"It's ok to do things just because they're fun." As one of those lunatics... I'm with you. It's so hard to NOT try to be the best at every single thing I attempt. 😅
@jimjo8541 I'd love to, but current financial situation means every waking moment not tending children solo has to be dedicated to earning money. I'll get back to that mindset someday.
I got really into hobbyist board games over lockdown which was weird because, I'm just playing this thing? I can't even go online and compete? Then I made a board game youtube channel... 🤦
"Choose your mediocrity" is such an interesting concept. I've been studying a lot of OK Go's music videos and process in the past few weeks, and they mention in some interviews that they are kind of mediocre musicians and certainly mid-level as far as musical success. But they realized they just enjoy making things in general and that their videos were another chance to do that -- each video becomes its own piece of delightful art instead of just being advertising for the music. They have insane levels of creativity and dedication that really shine through in their videos in a way it couldn't in their music alone. They are arguably the BEST at making music videos and they never would have discovered that if they hadn't made the effort. On the other hand, their first viral video (the treadmills) was visibly low-budget, and if they had worried about making it look shiny and expensive, it never would have happened. The path to excellence is being intentional in the mediocrity you choose.
That's a great parallel to draw, and it's got me thinking about what can a writer push at and have creative fun with that they might think of as just boilerplate necessity before getting back to the good stuff... I'm taking note of this comment. Thanks!
As an artist you should always aim for excellence. At the same time, being too precious and uptight can inhibit the natural flow. I find when it comes easy it is usually really good. When it comes hard it usually sucks at the beginning., sucks in the middle and sucks at the end no matter how hard I labor.
I think it's important to always be pushing at at least one aspect of your work each time. I think it helps with that flow if you're not trying to improve everything all at once
I grew up somewhere that was hypercompetitive/hypercritical, so this type of content helps me calm down, get out of my thoughts, and start doing things. Thank you for sharing!
Thank you for the kind comment! Growing up, I was awkward and unpopular, but I was good at intellectual things. So when I wasn't good at something, I just said it wasn't for me and turned my back on it forever, because that was my entire identity under attack. I've really struggled with getting past that. I'm really glad you found my thoughts helpful
6:45 The issue I have with critiques: I learn more about the person critiquing than about my story and why it doesn't work. If I try to follow the critique, I only watered my story down or so I felt. So yes, I would love a constructive critique than makes me instantly see how my story could be better. But it usually doesn't happen.
yep, in something as competitive as fiction, you have to have that Mamba mentality and be doing focused practice. It might mean you like doing it less, but that's the cost. Putting in the work to improve often isn't fun; it's uncomfortable. Just like exercise
You can see his rear end at the very beginning of the video but then he hopped down and didn't return, unfortunately. I'm going to try to get a better angle next time for him to wander into frame. Thanks! The shirt is an early Christmas present from my wife, and if my dog gets much more popular, I'm going to have to reproduce it as merch!
Mediocrity was the reason I gave up drawing; I wasn't willing to take the time and invest in the intentional practice to improve. Writing came much easier, but unlike drawing, I was willing to refine based on feedback. Like you, I'm a hot head. It took me years to learn to not immediately respond to feedback, but at the same time, especially as I grew as a writer, the feedback grew less and less helpful, leading to more questions. I was writing for readers who don't need to be hand-held through out a plot - right down to how the reader needs to be told hold to feel about a situation - that's just not my deal. I want readers capable of critical thought, which unfortunately narrows my market value. But it makes me happy because I get to dig into topics and ideas on a deeper level, than if I were aiming for superficial mediocre stories. That said, there is a limit to how much readers can actually help with refinement. Some can instinctually point out a flaw, but most can't articulate what the flaw is. My issue is context as it turns out, but that was thanks to a dev. editor - not because of the 100 or so readers who pointed out that they struggled to understand what was going on. Turns out after a conversation with those readers, they understood what was going on - thus leaving me scratching my head as to what the actual f the problem was. Did the readers not trust themselves to make the appropriate intellectual leaps? I mean they were following what was going on. The dev. editor suggested that I explain why things were happening.... cue the sound of screeching breaks. Me: Everyone is dying because demons are attacking. That's clearly established. Dev. Editor: But why are the demons attacking? What's their motivation? Me: They're demons. This isn't a romance novel disguised as a dark fantasy novel. And round and round I go. I hate the editing phase, too much WTF do you mean by that? And I just established that two f-ing paragraphs ago! The other thought I had is that refinement is all well and good, but it shouldn't stop you from finishing a project - or else one will end up in an endless cycle of rewrites. Ask me how I know.
I think you've found the right perspective on criticism, which is such a complicated thing. I have a video dedicated to this topic (here is where it starts in on reader opinion ua-cam.com/video/aXff7Zjkz_A/v-deo.htmlsi=n1mOmtVtSOXfsOmx&t=316) . I think basically they can tell you how the book made them feel, and then you have to figure out what to do with that. Even as far as WHY it made them feel that way, I think once they start intellectualizing their experience, they often can't be trusted. It's great that you found an editor relationship that helps you grow. It's a really good sign that what they say and what the readers said point in the same direction. Totally agreed on the limits of revision. At some point, you have to take what you've learned and apply it to a greenfield project. Thanks for the thoughtful comment!
