Jump to content

[Writing Discussion] Whose Opinion is More Important, the Author's or the Reader's?


Aix

Recommended Posts

Who do you write for? Yourself, or your readers? Is it more important to write what you want to write or what people want to read? Of course, maybe sometimes you're writing for fun, and sometimes you're writing for others, but let's talk about when you're writing something you want people to read. How do you balance between yourself and your readers?

 

When I was really young, I started writing comedies. There was nothing more enjoyable for me than to see my friends' laughter at my childish humor, nothing greater than the feeling of my papers being passed around. Even in Grade 9, we had a time where we could share our writing if we wanted, and rather than writing anything serious, the type of fiction I enjoy myself, I wrote vulgar comedies for the sake of inciting the classes' laughter and the teacher's glares as I read them out loud. It's not like I didn't enjoy writing them, in fact, the thought of seeing people laugh motivated me to write. Hence, I'd say I like writing for others, I'm always looking to see what others want to read. Their opinion is what matters to me. What a funking attention whore and sheep.

 

Though, an exception is in RPing. If I'm not doing my host duties, I write for myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like writing for the story itself, though I definitely want people to enjoy it.

 

I'd say neither are most important, but the characters and story you're breathing life into are. I only wish for people to see the world I've created, as I watch it grow beyond what I'd planned for it, and where it goes. I created a universe, albeit an intangible one, and I owe it to the 'lives' I made to give them truth. This is my first real attempt at writing an original story, but even fancition has given me characters that stick with me forever. The difference is that this original fiction is one I never feel like giving up on, even when I'm daunted, because I hand crafted the world.

 

I'd say that the story itself is most important. It's the writer's duty to tend to what he or she created, and it's the readers view to watch and enjoy what unfolds, or to help the writer make the world better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it doesn't really matter what the writer thinks about their own work. To be blunt, the reader has all control over if the story was well done and how it's interpreted. I never got why authors try to tell people what their story meant as if it's fact. It's all up to interpretation and the author's opinion is just one of many.
At least that's how I feel.

I tend to write for myself though, and hope that others enjoy what I came up with. That's it really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it doesn't really matter what the writer thinks about their own work. To be blunt, the reader has all control over if the story was well done and how it's interpreted. I never got why authors try to tell people what their story meant as if it's fact. It's all up to interpretation and the author's opinion is just one of many.

At least that's how I feel.

I tend to write for myself though, and hope that others enjoy what I came up with. That's it really.

While I get where you're coming from, especially with how that's something writers shouldn't say in that manner, that's not true.

 

The meaning of the story, the original intent, is the true intent. It can be interpreted with extra meanings, and it can change the world, but the original meaning is what the author says. Why? They made it, they know what the meaning was from start to finish. That is a fact. Their opinion isn't "one of many", it's the opinion of someone who knows far more about the story than anyone else, and it's arrogant to assume you know as much as or more than the writer about their own creation.

 

As I said, it's fine to have more interpretations and growth beyond the story, but the writer's intent is always the true original interpretation, without fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The story should belong primarily to its writer.

All stories, as such, can be taken with a grain of salt- this is how a particular writer sees people. This is the fantasy had by a specific writer. You can't get mad at a story which inherently belongs to someone else.

 

Or, to use the saying, "Just because you decide to sell out doesn't mean people will want to buy."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it more important to write what you want to write or what people want to read? 

If you do it right, you can do both. 

But if I had to give an answer, it'd be best to write what you, the author, wants to write. Passion translates into your work ethic and what you produce. You can tell authors like J.K. Rowling or Eichiro Oda poured their heart and soul into their worlds and their works are so much better off because of that. 

I learned this from public speaking. Even if you don't have a vested interest in what the speaker is talking about, if they're really enthusiastic and are talking excitedly about their topic, you're more likely to get swept up in it and pay attention too.

If you love and believe in what you write, it'll be all the more likely that other people will pick up on that when they read your work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends on who it is written for. The receiver's opinion is what matters the most, so in my case the most important opinions I could receive are from my readers. They are who I write for, ergo, their opinions matters the most as I want to ensure my works are the most enjoyable for them.

