And, How One of Those Lives Changed Could Be Your Own… - I recoiled at the arrogance, thinking my writing could change lives. But the alternative is worse...
Sobering thoughts here, Graham. I write primarily horror and I don't necessarily think about changing someone's life until I put it into perspective that reading King's "The Shining" at age 14 in 1984 indeed changed my life. Gave me my compass. Made me want to write. If I strive to achieve anything in my horror writing beyond pricking fears and grossing out, it's to do something emotive with it where I hope my reader feels shellacked for the character(s) affected.
Exactly! Pure entertainment can also change people's lives.
I chose the wrong King book, unfortunately: The Tommyknockers. I've learned that most consider this to be his worst. I've never been a pure horror fan anyway, so that didn't help. But I came to love his On Writing book -- I've read it about three times now. It certainly changed my writing life!
Of course. It's been a long time since I read Tommyknockers but it's on my shelf looking back at me right now saying "What? Who, me?" I do remember it being a chore and yes, many fans slag that one. "On Writing" is an absolute bible, no matter your genre.
I’m always so grateful when someone spends time with my writing! It’s a gift of their time and attention. I want to make it worth their while. Is that wanting to “change their life?” 🤷
It is -- that falls under the category of "not the Magna Carta".
Although I think I knew this on many levels, it hit me on a whole new level that made me change the way I think about writing a piece. I love little shifts like this when they happen...
On reflection I start by working on something interesting to ME, something I’m proud of, that I then try to make interesting to others who might read it. I guess I also want to change own life!
I've gotten into pickles anytime I've felt like I was writing something with the goal of reaching a "particular" reader. This has been one of the unfortunate side effects of writing on a platform like Substack, where we get to know the people who frequently read and enjoy our work. If I write something aiming for praise from a specific someone and that someone doesn't show up that day, or worse does and doesn't think what I made for them is amazing, then I feel rather let down.
I think writing for ourselves first makes the most sense, since we are ALWAYS our own first reader. One piece of advice I've held on to is the adage that if YOU feel something when you're writing the story, it will inevitably make someone else feel SOMETHING too. I think the fun part comes from not knowing WHO that person is, or what the story will make them feel.
Yes - good point about writing to the one reader. I think you can relate truths to one reader that are universal and will resonate with others. Similarly, writing to one reader is really about writing to one *type* of reader. If I'm addressing you, the writer, then I'm kind of addressing other writers like you, too. It's a delicate dance!
(If I was ever one of your no-show readers that let you down, know that I go to your Substack blog(s) because I love reading your writing. Anything that suggested otherwise was an oversight on my part!)
I've been working on the "feeling something" thing lately. As I mentioned in my post, touchy-feely is not my natural default. But yeah, I see evidence of that old adage all the time. I'm getting better, I know. But I still have work to do.
Ack! I certainly didn't mean you, Graham! Not that I don't appreciate your appreciation of my work. 🙂 I do think there's a constant battle to be fought between writing for creative expression and writing for validation or attention. The whole ecosystem seems to reward the latter "these days," which doesn't leave the quieter creative types much room to thrive. If everyone could just be satisfied with a loyal cult following of 50-500 readers, we might all be able to achieve "success." 😁
Ha - I didn't feel like you were singling me out by any means! All I meant was that I'm not always the best Substack friend, all the time. But I think we're all like that, no? Life happens, priorities change, hockey seasons start...
Kind of builds on your point about the loyal cult following. Even they take a weekend off here and there. But that's okay -- everyone circles back. Including me. I just reconnected with a person I met on one of my original blogs from like 15 years ago. Hilarious how the universe -- and the Internet -- work.
I'm still trying to decide what "success" means on Substack. I'm very grateful for the readers I have. But... I'd like to change more lives. Maybe I'm happy with my success, and want more success, all the while feeling like *everything* is a success and without feeling like a not-success at any time? Is that doable?
For me, it's akin to self-marketing -- it feels a little dirty... lol
You and I have had similar discussions in the past. I've never wanted to be the Voice from the Ivory Tower for several reasons, not least of which I don't have the convictions or the credentials.
But there is a middle ground, I think. Simply sharing ideas that we ourselves believe in, for example, can change lives. This sharing doesn't have to be a foisting. And, just as not everyone will pick up what I'm sharing, not every reader's life will be changed.
I'm actually more interested in what this philosophical shift does for the writer rather than the reader. I'm not actively trying to change lives per se. But I am trying harder to connect with the reader. My thought is that it's not about changing lives -- or minds -- as much as it is about engaging readers.
I'm also fairly certain that won't happen every time. But just this little shift in approach has, I feel, improved my writing.
Speaking of changing lives -- I have a photo I need to send you connected to your last post! Hope to get to that later today...
Oh, and I’ve got a follow-up coming on the green buddy, believe it or not. I wish people could submit photos in response to a post—that would enliven many a comments section.
Yes, I sense we probably feel the same. I try to express my ideas as truthfully and interestingly as possible—to be true to my vision—and trust that if I’ve done that well enough, it will connect with someone else. But I can’t know who or how, really, and if I think too much about the reader, it will just distract me. That’s the beautiful alchemy of communication: it takes both a writer and a reader to make meaning.
Sobering thoughts here, Graham. I write primarily horror and I don't necessarily think about changing someone's life until I put it into perspective that reading King's "The Shining" at age 14 in 1984 indeed changed my life. Gave me my compass. Made me want to write. If I strive to achieve anything in my horror writing beyond pricking fears and grossing out, it's to do something emotive with it where I hope my reader feels shellacked for the character(s) affected.