I used to be a huge perfectionist, but because of it I hardly got things written and struggled with writer's block because of too much fear of not being good enough. Now I'm having to choose at least some level of settling if I am to ever write anything and finish anything, and I'm learning to accept that. To some people it might be mediocre, but I definitely won't settle for anything that has grammar errors, inconsistencies, clumsy sentences, etc. etc.. so I know at the least that it won't be bad writing, and I know it will be in alignment with my values. I think one thing that has helped encourage me is the fact that the author of Tarzan originally got into writing fiction because he looked at pulp fiction, recognized it as bad writing, and said he knew he could write something at least as good as that. To some degree, it is hard for one to objectively view their own writing, and of course that's why critiques are so helpful, but even those don't always hit the mark of an accurate estimate of the writing's merits. But I think about the fact that if everyone is sort of an imposter when it comes to writing, then it doesn't matter if I am too. At the least I will do what I am able to do to bring forth the vision in my head for my stories, do my best, do the work to get feedback and edit, and hope that's enough. I totally agree with you about the lack of self-awareness many people have when it comes to standards of excellence. They think because they can get away with releasing something mediocre or even lazily bad, that they don't have to improve it, but then they wonder why their book isn't selling when it has a weak or lazily bad book cover or a lot of typos.
I accidentally refreshed the page halfway through my response ugh... I identify with a lot of what's here and also in your thoughtful replies to other comments. I kind of think of it as trying to get all aspects of my writing up to par, and then focusing on improving on or experimenting with just one or two things at a time. I tend towards trying to build up my strengths, which besides I think paying bigger dividends (as long as everything is on par), also makes writing more fun because the things that are my strengths probably are so because they're what I find interesting (though I guess I might not be aware of the causal direction, there). The writer who doesn't feel like an imposter has either reached the peak (1%?) or is at the base of the mountain and will keep circling forever. I used to feel like an imposter just writing, and now I'm telling people what I think about writing?! I think that trying to work in an elevated way in a genre that fully allows cud chewing can be a lot of fun. If you're into the pulps (Tarzan was a favorite as a kid), then you know Raymond Chandler didn't have to write nearly as well as he did to make a living. Thanks for the great comments
Thank you! I'm recovering from the grindset and trying to take my competitive nature down a notch, so the perspective has been worked towards! It struck me awhile back that "mid" is almost the worst insult anymore, and this is coming from post-hustle culture...
You made some wonderful points! I love constructive criticism because I want to be the best I can be, so I belong to a writers' group for criticism and encouragement. I think that insecurity gets in the way for many people. I had to laugh when you talked about vacillating-- I go between thinking my work is great and that it sucks, sometimes even in the space of an hour. 😂
Finally off Twitter (at least on my phone, still have my Author account but it's only accessible on my desktop where I never use Twitter) and Reddit (except for my PODCAST account, again, laptop only). Need IG to communicate with my kids and FB to communicate with my friends, but I scroll way less than ever before. I think I finally burned out on social media. Feels good, man.
Thank you for the video! I am mediocre in many things and that is ok. It is realistically impossible to be the greatest n every medium of art, IMO. I strive for better, keep learning and moving forward. It’s like learning new languages. I may not be fluent but getting by in it is far better than being clueless.
Such a good point! I think occasionally its good to look around and see where you're at, but 99.9% of the time, you judge yourself by how you have moved in relation to your previous work. This might have to be a video... thanks!
My writing goal is to get into the groove. I understand that other writers might fear getting into a rut. I think the difference is subjective. I think (hope) my writing nowadays is of sufficient quality for my overall goal of telling the many stories I have thought of. I want to get faster more than I want to get better. I have far more stories plotted out than I have years left to write them. The successful fast writers who I want to emulate are reassuring that most writers do get better as they get faster. It's not a question of sacrificing quality for quantity. On the one hand I think I will get better as I write more. On the other hand, I am drafting my fifth novel as I’m also doing a minor revision on my second - and honestly not seeing a big difference in the quality between the two… And I'm OK with that. I do see the word "mediocre" as the pejorative so I don't really accept that term. Maybe “Good Enough.” I want to be a good enough writer so that the writing does not get in the way of the story. When readers say “that was a well written story” I want them to mean they were immersed in the narrative, not admiring the sentences.
I am not one to pore over sentences, especially not in novella-length-plus works. I want my words to be good enough to not be distracting, and, I don't know if this is the right thing to do, but work harder on strengthening my strengths. So I also write pretty quickly, but usually I have one conscious goal of something to improve. I think it's hard to compare a whole work and say "this is better than this" but it's easier to say, "my dialogue in this is more natural than in this." Sometimes the goal might not need to be returned to consciously (for instance if I want to write in a particular perspective or a type of character I've never written before) but others take reminding, like with dialogue I like the groove and the rut idea
This video came at the right moment. I'm working through evaluting ( based on feedback and me) if the book's saying what i want it to and how I can push things. / Why sometimes it's difficult to write what I wanted to say.
8:37 (7:36) This and that are true. You can both have something profoundly important to say and not have the necessary skills to communicate it effectively. Regardless of skill, it takes time to refine a message, whatever it may be.
