
There Is No Handbook for Being a Writer - vkb
http://www.themillions.com/2016/06/there-is-no-handbook-for-being-a-writer.html
======
methehack
I know folks are trying to be helpful by listing all the handbooks on the
mechanics of writing, or on the creative process (closer), but it's off topic.
The author is talking about 'being a writer', as in the title. As in:

    
    
      "What do you do?"
      "Oh, I'm a writer"
    

Not like:

    
    
       "Should one _ever_ begin a sentence with 'but'?"
       "No, you should _never_ do that.  I'm a prig!"
    

It seems that sitting down to write every day and telling people you're doing
it brings with it a wrath of psychological goop that sane people need to cope
with if they're going to keep remain sane. That's more what this essay is
about.

All that finger-waggingly-said, some great books recommended. Thank you for
that!

~~~
dredmorbius
Rather. Grasp on that seems lacking here.

By comparison, there are many schools which teach (or claim to teach)
_programming_ , but few which cover the details _of being a programmer_ :
addressing employment contracts, valuing stock or equity options, non-
competes, project management, vendor management, operating as an independent
contractor, client (or boss) management, etc., etc.

There are similar observations made of the medical profession, law,
engineering (particularly where independent / small firm work is common), etc.
The nuts-and-bolts of the business.

Much of what's discussed (in the context of startups) on HN, for example.

That said: there are some guides, several mentioned below. _The Writers '
Handbook_ is the long-time classic. I'm looking at a few of these now based on
their mentions here.

------
AndreyErmakov
It's interesting that the author pursued a degree in literature and that's
what ultimately pushed her away from that career path. It seems to be a common
theme where a formal education in creative arts makes people want to do
something else in life, anything else.

I've had acquaintances with a musical background and eventually they went to
do something else, including IT. From what an old buddy told me once, most
graduates of a musical school learn to hate music and quit that vocation past
graduation.

In the opposite fashion, I've never had a literary education and I'm feeling
more and more drawn to this line of work. I'm not sure if I want to make a
complete switch though, software engineering and startups are just too
exciting to give it all up. Somehow it feels I can accomplish more and make a
better contribution to the society with my honed programming skills than with
words, but I might be wrong about it. For now, I'm just writing essays every
now and then, publishing them on my blog and that seems to be enough.

One word of advice in relation to all of this. Don't shy away from reading
foreign literature. I know that for many native English speakers other
languages simply don't exist in their world, but you're missing out on an
incredible body of thoughts and ideas that might expand your vision borders.
Don't be stuck in your English silo, learn some foreign language and go
exploring. And no, a translation is not the same, it's devoid of the original
energy. That's why people are often unimpressed by what before a translation
was a profound piece of work. You can't translation energy.

~~~
greenspot
> but you're missing out on an incredible body of thoughts and ideas that
> might expand your vision borders.

Have to disagree here. Yes there is a lot of good stuff especially written in
the past but looking at today I see high caliber English writers and books in
every category I do not see in that quality and quantity in any other
language. Ok I do not know how it's about Chinese but that's my perception
regarding other in particular European languages.

Always when I look for something, literature, fiction or non-fiction I switcch
after seconds to Amazon.com from my local Amazon and find way better and more
stuff. Frankly, the local selection feels like written by amateurs comapred to
the US, I know this might sound bold and is probably too generalizing but the
general perception is that you do not miss out anything if you stick to
English based literate, rather the opposite. Of course therr are exception and
genious writes not from the US like Unberto Eco and others but still nothing
to the vast majority English based literature offers. Heck, even my Kindle
account is US only.

If one country produces excellent media it's the US.

~~~
weeksie
Spoken like somebody who's never read Journey to The End of The Night. In my
opinion (and many others') it's one of the best novels ever written.

Tastes may vary but to dismiss foreign literature outright betrays a lack of
experience as a reader. This is where I complain, as an old guy, about the
poor state of liberal arts education.

Do yourself a favor and pick up some Dostoevsky. Or Gunter Grass. Or Murakami.
Or Knut Hamsen. Or oh hell, there are far too many to list, those just come to
the forefront in my head.

