Бесплатный фрагмент - Be a writer

Writer and Motivation

A writer can do just fine without external motivation, because he always has an inner motivation, he is born with it. Therefore, it is not necessary to motivate the writer specifically, he will write anyway. We don’t get paid — we write, we don’t win contests — we write anyway. We write even when it’s at a loss to us (expenses for proofreaders, editors, high-quality covers and art).

A writer feels that when he writes, he feels better. A writer feels that when he writes, he is involved in something important. Because «living and writing is easier than living and not writing.» These are the words of a participant in the literary contest «Debut», which took place many years ago, but I still remember these words, because you can’t be more precise.

Let’s add here that unrealized talent turns into a disease. Therefore, writing is often a vital necessity for a writer. In an interview, D. Dontsova said that either her grandfather or someone else just wrote everything by hand in a notebook. When asked, «Why are you doing this?» he replied, «Otherwise I’ll get sick.»

Of course, a writer has stops and breaks, and they should be, but anyway, all writers write because they want to write. It’s not for the sake of becoming famous or making money, we just want to live. To live is in such a full sense, which is understood as happiness (and happiness can also be a test).

But whether you need to expose yourself to external motivation is a big question. Let’s remember our Lev Nikolaevich with his «if you can’t write, don’t write.» That’s what it’s about here. The true meaning of this statement by Leo Tolstoy may escape the reader (read the writer), because this is an abbreviated version of his expression. Entry in Count Leo Tolstoy’s diary dated October 19, 1909: «If you really want to write, then only when you can’t help but write.» Let me decipher it again: you don’t need to additionally stimulate yourself with the buns of external motivation, because the future work that the author has inside must undergo several degrees of purification before it finds a way out to the reader.

External motivation often harms a writer because his inner intention does not have time to mature, and if the energy of the idea has already bubbled and is on the rise, then it does not have time to settle down. In one case, we get raw material, in the other — literature on neurosis. The writer does not need either option, because it is a lost work or a work of poor quality. So it’s better to do without external incentives. Let the writer write only when he is ready for it. He will understand it without prompting, he will feel it, and immediately there will be time for writing, and a place, and everything else. You’ll see.

Copying in writing

If a writer copies another writer, then it’s not a big deal for the other writer (as long as it’s not plagiarism, but an attempt to be similar). It’s not terrible for the writer who copies someone, if it’s a moment of apprenticeship. At the initial stage, the writer often copies someone, and then comes to himself. We can call this copying imitation, he’s just learning. If a writer is constantly copying someone, then this is a problem, but we’ll talk about this later.

A much more interesting and difficult case is when the author begins to copy himself, copy his past works. In most cases, this happens in the twilight of the author’s ignorance, but only for the reason that the author does not want to realize it.

Why it’s bad.

This is bad because the author, by copying himself, his past works, deprives himself of the chance to update, which should happen periodically.

The author’s works are based, among other things, on the energy of discovery, the author is always discovering something. Everyone discovers their own, it depends on the vector of internal development (we are all different).

The problem with copying oneself is that the author does not see this problem. How can the author understand that he has begun to copy himself?

The first thing that should alert the author is the agony of the process, the torture. Writing is hard. The work seems to be quite good, but for some reason it doesn’t work, it’s stalling, it doesn’t seem to want to be written. You have to face the truth and ask yourself questions: «Maybe this has already happened? Am I repeating myself?»

Vulnerability of the text

Any artistic text is vulnerable when it is not closed. How can you make the text less vulnerable? I think it’s air tightness. The tightness of a text is when it is self–contained, that is, it has a certain integrity that accommodates the whole world. And the worlds can be different: both more complicated and simpler.

The more the text seems to be on its own, in other words, it will be itself, the better. The originality and autonomy of the text governs. Well, you know, as psychologists usually tell their clients now, be yourself, that’s what we’ll apply to the text. Let him be himself, and this will protect him from destruction, both external and internal. The text may look light, clumsy, «stingy» on the outside, but if it is closed, if there is a feeling that it is «in the house», then you will not break into it. You may like him or dislike him, but he is, he exists, and that’s how he is.

Another word that can be the key to wholeness is harmonious. And what is harmonious? This is consistent, this is when each part of the test is negotiated with the next one in order to then obey the general idea (form). Yes, an idea is a formative factor.