Yes. Another comment below said that Ira Glass said something about how practice is closing the gap between the two. Honestly, I think that gap is almost necessary to progress as a writer. It hurts to see the difference, but that's how you know what direction to go in to improve
Agreed. The counterintuitive part is, that level of empowerment, of creating every aspect of the world one presents, is what I think intimidates most people away from it
Man, I love those drawings! I'd certainly follow your progress on Instagram or wherever you post them. Also, do you draw your maps for your own speculative fiction?
Thanks! I wanted to be a comic book artist as a kid and have some holdover ability. I was thinking of doing a scifi rpg supplement and couldn't find any cheap bulk spot art (the little art to fill blank spots on the page) so it sparked up a resurgence in trying to make it myself, though I haven't kept up with it like I should. I've posted a couple on instagram, but I find social media pretty overwhelming, so that I'm mostly putting that energy into comments here. I don't draw maps. I do follow a few people who do, because it's such a cool art
Dear gods, am I mid at basically everything in life 😂 I might even be mediocre at writing. I agree that doing things for fun is important. I am finding the more I gamify some elements of my drafting process (rolling dice to determine outcomes, figuring out what class or stats a certain character might have, etc.), the more I want to do it. Random tanget end.
You know, reaching mid sounds easy, but there are a lot of people pouring a lot of energy into fiction writing. Just getting to mid is bragging rights Randomizing makes writing a puzzle! "okay, how do I take it from here to here?" It also reduces the stress I have about my overly-linear thought pattern. Now the randomness comes as part of the process and the logical brain is a benefit, not something to try to hold back. You follow my board game channel @jalanrykergames ? I have trouble remembering who I talk to where. If you haven't checked it out, I'm doing some solo rpg content with a lot of randomizers
Coming back to add say too that, and I was talking with another writer about this recently, that it can be easy to feel like all the great works have already been written, and that everything written today will only be derivative of what has been done before at this point. Because of that arises the question, is it possible to write great works anymore? Is it possible to even rise out of mediocrity? I think the answer is yes, but I feel like it's harder to make the distinction between good and great now. It seems like the truly great works that come out nowadays have a distinct quality about them that sets them apart from most other books, and they tend to be experimental in some way, like the Book Thief for instance. So I suppose if you want to be great, you might have to experiment with different styles of writing and try to do things that haven't been done before, or things that are not done often anyway in writing. I was watching video essays about Wes Anderson's movies having so many commonalities between them and had the thought, "Why aren't there video essays on UA-cam analyzing particular author writing styles?" But perhaps that is uncharted territory that might soon be remedied.
It's so difficult for me to assess my work and determine whether it's good or not. I crave constant progression and improvement which is why I consume so much writing advice and do my best to apply it to my actual writing (definitely not content with mediocrity), but after a certain point it's like damn, where is the line between objective and subjective? How can you really tell if your writing is good or not since popularity and copious amounts of validation don't necessarily indicate the quality of a work. I get lost trying to find a gauge or way to measure quality.
Yeah I have had to write down for myself what my personal standards are. If you take classes on literature they might talk about "What was the purpose behind this book? Do you think the author succeeded?" and I think that's a helpful way to measure excellence--you get to decide what you want the book to do, and the level of intention and awareness of the tools you're using to bring that about help you see, "Yes, this is how I want the book to be, and I am satisfied with it now." It might not be everyone's five star book but if you're satisfied with it, and are aware of anyone else's criticisms of it and don't care or mind about those things, then that's enough. Of course, we sometimes catch things after a book is out and that's okay. We live, we learn, we keep going.
I think of the quality of fiction writing as being subjective, but inter-subjective. A book is a pointless thing, so how can you say if it's good or bad. But, once we place that point, we can take another book and say, "This book has more musical language" and place it higher, at least in that regard, and "This book has worse pacing," and place it lower. To me, that says it's easier to think of one thing at a time and view it with something more like objectivity. It's good to crave constant progression, but in order to both achieve and perceive it, I think your practice has to be focused on a limited number of things at a time. And I like what Emilyn says about the purpose of the work, and think it's tied to this. You can set the purpose of the work, and see if you achieve it. That purpose can be tied to either an effect you're trying to achieve, or a goal of a particular voice for a character, or a twisty plot, or whatever you want to focus on
Yeah, I think you can. I think it's pretty common to get to a pro level and then put less focus on improving. I think some publishers even encourage it, not wanting you to change your winning formula too much. Getting to be a pro at writing is still a big goal. When I was a junior computer programmer, the company expected me to lose them money and be bad at my job. That certainly is a far cry from how much it takes to be a professional fiction writer
This is also related to your last video: How do you get over your mediocrity? Not even mediocrity, how do you push through and write knowing very well that what you're writing is awful? This is especially hard when you're older and have plenty of reading under your belt. I know what great writing is, I know what compelling plots are, I know what relatable characters are. That's why it's so painful to look at my own writing and not to throw everything through the window.