 

However, in terms of content it's always what I want to write, unless I take a request or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, you should just write for the sake of doing so, and use it as a means of self-satisfaction/accomplishment. I mean, having [x] posts/comments/etc honestly shouldn't be what determines the value of something, but the content itself is what actually matters. Writing because it's a story/etc that you feel has to be told is what should really matter, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's dependant on the piece to me. Some pieces are written with specific an intent, to be read by a certain audience, a person, to deliver a specific idea, or explore a theme. Those pieces are the sort of ones where the readers opinion matters as much if not more than the writers. 

 

Some pieces are written because you wished to write them, because you had the idea floating about, or you needed to express yourself in a given manner. In those cases your opinion generally matters more. 

 

And then there's whether you want the piece to be acknowledged critically or not. If you do, then the opinion of someone who knows that sort of thing is probably more important than your own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I get where you're coming from, especially with how that's something writers shouldn't say in that manner, that's not true.

 

The meaning of the story, the original intent, is the true intent. It can be interpreted with extra meanings, and it can change the world, but the original meaning is what the author says. Why? They made it, they know what the meaning was from start to finish. That is a fact. Their opinion isn't "one of many", it's the opinion of someone who knows far more about the story than anyone else, and it's arrogant to assume you know as much as or more than the writer about their own creation.

 

As I said, it's fine to have more interpretations and growth beyond the story, but the writer's intent is always the true original interpretation, without fail.

I would have to disagree. First with the statement "That's not true". It's not a matter of what is true or not, it's a matter of what each person thinks.

 

Anyway, I still disagree that the writer's intent is the "true" interpretation. Obviously it's the original but interpretations cannot be true or false, in my opinion.

It's not arrogant at all, because once it's out into the world it's up to any number of interpretations. Everyone thinks and feels different and I don't think it's right to say any one person is more or less correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to disagree. First with the statement "That's not true". It's not a matter of what is true or not, it's a matter of what each person thinks.

 

Anyway, I still disagree that the writer's intent is the "true" interpretation. Obviously it's the original but interpretations cannot be true or false, in my opinion.

It's not arrogant at all, because once it's out into the world it's up to any number of interpretations. Everyone thinks and feels different and I don't think it's right to say any one person is more or less correct.

are you seriously going to sjw even this

 

The writer knows what THEY interpreted when they wrote. You can interpret it differently, but there's no way yours is any more correct than the writer's, because they wrote it. It honestly does not matter 1 damn percent what you think if the writer says otherwise, because you know far less about the work and the world it is based in.

 

It's not a matter of what each person thinks, because each person isn't the de facto god of that universe. The writer is. And that means that they are, in fact, the owner of the true interpretation. Anythign further is additional, but the  writer is, in fact, infallible and correct in their interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you seriously going to sjw even this

 

The writer knows what THEY interpreted when they wrote. You can interpret it differently, but there's no way yours is any more correct than the writer's, because they wrote it. It honestly does not matter 1 damn percent what you think if the writer says otherwise, because you know far less about the work and the world it is based in.

 

It's not a matter of what each person thinks, because each person isn't the de facto god of that universe. The writer is. And that means that they are, in fact, the owner of the true interpretation. Anythign further is additional, but the  writer is, in fact, infallible and correct in their interpretation.

Um, what do you mean by sjw it?

...And "even this"? I'm confused.

 

You're not gonna change how I feel about this. I never said that anyone is more correct. In fact I specifically said that no one is more or less correct. Because that's what an interpretation is. What each person thinks about something. The writer of course has their own interpretation but doesn't mean anyone else is wrong for thinking a different way from what the writer thinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are you seriously going to sjw even this

 

And are you seriously going to yet again argue as though every opinion you hold is absolute fact and everyone who disagrees is an idiot for doing so? That's not how discussions and opinions work. I realize you're terrified of showing any of yourself for fear of it ending in only being rejected and hurt again but hiding behind stating your opinions as unchallengeable truth doesn't help anything. These kind of threads where you go to great lengths to tell people their opinions are wrong are why so many people get the wrong impression of you. Or rather the right impression because that's all you give them to work with.