So, the tightness of the text gives integrity. Even a lightweight text with integrity is practically not vulnerable.

Expiration date of the book

Not only does food have an expiration date, but books also have one. For example, we buy cottage cheese in a store, and the expiration date is written on the package in small print (sometimes very small). The books we buy don’t have an expiration date written on them, but it’s there too, and sometimes I think it should be written. It would be fun, at least, and, at most, would save many readers from disappointment. It’s easy to get poisoned by a book, so don’t read something that doesn’t suit you. Have you ever noticed that what you read sometimes makes you feel sick? This happens not only because of the indigestible content. It often happens that the book is not bad, but the expiration date is out. Some works will last more than a hundred years (or even two hundred), and some will not last even two years, will deteriorate, and will become irrelevant. But it’s not bad, it’s the way it is, all kinds of works are needed.

I recently found my old USB flash drive and decided to see what was in there. My early works were there. I was most interested in the book of fairy tales, with a volume of almost 12 author’s sheets (this is a lot for fairy tales, the writers will understand).

The fairy tales were divided into blocks, they had a table of contents with page numbers, and the most amazing thing was that they were proofread in such a way that even when reading slowly, I found almost no errors (!). It’s not typical for me, but then I tried very hard. Ten years ago, I sent them to publishers, but, of course, there was no result.

So I started thinking about what to do with them now. To publish as one book or to publish individually only those that I like the most. Anyway, I walked around them in circles for about a week, and then I made a verdict: they are morally outdated. Yes, my fairy tales couldn’t stand ten years of storage. This does not negate their value for me as an author, but I no longer want to publish them.

How do you feel about your early works? Can you specify their expiration date? And is there an eternal literature at all, for all time?

A question about time

«How long have you been writing this book (work)?» — this question is capable of baffling any writer, because it is not clear how to count. If we count the purely technical part, then we get one figure, and if we add to this the time for «thinking» that was before, then this figure is completely different. And if you understand that the work begins long before the author begins to think specifically about it, then you can completely lose the answer.

In addition, the authors of large works also like to start with short works, outline something in one story, then in another, and then write a full-fledged novel where all these ideas will be developed. Are we going to take into account these stories that were before the novel or not?

Or, let’s say the author wrote a novel, but was not ready to show it to the world, he had this novel on his shelf for five years, then the author matured to expand it to a new level. Are we going to include these five years of downtime in the time frame of writing a novel? For example, everything counts with me. Even if the author did not deal with this novel specifically, the work was going on anyway, he was secretly thinking about it, and at some point the energy accumulated, the author matured.

In general, it is very difficult to count the time spent working on a work, because the work of a writer is not limited to a purely technical part. What is the technical part? It’s just a whoosh, and that’s it, I wrote it. If there is something to write, it will be easy to write. The main work does not take place on paper, but in the writer’s soul, and only then is it fixed by consciousness and transferred to paper.

Many authors gracefully evade the issue of time and are doing the right thing. I’ve often heard writers respond like this: «You could say I’ve been writing this book all my life.»

What do you think, dear writers?

The key to the work

Entry into the work is carried out through the author’s strong side. If the entry into the work does not occur, then the author slides along the top edge, but does not sink inside.

This problem has become very relevant due to technological progress: artists with ready-made covers have entered the market. Previously, this problem was not so relevant, because most authors first came up with a story, then the story unfolded, and only then the cover was applied to this story. That is, the cover went to the finished text.

There are a lot of ready–made covers now, so more and more writers will follow the path of not «text — cover», but «cover — text». And let’s see what happens: the author sees the cover, he likes it, he begins to fantasize (or puts it on his spontaneously conceived idea), gives a name, the artist writes the name on the cover in a beautiful font, the work is paid for. That’s it, the author is happy. And then the author tries to tell this story, which until recently shone so brightly in his brain, but somehow it’s not the same, it comes out dimly. This is all because the author is sliding on the edge, well, like on an eggshell, but you need to get inside in order to live this story from the inside. I called the article «The Key to the Work,» although it would be more accurate to say «The Door to the Work.»

Entry into the work is carried out through the author’s strong side. The author’s strong side forms the door through which one can enter the work, like a house.