Ira Glass has a short youtube video on creativity. In it he says this happens because your taste is good, and now you just have to do the work to catch up with your taste so that your work will get to the point where it matches your taste/gets to the standard you want it to be. Of course, too, there's the patient editing process. You can't edit something till you have a completed rough draft. Then you make notes on your writing and learn how to improve it. There are some helpful books on self-editing out there. And then also, many books are not published till after they've gone through 7 or 8 drafts. Of course, not everyone has to do that but it is good to recognize that that can be a part of the process for some writers.
it's difficult in fiction to hang on. most things in life you can create at a mediocre level and find some success as you work to push onward. If you were a computer programmer, for instance, you could study for 4 years and then go and be a bad programmer someplace, getting paid to learn. That doesn't exist for fiction. The other side of that is, 4 years of fulltime study is a lot, and people expect to work that hard to get proficient at something, but often people want to get a pro result on their first or second novel. You're right that the perspective of age makes it a lot harder to put in those hours than the blind enthusiasm of youth, but your hours will count for more. I think Emilyn is right on with the Ira Glass reference: that despair over the gap means you recognize the gap and will cross it much more easily than if you were blind to it. Your progress forward can be more of a straight line than a wandering path of accidental improvement, because you have your target
While I concur that mediocrity is a choice, I don't think hard work is how you get to become great. Sure, dedication is needed, but just doing the hustle usually leads not to improvements either. So, work smarter not harder! That means learn fast form you mistakes, not just work endlessly, but get as often as possible feedback to recognise the flaws early on.
Isn't it? Hard work is absolutely how you become great-- I agree with smarter not harder, but I've found the hard work is usually what points towards moving into a positive direction. It's absolutely a folly to think just working hard will get you places, but similarly, it's a folly to think the hustle isn't needed for improvements
You have to work both hard and smart. The first chair in an orchestra tends to work twice as many hours as the 2nd chair (according to a study referenced in Grit), and it has to be focused practice. That's where the self-analysis I was talking about comes in.
Mediocrity sells in the DEI gatekept Trad pub world today. If we were to follow the tenents of "own voices" there wouldn't be any straight white male protagonists. And when romance fans buy YA... What the heck, Trad Pub?
Do you need a straight white male protagonist? It’ll blow your mind once you realize that we are all essentially the same person, regardless of our race, ethnicity, sexual orientation. So much of what makes us who we are is primal. Tap into that. Be around people. You really don’t think you could write a story with a black lesbian as the protagonist? Come on, now. You’re supposed to be a creator, not someone that just wants to put themselves in every story as the main character.
@jimjo8541 Yes I could. I have a black lesbian who was one of my best friends, though she lives in NY and we have lost contact. We used to watch Ally McBeal together while she would twist beeswax into her dreads, all while smoking a Backwoods natural leaf blunt kept together by flat hairpin. I care about people, and I listen to "other voices". I can write write dialogue of an Indian man and woman, with their hurried style of speech. They seem to choose phrases that sound good quickly. I have a talent with writing, as I am very observant of people. But that's ok. Sometimes, you just got to write a good story, then sit back and when people have this "Other voice" DEI, or sensitivity issues, the piece will be so good and undeniable that they can't say crap. And then they can sit and spin. Everything, your advice which you wrote me, is BS. Not to mention, but it's that "advice should never be given except when asked for ". You say "Be around people." And "Tap into that." I have, and I wrote about them, as a tribute. And then maybe they will get their heads out of their asses with this crap, which is destroying the arts. It's ok though, because I have already written the book that does that.
@@jimjo8541way to miss the point - you are effectively mandated to do this now, effectively killing all genuine artistic inspiration (what are the odds that most straight white male writers would choose of their own volition to make their protagonist a black lesbian?)
Bro says he is an amateur at music, then plays a literal BANGER. I think you're 100% correct with this video. Mediocrity is a choice and it's the one that 99% of people make every day, without even realising it. Because being exceptional is HARD and it requires sacrifice. 99% of people can't make that sacrifice. In fact it's simpler than that. Deferred gratification is a concept that most people don't even begin to think about. Most people can't save money because they want to buy everything NOW. Why save for something when I can buy it on credit? If most people can't grasp that concept then why should we expect most people can grasp the concept of sacrifice and practice? In truth, most iconic writers (King, Hobb, Sanderson) aren't great, they aren't even talented. They are practiced. The decided to get up everyday and make time to practice their craft, they sacrificed for it. Free time, family time, social media time, late mornings, early nights. Delayed gratification of the wants for the long term goals. You're absolutely correct that it also requires you to put aside your anxiety and choose the hard road. Being exceptional is simply making the hard decision each time you have the option to take the easy route. In any discipline, not just writing. Thank you for challenging me to be better. I've just broken 60,000 words and into the 3rd act of my first novel.
Congrats on getting into the 3rd act! That's a much more fun place to be. "most iconic writers (King, Hobb, Sanderson) aren't great, they aren't even talented. They are practiced. The decided to get up everyday and make time to practice their craft"
"It's ok to do things just because they're fun." As one of those lunatics... I'm with you. It's so hard to NOT try to be the best at every single thing I attempt. 😅
I think we learn to write some of our best work through the "just fun" exercises.
@ndsire I wholeheartedly agree.
Normalize doing things for fun and not having to monetize those things.
@jimjo8541 I'd love to, but current financial situation means every waking moment not tending children solo has to be dedicated to earning money. I'll get back to that mindset someday.
I got really into hobbyist board games over lockdown which was weird because, I'm just playing this thing? I can't even go online and compete?
Then I made a board game youtube channel... 🤦
"Choose your mediocrity" is such an interesting concept. I've been studying a lot of OK Go's music videos and process in the past few weeks, and they mention in some interviews that they are kind of mediocre musicians and certainly mid-level as far as musical success. But they realized they just enjoy making things in general and that their videos were another chance to do that -- each video becomes its own piece of delightful art instead of just being advertising for the music. They have insane levels of creativity and dedication that really shine through in their videos in a way it couldn't in their music alone.