 

You're not going to persuade Cowcow to change his opinion. The things you're saying are your own opinion whether you choose to say that or not. If you want to continue in this discussion thread you have to realize this and stop attacking every opposing viewpoint. All that does is make the thread it's happening in extremely unpleasant.

 

 

Now for the actual topic of the thread. I feel the collective views and interpretations of a work are what really bring life to them. The author creates the world and original meaning and theme. But one also has to be careful that unintended themes aren't conveyed if not desired. Whether or not they're officially right by the author's original intent they're still there and valid for the readers. This is true of any artform. I can set out to show one view and unintentionally portray another in the eyes of others and I can't simply dismiss their views. Instead we should turn to what this thread was intended for, namely to discuss our varying views and why we feel the ways we do, not bicker about who's right or wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dang I missed all the cool threads yesterday.

 

Um...on topic, I have to say that for me, a writer's interpretation and original intent is the most important. Perhaps it's years of English and interpreting various books, but I always found a special thrill in hearing how a writer thought about what they wrote and why, because it added new depth and meaning to the story. However, I think it's also interesting to hear reader opinions. While they may not be as influential, they can still find or interpret something in a new, refreshing way that the author never considered before. It's a lovely way of keeping the story in people's minds rather than just thinking of it in one specific way. I got that opinion from all the Shakespeare I read, where there can be multiple ways of interpreting a single passage.

 

Still, when it comes down to it, I prefer to write for myself. Sure, for fanfiction, I take reader opinions into account and that's affected my stories in a positive way sometimes. It's nice. Feels like less of a solo venture and more of an RPG tale with companions following behind you. But you also have to consider the parable of The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey. "Please all, and you will please none." It's good to try and be considerate of your audience, but in the end, you're the one writing it, not them. It sprang from your own mind, was written by your own pen/typewriter/keyboard, and you're the one that will think of it like your own child, not them. So limiting or changing what you want to write merely to suit the whims of others isn't the best plan in my opinion, as it's likely to make your story another cookie cutter. Plus, at least for me, my enthusiasm wanes if I feel I am writing what others want me to write rather than what I want to write.

 

To continue the RPG analogy: Sure, your companions are there to help you on your way, but ultimately you're the hero of this game, and you will eventually have to decide your own path. It's just how things roll. Follow your heart and all that jazz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this is CW, I'm sure you all don't mind reading a lot.

 

I think one of the most interesting things about any sort of writing is what the author doesn't intend.

 

The death of the author is a common theme, of which you can learn a bit more from in this video:

 

But if you don't want to watch it, that's okay, too. I can talk about it. Stories, like anything that happens in the world, are a series of events, often containing people who perform actions in a successful or unsuccessful attempt at completing a goal. At its basis, it is merely a text (just like anything from a youtube to a news article), and inherently, texts do not have meaning. The meaning is gained through interpretation and interpretation is made by any single individual imposing their knowledge and experience onto the text. The important thing to note, then, is that in a world full of billions of people, no single person– even the author themselves– could have control over the interpretation of the text because no one person could understand the many different ways that a story can be interpreted.

 

This is something that becomes fairly obvious if you've taken any sort of literature courses in college– unless, of course, you have a shitty professor. Often, the most important and interesting part of any text is what the author didn't think of when they wrote the text. For an easy example, take a look at Heart of Darkness. Book is racist as sheet. Did Joseph Conrad think about whether or not his book would be interpreted as racist as sheet when he wrote it? Probably not. He was racist as sheet. Fifth Chinese Daughter, a book written in the 50's that was viewed by many as a sort of step forward in educating Americans about the Chinese-American population, was a decade later criticized heavily for enforcing a stereotype for asian women and the Chinese population in general. Public opinion on the book itself has swerved back and forth over the decades and more recently has come back for more criticism for some of the underlying history that some scholars feel the writing tries to ignore to make its own point. I know I'm pointing to race-oriented examples, but throughout history, those are some of the easiest to find.

