(Alternate title: Things I Can Say About That Article Written By That Creative Writing Ex-MFA Teacher Guy Now That I’ve Read It And Gotten So Angry It’s Like My Urethra Is Filled With Bees.)
Okay, fine, go read the article.
I’ll wait here.
*checks watch*
Ah, there you are.
I see you’re trembling with barely-concealed rage. Good on you.
I will now whittle down this very bad, very poisonous article — I say “poisonous” because it does a very good job of spreading a lot of mostly bad and provably false information.
Let us begin.
“Writers are born with talent.”
Yep. There I am. Already angry. I’m so angry, I’m actually just peeing bees. If you’re wondering where all these bees came from? I have peed them into the world.
This is one of the worst, most toxic memes that exists when it comes to writers. That somehow, we slide out of the womb with a fountain pen in our mucus-slick hands, a bestseller gleam in our rheumy eyes. We like to believe in talent, as if it’s a definable thing — as if, like with the retconned Jedi, we can just take a blood test and look for literary Midichlorians to chart your authorial potential. Is talent real? Some genetic quirk that makes us good at one thing, bad at another? Don’t know, don’t care.
What I know is this: your desire matters. If you desire something bad enough, if you really want it, you will be driven to reach for it. No promises you’ll find success, but a persistent, almost psychopathic urge forward will allow you to clamber up over those muddy humps of failure and into the eventual fresh green grass of actual accomplishment.
Writers are not born. They are made. Made through willpower and work. Made by iteration, ideation, reiteration. Made through learning — learning that comes from practicing, reading, and through teachers who help shepherd you through those things in order to give your efforts context.
No, not everyone will become a success because nothing in life is guaranteed.
But a lack of success is not because of how you were born.
Writers are not a caste. They are not the chosen ones.
We work for what we want. We carve our stories out of stone, in ink of our own blood.
“If you didn’t decide to take writing seriously by the time you were a teenager, you’re probably not going to make it.”
[becomes Madeline Kahn]
FLAMES. ON THE SIDE OF MY FACE.
This is one of those “provably false” things.
Because lots and lots and lots and lots of writers — successful writers, writers with books, with audiences, with money, with continued publishing contracts — did not start getting serious about writing until their 20s, 30s, 40s, and even beyond that.
Sidenote: teenagers are rarely serious about anything at all ever.
I, admittedly, was serious about writing as a teenager.
I was also serious about sandwiches, Star Wars, Ultima, vampires, masturbation.
I don’t think “what you took seriously as a teenager” is ever going to be a meaningful metric to see how the rest of your life is going to turn out. Your pubescent years are not prophecy.
“If you complain about not having time to write, please do us both a favor and drop out.”
This is one of those points he makes that almost sounds right-on. Because, sure, you shouldn’t complain about not having time to write. Wanna be a writer? Find the time to write.
Except, he’s talking to students. Students, who routinely do not have enough time. Students, who of course are going to complain because complaining is part and parcel of life. So, “just drop out” seems maybe a little presumptuous, don’t you think?
“If you aren’t a serious reader, don’t expect anyone to read what you write.”
Wait. Yes! I agree with this! If you want to be a writer, you need to be a serious reader, and so — *keeps reading the article* — oh, goddamnit. He doesn’t mean ‘serious’ as in, ‘committed to the act,’ he means ‘serious’ as in, “I read the hoitiest-toitest of books.”
Dude, I tried reading Finnegans Wake and it didn’t give me a writing career. It just gave me a stroke. I have a copy of Infinite Jest around here somewhere — oh, ha ha, not to read, but rather, to bludgeon interlopers when they try to steal my sex furniture.
Wanna be a writer? Just read. Read all kinds of stuff. Read broadly. Read from a wide variety of voices. Do not read by some prescription. Do not read because of some false intellectual rigor. Read a biography of Lincoln, then mainline a handful of Dragonlance novels, then read Rainbow Rowell before figuring out why anybody gives a fuck about Tom Clancy. Read a book about space, about slavery, about bugs, about hypnosis. Read anything and everything. Your reading requires a serious commitment, not a commitment to serious books.
“No one cares about your problems if you’re a shitty writer.”
Ah, yes, Alex, I’ll take THINGS SHITTY HUMANS SAY for $500.
Author goes onto say:
“Just because you were abused as a child does not make your inability to stick with the same verb tense for more than two sentences any more bearable. In fact, having to slog through 500 pages of your error-riddled student memoir makes me wish you had suffered more.”
Wh… whuuuuuh… why would… whhh.
That whistling sound is the dramatic whisper of oxygen keening through my open, slack-jawed mouth. Because holy fucking fuck, why would you ever say that and think anybody is ever going to feel good about it? Man, I am a huge fan of the TAKE YOUR MEDICINE LIFE IS HARD school of teaching writing, but never in a zajillion years would I suggest you suffer more child abuse because you’re a bad writer. Thanks, teacher, you’re so helpful.
That’s colder than a snowman’s asshole, dude.
I mean, dang.
“You don’t need my help to get published.”
Once again: skirting truth. It’s true that you do not need an MFA to get published. Actually, you need almost nothing at all in terms of qualifications. You don’t need a BA, either. You don’t need a high school diploma or even a GED. Publishing doesn’t care if you even graduated your preschool. Your audience has no interest in when you learned to walk.