They are arguably the BEST at making music videos and they never would have discovered that if they hadn't made the effort. On the other hand, their first viral video (the treadmills) was visibly low-budget, and if they had worried about making it look shiny and expensive, it never would have happened. The path to excellence is being intentional in the mediocrity you choose.
Grohl is the only talented musician in Nirvana and look how they thrived in their mediocrity.
That's a great parallel to draw, and it's got me thinking about what can a writer push at and have creative fun with that they might think of as just boilerplate necessity before getting back to the good stuff... I'm taking note of this comment. Thanks!
As an artist you should always aim for excellence. At the same time, being too precious and uptight can inhibit the natural flow. I find when it comes easy it is usually really good. When it comes hard it usually sucks at the beginning., sucks in the middle and sucks at the end no matter how hard I labor.
I think it's important to always be pushing at at least one aspect of your work each time. I think it helps with that flow if you're not trying to improve everything all at once
I grew up somewhere that was hypercompetitive/hypercritical, so this type of content helps me calm down, get out of my thoughts, and start doing things. Thank you for sharing!
Thank you for the kind comment! Growing up, I was awkward and unpopular, but I was good at intellectual things. So when I wasn't good at something, I just said it wasn't for me and turned my back on it forever, because that was my entire identity under attack. I've really struggled with getting past that. I'm really glad you found my thoughts helpful
6:45 The issue I have with critiques: I learn more about the person critiquing than about my story and why it doesn't work. If I try to follow the critique, I only watered my story down or so I felt.
So yes, I would love a constructive critique than makes me instantly see how my story could be better. But it usually doesn't happen.
Just because you like doing something and you do it a lot doesn't mean you're good at it.
yep, in something as competitive as fiction, you have to have that Mamba mentality and be doing focused practice. It might mean you like doing it less, but that's the cost. Putting in the work to improve often isn't fun; it's uncomfortable. Just like exercise
“I’m an amateur at…naw…I’m a pro.”
I missed your dog. Love your shirt.
You can see his rear end at the very beginning of the video but then he hopped down and didn't return, unfortunately. I'm going to try to get a better angle next time for him to wander into frame.
Thanks! The shirt is an early Christmas present from my wife, and if my dog gets much more popular, I'm going to have to reproduce it as merch!
Mediocrity was the reason I gave up drawing; I wasn't willing to take the time and invest in the intentional practice to improve. Writing came much easier, but unlike drawing, I was willing to refine based on feedback. Like you, I'm a hot head. It took me years to learn to not immediately respond to feedback, but at the same time, especially as I grew as a writer, the feedback grew less and less helpful, leading to more questions. I was writing for readers who don't need to be hand-held through out a plot - right down to how the reader needs to be told hold to feel about a situation - that's just not my deal. I want readers capable of critical thought, which unfortunately narrows my market value. But it makes me happy because I get to dig into topics and ideas on a deeper level, than if I were aiming for superficial mediocre stories.
That said, there is a limit to how much readers can actually help with refinement. Some can instinctually point out a flaw, but most can't articulate what the flaw is. My issue is context as it turns out, but that was thanks to a dev. editor - not because of the 100 or so readers who pointed out that they struggled to understand what was going on. Turns out after a conversation with those readers, they understood what was going on - thus leaving me scratching my head as to what the actual f the problem was. Did the readers not trust themselves to make the appropriate intellectual leaps? I mean they were following what was going on. The dev. editor suggested that I explain why things were happening.... cue the sound of screeching breaks.
Me: Everyone is dying because demons are attacking. That's clearly established.
Dev. Editor: But why are the demons attacking? What's their motivation?
Me: They're demons. This isn't a romance novel disguised as a dark fantasy novel.
And round and round I go. I hate the editing phase, too much WTF do you mean by that? And I just established that two f-ing paragraphs ago!
The other thought I had is that refinement is all well and good, but it shouldn't stop you from finishing a project - or else one will end up in an endless cycle of rewrites. Ask me how I know.
I think you've found the right perspective on criticism, which is such a complicated thing. I have a video dedicated to this topic (here is where it starts in on reader opinion ua-cam.com/video/aXff7Zjkz_A/v-deo.htmlsi=n1mOmtVtSOXfsOmx&t=316) . I think basically they can tell you how the book made them feel, and then you have to figure out what to do with that. Even as far as WHY it made them feel that way, I think once they start intellectualizing their experience, they often can't be trusted.
It's great that you found an editor relationship that helps you grow. It's a really good sign that what they say and what the readers said point in the same direction.
Totally agreed on the limits of revision. At some point, you have to take what you've learned and apply it to a greenfield project.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment!
I used to be a huge perfectionist, but because of it I hardly got things written and struggled with writer's block because of too much fear of not being good enough. Now I'm having to choose at least some level of settling if I am to ever write anything and finish anything, and I'm learning to accept that. To some people it might be mediocre, but I definitely won't settle for anything that has grammar errors, inconsistencies, clumsy sentences, etc. etc.. so I know at the least that it won't be bad writing, and I know it will be in alignment with my values.