 

It's even harder to make a case for the author's interpretation being the only interpretation if they're no longer here to make it. Or in the case of Gawain and the Green Knight– an Arthurian poem with heavy Christian themes– the author was never known to begin with. There are also cases where the author contradicts themselves. Take Thomas Pynchon, a secretive man who is known for hating scholarly writing for trying to find meaning in a work he believes holds none. The epitome of this sentiment, however, is very easily read in one of his most famous novels, The Crying of Lot 49, which features several events in a single character's life that on their own read as very unrelated. The character in the novel, however, slowly starts to suspect there is a conspiracy and that her involvement in it is quickly destroying her life. In essence, the character is tying disparate events together as if they have meaning, even if there is none. So even if Thomas Pynchon says there isn't any meaning in that specific novel, it's fairly easy to interpret a greater point he may be trying to make.

 

As a reader and critic, I feel that accepting the author's opinion as basic fact is boring. It doesn't really help anyone. What if the writer is sheet at getting his point across? Does it matter that no one gets the point just because the author wanted to make it? I certainly don't think so.

 

But as a writer, man, I'd funking hate it if everyone accepted my opinion as the only interpretation that matters. How could I feel good about my writing if I'm constantly being told that it's infallible? You're telling me that I have nothing to improve upon? Nothing I couldn't learn? That's horrifying. The most interesting part of writing is getting the work critiqued by someone with a different perspective than you so you know if you've missed anything or should try to rewrite something. It's never just syntax and grammar that's corrected, it's often how characters and events are handled, because how I handled it may offer a dominant interpretation I did not intend or even want.

 

That being said, this isn't to say that a writer can't write whatever they want. They're free to do so. They're free to ignore any criticism they're given throughout the process of editing and revising. They're free not to even take any criticism throughout the process of editing and revising. They're free to also not edit and revise throughout the process of editing and revising. They're also free to try to crowdfund their book when the publisher turns their manuscript down. They're also free to get mad when no one funds their book and they have to find other means of self-publishing. And they're also free to ignore any criticism or their empty bank balance once the book is released because, surprise! It's a shitty first draft.

 

No, but the author's intent is good to know. It lets us, as readers know what they were going for, and for many, allows them to see exactly where they went wrong in doing so, offer other criticism, etc.

 

 

As far as who I write for, it is undoubtedly for myself. That being said, I think it's very important to take into account how something I make might be viewed by an audience, and that influences a lot of my writing. Storytelling has generally been about either simple entertainment or to get a point across. If people interpret my work differently than I would like, I see that as a chance to learn why and improve on it so that the next time or in revision, I'll be prepared to really push the point home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If writing for a career, you sure as hell need to cater to the reader. It is their opinion that your livelihood hangs from.

 

Now, in the realm of fanfiction, or other places where your writing is not held under critique of any impact, write for yourself. You are the one gaining from the exercise, so do it how you want.

 

Roleplay is its own creature. You are to write for yourself, as the expression of creativity is why roleplay exists, but at the same time it is your responsibility to allow the other participants to do the same. I could probably say a lot more on this, but I am too lazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Changed the question slightly, whose opinion on the story and where it's going is more important here?

The writer's opinion on the story is important; if they're writing a story and they start hating the story, they should stop writing it. The reader's opinion... maybe not as much, but it still matters; while yes you can't please everyone, if no one thinks your story is good, there's definitely something that needs to be changed; unless you're writing for yourself, then you can do whatever. The same goes for where the author is taking the story.

 

If writing for a career, you sure as hell need to cater to the reader. It is their opinion that your livelihood hangs from.

 

Now, in the realm of fanfiction, or other places where your writing is not held under critique of any impact, write for yourself. You are the one gaining from the exercise, so do it how you want.

this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta say in regards to the debate earlier that it does sound a somewhat wrong to say claim that the person reading is just as right as the author when it comes to interpretation.

 

When an author writes with meaning, they're building an extended metaphor. When people make an example of something via comparison, you wouldn't up and say "well I recognize what you're trying to say but what you actually said was X".

 

Not without coming off as awfully arrogant, at any rate.