All it cares about is if the book is good.
Now, you of course go through all the schooling not for the pieces of paper it provides but rather for the skills you learn along the way. I don’t have an MFA but I did have writing professors in college and they helped hone who I was as an author. It had real meaning, and I don’t regret it.
Of course, the author of the article goes on to say:
“But in today’s Kindle/e-book/self-publishing environment, with New York publishing sliding into cultural irrelevance, I find questions about working with agents and editors increasingly old-fashioned. Anyone who claims to have useful information about the publishing industry is lying to you, because nobody knows what the hell is happening. My advice is for writers to reject the old models and take over the production of their own and each other’s work as much as possible.”
Advice that runs considerably counter to the rest of his piece, I think — and again, provably false. You could self-publish and you could do well. You might even want to try that. But to assume that the other ways are so outmoded that they’re equivalent to buggy-whips and phonographs is absurd. Lots of good information out there on both traditional and self-publishing. You already know this, of course, but this article cheeses me off enough that I’m pretty sure my salivary glands are producing actual cobra venom.
“It’s not important that people think you’re smart.”
Finally.
Finally!
Something I agree with. In its entirety.
Writing isn’t set dressing. The words are not themselves the end of their function — they have to dance for their dinner, and so must be enlightning, engaging, entertaining. I take some umbrage with the idea of being only entertaining or pleasurable (seriously, has he actually read Gravity’s Rainbow?), and would instead correct to say:
You write to tell a story.
You don’t tell a story in order to write.
The language is there as a tool. Words are not preening peacocks.
“It’s important to woodshed.”
Once more, a moment of almost truth.
Writing is a solitary act, and a lot of the early writing you will do will be fit only for the manure pile. This is true of most writers, I think, where we iterate early (and ideally, iterate often) in order to figure out what the fidgety fuck we’re doing. We trunk novels not because we strive for perfection but because we have to learn. Of course the first stories we produce aren’t going to be sublime shelf-burners and bestsellers, just as a toddler’s first steps are clumsy drunken ones, not an elegant Olympian sprint.
But I disagree that nobody should see it. That’s ultimately what he’s saying — write in the dark, some fungal producer of literary mushroom caps. Tell no one. Iterate in shadow and shame. Which is not functional — we write to be read, and writing demands readers. We let our friends read our early work. Our parents. Other writers. We let editors take a crack when we’re at a certain level. Agents if we get that far. Working in isolation and sharing nothing often nets you nothing — we are the worst judges of our own work. Creative agitation is an essential, and that agitation comes from readers. Readers with comments. Critiques. Complaints. And, of course, compliments.
Here’s the thing. I joke that the article makes me pee bees and roll my eyes so hard that I’ll break my own neck, and it does that, a little bit. Mostly, though, it just makes me sad to think that there might be writers out there who believe these things. Particularly who believe them because a teacher has told them this. (Teachers, like parents, are supposed to be good for us. They’re supposed to help us. Ironic how often the reverse ends up true, then.)
If you want to write:
Write.
Write a lot. As much as you are literally able.
Read a lot, too. And not just one thing. But all things. A panoply of voices. A plethora of subjects.
Read, write, read, write.
And be read, in turn.
If you want schooling? Do it. If you want critique? Do it. But go in, eyes open. Do not believe in your own inherent talent, or ego, or ability. Find ways to turn up the volume. Gain new skill-points in this Authorial RPG. Level up. Don’t be complacent.
You don’t have to suffer for your art.
You don’t have to do it in some hyperbaric isolation chamber.
You don’t have to just put it out in the world, nor do you have to keep it from the world.
Find your own way.
And go with your gut.
Want it.
Work it.
Write it down.
NOW SOMEBODY SET THAT TO A COOL BEAT AND LET’S DANCE
menomama3 says:
You have the nose of a truffle pig for sniffing out crap and giving it a good airing. Let’s make a special cologne for that Ex-MFA-CWTD – a special blend of Wendig ground, dried bees, pee, and a soupçon of brimstone. Then everyone else could smell him too.
March 1, 2015 — 4:23 PM
Life With Teens and Other Wild Things says:
My reaction to the original was pretty much summed up by “self important, pompous jackass”, but you put it SO much more eloquently. Hey, you should be a writer, or something.
March 1, 2015 — 4:26 PM
christianfennell says:
Um, of course talent is real, what, are we in some kindergarden love-in here? Some Soviet-era proletariat equalization program? And how hard you work, or the next person doesn’t, is immaterial … these things do not belong to some cosmic quantified constant; some comparative karma weighting, as if all the books queried for publishing were placed in a long line and chosen by who worked hardest? And I’m with Toni Morrison, reading matters, it’s a very good thing to do, and you should do it, I’m just not so certain it has as much impact on writing ability as some people seem to think. The bottom line is this: when it comes to writing, there are no absolutes. None. Zero.
March 1, 2015 — 4:34 PM
Liz Reese says:
Simply, bravo! Your words came alive on the page and in my mind; don’t stop doing what you’re doing! You’ve got talent!
