs all its writers -- as many as possible to maintain a civilized society, regardless of whether they're "brilliant" or "good" or whatever.

garymorris Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think this is an uncommon feeling among
> writers. It might be odd if they didn't feel that
> way on some level.
>
> I corresponded for a while with the novelist and
> short story writer James Purdy, who made a splash
> in the 1950s through the '80s with controversial
> books like 63: Dream Palace, Malcolm, and Eustace
> Chisholm and the Works. I was totally smitted by
> his dazzling use of language and sheer narrative
> power, and I was in good company too, as he was
> wildly praised by Dorothy Parker, Edith Sitwell,
> Edward Albee, and other literary lights of the
> day.
>
> But I remember in one of his letters he expressed
> almost crushing doubt about his abilities. He
> said, "Each book is a command to be written" but
> the writing process inevitably brought him to
> despair that he would never be able to translate
> what was in his head to the printed page: "I think
> everything I write is shit."
>
> Scott, maybe striving for the true "Effect" you
> mention is the important thing, and all we can do.
> The world needs all its writers -- as many as
> possible to maintain a civilized society,
> regardless of whether they're "brilliant" or
> "good" or whatever.

Thank you Garry. I think my problem is I wish to literally use the written word as a knife to tear out my feelings and put them down on paper for the reader. Perfection I guess would probably be the word. Guess as the years pass and I age, write stories and publish them, the whims of youth will be silenced.

Thanks to all for being such a great help, again.

CD

OConnor,CD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wish to
> literally use the written word as a knife to tear
> out my feelings and put them down on paper for the
> reader.

I do not think art is about expressing feelings. Expressing feelings is what you are doing in your posts here, and what people do in their private diaries, but art is something different. Generally, people who do not know you well are not interested in your feelings. If art was about the artist communicating information about his personal emotional states, few people would be interested in art. Many of the greatest works of literature---THE ILIAD, THE ODYSSEY, and THE ARABIAN NIGHTS are just a few examples---do not even have any specific authors, as such, and hence could not possibly be expressions of anyone's feelings.

I agree with Jojo LapinX, here. Merely expressing your emotions in art will not necessarily evoke the emotions of others (except perhaps in a negative way). Feelings should be a part of art, of course, but only a part; otherwise, the whole business starts to seem narcissistic--which, by the way, most modern "confessional" so-called "poetry" is, in my opinion. Wordsworth defined the source of poetry as "emotions recollected in tranquillity", but I think that the principle applies to any sort of writing.

Anyway, that's just food for thought. Fay ce que voudras.

To the last two posts may I add a brief "Amen". It is one's own emotions that may provide the passageway to the great themes - the larger world wherein (as in the examples given before) readers may catch a part of the vision that illumines their world - the modern penchant of the last 50 years to "navel gaze" and imagine as some have said: "It's art because I say it's art!, is puerile nonsense. Your task is to write, and pour all that you are into it, but the results are not yours to judge - at least in the long term - If you study the bios of most writers there are none of whom I am aware who did not wish to change something, and there was never a moment when there was full satisfaction with the product -- more commonly,resignation. If there were no pugblishing deadlines, nothing would get into print, good or bad.

calonlan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To the last two posts may I add a brief "Amen".
> It is one's own emotions that may provide the
> passageway to the great themes - the larger world
> wherein (as in the examples given before) readers
> may catch a part of the vision that illumines
> their world - the modern penchant of the last 50
> years to "navel gaze" and imagine as some have
> said: "It's art because I say it's art!, is
> puerile nonsense. Your task is to write, and pour
> all that you are into it, but the results are not
> yours to judge - at least in the long term - If
> you study the bios of most writers there are none
> of whom I am aware who did not wish to change
> something, and there was never a moment when there
> was full satisfaction with the product -- more
> commonly,resignation. If there were no
> pugblishing deadlines, nothing would get into
> print, good or bad.


I have to agree with this. But Dr. Farmer wouldn't you agree to that one illness of an artist, poet, or writer is trying to get every nook and cranny of his or her visions down on paper exist? I mean to such an extent that it overcomes the artist or gobbles him up. (Not artisticly but literally as in real life). How does the artist or writer calm his or her self and learn to channel their visions in a healthy way onto the paper.

Everyone is effected by a mere word and this I tend to forget. No reason to go all purple prose on the reader. If I was to write "Joanna was drowning in the black seas of past memories, both good and bad, as she walked the winding dirt road leading to her fathers grave".

To some or many that (which only took me a few seconds to a minute to produce) statement alone can mildly or majorly effect the reader that, "Hey she is sad or seems like the atmosphere at this moment is dreary".

But to the writer with an illness of being so obsessed with his idea and vision for a specific piece that he literally wants to pull this scene out of his mind so that the reader can actually touch it and see it".

I know, and to the many who read this, might think its crazy. Right now its effecting me, this perfection. How does one overcome all of this? At moments when I am calm and just write, nice and easy- not going all purple prose, I see it comes easier. A day ago I redid a piece using simple description and tone appropriate for the scene and the one I showed it to loved it, said I am improving and that he looks forward to reading the whole thing. And this guy is not afraid to tell the truth, lol.

Is what I am experiencing normal for some artists or writers. What is it anyway? I know Van gogh had it and H.P.L felt it on occasions. Wonder if Clark Ashton Smith had it or if he even knew what it was for he writes beautifully as I'm delving more and more into his work.

Yet again, thank you to everyone who has responded with such respect and care. I'm not usually good or feel right about ever expressing emotion. I come from that sort of family.

Happy Valentines Day everybody!!