 

You can have your own interpretation of what the other person said, and you can explain it as such; you cannot however say that your interpretation of what they said holds the same relevance as what the person was talking about. Or have you never heard an exasperated "...you know what I meant"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agrospeech

Agro, I'm not sure if I should tell you to say things like this more often, or to be silly more often, because to be honest, I really like both sides.

 

On-topic, I think the best thing about writing anything is the enjoyment and satisfaction people get from reading it, and that you get from writing it. So if one or neither of you are experiencing that, then you're doing something wrong. The only exceptions I can think of are books that you derive neither from, but make you think. But at least for me, I still enjoy those kind of books, so idk. *shrugs*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dang I missed all the cool threads yesterday.

 

Um...on topic, I have to say that for me, a writer's interpretation and original intent is the most important. Perhaps it's years of English and interpreting various books, but I always found a special thrill in hearing how a writer thought about what they wrote and why, because it added new depth and meaning to the story. However, I think it's also interesting to hear reader opinions. While they may not be as influential, they can still find or interpret something in a new, refreshing way that the author never considered before. It's a lovely way of keeping the story in people's minds rather than just thinking of it in one specific way. I got that opinion from all the Shakespeare I read, where there can be multiple ways of interpreting a single passage.

 

Still, when it comes down to it, I prefer to write for myself. Sure, for fanfiction, I take reader opinions into account and that's affected my stories in a positive way sometimes. It's nice. Feels like less of a solo venture and more of an RPG tale with companions following behind you. But you also have to consider the parable of The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey. "Please all, and you will please none." It's good to try and be considerate of your audience, but in the end, you're the one writing it, not them. It sprang from your own mind, was written by your own pen/typewriter/keyboard, and you're the one that will think of it like your own child, not them. So limiting or changing what you want to write merely to suit the whims of others isn't the best plan in my opinion, as it's likely to make your story another cookie cutter. Plus, at least for me, my enthusiasm wanes if I feel I am writing what others want me to write rather than what I want to write.

 

Oh god, this.

 

THIS.

 

I write primarily for my own enjoyment. For most of my life, in fact, I rarely ever shared my work with people, even though I was told my stuff was pretty good. Eventually I got into the fanfiction writing scene, and worked on that.

 

One of my stories was a project I continuously added onto for...3 years. In addition to another project that was...alarmingly popular and served as a prequel in some parts to the larger project. This was when things went downhill for me. This side project was so well-liked because the protagonist was a budding psychopath, essentially. People loved it. So, naturally, I started to add more scenes to it that involved the character getting violent and aggressive over petty, perceived injustices. Granted, the plot behind it was that he was really messed up and being manipulated a little, but ultimately, the character got corrupted too quickly.

 

And that characterization had to transfer over to the larger project eventually. By this point, I HATED the character. He was loved by fans, but he had exhausted his Freudian excuses to the point where he was just an utter sadist with almost no redeeming features whatsoever. And I wanted him to be hated by fans, so I pushed his boundaries further, trying to get it where the readers would hate him, but it never happened.

 

And I was so wrapped up in readers' approval that I grew more frustrated and disillusioned by my work, because such a massive project had taken innumerable missteps over the years, in plot and characterization. And when I tried new projects, I found the feedback somewhat hollow and inconsistent, and would get more and more frustrated by the lack of quality feedback until I axed or quit all my projects.

 

This was four years ago.

 

Only RECENTLY, have I managed to get back into writing. And to me, the most important thing is whether I like the direction things are going. I do want feedback, of course, but I refuse to let myself get drawn back into that horrible vortex of needing reader approval to enjoy writing. I'd love to hear interpretations and theories, and my main reviewer is fantastic at this sort of analysis, and can inspire me or nudge me into altering little details later down the road. But I write now because I enjoy writing, and I'm overall happy with the direction the story's going.

 

It is a balancing act. But you won't have the motivation to write something you don't like writing about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta say in regards to the debate earlier that it does sound a somewhat wrong to say claim that the person reading is just as right as the author when it comes to interpretation.

 

When an author writes with meaning, they're building an extended metaphor. When people make an example of something via comparison, you wouldn't up and say "well I recognize what you're trying to say but what you actually said was X".

 

Not without coming off as awfully arrogant, at any rate.