March 1, 2015 — 4:36 PM
lenalingard says:
Brilliant but I would add this: students may not be complaining about their time management because it’s “part and parcel” of student life. Most of my students hold down (shitty) jobs, 20-30 hours a week; they take a lot of course-hours to maintain whatever financial aid they have. Graduate students usually have to teach freshman writing courses, which will mean tons of grading. That they find time to write at all impresses me, and I don’t mind a bit if they want to complain a little.
March 1, 2015 — 4:37 PM
Nicole Pyles says:
You know what bugs me – no, pisses me off – about this article you’re talking about – is that it makes being a successful writer some big secret only this asshat has the answers too. The big secret is no secret. You write, you finish. You revise. You show other people. You take the asswhooping that is critiquing. You demand for more. You go back. You rewrite. When you go back agaiin enough times that you get less hate over your work, you submit. And you read. You submit. It’s a lifestyle. Not a race. Not a marathon. It’s like eating right. Eating right isn’t a diet. It’s a lifestyle. So is writing. You don’t lose 20 pounds and go back to donuts and you don’t publish once and go back to video games. You have to be willing to change your lifestyle in some way. Self publishing is always an option (although I think people self publish far too soon) and regular publishing is too. It’s all a process, though. And neither path is easy.
March 1, 2015 — 4:40 PM
jfaraday says:
Well said.
March 1, 2015 — 10:39 PM
ProfeJMarie (Janet Rundquist) says:
Honestly, part of me is wondering if he meant his post to be satirical… but if so, it was poorly done. Maybe he should enroll in an MFA program – or go back to his woodshed?
March 1, 2015 — 4:42 PM
Jackie Kessler says:
I <3 you so very, very much.
March 1, 2015 — 4:45 PM
dpatneaude says:
This guy is from Seattle. Or at least seems to be. There, I confessed to it. For anyone in the Pacific Northwest writers’ community, that’s the bad (embarrassing) news. The good news is that he doesn’t speak for the rest of us. Or on behalf of reality. More good news: I can name lots of successful (big contracts, big sales, big dollars, major awards) and moderately successful (smaller contracts, fewer sales, minor awards but still traditionally published) writers in his own backyard who didn’t write anything significant or embark on anything resembling a writing career until they were well into middle age. I don’t know any of them who believe they were born with talent. They developed an interest in writing, and then they developed a drive to write, and then they got serious about it. They became serious readers and serious writers and serious students (not necessarily MFA students, but people who are willing to read books and articles and blogs about writing and go places where writers talk about what they do and become sponges for all kinds of writer stuff and open-minded about critique and what works and doesn’t).
The guy who wrote the article included enough truths and half truths (you need to read, you need to write, you need to quit whining about lack of time) to mask, or maybe dilute, or maybe give some credibility to, the flawed main thrust of his argument: Writers are born, not made; from the get-go, you either have it or you don’t. When I visit schools I tell kids the exact opposite, based on what I’ve observed and experienced. Writers are made, not born. The ability to write well is a complicated mix of aptitude, desire, persistence, resiliency, stubbornness, open-mindedness, and the ability, or good fortune, to make the right choices. And of course, practice. Want to be able to hit a baseball over the fence? Dance on Broadway? Play a mean guitar? Practice! Want to write something good? Practice!
My first book was published when I was forty-nine. I wasn’t a born talent. After a few years of being a sponge (and practicing), I wrote a good story and was persistent through a series of rejections and was ultimately lucky enough to find an editor who believed in me. Two decades later the book is still selling. Nine others followed. Pedigree, schmedigree. If you want to write, write.
March 1, 2015 — 5:01 PM
Melissa Lewicki says:
Thank you.
March 2, 2015 — 3:12 AM
Cari Hislop says:
Having never heard of the guy who wrote the article I went to look up his “published” work in the usual places to read a sample to see if I thought he could actually write or not….none of his offered works (that I could find) offer any free chapters to preview. Well…he might be a talented writer (though clearly he has no business teaching anything creative)…but who’s to know? I’m not spending money to find out if he’s crap or not. Thank goodness he quit “teaching” students how rubbish they all are after being asked to pay exorbitant fees. Bloody cheek!
March 1, 2015 — 5:03 PM
Green Embers says:
Hey Chuck, new to your blog. 1st — Excellent rant. 2nd — Nice to see another Ultima fan out there. (I’m like the guy in the Farside comic who is noticing the goldfish in the moat as his compatriots are storming the castle, lol).
March 1, 2015 — 5:10 PM
jbirdwriting says:
Thank you for this. That article upset (as in, threw me off balance) me in ways that I hadn’t anticipated. Especially the part about being serious about writing as a teenager. I wasn’t serious about READING (I mean, I might’ve been but cannot remember) until I, as you put it, mainlined a bunch of Dragonlance novels. (No kidding, a boy in my horticulture class – I liked plants, but was the only girl – brought me a GIANT birthday bag of something like 20 Dragonlance novels because he had read them all and found out I played D&D.)
So. Yes. Thank you for this.
And man, I wonder if this person was destroyed by teaching or came into it that way.