Exactly! Pure entertainment can also change people's lives.
I chose the wrong King book, unfortunately: The Tommyknockers. I've learned that most consider this to be his worst. I've never been a pure horror fan anyway, so that didn't help. But I came to love his On Writing book -- I've read it about three times now. It certainly changed my writing life!
Welcome -- and thanks for chiming in!
Of course. It's been a long time since I read Tommyknockers but it's on my shelf looking back at me right now saying "What? Who, me?" I do remember it being a chore and yes, many fans slag that one. "On Writing" is an absolute bible, no matter your genre.
I’m always so grateful when someone spends time with my writing! It’s a gift of their time and attention. I want to make it worth their while. Is that wanting to “change their life?” 🤷
It is -- that falls under the category of "not the Magna Carta".
Although I think I knew this on many levels, it hit me on a whole new level that made me change the way I think about writing a piece. I love little shifts like this when they happen...
On reflection I start by working on something interesting to ME, something I’m proud of, that I then try to make interesting to others who might read it. I guess I also want to change own life!
I think that falls under the category of what Karen Connelly said in a workshop once: "I write in order to learn what to write."
We are our own first readers!
Mostly I want to not accidentally post comments too soon 🤣
Part and parcel... lol
Good one, Graham!
I've gotten into pickles anytime I've felt like I was writing something with the goal of reaching a "particular" reader. This has been one of the unfortunate side effects of writing on a platform like Substack, where we get to know the people who frequently read and enjoy our work. If I write something aiming for praise from a specific someone and that someone doesn't show up that day, or worse does and doesn't think what I made for them is amazing, then I feel rather let down.
I think writing for ourselves first makes the most sense, since we are ALWAYS our own first reader. One piece of advice I've held on to is the adage that if YOU feel something when you're writing the story, it will inevitably make someone else feel SOMETHING too. I think the fun part comes from not knowing WHO that person is, or what the story will make them feel.
Yes - good point about writing to the one reader. I think you can relate truths to one reader that are universal and will resonate with others. Similarly, writing to one reader is really about writing to one *type* of reader. If I'm addressing you, the writer, then I'm kind of addressing other writers like you, too. It's a delicate dance!
(If I was ever one of your no-show readers that let you down, know that I go to your Substack blog(s) because I love reading your writing. Anything that suggested otherwise was an oversight on my part!)
I've been working on the "feeling something" thing lately. As I mentioned in my post, touchy-feely is not my natural default. But yeah, I see evidence of that old adage all the time. I'm getting better, I know. But I still have work to do.
Hmmm, that might make a good future post...
Ack! I certainly didn't mean you, Graham! Not that I don't appreciate your appreciation of my work. 🙂 I do think there's a constant battle to be fought between writing for creative expression and writing for validation or attention. The whole ecosystem seems to reward the latter "these days," which doesn't leave the quieter creative types much room to thrive. If everyone could just be satisfied with a loyal cult following of 50-500 readers, we might all be able to achieve "success." 😁
Ha - I didn't feel like you were singling me out by any means! All I meant was that I'm not always the best Substack friend, all the time. But I think we're all like that, no? Life happens, priorities change, hockey seasons start...
Kind of builds on your point about the loyal cult following. Even they take a weekend off here and there. But that's okay -- everyone circles back. Including me. I just reconnected with a person I met on one of my original blogs from like 15 years ago. Hilarious how the universe -- and the Internet -- work.
I'm still trying to decide what "success" means on Substack. I'm very grateful for the readers I have. But... I'd like to change more lives. Maybe I'm happy with my success, and want more success, all the while feeling like *everything* is a success and without feeling like a not-success at any time? Is that doable?
It feels a little grandiose for my tastes.
I know, right?
For me, it's akin to self-marketing -- it feels a little dirty... lol
You and I have had similar discussions in the past. I've never wanted to be the Voice from the Ivory Tower for several reasons, not least of which I don't have the convictions or the credentials.
But there is a middle ground, I think. Simply sharing ideas that we ourselves believe in, for example, can change lives. This sharing doesn't have to be a foisting. And, just as not everyone will pick up what I'm sharing, not every reader's life will be changed.
I'm actually more interested in what this philosophical shift does for the writer rather than the reader. I'm not actively trying to change lives per se. But I am trying harder to connect with the reader. My thought is that it's not about changing lives -- or minds -- as much as it is about engaging readers.
I'm also fairly certain that won't happen every time. But just this little shift in approach has, I feel, improved my writing.
Speaking of changing lives -- I have a photo I need to send you connected to your last post! Hope to get to that later today...
Oh, and I’ve got a follow-up coming on the green buddy, believe it or not. I wish people could submit photos in response to a post—that would enliven many a comments section.
That would be good. I can, however, post a link to a photo if that helps!
Sure, or hit me in chat
I posted a link to the photo in your comment section. I'll send you a photo of the completed project when have a pic to send!
Yes, I sense we probably feel the same. I try to express my ideas as truthfully and interestingly as possible—to be true to my vision—and trust that if I’ve done that well enough, it will connect with someone else. But I can’t know who or how, really, and if I think too much about the reader, it will just distract me. That’s the beautiful alchemy of communication: it takes both a writer and a reader to make meaning.
Exactly!