I have problems with the logic behind the pithy advice that in order to be a great writer, you must read. Voraciously. I know Stephen King has been credited with saying something along those lines, and I’m pretty certain he isn’t the first author to give such advice. [Oh no! Nobody Author dares counter the prevailing wisdom of the Almighty Stephen King! Heresy!]
I mean, I think that might be partially true if you are looking to emulate a style, a genre or an author. I will submit that you should be well-read in order to know how others write — as long as when you have done so, you read or have read with a critical eye. Reading only eye-candy and consuming to consume will not make anyone a great writer. But I question the concept that the reading requirement is a persistent prerequisite for writing great things.
It is probably a good thing that I have no ambitions for greatness. I’m quite alright just writing and enjoying the act of writing. Happy about it, even. So there’s little risk of greatness coming from my little corner of the world. I honestly should let those striving towards greatness deal with this question and not worry my pretty little head about the matter.
But I’m not convinced being a constant reader necessarily is a requirement towards being a great writer. Especially if you want to be a writer that wants to be the pathfinder type. To boldly go where no one has gone before, or some such thing. Or the subversive, where you need to have enough freedom apart from classic tropes to break them while still remaining familiar with them. I can see several other types of writers who could benefit from not “reading when they aren’t writing.”
When wisdom seems to not stand up to scrutiny, I get all nervy and bothered and I end up saying something.
Am I off the mark? Probably. But I remain unconvinced that the wisdom that a writer must read as part of their formula for greatness always holds true.
I know… I’m all duck and cover after this post. Especially after invoking and questioning the King of Horror’s holy gospel.
Your thoughts?
Be gentle as you tear me a new hole. I break easy.
32 responses to “Half-penny thoughts | 14aug25”
Sorry, Michael, not with you on this one – and I’m not often with Mr King either. I’ve seen braggarts on FB claiming that they never read but they write fine – and the samples they post show that this is only their own sad delusions at work. A person can’t be a great chef unless they get eat and appeciate food as well as getting to know ingredients and how flavours work together. As the recently-deceased Ozzy Osbourne once apparently put it (referring to a certain so-called head of state somewhere in your part of the globe, ‘You can’t just go in with a scalpel and hope if you want to be a brain surgeon. You have to know what the f**k you’re doing’. Whatever you want to do, you need to practise, and a part of this in writing is reading. By reading the work of others you work out what appeals to you and what doesn’t, hence it will influence the voice that you develop for yourself, what you use and what you don’t. And – call me old-fashioned – there’s the small matter of learning grammar, punctuation, plot structure and so forth. We might not overtly read with these in mind, but if when we come to write ourselves we want to do a certain thing it’s handy to have a few ‘patterns’ of these stored in the memory banks. Painters have their influences, as do singers and those of other performance disciplines. Why should those who aspire to write try to do so without this? It’s about forming a connection to the canon of your particular art form. There are those who work detached from that (sharks in formaldehyde, dishevelled beds, fluorescent tubes, piles of bricks etc) but this lack of attachment makes them problematic. Having said all that, it’s possible to do just what you want if it’s just for your own pleasure – but don’t expect a huge readership. Yours, the grumpy old cow across the pond who you don’t have to take seriously. 🙂 Have a good week. 🙂 🙂
But, if you notice, I didn’t say never read, I said that I’m not buying the idea that you must be reading when you’re not writing or you’ll never write great works. I’m not accepting that one or the other must be your occupation in order to write something great.
It’s the all or nothing dynamic that I feel is a little overemphasized.
I think that it is perfectly reasonable for someone to write something great with intermittent reading, provided they study the writing they do read and understand the techniques employed. I merely disagree that it must be a continuous process in order to be effective.
Thanks for the thoughts. Food for my noggin to consume! Have a great weekend 🙂
Many apologies for my misreading, and I hope I didn’t offend. I also said at the end that if you’re writing for self-pleasing and not aiming for greatness then yes, do what you like. I stand by the idea of a continuous process, however. I’m pretty that, when the greats of the past took a holiday, they still had ideas going through their minds, or were watching the world around them to gain ideas and inspiration. So far I’ve written nothing great, but as a reader I’ve always got a book on the go; I can’t imagine not reading something everyday, whether it’s a book, a blo or newspaper. But that’s just me and my opinion, so it’s fine to ignore. Have a good week yourself. 😊
No offense taken!
I opened myself up to criticism with this post and expect it. I should mention that I’m used to being called the village idiot 🤣
I mean, I did suggest that a beloved writer might have a flawed viewpoint. In that respect I’m “asking for it” by my hitting the publish button.
Continuous improvement is a great idea, but I think we are allowed to take a break now and then to let things percolate in those dark, nether regions of the mind. Not everything has to be a labor.