March 1, 2015 — 5:13 PM
Teri Brown says:
Thank you, thank you, thank you. I read this yesterday and it left a bad taste in my mouth. I didn’t have time to figure out why, (Had to go climb a mountain. Like for reals), but you said why I hated it more perfectly and profanely than I could have. As someone who hopes to get an MFA some day, (and am already traditionally multipublished, so there), I’m hoping that teacher twits like this aren’t the norm. And dude, colder than a snowman’s asshole? OMG, where do you come up with this shiz? LOL
March 1, 2015 — 5:21 PM
Michele says:
Thank you for writing this. If professors don’t want their students to be stretched for time, how about funding them properly? I was a fully-funded MFA student, but the stipend was still so meager for the area in which I lived that I had to take up two part-time jobs, alongside the two classes I was teaching for the university. This amount of work, on top of taking a full course load every semester, left me fried and my work suffered. I’m grateful, now for the teaching experience, but that year was awful.
It has been such a relief to be writing outside of the MFA, following the guidelines you set down instead: write a lot, read a lot, repeat.
March 1, 2015 — 5:23 PM
Claire says:
Simply put – thank you. I am in my 30s and very, very new to writing. I have actually refused to write for most of my life because of poor grades in elementary school and getting ripped a new one in college and grad school. I have no degree in English/Journalism/Creative Arts. I haven’t read more serious books and I have no idea the premise of Gravity’s Rainbow. I felt like a worthless shit reading Ryan Boudinot’s article and questioned what right I had to write. I am a firm believer that the world has more than enough critics (ahem, Mr. Boudinot) and what we really need are encouragers. With that said, thank you, Chuck. I teared up at the end of your article and felt support and love. Thanks for the encouragement. Everyone of us needs it from time to time.
March 1, 2015 — 5:29 PM
writingkat says:
Right there with you. 😉
March 2, 2015 — 12:48 AM
T.B. Jeremiah says:
Different life circumstances, but so much this! Boudinot’s article hit me right in the middle of a bad weekend (for unrelated reasons) and pretty much wrecked me emotionally. Seeing Chuck’s solid takedown is SO cathartic. Seconding the thanks!
March 8, 2015 — 2:05 PM
Eric Bourland says:
The author is bitter in places, and it seems like bitterness is one of the common outcomes of employment in the academe. And is also one of the most uncool of emotions. And the academe seems like a relentless Gehenna.
But I liked some of the things the author said: “… writing that’s motivated by the desire to give the reader a pleasurable experience really is best.”
I think reading is paramount, especially in a postliterate age when reading is regarded as a little strange, a little suspicious. I read “the classics” not because they are part of any Canon, or because somebody told me to go read them, but because they contain well-crafted stories and passages of beauty.
Edith Wharton; George Eliot; Joyce Carol Oates; Marilynne Robinson; Jorge Luis Borges. Eudora Welty. Flannery O’Connor. Lucille Clifton; Gwendolyn Brooks; Cornelius Eady. Some of these are classics, and some should be. I think these writers have talent, and I mean “talent” in the most magic and occulted way. I think they have done a lot of reading.
I do not know where people get talent, but I believe, wherever it comes from, talent is nurtured by reading and by difficult work.
Speaking for myself. It is more pleasurable to read stories and poems that are entertaining and also rigorous. I love a crafted story that gives me subtle clues I need to think about. I can tell when a writer has been a lifelong reader. And when she has done careful research and is intent on the crucial goal of giving her reader a great time.
— Eric Bourland
March 1, 2015 — 5:33 PM
Davide Mana says:
The total lack of empathy and of actual *fun* that comes from the guy’s article is possibly scarier than the absurdity of some of his points. I wonder if theguy was a good teacher at all.
And if he taught bad ideas in a bad way… ouch!
March 1, 2015 — 5:33 PM
Anthony Elmore says:
During my teen years, teachers wrote me off as “not slow enough to be special ed, but not quick enough to be average.” I took it as notice the institution would not devote any more to my education and I was on my own. I got my GED and entered community college. At the library I picked up a list of “100” classic books and within two years I had read 99 of them (War and Peace tore a hole in my bookbag). I got a notion that I should become a writer after a teacher commented that my essays were among the best. My ambition at that time was to be at least mediocre at something and here was the first nod from God that I had a use.
In state college, I took my first fiction writing class, and turned in a few characterizations of people I met in Goth clubs. After class, he called me up to his office, where I supposed he was going to hand me a drop slip and directions to the registrar’s office. He sat me down and said, “Have you ever published?” He told me I had ‘it’, but I wasn’t sure what he meant.
if he told me I sucked and I should just lay bricks or wash trucks for FDOT, it would’ve been better medicine. I didn’t write a thing worth crap for a year, and not because it needed revision or some coaching. The work was fly paper. I became impervious to criticism because I had ‘it.’
I fault the teacher because he should’ve done what winning coaches do for their promising players – train, debase and commit his promising players to rigors designed to deflesh any obstruction to mastery. Shortly after, I quit writing until I was 35.
I restarted writing with humility and the realization I’d be applying for AARP membership before my Writers Guild card, but I’m locked in. Don’t know and don’t care if I have ‘it.’ I don’t think his chosen students had ‘it’ but had a maturity and commitment to make ‘it’ into ‘wow’. For people like me, I had to work for ‘it.’
