do you have to be an avid reader to be a good writer?
i am a musician but i don't listen to music. i've been wanting to start writing but i have no interest in reading either.
i'd rather spend my time creating rather than consuming -- but is that a viable option for literature?
>>8149791
I mean it doesn't make sense for music either
No, not avid. Try serious addiction to. At least with fiction
>>8149798
doesn't it though? any time i feel like listening to music, i always end up feeling more like making it. and i'm fairly decent too -- nothing to write home about but i have a genuine skill.
>>8149791
>do you have to be an avid reader to be a good writer?
It helps, but whats more important is being a good reader.
>>8149791
The only thing that every great writer has in common is that they read. It's the only common denominator they share between them.
Can you be a writer without reading? sure. you might even be a pretty good one, but I wouldn't say that greatness would ever come of it. You need to be fed greatness if you expect to produce greatness
>>8149791
I've never met a case of writer-not-reader (they're more common than you'd think) in which it didn't show.
I mean this in a negative sense. You might think that their not observing literary conventions could at least be a potential source of originality, but even this isn't an advantage when the writer isn't aware of what they are doing. The result can only be appreciated as art in the same fashion as found documents -- interesting at best as a cultural artefact or, and this always carries implicit disdain, as an external cue of what goes on in the author's mind and creative process, rather than interesting in and of itself.
This is absurd
You experience other's art to see what has been done to thus find what NEEDS to be done
>>8149805
you're a lot shittier than you think you are
You can be decent but you'll probably never be good without reading widely (or listening to a lot of music). It's hubris to think you can single-handedly discover all the nuances of writing and playing that took generations of artists to discover and hone.
My problem is I get bored of most stories very early on. I think I just have a short attention span. I have no problem reading books for school, because there's such neat, arranged ways to read it in. Read this chapter by this date, etc. Does anybody set schedules for reading a book? Like, one chapter a night or something. I find that if it's just a free time sink I never make much progress and get bored.
you can get by on being a good communicator and knowing another art form in depth, but that probably means reading a lot of non-fiction, or just having a great sense of interpreting what little you do read. knowing another language helps with forming logical sentences
>>8150044
>I find that if it's just a free time sink
if you think that reading is a waste of time, you'll either think writing is an even bigger waste of time or you think that shitting out sentences counts as "writing".
also if you think reading is a waste of time, how could you expect anyone to spend their time reading what you wrote.
>>8149791
>i am musican
> i don't listen to music.
You people make me sick. Seriously, fuck off, you self-rightous sack of shit.
>>8150134
Calm down. I recognize the value of reading and enjoy it if it's well written or insightful, but I don't enjoy investing hours of unscheduled time into reading a book because it feels like a time sink in an age where I have tons of other things I could do. I was asking if anyone else sets specific chapter requirements for themselves to make the reading feel less random and time sink-y. Also, way to imply that, if somebody disliked most of the literature they read, they couldn't be a good writer or even enjoy writing. That's very naive and uncompromising.
>>8149791
How do you not listen to music what the fuck
With literature, you can tell when a writer hasn't read enough - their work feels diluted, insubstantial and one-dimensional with little understanding of structure, character development, theme or expression through prose.
>>8150811
>Also, way to imply that, if somebody disliked most of the literature they read, they couldn't be a good writer or even enjoy writing. That's very naive and uncompromising.
Not really, prick.
You literally sound like you're delusional about how good you are. If you have any """"""""talent""""""""", you're mistaking this "talent" for actual skill, which you're clueless about obtaining.
Just out of curiosity, how old are you? And how many people have reviewed your work so far apart from Mummy?
>>8150044
If you don't like reading, you won't like writing, and writing without any enthusiasm really shows because it will be lazy and poor.
But yes, reading to a schedule can help. I try and read 50 pages a day when I'm not busy - it's not too many and it's not too little an amount.
>>8149798
Yes it does, no point in "listening" to "music" when you should be studying scores.
>>8150811
>way to imply that, if somebody disliked most of the literature they read, they couldn't be a good writer or even enjoy writing.
>>8150866
>no point in "listening" to "music" when you should be studying scores.
a-anon... I hate to break this to you... b-but... are you sure that anything artistic is really the best fitting field of work for your personality?
>>8150892
just to clarify that, what I mean is, you don't really seem to enjoy that much the very things that you're setting out to make
