sovereignbeef on Nostr: After decades of almost exclusively writing fiction, my first year of non-fiction ...
After decades of almost exclusively writing fiction, my first year of non-fiction work has revealed the distinction between the two.
Since my first or second novel, I have always kept the words FUCK THE READER within clear view of my work station. This cue has been my primary compass for well over a decade. What began as a simple reminder to trust my own intuition as a writer and not worry myself about how my words are interpreted by others has evolved into my own literary philosophy.
My philosophy of FUCK THE READER will likely get its own post now that I have introduced it here, but for the sake of this post’s intention I’ll round it off by saying that it also reminds me to assume my readers are intelligent and intuitive enough to pick up on all the unsaid parts that compose a well written story. I also subscribe to Hemingway’s Iceberg Philosophy which claims what makes a book good is like the underwater part of an iceberg - the reader doesn’t know for certain what lies beneath, but rather senses there is more than what’s being said. My favorite stories are the ones that provide this underlying sense of “more” throughout the book and, in the end, ascertain the reader’s intuition in a hyper-realistic manner.
All that being said, FUCK THE READER is about *trusting* the reader to experience this instead of spoon feeding them as if they are too stupid to tap into the underwater parts of the story.
What I have noticed after spending the last couple years writing mostly about Bitcoin and the subjects its understanding necessitates is that I deeply care about my reader in a way that defies my philosophy around fiction.
The function of non-fiction is to teach readers. While writing, I find myself desperate to explain and even spoon-feed my reader, seeking any way I can to ensure the words are being understood. Metaphor after metaphor, I attempt to distill what feels like a storm of knowledge in my mind into concise paragraphs that readers will not only follow, but be interested in.
And every time I finish, I feel I have either failed to adequately convey my thoughts or that I’ve written beyond the scope of each point I’m trying to make and anyone who reads it will feel lost and ultimately give up, slam the book closed, throw it in a firing barrel, douse it in lighter fluid and ignite it while laughing maniacally in youthful academic defiance at my attempt to teach them something.
Which tells me, as a writer, that I’m probably doing pretty well overall.
So. Now that I’ve made the distinction, it’s likely time to consider if I’m totally wrong about it and FUCK THE READER applies to non-fiction as well.
I imagine, as with most things, a nice blend of both is the solution. Caring, but not caring too much. Playing it cool - the exact opposite of how the situation makes me feel.
Will consider.
Since my first or second novel, I have always kept the words FUCK THE READER within clear view of my work station. This cue has been my primary compass for well over a decade. What began as a simple reminder to trust my own intuition as a writer and not worry myself about how my words are interpreted by others has evolved into my own literary philosophy.
My philosophy of FUCK THE READER will likely get its own post now that I have introduced it here, but for the sake of this post’s intention I’ll round it off by saying that it also reminds me to assume my readers are intelligent and intuitive enough to pick up on all the unsaid parts that compose a well written story. I also subscribe to Hemingway’s Iceberg Philosophy which claims what makes a book good is like the underwater part of an iceberg - the reader doesn’t know for certain what lies beneath, but rather senses there is more than what’s being said. My favorite stories are the ones that provide this underlying sense of “more” throughout the book and, in the end, ascertain the reader’s intuition in a hyper-realistic manner.
All that being said, FUCK THE READER is about *trusting* the reader to experience this instead of spoon feeding them as if they are too stupid to tap into the underwater parts of the story.
What I have noticed after spending the last couple years writing mostly about Bitcoin and the subjects its understanding necessitates is that I deeply care about my reader in a way that defies my philosophy around fiction.
The function of non-fiction is to teach readers. While writing, I find myself desperate to explain and even spoon-feed my reader, seeking any way I can to ensure the words are being understood. Metaphor after metaphor, I attempt to distill what feels like a storm of knowledge in my mind into concise paragraphs that readers will not only follow, but be interested in.
And every time I finish, I feel I have either failed to adequately convey my thoughts or that I’ve written beyond the scope of each point I’m trying to make and anyone who reads it will feel lost and ultimately give up, slam the book closed, throw it in a firing barrel, douse it in lighter fluid and ignite it while laughing maniacally in youthful academic defiance at my attempt to teach them something.
Which tells me, as a writer, that I’m probably doing pretty well overall.
So. Now that I’ve made the distinction, it’s likely time to consider if I’m totally wrong about it and FUCK THE READER applies to non-fiction as well.
I imagine, as with most things, a nice blend of both is the solution. Caring, but not caring too much. Playing it cool - the exact opposite of how the situation makes me feel.
Will consider.