And, sometimes, greatness is purely accidental or a product of circumstance. 🤓
No way are you a village idiot; we just have different perspectives, which you were asking for with this post. And of course it’s allowable to take time off from any work, like the annual few weeks break from any job. Personally I can’t imagine not reading; I always have and I always will, while my eyes function, and I’d do that even if I wasn’t writing. It’s also true that, even when I’ve begun a new book the old one is still being worked on in my mind. Sometimes I start one that turns out to be not very good and I’ll skim it, or I try a few like that until I find something good: but for me there’s always a book or a newspaper or somebody’s long blog post. That’s just me – but others may do it differently, and that’s their right. 😎
I like my jester outfit. I find it flatters my figure. 😂
I like to play devils’ advocate and challenge my own thinking. I don’t trust it when my opinions become too entrenched or take on a myopic character. It means that I have not thought about something hard enough.
It’s good to challenge your own ideas sometimes, broadens the mind – jest don’t think too hard! 🙂
If you smell something burning, that’s probably just my brain thinking.
I didn’t read at all as a kid. Raised by television. After graduating from high school (I didn’t go to collage right away) someone gave me a copy of On The Road, by Kerouac. Since then, I’ve always had a book I’ve been reading. Funny you should write this though, I’ve been thinking of taking some time off of reading. And just give myself some time to think. Just quietly sit and think. But I really do like reading. But I don’t think it is necessary for good writing.
I grew up making my way through the local library from A-Z in the kids/teen section of fiction, then hit the adult section — both non-fiction and fiction. I watched my fair share of television too, but I devoured most of the library and it wasn’t a small one.
I don’t read nearly as much now, and I prefer nonfiction over fiction in most cases. I think I’m mostly waiting for “something different” to come my way. I’m definitely burned out on genre fiction and most literature sometimes feels samey to me after a point. But I do read, just less fiction than nonfiction in books and here, with our resident writers on WordPress and elsewhere.
I really do wish I could find something new that hooked me. Something that makes my jaw drop…
I wish I read as a kid. I even read children’s lit now once in a while. I read Treasure Island this year. But I get the burn out on what to read. It happens to me too. And it happens with music too. Just kind of hoping something new pops up and gets me excited again.
Very definitely yes to both. I’ve been obsessed with Heartworms for music the past month or so, but I haven’t been able to get excited about reading the books I have purchased. Heartworms is like Cure, Siouxsie, Joy Division, Bauhaus and Sister of Mercy all rolled into one with a female singer who has massive stage presence in the manner that I tried to cultivate when I was performing. She’s better at it, of course. 😆
Funny, I thought about digging up my old copy of Treasure Island recently. Fond memories of that book (and the play at the Children’s Theatre in Minneapolis). Then I found my copy of Ambrose Bierce’s collected works and I’m thinking of reading that instead.
I went and listened to Jacked by the Heartworms. Really cool song. I’ve never read anything by Ambrose Bierce. I’ll have to check out something by him too.
A nice intro is to read “An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge”. It’s been too long since I last read his works to recommend anything else. Devil’s Dictionary can be fun, but is more satire than fiction.
Cool. I’ll check those out.
Extraordinary Wings is another great tune. Or I May Comply.
I’ll check them out. Know that I watched one video, my Youtube is filled with their videos.
Yeah, YouTube doesn’t want you to miss anything. 🤣
Haha. They certainly don’t.
I think that, perhaps, this partly comes down ones aims and ambitions. To become a ‘best seller’ then reading to discover how such authors become ‘successful’ probably helps, but, unless one wants to become formulaic, then perhaps reading all the time doesn’t help.
It’s a bit like (and I know we’ve mentioned this before) writing what you know – all very well and good, but how challenging and original will this make your work?
Same with music. The older I get, and the more I listen too, the more I hear music that is derivative or ‘borrowed’. Accidental? Maybe, but finding originality is not easy.
I love a good book (although I tend to prefer short stories tbh) but I’m not convinced that reading alot is necessarily conducive to writing well.
Interesting thoughts.
“Writing what you know” seems like another pithy piece of wobbly wisdom. On the surface, it holds some logic, but when you challenge the wisdom, it falls apart somewhat. Most fiction is entirely a product of imagination and you would then have to throw out most speculative and fantasy fiction if everyone wrote what they “knew”. It ends up being absurd wisdom except for writers starting out (in which case, to cut their teeth, they probably should write what they know).
Like you, I have found music to be more derivative — especially after the advent of digital recording. The adjective “New” has been applied to modern genres of music with their roots in the 70s through early 90s, which is a bit telling if you ask me.
I tend to lean towards short stories myself, as you can read them in bit-sized amounts. I’ve read my fair share of epic multiple-book tales and I’ve found they are increasingly packed with filler and bulk. Give me a solid short story that culls all the chaff and I find I am happier for it. In fact, that might explain why I am gravitating towards graphic novels more as I age. They seem to keep the story arcs tighter.
Originality, in my mind is where you ask yourself what dark corner of the room has not been fully explored. It doesn’t have to be wholesale different, but it has to provide a differing perspective without being lazy about it.