I think one thing that has helped encourage me is the fact that the author of Tarzan originally got into writing fiction because he looked at pulp fiction, recognized it as bad writing, and said he knew he could write something at least as good as that.
To some degree, it is hard for one to objectively view their own writing, and of course that's why critiques are so helpful, but even those don't always hit the mark of an accurate estimate of the writing's merits.
But I think about the fact that if everyone is sort of an imposter when it comes to writing, then it doesn't matter if I am too. At the least I will do what I am able to do to bring forth the vision in my head for my stories, do my best, do the work to get feedback and edit, and hope that's enough.
I totally agree with you about the lack of self-awareness many people have when it comes to standards of excellence. They think because they can get away with releasing something mediocre or even lazily bad, that they don't have to improve it, but then they wonder why their book isn't selling when it has a weak or lazily bad book cover or a lot of typos.
I accidentally refreshed the page halfway through my response ugh...
I identify with a lot of what's here and also in your thoughtful replies to other comments. I kind of think of it as trying to get all aspects of my writing up to par, and then focusing on improving on or experimenting with just one or two things at a time. I tend towards trying to build up my strengths, which besides I think paying bigger dividends (as long as everything is on par), also makes writing more fun because the things that are my strengths probably are so because they're what I find interesting (though I guess I might not be aware of the causal direction, there).
The writer who doesn't feel like an imposter has either reached the peak (1%?) or is at the base of the mountain and will keep circling forever. I used to feel like an imposter just writing, and now I'm telling people what I think about writing?!
I think that trying to work in an elevated way in a genre that fully allows cud chewing can be a lot of fun. If you're into the pulps (Tarzan was a favorite as a kid), then you know Raymond Chandler didn't have to write nearly as well as he did to make a living.
Thanks for the great comments
That is literally the most zen take I've heard on mediocrity! I hate how the word has just become a synonym for bad or forgettable now
Thank you! I'm recovering from the grindset and trying to take my competitive nature down a notch, so the perspective has been worked towards!
It struck me awhile back that "mid" is almost the worst insult anymore, and this is coming from post-hustle culture...
You made some wonderful points! I love constructive criticism because I want to be the best I can be, so I belong to a writers' group for criticism and encouragement. I think that insecurity gets in the way for many people. I had to laugh when you talked about vacillating-- I go between thinking my work is great and that it sucks, sometimes even in the space of an hour. 😂
I always check my comments for editing advice below each of my web novel chapters so I can correct what I missed.
crowdsourcing your editing... That's really smart
Finally off Twitter (at least on my phone, still have my Author account but it's only accessible on my desktop where I never use Twitter) and Reddit (except for my PODCAST account, again, laptop only). Need IG to communicate with my kids and FB to communicate with my friends, but I scroll way less than ever before. I think I finally burned out on social media. Feels good, man.
Thank you for the video! I am mediocre in many things and that is ok. It is realistically impossible to be the greatest n every medium of art, IMO. I strive for better, keep learning and moving forward. It’s like learning new languages. I may not be fluent but getting by in it is far better than being clueless.
Such a good point! I think occasionally its good to look around and see where you're at, but 99.9% of the time, you judge yourself by how you have moved in relation to your previous work. This might have to be a video... thanks!
tshirt: "I didn't choose mediocrity; it chose me."
tshirt: "I chose mediocrity; mediocrity said no."
haha the first is for when you're doubting yourself and the second is when you want to humblebrag your own genius. love it
My writing goal is to get into the groove.
I understand that other writers might fear getting into a rut.
I think the difference is subjective.
I think (hope) my writing nowadays is of sufficient quality for my overall goal of telling the many stories I have thought of.
I want to get faster more than I want to get better.
I have far more stories plotted out than I have years left to write them.
The successful fast writers who I want to emulate are reassuring that most writers do get better as they get faster.
It's not a question of sacrificing quality for quantity.
On the one hand I think I will get better as I write more. On the other hand, I am drafting my fifth novel as I’m also doing a minor revision on my second - and honestly not seeing a big difference in the quality between the two…
And I'm OK with that.
I do see the word "mediocre" as the pejorative so I don't really accept that term.
Maybe “Good Enough.”
I want to be a good enough writer so that the writing does not get in the way of the story.
When readers say “that was a well written story” I want them to mean they were immersed in the narrative, not admiring the sentences.
I am not one to pore over sentences, especially not in novella-length-plus works. I want my words to be good enough to not be distracting, and, I don't know if this is the right thing to do, but work harder on strengthening my strengths. So I also write pretty quickly, but usually I have one conscious goal of something to improve. I think it's hard to compare a whole work and say "this is better than this" but it's easier to say, "my dialogue in this is more natural than in this." Sometimes the goal might not need to be returned to consciously (for instance if I want to write in a particular perspective or a type of character I've never written before) but others take reminding, like with dialogue
I like the groove and the rut idea
This video came at the right moment. I'm working through evaluting ( based on feedback and me) if the book's saying what i want it to and how I can push things. / Why sometimes it's difficult to write what I wanted to say.
1. Your painting is beautiful
2. Those are good questions to ask. And then you can mold the raw material
8:37 (7:36) This and that are true. You can both have something profoundly important to say and not have the necessary skills to communicate it effectively. Regardless of skill, it takes time to refine a message, whatever it may be.