~~~
gglitch
Here's a few more: Or Homer, or Sophocles, or Ovid, or Rumi, or Rilke, or
Proust, or Cicero, or Molière, ...

------
m52go
But there is a game! It's called Write On Par. It teaches concise writing,
playfully.

Because no writer has the patience to sit through a grammar class...and no
reader wants to read wordy, confusing writing no matter what the topic.

[http://writeonpar.com](http://writeonpar.com)

/shameless plug

Beautiful article though. I've met a couple recently-turned full-time authors
and have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for the author/artist
life. It's such a lifestyle sacrifice that their love for the craft must be
incredibly deep.

~~~
rewrew
Writing is a craft, and it's a freaking hard one that takes combining a lot of
skills plus a lot of discipline and hard work. If you don't have the patience
to sit through something as simple as as a semester-long grammar class at your
local community college as one aspect of learning the fundamentals you need to
succeed, then most likely writing isn't the career path for you.

~~~
FuNe
Hm, dunno. I'd say writing is about having something to say. Especially
something other people want or (more importantly) need to read. I don't think
that Charles Bukowski was particularly disciplined or educated for example.

~~~
trobertson
Everyone has something to say. The achievement of writers is being able to
suitably express their thoughts to their audience.

Regarding Bukowski, you should check out his Wikipedia page. I'll snip some
highlights, and draw some conclusions.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Bukowski](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Bukowski)

> poet, novelist, and short story writer

> Bukowski wrote thousands of poems, hundreds of short stories and six novels,
> eventually publishing over 60 books

You don't write thousands of poems without understanding language. He may not
have had a complete collegiate education, but you can be sure he ended up
studying language on his own.

------
sverige
The best advice on writing I've come across in 40 years of reading about
writing is a "pithy maxim" from Cato the Elder: Rem tene, verba sequentur.
(Grasp the thing, the words will follow.)

The best advice on being a writer is mostly reading how others did it and then
avoiding their mistakes. Thus, I hope I don't end up kicking a can up a lonely
road in Idaho or showing up drunk for an interview by Buckley or marrying my
too-young cousin or winning any kind of prize.

Edit: I forgot to say what I came here to say: "Being a writer" is socially
awkward and a little embarrassing, especially in this society. I've had
feelings similar to the author's and had to learn to deal with them. Almost no
one talks about that part of writing.

~~~
henrik_w
Thanks for the "pithy maxim" \- I have never seen it before, but the idea has
always been my key to giving a decent presentation. It goes straight into my
quotes-file!

------
vonnik
People mean different things when they say "writer," and it's worthwhile
untangling a few different types.

* Writers who make a living writing

* Writers who don't (yet)

* Fiction writers: Novelists and short-story writers

* Poets

* Journalists: reporters, war correspondents, editors

* Bloggers

* Corporate: Technical writers, Marketing copy writers, etc.

* Academics all stripes

These categories aren't mutually exclusive, but they each represent a
different type of writing, which itself requires a different practice,
approach or method.

There are, in fact, many handbooks for being a writer, and almost all of them
are written to serve a particular type of writer and not others.

The creative writing departments of America have produced piles of writing
about writing (about writing -- gaah ... self-referential recursion! No one
escapes a medium describing itself.).

Some of the classics are:

* The Elements of Style - Strunk and White

* Politics and the English Language - Orwell [https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm](https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm)

* Hemingway on Writing [https://www.scribd.com/doc/156100470/Ernest-Hemingway-on-Wri...](https://www.scribd.com/doc/156100470/Ernest-Hemingway-on-Writing)

* Copia: Foundations of the Abundant Style - Erasmus (the opposite of Strunk...)

* And so on...