March 1, 2015 — 5:46 PM
Steve Kelner says:
Well said, Chuck. I’ll go a step farther: not only is he utterly mistaken in most of his views, he is DEMONSTRABLY mistaken in most of his views. How do I know? Because I used SCIENCE.
And I’m not even kidding. See my book, Motivate Your Writing! for details, but here are a few points from the scientific literature of creativity:
1. Everyone is creative. Creativity, as defined by David Perkins, is a generator (making links between things, progressively farther and farther out in obviousness), and a selector (deciding when to stop or pull back). Or, as you might put it, the ideator and the editor. This is hardwired into human beings. If it weren’t, you couldn’t put two and two together. Developing it to be useful FOR WRITING is the hard part. Or for cooking, or for painting, or for anything else requiring creativity. So, technically, creativity is indeed born in. In everyone.
2. Lots of people pick up writing late in life. Doesn’t mean they’re not learning how, just that they’re not applying it that way. Why are there so many lawyers writing books? Because writing a coherent story is key to their training, whether they write a book or not. Lots of people published their first book later. Heck, Grandma Moses didn’t START painting until she was 81.
Perhaps my favorite quote on writing is Rudyard Kipling (widely dissed by the “serious,” “literary” writers): “There are nine-and-sixty ways/of composing tribal lays/and every single one of them is right!”
In my research into published writers, practice and openness to learning are way more important than what you read. As long as you DO read, of course. That’s definitely important. But what you read? Who cares?
And, I might add, working at writing is more important than getting an MFA. Harlan Ellison, a guy who knows about great writing — and has won awards across multiple genres and media — was told in college by a jerk just like this that he would never be a writer. Students should do what Ellison did: get mad, and prove him wrong.
March 1, 2015 — 5:48 PM
melorajohnson says:
I still haven’t read Moby Dick, and I don’t see that changing in the near future. However, as an English major and librarian, I have read far and wide. There just isn’t time to read everything I want to. I read a lot and I write a lot. I run a writers group where people are at all different levels of writing and may write at any time in any genre. That’s called having fun. Go have fun everybody!
March 1, 2015 — 5:49 PM
ritadogs says:
bandwagonesque.
March 1, 2015 — 5:53 PM
flloh says:
I want to start with this, I love Chuck Wendig so far as an author. I feel like me and him could have a conversation at a coffee shop or smoke shop (preferably one you can smoke some marijuana at), or with a bottle of Scotch (no mix please), and just talk. No, we wouldn’t agree on everything, possibly nothing, but we can talk without hating one another at the end of our differences.
I’ve read just a few short stories so far, which lead me here to this post. I read ol’ MFA, and yes i’m going to share my thoughts on what Ryan Boudinot had to say. What i would like to just start off by pointing out, is how great C.W’s-(Sea/doubs- how i’m pronouncing it) has come across TO ME. From ‘Radioactive monkey,’ ‘Product Placement,’ and ‘i don’t drink anymore.’ YES IT’S THE FREE STUFF, and yes, i’m broke. If i could read the merchandised material i would. No doubt! C.W’s has a talent for provoking emotions in a twisted scenario, may it be getting drugged by the monkey queen or the prequel to such. I’m still conflicted about the abortion stifled relationship, and why I feel Donnie should have been blissful the abortion happened.
This is my first time really indulging myself into some of Chuck Wendig’s work, which i’m sure one day i can fully appreciate. (Meaning i can afford to read a book.)
Yet why so many writers are so disgusted with Ryan Boudinot’s criticism is beyond me. I understand that not everything he said was positive or even Pro-writers. He more or less put writers down. Keep in mind he’s also a professor the most, pompous and pretentious of educators. Of course he thinks his ‘hit don’t stink, probably feels like he’s part of the 100 greatest ‘hits. Shit, ‘hit, take it as you read it.
He is, still an educator. I’m sure some of what he has to say, even if very little should be absorbed, has meaning to it.
He did make a few powerful points to me. For those out there looking to make excuses on why their time is just so limited they can’t write their material. I agree with him, DON’T BOTHER WRITING ANYTHING THEN. Hell i’m taking care of two kids, both under 2, working a full-time job and a part-time job, hanging out with friends and the women of my dreams, I still find time to write. When i write, i don’t make a point to complain about the lack of time i have, instead, i make a point to find the time and write and read. I will put writing before reading, but i will try and do both. I have complained about not having the time to draw, i stick true to this complaint. I love drawing, i can draw. I just don’t have the time to draw. My point isn’t to become an illustrator, but a writer.
Without getting into too much, i do feel that some of Boudinot’s words made sense. Overall, he did piss me off. Yet getting pissed off doesn’t mean your not hearing the right things, how often did you get pissed off at your mom or dad for grounding you or spanking you? Most of what pisses me off, is what i don’t want to hear. I do not believe you are born with the talent to write, no matter how young you became a writer. Just because someone is a GREAT writer at 17, does not mean they were born with the skill, it just means they’ve been at it longer. They probably started writing at seven or eight. It’s easier for someone to write in today’s society, people with money can pay to have their grammar adjusted, their words scrubbed and rebuffed. Jesus just use Microsoft word or any other editorial service that comes with any writing software.