Yes. Another comment below said that Ira Glass said something about how practice is closing the gap between the two. Honestly, I think that gap is almost necessary to progress as a writer. It hurts to see the difference, but that's how you know what direction to go in to improve
Writing may not be basketball, but you are dribbling in the court of complete empowerment.
Agreed. The counterintuitive part is, that level of empowerment, of creating every aspect of the world one presents, is what I think intimidates most people away from it
Man, I love those drawings! I'd certainly follow your progress on Instagram or wherever you post them. Also, do you draw your maps for your own speculative fiction?
Thanks! I wanted to be a comic book artist as a kid and have some holdover ability. I was thinking of doing a scifi rpg supplement and couldn't find any cheap bulk spot art (the little art to fill blank spots on the page) so it sparked up a resurgence in trying to make it myself, though I haven't kept up with it like I should. I've posted a couple on instagram, but I find social media pretty overwhelming, so that I'm mostly putting that energy into comments here.
I don't draw maps. I do follow a few people who do, because it's such a cool art
Dear gods, am I mid at basically everything in life 😂
I might even be mediocre at writing. I agree that doing things for fun is important. I am finding the more I gamify some elements of my drafting process (rolling dice to determine outcomes, figuring out what class or stats a certain character might have, etc.), the more I want to do it.
Random tanget end.
You know, reaching mid sounds easy, but there are a lot of people pouring a lot of energy into fiction writing. Just getting to mid is bragging rights
Randomizing makes writing a puzzle! "okay, how do I take it from here to here?" It also reduces the stress I have about my overly-linear thought pattern. Now the randomness comes as part of the process and the logical brain is a benefit, not something to try to hold back. You follow my board game channel @jalanrykergames ? I have trouble remembering who I talk to where. If you haven't checked it out, I'm doing some solo rpg content with a lot of randomizers
Coming back to add say too that, and I was talking with another writer about this recently, that it can be easy to feel like all the great works have already been written, and that everything written today will only be derivative of what has been done before at this point. Because of that arises the question, is it possible to write great works anymore? Is it possible to even rise out of mediocrity? I think the answer is yes, but I feel like it's harder to make the distinction between good and great now. It seems like the truly great works that come out nowadays have a distinct quality about them that sets them apart from most other books, and they tend to be experimental in some way, like the Book Thief for instance. So I suppose if you want to be great, you might have to experiment with different styles of writing and try to do things that haven't been done before, or things that are not done often anyway in writing.
I was watching video essays about Wes Anderson's movies having so many commonalities between them and had the thought, "Why aren't there video essays on UA-cam analyzing particular author writing styles?" But perhaps that is uncharted territory that might soon be remedied.
It's so difficult for me to assess my work and determine whether it's good or not. I crave constant progression and improvement which is why I consume so much writing advice and do my best to apply it to my actual writing (definitely not content with mediocrity), but after a certain point it's like damn, where is the line between objective and subjective? How can you really tell if your writing is good or not since popularity and copious amounts of validation don't necessarily indicate the quality of a work. I get lost trying to find a gauge or way to measure quality.
Yeah I have had to write down for myself what my personal standards are. If you take classes on literature they might talk about "What was the purpose behind this book? Do you think the author succeeded?" and I think that's a helpful way to measure excellence--you get to decide what you want the book to do, and the level of intention and awareness of the tools you're using to bring that about help you see, "Yes, this is how I want the book to be, and I am satisfied with it now." It might not be everyone's five star book but if you're satisfied with it, and are aware of anyone else's criticisms of it and don't care or mind about those things, then that's enough. Of course, we sometimes catch things after a book is out and that's okay. We live, we learn, we keep going.
@@EmilynWood You give really good advice! I'm turning over my comment section to you
I think of the quality of fiction writing as being subjective, but inter-subjective. A book is a pointless thing, so how can you say if it's good or bad. But, once we place that point, we can take another book and say, "This book has more musical language" and place it higher, at least in that regard, and "This book has worse pacing," and place it lower.
To me, that says it's easier to think of one thing at a time and view it with something more like objectivity. It's good to crave constant progression, but in order to both achieve and perceive it, I think your practice has to be focused on a limited number of things at a time. And I like what Emilyn says about the purpose of the work, and think it's tied to this. You can set the purpose of the work, and see if you achieve it. That purpose can be tied to either an effect you're trying to achieve, or a goal of a particular voice for a character, or a twisty plot, or whatever you want to focus on
How 'bout we step out of mediocrity just far enough to be professional? Could that work? How much extra would one need to do?
Yeah, I think you can. I think it's pretty common to get to a pro level and then put less focus on improving. I think some publishers even encourage it, not wanting you to change your winning formula too much.
Getting to be a pro at writing is still a big goal. When I was a junior computer programmer, the company expected me to lose them money and be bad at my job. That certainly is a far cry from how much it takes to be a professional fiction writer
This is also related to your last video: How do you get over your mediocrity? Not even mediocrity, how do you push through and write knowing very well that what you're writing is awful? This is especially hard when you're older and have plenty of reading under your belt. I know what great writing is, I know what compelling plots are, I know what relatable characters are. That's why it's so painful to look at my own writing and not to throw everything through the window.