 

You can have your own interpretation of what the other person said, and you can explain it as such; you cannot however say that your interpretation of what they said holds the same relevance as what the person was talking about. Or have you never heard an exasperated "...you know what I meant"?

I'm inclined to disagree. "You know what I meant," implies that the reader does know at any point, exactly what the author is trying to tell them. And if the textual evidence- which all literary criticism need point to- and techniques back up what turns out to be the author's interpretation, then so be it. But that being said, it's also entirely possible that the textual evidence allows for the argument of a different interpretation. And if that, and not the prior, is the case, then "you know what I meant" is irrelevant because the reader literally would have no idea what they actually meant.

 

 

 

Agro, I'm not sure if I should tell you to say things like this more often, or to be silly more often, because to be honest, I really like both sides.

I tend to avoid argument since it makes me feel sick. I only ever really speak my mind like this if I feel I have something important to add to the conversation or will avoid spiteful backlash.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh god, this.

 

THIS.

 

I write primarily for my own enjoyment. For most of my life, in fact, I rarely ever shared my work with people, even though I was told my stuff was pretty good. Eventually I got into the fanfiction writing scene, and worked on that.

 

One of my stories was a project I continuously added onto for...3 years. In addition to another project that was...alarmingly popular and served as a prequel in some parts to the larger project. This was when things went downhill for me. This side project was so well-liked because the protagonist was a budding psychopath, essentially. People loved it. So, naturally, I started to add more scenes to it that involved the character getting violent and aggressive over petty, perceived injustices. Granted, the plot behind it was that he was really messed up and being manipulated a little, but ultimately, the character got corrupted too quickly.

 

And that characterization had to transfer over to the larger project eventually. By this point, I HATED the character. He was loved by fans, but he had exhausted his Freudian excuses to the point where he was just an utter sadist with almost no redeeming features whatsoever. And I wanted him to be hated by fans, so I pushed his boundaries further, trying to get it where the readers would hate him, but it never happened.

 

And I was so wrapped up in readers' approval that I grew more frustrated and disillusioned by my work, because such a massive project had taken innumerable missteps over the years, in plot and characterization. And when I tried new projects, I found the feedback somewhat hollow and inconsistent, and would get more and more frustrated by the lack of quality feedback until I axed or quit all my projects.

 

This was four years ago.

 

Only RECENTLY, have I managed to get back into writing. And to me, the most important thing is whether I like the direction things are going. I do want feedback, of course, but I refuse to let myself get drawn back into that horrible vortex of needing reader approval to enjoy writing. I'd love to hear interpretations and theories, and my main reviewer is fantastic at this sort of analysis, and can inspire me or nudge me into altering little details later down the road. But I write now because I enjoy writing, and I'm overall happy with the direction the story's going.

 

It is a balancing act. But you won't have the motivation to write something you don't like writing about.

Honestly, I agree with this. I went through it to. Here's something most people won't think about. 

 

The reader's opinion is important, yes, but if you want to show the world something 'new' (yes, I know, nothing new under the sun, just the way we tell them), they aren't going to want that. They don't know it exists! You have to just write what you want, and the people can judge you later.

 

As for how to interpret a work, in the end, the way the author interprets it is the way is was meant to be. Now, if you get something else out of it, good for you, but that doesn't mean, 'Oh, since I think this way, I supersede the person that created this world that touched me'.

 

E.g. People can interpret Sam and Frodo as gay all they want. But that's not what Tolken wanted nor intended. He wanted to show the power of loyalty and friendship, and that is the correct interpretation of that relationship, no matter how many people wanna scream they are gay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

evilfusionspeech

Your story sounds startlingly similar to this one author's I met on FFN. And yeah, I've noticed readers seem to love psychopath characters, for various reasons. Makes me wonder if that's becoming a bit overdone now.

 

I tend to avoid argument since it makes me feel sick. I only ever really speak my mind like this if I feel I have something important to add to the conversation or will avoid spiteful backlash.

I get that, which is why I tend to avoid hot-button issues lately, or at least skirt around them and try to lighten the mood. I'd rather not deal with the amount of vitriol people can generate over these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...