Although Ryan Boudinot’s criticism fell on more deaf ears, as a result of the ignorance he typed, i still think he meant to say something of meaning. He meant to boost the morality of those who have been trying to write their entire lives. Again, i don’t think he used the right terms, but i think he meant the right logic.
March 1, 2015 — 5:54 PM
Uraniabce says:
So glad you said this. I am 55 and I just finished what I consider my first real short story yesterday. I never thought I could do short stories, being too verbose a writer. But I did it, and now I know I can do it again. This guy is full of crap. He sounds angry and bitter, but that’s his problem. Not ours. Thanks Chuck for putting him in his place.
March 1, 2015 — 5:58 PM
Jon Kaneko-James says:
If you believe in writers ‘born with talent’ read about the writing process of Raymond Chandler, one of the fathers of the hardboiled detective story. He worked his arse off on craft, modelling scenes and conversations he admired until he could understand WHY they worked, copying them out again and again with his own characters.
J K Rowling, a woman who basically made it as a writer so hard that she basically sh*ts money, took a scalpel and butchered Harry Potter so hard that the original draft has NOTHING to do with the product we saw. Talent is a very simplistic way of saying ‘hard work, willingness to change and ability to learn.’ That’s all.
March 1, 2015 — 6:04 PM
W. P. Kinsella says:
As an MFA graduate, teacher and successful writer, I agree with the original article. Would be writers either have talent or they don’t. After a class they may write a better sentence, but still have no talent. I do disagree with push to self publish. In my experience only the worst writers with the largest egos self publish.
March 1, 2015 — 6:11 PM
Dusty Wallace says:
That original article sounds like it was written by a jaded professor. I suppose if you read student work constantly you begin to lose perspective.
“Writers are born with talent.” and “Writers are made through willpower and hard work.” I sort of feel like the truth is somewhere between these two. Hardwork and willpower are a big deal. A little talent goes a long way too.
March 1, 2015 — 6:52 PM
ellys phox says:
Chuck, I had a very similar reaction to this “expert’s” article, which is likely why I so heartily applaud what you said. But even more than that I love, love, love HOW you said it! Actually, I always enjoy what you write.Thanks for the affirmation and the entertainment!! OXOXO
March 1, 2015 — 6:55 PM
Erika says:
And this is why I love you Chuck. And I started a sentence with and. I’m sure he would tell me to quit now.
March 1, 2015 — 7:01 PM
Kathryn Mann says:
Thanks for writing this insightful rebuttal (complete with pissing bees) to a disturbing article.
I had only read the excerpts, but the poison had begun to seep in.
Your article helped clear the air.
Thanks for the rant. It helped us all.
March 1, 2015 — 7:05 PM
Sarah says:
It makes my stomach ache to think of what he told students in class about their writing. Whatever. That guy can go suck his own dick. Thanks, Chuck, for being rad and putting it simply: read and write. Someone in the comments mentioned how writers need to encourage one another and I totally agree.
March 1, 2015 — 7:05 PM
tedra says:
This guy sounds like one of the people who stifled my creativity when I was a kid. I used to write when I was just a pup then someone’s told me I wasn’t good enough. That little black girls didn’t books in libraries. Or you can’t read that because its filth. People made me embarrassed to read to in front of anyone. Going to the library? Keep it a secret.
My mom tried. I had creates and creates of books as a kid but the more I let bad seeds get into my head, those creates disappeared. He makes it seem like there are conditions upon conditions to do something that comes naturally, rather good at it or not. If I wasn’t as confident about being a writer, reading his article would make me put up my pens and throw away my computers.
Its just sad that people like this exist. His way isn’t the only way. Thats what works for him. Thats what gets his rocks off. He doesn’t need to push that gunk on everybody else.
March 1, 2015 — 7:09 PM
manifenestration says:
Thank you for sharing this.
Today I wrote in my paper journal for a few hours. Then I read the Ryan Boudinot article, and then got a rejection e-mail from a conference, and thought, “why do I even bother looking at the Internet on Sundays?” Then the little red demon of nastiness on my left shoulder started telling me that I should have gone to beauty school instead of getting an MFA in playwriting. Then I read your post, and now I feel better and will go back to rewriting my podcast.
Thank you again.
March 1, 2015 — 7:14 PM
Selene Grace Silver says:
We know, even before we read Boudinot’s essay, by the title, that he’s speaking from the experience of teaching in an MFA program. That means, his comments are about academic writing students. MA/MFA programs in creative writing are not designed to be valuable to all writers–especially anyone who wants to write genre fiction like YA, romance or mystery, which is largely dismissed by academia–and I have my criticisms with the way these programs seem to have even lost focus on teaching students how to write literary fiction people actually want to read.
Still, to ignore the context of the piece is to potentially misread it. It seems to me that Boudinot’s speaking about the writing of literary fiction, and even about writers who want the added qualification to teach creative writing at university. Its application to writers of genre fiction is limited. The MFA is a terminal degree, so it represents more than simply being a good writer; it means a successful graduate is an expert on literary fiction–both the history of it and the writing of it.