The best handbook of all, though is simply the study of great writers whose
work you love, as the author points out. Anyone serious about fiction or prose
should dive into the 19th-century Russian and French novelists, Virginia
Woolf, an annotated Shakespeare, etc. It's all there just waiting for us. In
that sense, every piece of good writing is a handbook on writing.

(Fwiw, I made a living as a reporter and editor for about 10 years.)

~~~
klodolph
Not that Strunk and White is _bad_ , but it's a peculiar choice to list first
because it is mediocre and there are so many other options which are better.
At the very minimum, Strunk and White is a very contentious entry, and people
(like me) will come out of the woodwork to attack it.

* _Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace_ , Joseph Bizup

* _The Chicago Manual of Style_ (depending on what kind of writer you are, a different guide may suit you better)

* _Bird by Bird_ , Anne Lamott

* _On Writing_ , Stephen King

~~~
achairapart

        ...in On Writing, Stephen King writes: "There is little or no detectable bullshit in that book. (Of course, its short; at eighty-five pages it's much shorter than this one.) I'll tell you right now that every aspiring writer should read The Elements of Style. Rule 17 in the chapter titled Principles of Composition is "Omit needless words." I will try to do that here".
    

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Style#Receptio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Style#Reception)

~~~
klodolph
From the linked section:

> The book's toxic mix of purism, atavism, and personal eccentricity is not
> underpinned by a proper grounding in English grammar. It is often so
> misguided that the authors appear not to notice their own egregious flouting
> of its own rules ... It's sad.

> aging zombie of a book ... a hodgepodge, its now-antiquated pet peeves
> jostling for space with 1970s taboos and 1990s computer advice

I'm not saying that this book is terrible, just that it is mediocre, spits out
good advice but not couched in good practice, is a bit old-fashioned, et
cetera. There are better books out there. Stephen King's book _On Writing_ is
better _in spite of the fact_ that Stephen King recommends Strunk and White.

I think that the reason people like the book is because it says things that
you would agree with. "Omit needless words." How can you dislike a book that
says such good things? But it doesn't surround the advice with solid examples
the way _Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace_ does, and it doesn't go into
depth the way a proper style guide like Chicago does, and it doesn't have the
more down-to-earth "how to be a writer" advice like King's or Lamott's works
do.

So I don't recommend it.

(It's also quite curious that you quoted a tertiary source such as Wikipedia
rather than King.)

------
blisterpeanuts
A time honored classic: _If You Want to Write_ by Brenda Ueland.

[https://books.google.com/books/about/If_You_Want_to_Write.ht...](https://books.google.com/books/about/If_You_Want_to_Write.html?id=8WjsAgAAQBAJ)

Another nice one is _Stein on Writing_

[https://books.google.com/books/about/Stein_On_Writing.html?i...](https://books.google.com/books/about/Stein_On_Writing.html?id=MQVlAgAAQBAJ)

Of course, what most writers will advise is that you just write a lot, and get
good writers to critique your work. Writing, like most arts, takes years and
years.

Today, there are various web sites that will "crowd-source" critiques of your
writing, in exchange for your critiquing other people's work (also good
practice). I've used critters.org quite a bit but there are several other big
ones these days.

------
klodolph
The title is a bit more precise than commenters in this thread are giving
credit for. There is no handbook for "being a writer", but there are many
handbooks for writing.

You could translate this to another field. I've read lots of books on
programming, but very few on "how to be a programmer". Mostly a few short blog
posts with contradictory information.

------
uberstuber
The War of Art by Steven Pressfield is a good start

~~~
danielvf
Seconded. Fantastic.

And I'd also recommend "On Writing" by Stephen King.

~~~
ericzawo
I was just telling a friend how important this book is in highlighting the
nuts and bolts of writing in that it's a lot like building stuff. We tend to
romanticize the writer as having ideas come to them with hot cocoa and a NYT
bestseller literally pouring from their fingertips, but the reality is a lot
closer to grinding at an especially punishing task. Mr. King highlights it
wonderfully, and even if you're not a fan of his work (huh?), I highly
recommend you read it.

