The Classics for Inspiration

[Makaro]

I like to read classics to learn how the great writers of the past wrote. I would recommend the following for budding writers:

A Canticle For Leibowitz---for descriptive prose
The Sound and the Fury--for stream of consiousness
Catch 22--a must for satirists, and for those who want to inject a wry wit into his or her writing
Slaughterhouse Five---for cosmic irony, and for strange ways of expressing ideas.
The Odyssy--for rhythmic structure and for the overall beauty of words
Any Novel by Fyodor Dostoevsky--for richness of dialogue, fluidity of speech, and mind-bending ideas, and for insight into the human mind.

The Master and Margarita, by Mikhail Bulgakov---see above

The Trial, The Castle, The Metamorphesis (Franz Kafka)---for dark absurdity, and a different way of looking at things

The Road, by Cormac McCarthy---poetic prose and overall atmosphere. Rather depressing, yet it is very powerful.


What are your suggestions for novels to learn from?

 

[Tariel]

I would suggest that you NEVER read a novel with the intention of learning how to write from it. If you do so your chances of imitating the author are extremly high, even if you don't intend to copy them. The truth is, we write what we read; avoiding sounding like a plagarist is a difficult enough task without TRYING to learn from them.


Off course we should read. Read read read read read. Just NEVER pick up a book saying, "I am going to read Lord of the Rings to learn how to write fantasy." It's a bad idea.

 

[Lessien]

I would suggest that you NEVER read a novel with the intention of learning how to write from it. If you do so your chances of imitating the author are extremly high, even if you don't intend to copy them. The truth is, we write what we read; avoiding sounding like a plagarist is a difficult enough task without TRYING to learn from them.


Off course we should read. Read read read read read. Just NEVER pick up a book saying, "I am going to read Lord of the Rings to learn how to write fantasy." It's a bad idea.

Read the classics and challenging books to become a better reader, to learn more about style and whatnot, to increase your vocabulary. Don't read to emulate that author. Because unless you're a master, then whatever you write will have very little of you in it.

 

[Makaro]

I would suggest that you NEVER read a novel with the intention of learning how to write from it. If you do so your chances of imitating the author are extremly high, even if you don't intend to copy them. The truth is, we write what we read; avoiding sounding like a plagarist is a difficult enough task without TRYING to learn from them.


Off course we should read. Read read read read read. Just NEVER pick up a book saying, "I am going to read Lord of the Rings to learn how to write fantasy." It's a bad idea.

I didn;t mean to say that one should learn all of writing from great authors. I just suggested that they would offer inspiration. Enjoyment of the novel is primary, learning is secondary.

 

[Tariel]

I didn;t mean to say that one should learn all of writing from great authors. I just suggested that they would offer inspiration. Enjoyment of the novel is primary, learning is secondary.

If you pick up a novel with any intent of learning from it, then you have already failed. Inspiration is perhaps worse. What do you think Paolini did for inspiration? He read.

NEVER underestimate the power that reading has. If you're not careful, the books you read will consume your writing. Banish even the smallest thought in the back of your mind about learning how to write or gaining inspiration from the book. Then you will be ready to read.

 

[Makaro]

If you pick up a novel with any intent of learning from it, then you have already failed. Inspiration is perhaps worse. What do you think Paolini did for inspiration? He read.

NEVER underestimate the power that reading has. If you're not careful, the books you read will consume your writing. Banish even the smallest thought in the back of your mind about learning how to write or gaining inspiration from the book. Then you will be ready to read.

So sorry, but I very much disagree. You seem to advise a Zen method for reading: that one should forget all intentions of actually gaining anything from the book to enjoy it.

By referring to "Paolini," I assume you are referring to the author of Eragon and its ilk. He's a fantasy writers, and the genre of fantasy seems to be exhausted. It is extremely difficult to write anything original in the genre in the first place. Thus Paolini didn't have a large toolbox to work from when he wrote his novels. For writers of general fiction, the variety of material is much larger, so the threat of unintentionally parroting the book of the month is restricted.

