Ira Glass's take on beginners

[Boneman]

Although this is taken from Patrick Rothfuss's blog, I think it belongs here, rather than his dedicated threads, as he's reproducing this fantastic piece of advice.

http://blog.patrickrothfuss.com/

(If you're looking at this post some time after its original inclusion - 23rd February - then you may need to scroll to Pat's blog entry of Feb 22nd, if he's posted since that date.)

 

[Brian G Turner]

Direct link:
http://blog.patrickrothfuss.com/2013/02/ira-glass-on-art/

 

[Jo Zebedee]

So good. And inspirational as opposed to saying we're all rubbish! Makes you want to keep trudging on and narrow the gap!

 

[Mangara]

Inspiring! Thank you so much.

 

[Boneman]

Thanks, Brian! (Mutters to himself; 'must get up to date with this new-fangled technology')

 

[Brian G Turner]

But ... most new writers aren't disappointed with their first attempt, reject any criticism, and then self-publish with the view that they are an undiscovered genius!!

 

[allmywires]

Nice, thank you Mr Glass for the words.

But ... most new writers aren't disappointed with their first attempt, reject any criticism, and then self-publish with the view that they are an undiscovered genius!!

Culture of immediacy that we live in...no desire to improve, no patience, no ability to hear the word 'no, that's not good enough' because we're brought up to live in a world where everyone's the same and equal and it's fluffy and amazing.

 

[Boneman]

Nice, thank you Mr Glass for the words.



Culture of immediacy that we live in...no desire to improve, no patience, no ability to hear the word 'no, that's not good enough' because we're brought up to live in a world where everyone's the same and equal and it's fluffy and amazing.

Sad but true. Actually, it occurs to me that one of the most ridiculous sayings I heard in relation to success and failure in schools, actually sits phenomenally well with writers;

"There's no such thing as failure, only deferred success."

 

[Hex]

Do you think it's "most"? And we don't know how things will work out.

Perhaps self-publishing will develop like publishing in fanzines etc. back in the olden days -- a way of getting started.

The measure of success won't be whether you get an agent/ conventional publishing deal but whether you sell any books. I don't think critique circles are necessarily the way to go for everyone -- there will be various paths to getting skilled.

I wish I lived in the world where everyone's the same and equal In the old days, you know, we lived in paper bags (etc).

Also, seriously, I'd rather live in a world where children are taught they all have potential to be great -- even though it's actually laughably false when you look at how different people's lives are before the age of 5, with some children arriving at school unable to speak, let alone speak in sentences -- than in the kind of world where only those with the most expensive educations could ever hope to succeed. I think before we bemoan the message that everyone is worthy, we might consider the alternatives... Brave New World, anyone? Ahem *rant ends*

 

[allmywires]

"There's no such thing as failure, only deferred success."

Culture of exam retakes that's another topic though.

Do you think it's "most"? And we don't know how things will work out.

Perhaps self-publishing will develop like publishing in fanzines etc. back in the olden days -- a way of getting started.

The measure of success won't be whether you get an agent/ conventional publishing deal but whether you sell any books. I don't think critique circles are necessarily the way to go for everyone -- there will be various paths to getting skilled.

That's a good point - well, I think if I fail with this round of agencies I'll start seriously looking at Kindle self-published. But I think a lot of people, espeically those who don't know a lot about the publishing world, will think: Ah, I wrote a book, I'll put it on Amazon and get some money from it? No feedback, professional opinions, etc.

I wish I lived in the world where everyone's the same and equal In the old days, you know, we lived in paper bags (etc). (also, seriously, I'd rather live in a world where children are taught they all have potential to be great -- even though it's actually laughably false when you look at how different people's lives are before the age of 5, with some children arriving at school unable to speak, let alone speak in sentences -- than in the kind of world where only those with the most expensive educations could ever hope to succeed. I think before we bemoan the message that everyone is worthy, we might consider the alternatives... Brave New World, anyone?) Ahem *rant ends*

I agree with you that everyone has the potential to be great - just not always in education. I hate, hate, hate the New Labour message that everyone should go to university* even if it's to do a Mickey Mouse degree when there's plenty of other things you can do that are practical and won't leave you thirty grand in debt - apprenticeships, internships, HNQs and all that.

But again...not really on topic... so... /rant

*I'm also a terrible degree snob which is a very awful trait

 

[Hex]

I completely agree that not everyone should go to university. We haven't sorted out how to decide, though. When I was at school I was friends with a charming girl -- absolutely lovely, sweet as anything, excellent at music, hopeless (beyond hopeless) at science.

Her parents were determined that she would be a pharmacist and they let her keep up the music because it would help her to get into university. But even in a truly excellent school, with all the tutors and the summer schooling money could buy, she was still only getting Cs in the subjects she needed (the ones she passed). I don't think she was doing it deliberately -- she was genuinely just not very academically gifted, especially not in science.