~~~
salemh
It also contains a chapter he wrote pre-edit, then post-edit, and why things
were kept, reduced, taken out, etc. One of the most helpful things I've seen
from a professional writer.

------
paulpauper
Too many people want writing 'hacks' and 'tips', without understanding that
writing is a market, which means that for writing to be read, it typically has
to meet some sort of demand. Famous people can create their own markets, but
unknowns have to latch onto existing ones.

Long-form seems to be very popular online these days. Anyone can hammer out a
500-word essay, but a it takes a 5,000 word one to stand out. Long-form may be
the best approach right now for writers hoping to gain visibility.

Also, I think IQ plays a role, too. You need to be smart to make a career at
writing (assuming you're not a celebrity), and few are sufficiently smart
enough, sorry to say.

------
update
it's pretty funny that the author takes so long to get to their point :P,
given the title

Anyone want to post a tldr?

as a paid author, given the title, i was hoping for an article that touched on
drinking, lallygagging, and partying --- then getting all your work done in
one day at the end of the month.

~~~
estonian
The article's also evidence of the temptation to write about yourself, as I
suppose that's what you know best. I have seen a lot of successful authors who
inject themselves into the narrative.

For example, this successful author (David Wilcock) who failed to make a
documentary, and wrote about it and turned it into a NYTimes bestseller. It's
sub-par book with silly claims but he has an audience and it provided a story
structure with interesting ideas and alleged facts. Eat Love Pray is another
example.

And I suppose if you can write about outrageous things you do, it probably
makes people all the more motivated to read you.

~~~
update
> The article's also evidence of the temptation to write about yourself, as I
> suppose that's what you know best. I have seen a lot of successful authors
> who inject themselves into the narrative.

Great point.

Searching for sentences that include "I", "Me", etc. in your writing is an
excellent exercise.

> And I suppose if you can write about outrageous things you do, it probably
> makes people all the more motivated to read you.

Personally, I think this is just human nature. That is, most people are
fascinated (and likely, long to do so themselves) with living an "outrageous"
lifestyles

------
weeksie
Hey, I'm a second career writer too! That's a fantastic piece.

My background is in software and I still freelance to pay the bills. I have
been writing on and off since I was old enough to hold a pen. Little fits and
starts here and there, but by the time I was in my early twenties I focused on
making a living instead of learning how to write. I dreamed of one day making
enough money to retire and maybe write a few books.

Three years ago I realized that was crazy. I wanted to write, putting it off
until the end of my life not only increases the chance I'd never get to do it,
but also means that I'd miss out on years and years of practice. I decided to
do with writing what I did with programming—set aside nearly half my time to
learn how to do it, then keep doing it until I could make a living.

I'm not making a living anytime soon, but after three years I've written a
couple novel manuscripts, published a short story collection, and am due to
publish a novel at the end of the year. But I'm still hesitant to answer, "I'm
a writer" when someone at a cocktail party asks what I do.

------
kriro
My litmus test for being a writer is fairly simple. How many completed items
do you have lying around. I don't care if they are published but they need to
be finished (as in a cohesive and typed out whole).

It's basically the same as being a programmer except programmers tend to self
publish their work rather quickly. I feel like writers should generally do the
same (and solicit feedback).

------
jonhohle
The Writer's Handbook [0]

0 - [http://amzn.to/28Z2K9e](http://amzn.to/28Z2K9e)

------
michaelbuddy
I would say most jobs or careers have no handbook. The ones that SEEM to have
handbook are the same jobs where they'll tell you that the handbook means
little in the real world. Think policing, firefighting, paramedic. Jobs with
certifications such as medicine or specific highly regulated trades such as
electrician, HVAC. These jobs have large ramping up periods, apprenticeships
because the 'handbook' is guided experience.