The author’s strong point can be anything. I believe that it is not necessary now to write platitudes and give examples of the strengths of the authors, so that the authors do not get caught up in this. After all, sometimes the author’s strong point turns out to be in the most unexpected things. The only problem is to figure it out, because the authors prefer not to notice their strengths. Usually the authors notice that? What they do the worst is because there are problems and stops associated with it. And the strengths escape the author’s attention, because everything turns out easily and naturally.

And yet: the author must have a strong side.

Obstacles that the author creates for himself

In the creative process of a writer, especially a beginner, there is a stage that can be described as «but we suffer anyway.» The essence of this stage is that the author chooses the most inconvenient and unprofitable way of writing a work.

For example, the author of the psychotype is a «lark», and writing at night is extremely inconvenient for him. Nevertheless, at this moment he puts a glass of weak tea on the table, turns on a dim lamp and, overcoming fatigue and pain, begins to create.

It’s hard for him, his eyes are closing, his thoughts are confused from fatigue, but he strives to walk this path.

Why is this happening?

Because writing is closely linked to asceticism and a special mission, these are the features of our mentality and Russian character. But for some reason, the author associates this asceticism with choosing the most inconvenient way for him. You know, it’s like a situation where the desire to accomplish a feat has been lifted, but the space for the feat has not been opened. So the author is trying to commit it in the wrong place. He has not yet accumulated material that is worth such an effort, but the author still makes these gigantic efforts through obstacles erected by himself. Maybe the author trains in this way? Maybe.

In any case, the author often creates obstacles for himself that he wants to overcome. And only after he pushes himself to the limit will he calm down. And only after passing this test will he allow himself to create according to a convenient individual schedule and in a way convenient for himself.

How to save creative energy

A creative resource, like any other resource, is limited, that is, it has its limits. I would roughly divide the authors into two groups: those who have a lot of creative energy, and those who have a little of it. This is a given that is determined by nature: someone has more, someone has less, and nothing can be done about it. You just have to take it for granted. I belong to the second group, and I don’t have much energy.

Those who do not have as much energy as they would like should take more care of their resources, otherwise they may encounter problems. Everyone has the right to make mistakes, but we, who don’t have that much, have less of that right.

How can we minimize the number of mistakes and save creative energy?

Rules developed based on your own experience will help you reduce the likelihood of mistakes and use the resource efficiently.

Authors with a lot of energy can afford to create without regard for the rules. But we, the representatives of the second group, simply need them.

What needs to be done to make these rules appear?

First, you should observe yourself and identify patterns that will help you avoid wasting energy. You don’t need to create a lot of rules — just one or two are enough to avoid becoming a hostage to them. A maximum of three.

I have only one rule, which I have already mentioned. Watching myself, I noticed that overloads negatively affect my work. Therefore, if I write, my daily allowance is no more than an hour. Even if I want to write more.

The individual characteristics of each author form the rules of his writing activity.

Tell me your secret name, the author

Of course, there is an ironic connotation in the title of this article, but in general the topic is quite serious and deep. I’ve been thinking about this for a long time.

The fact is that each of us has our own style, our own methods of working on a literary work, our own way of presenting material, and these individual characteristics characterize us.

I recently looked into a group of stand-up comedians, and I liked how they called themselves by the way they presented their material. There were, attention: a hidden cobra, a striking panda, a flowing mantis and others. Which name do you think I liked the most? Of course, a smooth praying mantis. I am not familiar with the author’s work, I liked only the image created by these two words.

However, humor prevails in all this, but why not take this topic seriously and really reveal your secret name? It is secret, in general, only because it does not lie on the surface, and the author himself does not recognize it until he thinks about it.

What would you call yourself, dear authors? What individual characteristics would be fixed in your name?

At different points in my life, if we consider it in relation to creativity, I would characterize myself in different ways. But now I’m giving myself a rather modest description — a catcher of intonation. This is my secret name, which reflects very well the specifics of my working methods.

I will be glad if you tell me your name in the comments. Shall we get acquainted?:)

Major work: crisis points

Let’s talk about a major work, or rather, about its crisis points.

First, let’s define what we will consider a major work. For me, this is a work equal to one author’s sheet or more. For LitErs, this is 5 liters or more.

However, everyone can determine the volume of a major work for themselves. As they say, everything is learned by comparison.

Why did I decide to talk about crisis points using the example of a major work?