But I bet she went to university in the end -- probably not the top flight ones, but likely a decent one -- and she probably got a degree because she had lots of money and all her parents' determination behind her.

I've taught at universities too and some of the most frustrating students were the could-be-smart-but-not-bothered who didn't work hard, coasted through on what they'd done at school (because really excellent schools do pretty much teach almost up to honours level at university topics -- especially in humanities), bought essays or got them from older students, and wasted a space that someone else could have used and benefitted from because attending university was socially expected. Grrrr.

The New Labour message that everyone should go to university was a mistake but the message that the people who traditionally go there may not be the best people, is not.

Just to relate that rant to the thread, some writers have raw talent but no education, and some have education but no real talent. Presumably a truly publishable writer needs to have both.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Culture of immediacy that we live in...no desire to improve, no patience, no ability to hear the word 'no, that's not good enough' because we're brought up to live in a world where everyone's the same and equal and it's fluffy and amazing.

What was that syndrome recently posted here again, where the least capable think themselves most capable, and the most capable think themselves least?

I was going to write something recently, but thought it might sound too snarky.

Basically, the point would have been that lots of people can draw a bit, but would never imagine themselves as being able to compete with professional artists.

So why is it that when sometimes decides to try writing a story they think themselves capable of competing with the best?

I've been through this myself, so I'm not directing it exclusively at others.

In which case, rather than encouraging people who have a whiff of wanting to write, shouldn't we be brutal about the situation, and point out how much it requires to even try to get into the running?

I don't know about anyone else, but writing uses up all my spare time, it feels like work, I spend a lot of money on it reading around the market and research. This is not a hobby. But ... I am still not there. And unless I am ever signed up with a mega deal, frankly I would have been financially much better off if I had spent my time working at Tesco's instead of trying to learn to write.

If I didn't feel a sense of destiny, and that the writing was a major part of it, I would have given up ages ago!

Am not bitter, though, as I appreciate that trying for success takes hard work.

 

[Hex]

My feeling is we should be honest about our own experiences and the results of our research, but we can't know that everyone will experience the same disappointments as we did. Brutality seems to me to be excessive.

A lot of it is taste, also.

 

[Mirannan]

Regarding people who are incompetent; sometimes even the most brilliant can have blind spots - and be unable to unmask them even when it's pointed out.

Case in point from a depressingly long time ago; halfway through first year at Cambridge University, during an organic chemistry lab session. The rather boring afternoon was enlivened by someone's apparatus catching fire. Twice.

It turns out that this was caused by a mistake. The work she was doing involved distilling off volatile solvent (acetone, I think) and she had built the apparatus in such a way that it was completely sealed, with the inevitable result that the solvent vapours had escaped through various joints. and caught fire. (Chemistry labs tend to have a lot of flames in them!)

Now, sure, this sort of mistake is easily made - although one might have thought that someone good enough for Cambridge wouldn't have made it, especially after 4 or 5 months. What really made the point I'm trying to make is that she continued with the work, without trying to find out what had gone wrong, without checking over the apparatus and without asking for help from the experienced technician a few feet away. Hence the second fire.

Making mistakes is human. Not learning from them is just ******** stupid.

 

[Hex]

See, I'm the sort of person who'd need to set something on fire seven or eight times before I considered it might be something I'd done rather than, you know, fire pixies.

And this is why I am not a chemist (or electrician, or remotely dependable in critical situations).

 

[Montero]

Well

Agree on University is not right for everyone - this country is remarkably lacking in applied training schools (but they are expensive to run...). Also mourn that many employers are now expecting to see a degree on someone's CV, even if that someone is great at their job and a degree would be irrelevant etc.

Chemistry - well, speaking as a chemist, it is an interesting mixture of advanced theory and practical work. In a degree you are learning both - and some people just ain't practical. There were several people in my year who were a bit of a liability in the lab. One was actually thrown out of the lab for everyone else's safety and no idea what level of degree they got in the end, but it was nothing exciting (especially without getting the marks from the lab work to contribute). The other got a first - usually OK in the lab, but had "moments". The greatest "moment" was to pour a solution of plastic in solvent down the sink (totally against safety regs, should have gone into waste solvent bin) but the especially joy of this was that the solvent evaporated leaving a plug of plastic blocking the drain pipe. There was a lot of water cooled apparatus around the place so a steady run of water down the drain - which backed up and flooded remarkably quickly. Said person did it TWICE. Didn't happen three times - there was an awful lot of yelling after the second time and I think the message stuck at that point.

 

[stephen.samuels]

If your critical of yourself, you've have a chance of being successful. However, its no bad thing to give yourself a pat on the back for getting better. That's the bit we miss sometimes.