What I don't understand is did the author think that most people new to
writing expected it to be more straightforward? Because I would have thought
people like writing because the career is what you make of it, where you
hustle and for what.

------
Mendenhall
Him sitting next to author reminded me how I always think you are a writer
when you pay your bills through writing, same with art etc. I find so many
that say they are an "artist" yet thats not how they pay their bills. Sure you
may make fantastic art but you are not an artist.

You never here someone say I am a basketball player just because they play
basketball as a hobby. Doing something that pays your bills is totally
different than it being a hobby or even being great at it.

~~~
gnaritas
Not everyone defines themselves by what pays the bills, plenty of artists do
menial jobs to make ends meet. How they pay their bills is a bad measure of
who/what they are, you shouldn't reject someone's self definition because you
want to judge them by how they make money. You are not your job.

~~~
AndreyErmakov
>> You are not your job.

Very true. I hold the same liberal view as to what people truly are.

An interesting idea just struck me. If a seasoned software developer quits his
full-time job to work on a startup of his dream, while taking a part time job
at a bar to be able to pay his bills, who is he then? Is he no longer a
professional software engineer? Is he now a bar tender? An entrepreneur? What
is he truly then during this period?

By the same token, if say an economist has been getting frustrated at his job
and starts learning web programming, building simple personal sites for
himself and friends, is it insufficient to call him a programmer, even if we
would all agree he is only a junior one?

Where do we draw a line?

If someone is serious about a new vocation and invests a lot of time and
energy into mastering it, then by all rights he's already in part what he
aspires to become.

------
ozim
Not really that interesting if main point is that there is no easy "follow the
instructions" way to become a writer. It is true for everything like there is
no "follow the instructions" way to have a good life, build muscles, etc. It
is all about showing up doing mistakes, learning not to make same mistakes
_poof_ after quite long time maybe you achieved your goal, but you are never
certain.

------
d33d33
I agree to the topic's message...but...who is a writer? Realeasing a book (and
especially in that travel genre) - in my opinion - does not make you a
(good/belletristic) writer.

But if it is just about writing for living / journalism and similar stuff,
then yes, handbooks exists and do work.

ps: worked as journalist and studied literature, but don't feel like i could
write books that come close to what i like to read.

------
etangent
Just don't be the d _\_ * whom people are wary about meeting in person for the
fear of being used as a (usually unpleasant) character in any of the future
writings.

------
p4wnc6
There most certainly is: < [http://www.earwolf.com/show/hollywood-
handbook/](http://www.earwolf.com/show/hollywood-handbook/) >.

------
nxzero
Being a writer is easy: (1) hire a good editor, (2) remix existing stories (3)
be famous.

~~~
pasquinelli
the first question isn't how to be a writer, but whether you have anything to
say.

~~~
AndreyErmakov
Right to the point.

------
nxzero
Use "The Elements Style" by Strunk & White.

~~~
WalterSear
[http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/LandOfTheFree.pdf](http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/LandOfTheFree.pdf)

[http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-
Grammar/2549...](http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-
Grammar/25497)

~~~
curiousess
That article for the Chronicle of Higher Education is so wrongheaded it's
hilarious.

""Keep related words together" is further explained in these terms: "The
subject of a sentence and the principal verb should not, as a rule, be
separated by a phrase or clause that can be transferred to the beginning."
That is a negative passive, containing an adjective, with the subject
separated from the principal verb by a phrase ("as a rule") that could easily
have been transferred to the beginning."

Yes. That's the joke, dear Geoffrey. They are showing the violation to
demonstrate its effect on a sentence. You have to be truly humorless if not
willfully obtuse to read this as Strunk & White having no idea what they're
talking about.

Strunk & White is self-critiquing, which is part of what makes it great—it's
not nearly so prescriptive as the author seems to think.