The fact is that there are crisis points in any work, but in a major work they are felt much more strongly by the author. You can write a short work on a wave of inspiration and not notice these crisis points.

In a major work, I noticed two crisis points, like two stumbling blocks.

The first crisis point is when the work is written by about a third. There’s kind of a glitch going on here. I have felt this both in my own works and in the works of other authors. It looks like this:

A) like a sharp drop in energy, so everything went well, it was intriguing and interesting, and then there was a decline, it became boring.

B) or vice versa — a new turn opens, fresh breath, a new wave is coming.

This is easy to explain, because when an author begins to write a work, he is full of energy and enthusiasm, inspired by an idea, character or plot. He’s interested, he’s on the rise. But after writing one third of the work, this fuse disappears, and here you need to update the system, because the previous settings cease to work. This is the first crisis point, after which there is either a new turn if the author copes with an obstacle, or melancholy if the author begins to panic.

And the second crisis point is the middle of the work. It can even be compared to a midlife crisis in humans. I have often heard that writers have difficulties when a work is already half written. They usually say this: «And when the work was exactly half written…", usually something happens there and the work stops. This is the second stumbling block, the second point of crisis.

Dear authors, have you noticed something similar in your works? Can you tell me which section of the road you are experiencing special difficulties on?

The integrity of the work. How to achieve it

Recently, I remembered an interview with Alexandra Marinina, which she once gave to one of the journalists. The journalist, as a writer, asked her for advice on how to write a good work.

In this case, it doesn’t matter how you feel about Marinina’s work or whether you’ve read her books. The fact itself is important here: she can create works that are understandable to people.

We must pay tribute to Marinina, because she spoke very simply and very clearly. I like it when writers speak simply, because the creative process is complicated and multifaceted, and if you start to complicate it, you can confuse others even more and get confused yourself.

«We need everything in the work to work on the idea, every dialogue, every episode, every little thing. Then it works.» That’s about what the writer’s answer sounded like.

In general, she did not talk about the creative process anymore, but even from these words it can be understood that she puts the integrity of the work at the forefront. To put it another way: a work is created when the entire text acts as a single mechanism.

I don’t want to focus on the idea right now, because not all authors work with the idea. Many go through the plot, that is, it is primary for them, others go through the character, that is, he is the main pivotal moment for them, around which everything revolves.

Then how will the integrity of the work be achieved? What do you think?

I think it’s like this: if it’s through the plot, then in order to achieve integrity, any scene, dialogue should work for the plot. And if it’s through a character, then all the situations in the work, every minor character, dialogue, and every little thing should work to reveal his image and character, guiding him through all the stages of development and leading him to a life lesson.

Let’s recall Chekhov with his phrase: «If a gun is hanging on the wall, then it will definitely go off.» He also speaks about the integrity of the work, that there should be nothing accidental in the work.

And at the end of the article, it’s not a sin to recall other famous words that Jane Fonda once uttered: «We don’t have to be perfect. We have to be holistic.»

The same can be said about the work. The work doesn’t have to be perfect, it has to be holistic.

And how do you, dear authors, come to integrity in your works? What techniques do you use? How do you prevent the piece from falling apart? Share your experience.

How to learn to work with yourself as an author

Learning to work with oneself is the task of tasks for the author.

Indeed, we are all organized in different ways, so the keys to our productivity are completely concentrated in the hands of the author.

Only the author knows when and how it works best. At what hours does his productivity increase and inspiration opens up, and when is it better not to touch himself?

All knowledge about oneself is gained experimentally, and then it is learned. There is no general rule for everyone. For example, it is important for one author to know in advance how his work will end (for example, Colleen McCullough, the author of the novel «Singing in the Blackthorn», was such a writer). And another author does not need to know this, otherwise the excitement will disappear, it is not interesting to write further, the intrigue ends. And so it is in everything: what is good for one writer is unproductive for another.

Dear authors, do you know how to work with yourself as an author? Can you combine a supervisor and a performer at the same time?

And now, by what criterion can you determine that you have learned to work with yourself as an author? I won’t keep up the intrigue, as they say — all the cards are on the table.

There’s only one way to tell if you’ve learned to work with yourself or not: you’re not mad at yourself.

But if you’re angry with yourself, annoyed that you haven’t written another page of a novel, or the day has been wasted again, then you haven’t learned yet.