I read the essay as someone who has been in the classes where guys like Boudinot taught, as someone who has read a lot of student work that sucked. I wrote my share of it, nervously imposing it on my fellow students, building up my alligator skin. It’s part of the process–especially in the competitive and brutal world of creative writing workshops where the focus seems to always be on what’s not working in a text, rather than what is–delivered by other student writers who are desperate to be Boudinot’s “Real Deal,” and therefore invested in tearing down their peers’ work. We go into the workshops treating each other as amateurs and it cuts. I’m pretty sure I would not have been one of Boudinot’s “Real Deal” students. (Though, one time, in one shining moment of a whole lot of dung, my writing professor told me that my story brought her to tears. A rare, single compliment in years of study and work.)
That there is such a thing as a “Real Deal” student writer is actually Boudinot’s most significant lie, the most damaging thing he perpetuates in his piece. It’s not whether writers are born or made, which can be easily argued one way or the other due to slippery definitions about what evidence demonstrates being born with talent.
It’s this: that somehow there is this special, elite batch of writers out there that outshine the rest of us wannabees…and most of us ain’t them. I noticed even here in the comments that some readers reacted to the piece by attacking Boudinot’s work (without having read it, so umm…*banging head on wall now), suggesting that they ALSO accept the idea that there exists some hierarchy of talent in place, whether innate or cultivated (and they desperately want to be at the top themselves.) I actually agree with Boudinot’s contention that if someone doesn’t like to read, they probably shouldn’t write. I mean…what is that about other than an egotistical drive for external approval?
Anyway, I get this guy’s frustration. I was a grad student in an MFA consortium program for several summers. Initially, the first summer I attended, students seemed to be on top of their assignments. Then less so the second summer. I remember some of students’ fiction pieces from earlier classes showing up in workshop the second summer (new prof, so he was unaware) seemingly unchanged from the first round of workshop where I’d read them before. Really? Not a new piece in a whole year, and then, not even revised, reshaped, reconsidered, revisited?
Then, that third and final summer, in a class on Southern Lit, I was in a class with about a dozen grad students. We were required to read about ten works of literature (yes, all from the canon or working their way into it–so technically “classics” or literature with a capital L). Did I love all of them? No, but I did discover some wonderful new works that I truly enjoyed (John Kennedy Toole’s A Confederacy of Dunces still stands out), and reading those novels deepened my understanding of how storytelling has evolved and changed. You know, the sort of thing one would expect a creative writer with an MFA to be an expert on.
Unfortunately, it became obvious by the second class session of that Southern Lit course that only the professor, myself and one other student had actually read, or were reading, the assigned novels. This truth meant that discussions about the merits (or lack) of the works consisted of three viewpoints, resulting in pretty limited discussions on how previous writers’ style and content might relate to our own writing. With each session, the professor grew increasingly frustrated that most of his dozen students continued to attend unprepared. I was amazed that the professor stayed professional and polite about it. If Boudinot had experiences like this, I understand his cynicism, his frustration, his elitist attitude. But I also think it’s a good thing he’s not teaching anymore.
March 1, 2015 — 7:30 PM
wendybarronwrites says:
A great response to a really disheartening article whose poison lies mostly in the flippant partial-truths and is spread by the frustration overspray.
I’ve found that the more I write, the more I learn, the harder I work, the more talented I become.
I don’t understand people who think that writers are born rather than made. No other creative art is thus dismissed; no one suggests that visual artists or musicians don’t need early and continuing education, training, and practice to achieve competence or even greatness in their chosen discipline. There is a difference between being literate — knowing how to read and write — and being a writer.
March 1, 2015 — 7:50 PM
VM Gautier says:
While a few very famous writers teach because they wanna, most writers who teach — even if they are award winning and established — because they gotta. This makes some of them bitter. I could see the teacher being sick of people complaining about not having time to write if those people are graduate students who have committed two years and a lot of their parents’ money to writing. If the teacher is talking about people general, he or she really needs to shut up and maybe reread A Room of One’s Own, and then to seriously IMAGINE the lives of people today who aren’t lucky enough to get a cushy teaching job that supports their writing habit.
March 1, 2015 — 8:00 PM
simone glover says:
I disagree with Uraniabce’s comment that Boudinot sounds: “angry and bitter”. He sounds tired and jaded to the point he might actually rest his heart on a knife if forced to read one more piece of flaccid self-absorbed creative posset, but who wouldn’t? To me, he came across as insightful and refreshingly candid. You might want to ask yourselves why you had such a visceral reaction to his words. That’s where the truth lies.
March 1, 2015 — 8:14 PM
Melanie Edmonds says:
Thanks, Chuck. The internet (and writers everywhere) needs you, your insight, and your peed bees.
I read the article’s comments about talent as ‘there were many that I couldn’t figure out how to teach, and a rare few that I barely had to teach at all; those few are Real Writers!’. I think it says more about him than it does about his students.
March 1, 2015 — 8:16 PM
SAID says:
Wonderful, amazing, your style draws the reader and do not release him unless finished reading the laste character.
I know very well that my English is very bad ,Nevertheless, I am keen to express my admiration for what you wrote here
I think you understand me.
You are awesome
March 1, 2015 — 8:28 PM
Lisa Pedersen (@UrbanMilkmaid) says:
What’s worse, an agent retweeted the article and said it was “good advice”.