Ira Glass has a short youtube video on creativity. In it he says this happens because your taste is good, and now you just have to do the work to catch up with your taste so that your work will get to the point where it matches your taste/gets to the standard you want it to be.
Of course, too, there's the patient editing process. You can't edit something till you have a completed rough draft.
Then you make notes on your writing and learn how to improve it.
There are some helpful books on self-editing out there.
And then also, many books are not published till after they've gone through 7 or 8 drafts. Of course, not everyone has to do that but it is good to recognize that that can be a part of the process for some writers.
@@EmilynWood oh that's so good. I hadn't heard that but I'm taking note.
it's difficult in fiction to hang on. most things in life you can create at a mediocre level and find some success as you work to push onward. If you were a computer programmer, for instance, you could study for 4 years and then go and be a bad programmer someplace, getting paid to learn. That doesn't exist for fiction.
The other side of that is, 4 years of fulltime study is a lot, and people expect to work that hard to get proficient at something, but often people want to get a pro result on their first or second novel.
You're right that the perspective of age makes it a lot harder to put in those hours than the blind enthusiasm of youth, but your hours will count for more. I think Emilyn is right on with the Ira Glass reference: that despair over the gap means you recognize the gap and will cross it much more easily than if you were blind to it. Your progress forward can be more of a straight line than a wandering path of accidental improvement, because you have your target
While I concur that mediocrity is a choice, I don't think hard work is how you get to become great. Sure, dedication is needed, but just doing the hustle usually leads not to improvements either. So, work smarter not harder! That means learn fast form you mistakes, not just work endlessly, but get as often as possible feedback to recognise the flaws early on.
Isn't it? Hard work is absolutely how you become great-- I agree with smarter not harder, but I've found the hard work is usually what points towards moving into a positive direction.
It's absolutely a folly to think just working hard will get you places, but similarly, it's a folly to think the hustle isn't needed for improvements
You have to work both hard and smart. The first chair in an orchestra tends to work twice as many hours as the 2nd chair (according to a study referenced in Grit), and it has to be focused practice. That's where the self-analysis I was talking about comes in.
Time for mediocrity-themed merch!! Take our money already!
ha! Mediocrity-themed is something I can do!
Mediocrity sells in the DEI gatekept Trad pub world today. If we were to follow the tenents of "own voices" there wouldn't be any straight white male protagonists. And when romance fans buy YA... What the heck, Trad Pub?
I wouldn't tradpub for all the tea in China. They pressure writers to wokify their story so it feels wrenchy. God knows what they're going to do next.
Do you need a straight white male protagonist?
It’ll blow your mind once you realize that we are all essentially the same person, regardless of our race, ethnicity, sexual orientation.
So much of what makes us who we are is primal. Tap into that. Be around people.
You really don’t think you could write a story with a black lesbian as the protagonist? Come on, now. You’re supposed to be a creator, not someone that just wants to put themselves in every story as the main character.
@jimjo8541 Yes I could. I have a black lesbian who was one of my best friends, though she lives in NY and we have lost contact. We used to watch Ally McBeal together while she would twist beeswax into her dreads, all while smoking a Backwoods natural leaf blunt kept together by flat hairpin.
I care about people, and I listen to "other voices". I can write write dialogue of an Indian man and woman, with their hurried style of speech. They seem to choose phrases that sound good quickly. I have a talent with writing, as I am very observant of people.
But that's ok. Sometimes, you just got to write a good story, then sit back and when people have this "Other voice" DEI, or sensitivity issues, the piece will be so good and undeniable that they can't say crap. And then they can sit and spin.
Everything, your advice which you wrote me, is BS. Not to mention, but it's that "advice should never be given except when asked for ".
You say "Be around people." And "Tap into that." I have, and I wrote about them, as a tribute. And then maybe they will get their heads out of their asses with this crap, which is destroying the arts.
It's ok though, because I have already written the book that does that.
@@jimjo8541way to miss the point - you are effectively mandated to do this now, effectively killing all genuine artistic inspiration (what are the odds that most straight white male writers would choose of their own volition to make their protagonist a black lesbian?)
Bro says he is an amateur at music, then plays a literal BANGER.
I think you're 100% correct with this video. Mediocrity is a choice and it's the one that 99% of people make every day, without even realising it. Because being exceptional is HARD and it requires sacrifice. 99% of people can't make that sacrifice. In fact it's simpler than that. Deferred gratification is a concept that most people don't even begin to think about. Most people can't save money because they want to buy everything NOW. Why save for something when I can buy it on credit?
If most people can't grasp that concept then why should we expect most people can grasp the concept of sacrifice and practice? In truth, most iconic writers (King, Hobb, Sanderson) aren't great, they aren't even talented. They are practiced. The decided to get up everyday and make time to practice their craft, they sacrificed for it. Free time, family time, social media time, late mornings, early nights. Delayed gratification of the wants for the long term goals.
You're absolutely correct that it also requires you to put aside your anxiety and choose the hard road. Being exceptional is simply making the hard decision each time you have the option to take the easy route. In any discipline, not just writing.
Thank you for challenging me to be better. I've just broken 60,000 words and into the 3rd act of my first novel.
Congrats on getting into the 3rd act! That's a much more fun place to be.
"most iconic writers (King, Hobb, Sanderson) aren't great, they aren't even talented. They are practiced. The decided to get up everyday and make time to practice their craft"