Note that you may not write anything in a day or even a year, but you shouldn’t be mad at yourself for that. If you are angry, then you have not yet found the key to yourself, to your inner needs, you have not accepted yourself (as our psychologists would say), you have not understood. So you need to be more attentive to yourself.

How to properly praise an author

Oh, it’s a subtle art to praise an author! Now I will tell you about the pitfalls of this praise.

The fact is that over time, as we age, we become more and more resistant to criticism. Here I use the word «criticism» in a negative sense, in the sense of criticizing, that is, to scold. But in general, criticism is just a matter of fact, that is, to objectively find the pros and cons of a work, to try to give it an objective assessment.

So, criticism stops hurting us over time, because we gain immunity. We rightly understand that, firstly, a person who criticizes our works may be mistaken, that is, we take into account the element of subjective assessment. Secondly, we just as rightly understand that a person has the right not to like our works. And finally, thirdly, there may be a rational grain in this criticism, so we can work even more on our writing skills.

But what about the praise? Can it unsettle the author and prevent him from developing further?

I think — yes, it can. Yes, it can. Because we are battle-hardened, we are ready for criticism, but we are often not ready for praise. We often get blown away by it, and after that it’s hard to move on.

Which of the philosophers, in my opinion, has Nietzsche (I may be mistaken) I’ve read that when a person praises us (incorrectly), it’s as if he’s observing us from a bird’s-eye view, looking at us from above, meaning we’re clearly visible to him. Well, who would like such praise?

Often, in order to please the author, it is necessary to misunderstand him a little bit, that’s it, dear writers. Because when we are understood and seen through, we lose the sense of our own mysterious personality.

In general, Nietzsche turned out to be right, because the most striking conflict at our seminar (the seminar of criticism at the Literary Institute) arose precisely because of the wrong praise. When they scolded, it didn’t matter, but when they praised them incorrectly, there were insults right up to leaving the seminar.

A writer is a subtle being with heightened sensitivity, so you also need to choose the right words so that praise does not touch the delicate strings of the soul. In addition, we are scolded much more often than we are praised — this is a fact, so we do not have time to figure out how to behave properly when praise falls on our heads.

«Well, that’s it,» the author thinks, «if they praise you so much, then you can finish, I won’t write anything better.» Of course, I’m exaggerating here, but that’s exactly the case. Therefore, the praise (excessive praise) of the author can be «strangled» even faster than the harshest criticism. Excessive praise is a dangerous thing, and it often hinders the author and puts additional obstacles in his way. If the author has not yet managed to form himself as a person, understand what he needs and what he does not need.

So what should I do? Not to praise at all?

It is possible, necessary, and obligatory to praise, and it is better to do it sincerely, but you should not overdo it in this matter. Sometimes I even have to restrain myself (because in my nature there is a desire to admire, to see the merits of the work), so as not to harm the author.

I recently read an article by Nikolai Tsiskaridze, in which he bluntly says that praises, awards and titles made it very difficult for him to go on stage. Because when they announce that a people’s artist is coming out, then they list all your regalia, then there is a fear of making a mistake, fear of not matching, of doing something wrong.

And what about you, dear authors? Have you often been unsettled by praise? Do you feel awkward or nervous after a laudatory review, does it feel like you need to match it now?

P.S. You can praise me in every way, I always accept praise with joy and gratitude. I’m seasoned;)

About writing through I don’t want

to «An artist is an artist

only at certain hours due to an effort of will…».

Edgar Degas.

This is an interesting statement, but is it true? What do you think, dear authors?

I don’t think so. Because artists (writers, musicians, etc.) are already born, and then they just go to themselves, to their beacon, invisible to others. Roughly speaking, they «take the right shape.» Here’s an analogy: «How do I become a writer? You need to be born him.»

So, here I come to the idea that this «effort of will» is not necessary, there is no need for violence against oneself. I’ll explain why now.

I recently read an interesting article about shame from Labkovsky. The point of this article is that it is not necessary to shame a person to be good. A person initially wants to be good (if mentally healthy) because he does not want to be left alone. It’s kind of written in the cortex of his brain.

So, here we have the same thing: the motivation for development is already inside us, the instinct of the writer is already in us. Therefore, whether we want it or not (and of course we do), we will still develop. The only thing you can do is not to bother yourself.