March 1, 2015 — 8:39 PM
Nick S. says:
That’s hilarious. Can you imagine an agent cutting off their own business in such an interesting manner.
March 2, 2015 — 5:34 PM
Ldrwriter says:
Every writer worth their weight in Laura Ingalls Wilder’s boob sweat will give this article the flying middle-finger salute, ignore everything in it (except for the “read stuff” and “write stuff” bits) and prove this douche-throttle wrong. You aren’t born with exceptional talent any more than you’re born with a set of mechanical wings. You gotta build it yourself, with sweat, labor, intentional observation and study, and whatever raw materials you can beg, borrow and steal.
March 1, 2015 — 9:38 PM
Laura W. says:
Thank God for your peeing bees sentence because without that laugh right off the top, I might have exploded in rage. I was so flabbergasted by the “your bad writing makes me wish you had suffered even more child abuse” part that I had to go back and re-read the paragraph several times to make sure I hadn’t somehow misunderstood. Now I realize I was probably giving the guy too much credit. I’m sure that that is EXACTLY what he meant.
March 1, 2015 — 9:53 PM
susieq777 says:
He does have rather the firm opinion about rather the many things, doesn’t he.
I did take his “writers are born with talent” comment as inferring that you nevertheless have to work fucking hard to develop it. I took his meaning as saying that if you an MFA won’t get you there if you don’t have the developable intrinsics to begin with.
Developable intrinsics. Goodness. That sounds like some shit someone in a boardroom would say. Forgive me.
March 1, 2015 — 10:03 PM
William Grit says:
Damn. Teachers…
*thinks* (I’m almost done with school, fuck my life, fuck my life one more year, I can do this.)
*daydreams*
What was I doing?
Oh yeah, false information, I like to give people the benefit of a doubt because I’m cool like that. But damn. What was he thinking? I take my benefit of a doubt away.
*spaces out*
What am I doing? O-yeah, email to boss.
Hello Scott,
Sean broke a Code of Ethics by– Wow! Wa? What am I doing? Oh yeah, I was commenting on a post–
–Chuck’s cool.
Chuck’s cool.
Chuck’s cool.
Done.
.
March 1, 2015 — 10:35 PM
Scot B. says:
Well said, Mr. Wendig. Well said indeed. I remember reading somewhere that the best lies always contain a kernel of truth. I won’t bother bagging on Mr. Hoity Toity’s post. You and others have done that far more effectively than I ever will. But I’ll observe that his piece is a wonderful example of that little axiom.
Off course talent matters. I’ve spent most of my life working with talented, creative people. But you know what? From observation, I’d put the value of innate ability at around 10%. The rest is sheer, effing determination. Not necessarily sweaty-assed hard work (although that counts as well).
What really makes the difference is not… ever… goddamitidon’tgiveashitwhatyousayyouselfimportantasshole… ever… giving up.
The rest is either an accident of circumstance or genetics – neither of which you can control so why waste time even thinking about it?
March 1, 2015 — 10:36 PM
A Citizen of the World says:
Thank you, Chuck. This is why we love you. Also: is peeing bees your secret superhero power?
March 1, 2015 — 11:00 PM
Nyx Bythesee says:
I think with the first point – the talent argument – there is, as with most myths, an element or kernel of truth to it. I think talent (or an affinity for a talent or whatever) exists, but passion, desire, the willingness to do it anyway etc play their part…
I went to a high school that pushed it’s students and held high ideals on several fronts (eg academic, creative / the arts, sports etc) and I’ve seen it time and again in the not so short time since then. Not everyone is good at everything. Some people seem to have a natural affinity towards certain things.
For example I cannot draw to save my life beyond stick figures despite repeated attempts to learn and much as I would love to b an author I know I never will (doesn’t stop me from writing or imaging stories for my own amusement). But give me a camera and I’m off and running. Through school and since I’ve seen people who can play music / do art / play sport / write / insert thing here with love and passion and with apparent ease who may or may not go that way. I’ve also seen people with less natural affinity / talent etc who have been passionate and worked at and gone on (or kept at it for no other reason than to simply enjoy it)
March 2, 2015 — 12:32 AM
writingsbyesse says:
Thank you Chuck, for your wonderful response to the biggest pile of crap I’ve read in a long time. I kept the rage away until the part about poor writing skills = you deserve more child abuse. What a pitiful excuse for a human being. To think that this fool was actually a teacher. . .
March 2, 2015 — 12:42 AM
writingkat says:
“You don’t need my help to get published.”
Wow! What a relief!
…because I shhuuurrrre don’t want it!
March 2, 2015 — 12:47 AM
Brent McGuffin says:
Thank you, Chuck.
I read this word garbage and thought about commenting. Pissing in the wind I know. But luckily I don’t piss bees.
That’s it!! Aim your bee peeing penis at this ignorant arrogant fool and anaphylactic shock him off the planet!!
March 2, 2015 — 1:39 AM
Corey Bell (@toastercult) says:
Haha I know that dude Ryan Boudinot. He worked at my undergrad as an advisor before making the switch to the MFA. Didn’t particularly care for him then, don’t care for him now.
March 2, 2015 — 2:40 AM