I was just talking about this with my wife, in regard to Stephen King particularly. She asked if she gave me his book On Writing, which she had, and which I enjoyed. I must say though, some of the things he put in there became cardinal truths for me and other writers looking to refine their craft. For me it was especially the idea of not using excessive adverbs, advice that is also found in Strunk and White. This made such an impression on me that I searched all my work for words that end in -ly and found ways to take those words out. Was it necessary? Did it make my writing better? I do think it’s good to expand on ideas; instead of saying the woman is beautiful, show why she’s beautiful. But for what I’m writing now I’m discarding a lot of those ‘rules’ and just using the words I want. Part of that is I feel my voice is strong enough now that I don’t have to worry so much about perfection. Part of it is taking down some of those sacred cows.
Where reading is concerned I do believe our teachers are all there in great literature, and there is a lot to be learned from them. I actually think there’s a lot to be learned from bad writing too. Mostly I think (and this is Hemingway) that a good writer has to be a sort of jack of all trades, willing to research and gather knowledge about a great number of subjects, and then mix them all together to make a compelling story with compelling characters. I don’t think anything else really matters.
I enjoyed On Writing, but I tend to think of it as more a fingerpost than a destination. Same with Bradbury’s Zen of Writing.
And yes, avoiding overuse of adverbs is one thing that stuck with me and I think is an absolute truth except when there is an exception. 😂 Aside from that, and endeavoring to reduce or eliminate exposition from my writing, I find value in breaking most “rules” at some point, or ignoring them altogether. In my opinion, ignoring convention is how language evolves.
Thanks for your two cents added to my half-penny.
Yeah exposition can get you in trouble. On the other hand, when you’re world building it can be very hard to avoid. Trying to put it all into dialogue just gets kitschy after a while: ‘hey Frank, remember when the Atlanteans took over the Gulf of Dreams that time?” You said it best: absolute truths except when there’s an exception
The key to world building and avoiding excessive exposition is to avoid info-dumps and history lessons. Peppered throughout and leaving room for readers to draw their own conclusions… That works. It depends on not being a control freak, I think.
Yeah, it’s easy to get caught up in your own imagination and ‘genius’ and natural to want to share it . . . but it’s important to remember that a little goes a long way with readers.
For my two cents I would say my favorite short stories right now are “The Dead” by James Joyce and “Good Old Neon” by David Foster Wallace. I know you’re not a hipster DFW guy but that story is just phenomenal, especially in our times. Also a big fan of Francis MacComber by Hemingway, Babylon Revisited (Fitzgerald) Roman Fever (Edith Wharton) The Day After Superman Died (Ken Kesey) The Most Dangerous Game (Connell-this is the one that makes every teenage boy want to be a writer) and The Open Boat by Stephen Crane. I don’t know which Salinger to put on this list but I’m terribly tempted to say Uncle Wiggily. What’s yours?
“Uncle Wiggly” is great, but I lean more towards “A Perfect Day for Bananafish” and “Down By The Dinghy” when it comes to Salinger.
I don’t have anything against DFW, I just haven’t gotten around to reading much of anything. I’m sure if I had read his work 25 years ago, I probably would have enjoyed him, but I’ve found that most post-modern writing doesn’t suit my current mindset, so I haven’t prioritized adding his writing to my reading material. I was turned off by “Ulysses” (I personally found it to be highly overrated), so I haven’t read much of Joyce. I should probably remedy that but, again, my mindset is not currently in the mood to deal with more high-browed literature. My leanings lately are more penny dreadfuls and non-fiction over high literature. 🤷♂️
Although Ambrose Bierce did land on my shelf from storage, so who knows?
I did read those other two Salingers too, on your rec. I think they’re both great. I don’t feel like I understood a single thing about Ulysses until I got to the last sentence. The Dead is very different, very approachable. My sister recently told me I should write non fiction. My reply was there was no way some magical realism wouldn’t creep in. Incident at Owl Creek Bridge?
I have a fairly comprehensive collection of Bierce’s works. It includes Owl Creek, which is one of my favorites by him.
I write nonfiction regularly as part of my job. It can be tiring at times.
Maybe I’ll give the Dead a chance. We’ll have to see.
All I would say is that King is still my favorite author, but all the lessons learned from him, I found it necessary to read anyone and everyone else to learn what they’re doing that got them published, or if they’re catching fire, it’s great to watch an emerging voice. I’m half times ecstatic and euphoric with my evolution and sometimes brokenhearted I still have a mountain to climb. Therefore, reading is a must for me, not that I want to copy anyone to sell out, but to mold my voice in the hopes of selling period.
And, if that is the motive, I entirely accept that premise. But I think it is entirely possible to write something wonderful without constantly reading or writing. Sometimes accidents happen. Sometimes the lessons are learned effortlessly. Sometimes there is a natural talent at work.
Most folks should probably read more, however. I’m not convinced that those more magical moments where “it just works” are all that common. Most of it is plain hard work (like you are doing).