Everyone -- including writers -- used to know that writers were some of the worst / most mentally ill people. A study at the Iowa Creative Writing Program found something like 80% of students had been diagnosed with a mental illness, and like a third or something were alcoholics.
"Woke" (and then Me Too) was a shift where suddenly (some) writers got it into their heads that they were Good, Smart People and any writer who wasn't Good like them needed to be cancelled because suddenly whether your art was worth reading was linked to whether or not you had the Good and Correct opinions. Low-level assholery that used to be just sort of expected like hitting on female writers a decade younger than you at the bar suddenly became Super Taboo. Quality of writing getting published plummeted, naturally.
Also it's weird you published this because I was literally thinking about all of this stuff just yesterday. But for like the first time, this is actually a topic I kind of beat you to, which is nice because I think you've dropped like 4-5 essays now on a topic that was sitting in my drafts and I ended up dropping them because yours was too good and I was like screw it.
Anyway, if we want good books again, we just gotta accept that writers are mentally ill and do crazy shit. I will add though -- from my days working at a literary magazine -- that ASPIRING writers with very little talent and social media addictions tend to be far worse humans than talented writers. The people who bully and victim-ID their way into publication instead of getting there via talent.
"Writers also tend to overestimate the universality of their own interior experience. Because their internal world is so vivid and articulate, it becomes easy to assume that others are either less aware or less honest about similar processes. This can lead to a subtle condescension: the belief that one sees more clearly not just because one writes better, but because one is, in some deeper sense, more conscious."
I resonate with a lot of this, but rather than "more beautiful narrative" substitute "deeper narrative" or "equally valid but undermined perspective," and rather than "writer" substitute "autist" or "man socially underdeveloped in youth" or something like that.
Frank Herbert was a good guy from most accounts, family man, self educated science aficionado, newspaperman during the day and writing short stories on the side until Dune made it big.
Tolkien for example was not. Lewis was not. Thing is, JKR and GRRM are not genuinely good writers. JKR was ripping off Star Wars, which was ripping off Campbell's The Hero Of A Thousand Faces. Her only useful idea was that now that we are living in an age of childish adults, the heroes should be children. GRRM is extremely lazy, like he did not bother to work out the Valyrian language, his way of naming places is just putting a random adjective and noun together, and look at the fucking map upside down... the problem is, we are not valuing good writers anymore, we are valuing pop writers.
That's not necessarily what he is saying, though. He is saying that, as a writer, one develops a rather over-indulgent relationship with one's own constructions – both in terms of craft and lifestyle.
Yes, often that leads to solipsism, i.e., "everyone else's existence is inferior to my own playground-labyrinth of consciousness." Equally, it leads to generating all sorts of novel & intricate models of reality that help the masses orient toward their lives in effective ways; or at the minimum, provide complex entertainment, which is a positive good.
Everyone -- including writers -- used to know that writers were some of the worst / most mentally ill people. A study at the Iowa Creative Writing Program found something like 80% of students had been diagnosed with a mental illness, and like a third or something were alcoholics.
"Woke" (and then Me Too) was a shift where suddenly (some) writers got it into their heads that they were Good, Smart People and any writer who wasn't Good like them needed to be cancelled because suddenly whether your art was worth reading was linked to whether or not you had the Good and Correct opinions. Low-level assholery that used to be just sort of expected like hitting on female writers a decade younger than you at the bar suddenly became Super Taboo. Quality of writing getting published plummeted, naturally.
Also it's weird you published this because I was literally thinking about all of this stuff just yesterday. But for like the first time, this is actually a topic I kind of beat you to, which is nice because I think you've dropped like 4-5 essays now on a topic that was sitting in my drafts and I ended up dropping them because yours was too good and I was like screw it.
Anyway, if we want good books again, we just gotta accept that writers are mentally ill and do crazy shit. I will add though -- from my days working at a literary magazine -- that ASPIRING writers with very little talent and social media addictions tend to be far worse humans than talented writers. The people who bully and victim-ID their way into publication instead of getting there via talent.
Anyway, for more on this topic --
https://thecassandracomplex.substack.com/p/moral-narcissism-and-the-literary-crowd
Nowadays, from what I gather, you're not supposed to hit on a woman at all unless she wants you to, which basically means never.
Anyway, I quit trying to write stuff a while ago.
Most writers are gammas
Don't tell Vox. ;)
"Writers also tend to overestimate the universality of their own interior experience. Because their internal world is so vivid and articulate, it becomes easy to assume that others are either less aware or less honest about similar processes. This can lead to a subtle condescension: the belief that one sees more clearly not just because one writes better, but because one is, in some deeper sense, more conscious."
Wow.
I had no idea I was such a massive tool.
What a great essay.
I resonate with a lot of this, but rather than "more beautiful narrative" substitute "deeper narrative" or "equally valid but undermined perspective," and rather than "writer" substitute "autist" or "man socially underdeveloped in youth" or something like that.
Can't edit for some reason. "Unpermitted", not "undermined."
I am the most conscious man to ever live, my sentience mogs
Frank Herbert was a good guy from most accounts, family man, self educated science aficionado, newspaperman during the day and writing short stories on the side until Dune made it big.
Do I count as a Cunt?
I'm going to be deeply disappointed if you don't call me a cunt now :c
Tolkien for example was not. Lewis was not. Thing is, JKR and GRRM are not genuinely good writers. JKR was ripping off Star Wars, which was ripping off Campbell's The Hero Of A Thousand Faces. Her only useful idea was that now that we are living in an age of childish adults, the heroes should be children. GRRM is extremely lazy, like he did not bother to work out the Valyrian language, his way of naming places is just putting a random adjective and noun together, and look at the fucking map upside down... the problem is, we are not valuing good writers anymore, we are valuing pop writers.
I love this essay and I couldn’t disagree more. The best writers are not solipsists
That's not necessarily what he is saying, though. He is saying that, as a writer, one develops a rather over-indulgent relationship with one's own constructions – both in terms of craft and lifestyle.
Yes, often that leads to solipsism, i.e., "everyone else's existence is inferior to my own playground-labyrinth of consciousness." Equally, it leads to generating all sorts of novel & intricate models of reality that help the masses orient toward their lives in effective ways; or at the minimum, provide complex entertainment, which is a positive good.
People hate the idea that a socially necessary niche role might just be experienced as kind of shitty individually.
Lol, spot on.
My wife so totally agrees with you !!!
;-)