On NaNoWriMo
Nov. 2nd, 2013 12:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lliiraI'm not trying NaNo this year because it destroys my ability to write for months on end. I get paralyzed during November, and then shaking off that paralysis is extremely difficult.
But NaNo is everywhere, and I have these twinges of guilt for not trying. Luckily, I know something about successful writers, and that is this: no two are entirely alike. Graham Greene wrote 500 words a day and no more. As he got more skilled and needed even less editing, he ramped that down to 300 words a day. Not one word more, not ever, not under any circumstances. Jane Austen is famous for editing her drafts over and over and over again until she was happy with them. Her elegance and mastery could only shine after her initial writing was torn to pieces.
Stephen King wrote in the laundry room, J.K. Rowling used coffee shops, but the only writer I know of who regularly wrote with their family in the room is Stephenie Meyer, and boy does it show. So needing a space of one's own -- whether that's your own room or a public place where you can be solitary in a crowd -- is normal. Fandom seems to enjoy a myth of writers being able to write under any circumstances at all. This is a response to the "I must commune with my muse in solitude" attitude that goes a step too far.
NaNo doesn't work for me, and neither does Graham Greene's method. I'm trying to write within certain times each day, though I have not discovered those times yet. (2-6? 7-11?) I do know that writing writing writing without schedule and without let-up is very bad for me, my relationships, and what I write. Writing can be addictive, and I believe all writers need a schedule of some sort, whether strict or loose, in order to thrive.
This is where I have an issue with NaNo that goes beyond "it's not for me." I believe it encourages the writing rush, edge of your seat, have to get this done, write write write mentality. An obsession with one's work. A feeling that if one is not obsessed with one's work, one is lazy. It goes back to the "I must commune with my muse in solitude" mentality, but with the added kick of "if I cannot produce lots of words anywhere under any circumstances I am no good." The reason I've started to worry for people other than myself is largely because of Laurell K. Hamilton.
LKH talks about how many "pages" she's written all the time. She feels better about herself when she's written more pages, and worse when she's written fewer. What's better: the long, meandering, action-filled ending of Huckleberry Finn? Or the short scene in which Huck decides, "all right, then, I'll go to hell"? Mrs. Dalloway is only 201 short, big-fonted pages in my small paperback version. Danse Macabre is 483 standard-sized hardcover pages in 12-point Times New Roman font. I've seen people online say they don't want to pay full price for a book solely because it is not long.
There are people who love NaNo and are successful with it. However, I keep seeing people beat themselves up over not reaching wordcount. I don't like that it seems to have normalized trying to write as much as possible, rather than as well as possible -- I don't think it was intended for that in the first place, but that's what I believe is happening for at least a few writers and communities.
I do think NaNo is overall a good thing, as it brings writers together and works for a lot of people, whether as a writing exercise or as a game. But there is a potential trap in it. It's one I've fallen into myself in the past, so I know how dangerous it is. Writing can be addictive; and, like any addiction, it can bring heavenly highs and hellish lows. Those of us who are predisposed to this addiction need to be wary and take it in moderation.
But NaNo is everywhere, and I have these twinges of guilt for not trying. Luckily, I know something about successful writers, and that is this: no two are entirely alike. Graham Greene wrote 500 words a day and no more. As he got more skilled and needed even less editing, he ramped that down to 300 words a day. Not one word more, not ever, not under any circumstances. Jane Austen is famous for editing her drafts over and over and over again until she was happy with them. Her elegance and mastery could only shine after her initial writing was torn to pieces.
Stephen King wrote in the laundry room, J.K. Rowling used coffee shops, but the only writer I know of who regularly wrote with their family in the room is Stephenie Meyer, and boy does it show. So needing a space of one's own -- whether that's your own room or a public place where you can be solitary in a crowd -- is normal. Fandom seems to enjoy a myth of writers being able to write under any circumstances at all. This is a response to the "I must commune with my muse in solitude" attitude that goes a step too far.
NaNo doesn't work for me, and neither does Graham Greene's method. I'm trying to write within certain times each day, though I have not discovered those times yet. (2-6? 7-11?) I do know that writing writing writing without schedule and without let-up is very bad for me, my relationships, and what I write. Writing can be addictive, and I believe all writers need a schedule of some sort, whether strict or loose, in order to thrive.
This is where I have an issue with NaNo that goes beyond "it's not for me." I believe it encourages the writing rush, edge of your seat, have to get this done, write write write mentality. An obsession with one's work. A feeling that if one is not obsessed with one's work, one is lazy. It goes back to the "I must commune with my muse in solitude" mentality, but with the added kick of "if I cannot produce lots of words anywhere under any circumstances I am no good." The reason I've started to worry for people other than myself is largely because of Laurell K. Hamilton.
LKH talks about how many "pages" she's written all the time. She feels better about herself when she's written more pages, and worse when she's written fewer. What's better: the long, meandering, action-filled ending of Huckleberry Finn? Or the short scene in which Huck decides, "all right, then, I'll go to hell"? Mrs. Dalloway is only 201 short, big-fonted pages in my small paperback version. Danse Macabre is 483 standard-sized hardcover pages in 12-point Times New Roman font. I've seen people online say they don't want to pay full price for a book solely because it is not long.
There are people who love NaNo and are successful with it. However, I keep seeing people beat themselves up over not reaching wordcount. I don't like that it seems to have normalized trying to write as much as possible, rather than as well as possible -- I don't think it was intended for that in the first place, but that's what I believe is happening for at least a few writers and communities.
I do think NaNo is overall a good thing, as it brings writers together and works for a lot of people, whether as a writing exercise or as a game. But there is a potential trap in it. It's one I've fallen into myself in the past, so I know how dangerous it is. Writing can be addictive; and, like any addiction, it can bring heavenly highs and hellish lows. Those of us who are predisposed to this addiction need to be wary and take it in moderation.
no subject
Date: 2013-11-02 08:38 pm (UTC)I can't just write them about what my rats are up to or my Sailor Moon headcanons
At first, I read this as "I can't just write about what my rats are up to IN my Sailor Moon headcanons," which sounds awesome.