When the author writes through I don’t want to, he begins to shame himself for laziness, he knocks down his fine settings. After all, dear authors, if you constantly force yourself to write when you don’t want to, or write what you don’t want to, then you won’t be able to tell later whether you like your text or not. You just won’t understand it. And that’s the most important criterion, right? That is, if you constantly break yourself, then sooner or later you will break yourself.

Yes, there’s only one piece of advice: listen to yourself, to your inner writing needs. And if, for example, you don’t want to write some text, and you don’t even understand why you don’t want to, then don’t write. Then you’ll understand.

Although, perhaps, Degas was talking about the maximum degree of manifestation of the artist only at certain hours. Then I agree. But willpower has nothing to do with it, that is, the author does not have to strain to lead the text, on the contrary, the text will lead him when the energy accumulates in sufficient quantity.

What do you think about this?

Three waves of ideas

As a rule, a good idea does not go to the author in its entirety and immediately, it comes to him as if in parts, which then overlap, transform, transform. In this process, I counted three waves.

The first wave. This is when the author has an idea, at first it seems interesting and fresh to him, he looks at it closely, «tastes it.» But very soon, literally the next day, the author realizes that it is «not very», too short or something. He feels that this is not enough.

And then comes the second wave. The second wave is so big and exciting, the author keenly feels involved in this process, it captures him. He gets euphoric. «Of course, and why didn’t I think of that before!» the author thinks. Most likely, during the second wave, the author will call his idea brilliant.

But the second wave is too unrealistic, and you can’t get far on euphoria. Therefore, the second wave is followed by the third wave, and it has a balancing character for the first and second.

Here I would recall Hegel with his triad (I love it). The triad is: thesis-antithesis-synthesis. And now the third wave carries synthesis.

As soon as the three waves have passed, there is already an idea that works. A working idea, not one that you can only admire, but you can’t do anything about it.

Have you, dear authors, noticed anything like this in your work? How do you come up with ideas? Can you track the main points of this process? Tell us about it.

Well, for the sake of fairness, we note that not all authors generally work with the idea as such and do not really understand what it is in general. However, this does not prevent them from creating and creating good works.

Choosing your own path in literature

What the author should develop and what not to develop is up to him to decide, but often (take a closer look, dear authors) it happens as if apart from him.

The author, for example, thought that he would write one thing, but in the end he writes something completely different. Moreover, he does not feel joy from this. «Well,» the author thinks, «I can’t follow my plan again.» Is this a familiar situation?

By the way, such situations arise all the time and very many writers. Let’s add to this the fact that correcting once, that is, pointing the pen in the right direction, is not enough, because this situation repeats anyway. So the author decided firmly: I’m writing a novel, but I find myself thinking that every day all he does is write short posts on the web.

What should I do?

Let’s look into this issue.

The point here is that all of us humans are inharmonious (and this is the key to our development and moving forward). We are all full of internal contradictions: the soul wants one thing, but a sober mind pulls in a completely different direction. They literally tear the author to pieces.

And of course, there is only one way out — to look for compromises, or, as they say, to look for a middle ground.

In general, this search for the golden mean, this middle path that can be followed, is for many the choice of their path.

What do you think?

A big writer and a small

Writer «14 years before the disaster, in 1898, a certain Morgan Robertson wrote a bad, penny-pinching fantasy novel in which a ship called the Titan, leaving Southampton for New York with 2,000 people on board, sinks on an April night, colliding with an iceberg, and all the passengers they are dying because of the lack of seats in lifeboats.»

This is a quote from a collection of short stories by Tatiana Tolstoy, a collection called «Raisins», and the story, as you already understood, is named «Titanic».

I recently wrote an article about the element of prophecy in the writer’s work, so I couldn’t help but catch my eye on this fact, which Tolstoy cites. But now I would like to talk not about prophecies (I think we have already dealt with them), but about the division of writers into large and small.

Tolstoy says nothing about Robertson as a writer, but her characterization of his novel makes it clear that he was «not very good.»

Look, dear authors, how Tatiana Tolstaya characterizes Robertson’s novel: «bad, penny,» she writes. I love Tolstoy, but in this case I disagree with her.

I do not know what kind of novel this Robertson wrote, I have not read this novel. But the very fact that we are remembering him now (and it has been more than a hundred years) is enough to doubt the validity of such a characterization.