Your approach to writing is puzzling. You advocate reading as much as possible, yet you discourage actually learning anything from it. That's like learning a foreign language by sitting down in a cafe in Paris and listening to the conversations around you without really thinking about it. How did you learn how to write, out of curiosity?

 

[Lessien]

Actually, fantasy writers have the most resources at their fingertips. All Paolini had to do was reach into his imagination, pull out an idea, then work to make it into a good, solid story. He just chose not to, instead choosing to parrot the work of other, more mature authors.

 

[Tariel]

First of all, you misunderstand me. If you are a good reader, you will unconciously learn from the book. Any concious thought not only ruins the enjoyment of the book, but puts to much of the writer into your own work.

And I learned how to write by writing. I write and get feedback. Sometimes it's postive, sometimes it's negative, and I learn from it all.

I am a fantasy writer, and no it has NOT been exhausted....no more than any other genre has been anyway. The reason people believe that about fantasy is people like Paolini who don't let their imagination take control, and instead resort to imitating others.

 

[Jehane]

Reading widely is like making bank deposites into the sub-concious. You then have the richness of vocab, style, plot, characterisation etc to draw on & make uniquely your own. Critical analysis achieves a different purpose in my mind & is more about actually structuring a story. I am not so good at that but I have a very unique vocab because I like & collect odd words. Maybe I should be an etomologist? Maybe I should just learn to spell?

 

[Tariel]

A good vocab does not make you a good writer. A good story and the ability to tell it in an entertaining way makes you a good writer. A unique vocabulary often scares readers. A reader shouldn't need a dictionary to get through your story--that was the hardest thing with your story, Jehane. The plot structure is fine. And because I had to run off...I never got to finish commenting on Makaro's last comment.Fantasy is no more difficult to develop an original idea for than common fiction. If anything, fantasy is easier. When writing real-world fiction you are bound to the constraints of the real world--there is only so much that can be done. On the other hand, when you have a volume of blank paper that you are free to use to create what ever world you want with whatever rules you want inhabited by whatever creatures you want. People can live even after taking a fatal wound to the heart, and it is believable (if properly explained). The problem is, most people don't tap into the wealth of inspiration that they have from everyday life. Good ideas are not gained by reading but by LIVING. Could you ever think that a writing professor could be inspiration for one young woman's training master? It's happened. Is Hausser Woods really inhabited by a Faerie Wizard? I think so. Live life on the border of reality--that's where ideas come from. And the best thing is, they're always original.

 

[Jehane]

I agree & I agree & I agree - especially about my vocab. Life should be both deep & rich & especially for fantasy writers (I think) lived spiritually. It is out of that true origonality & creativity spring.

 

[Lessien]

I agree & I agree & I agree - especially about my vocab. Life should be both deep & rich & especially for fantasy writers (I think) lived spiritually. It is out of that true origonality & creativity spring.

A good vocab does not make you a good writer. A good story and the ability to tell it in an entertaining way makes you a good writer. A unique vocabulary often scares readers. A reader shouldn't need a dictionary to get through your story--that was the hardest thing with your story, Jehane. The plot structure is fine. And because I had to run off...I never got to finish commenting on Makaro's last comment.Fantasy is no more difficult to develop an original idea for than common fiction. If anything, fantasy is easier. When writing real-world fiction you are bound to the constraints of the real world--there is only so much that can be done. On the other hand, when you have a volume of blank paper that you are free to use to create what ever world you want with whatever rules you want inhabited by whatever creatures you want. People can live even after taking a fatal wound to the heart, and it is believable (if properly explained). The problem is, most people don't tap into the wealth of inspiration that they have from everyday life. Good ideas are not gained by reading but by LIVING. Could you ever think that a writing professor could be inspiration for one young woman's training master? It's happened. Is Hausser Woods really inhabited by a Faerie Wizard? I think so. Live life on the border of reality--that's where ideas come from. And the best thing is, they're always original.

I wholeheartedly agree with both of you.