# "There has to be a reason..."



## Kyle R (Jun 8, 2014)

Today's discussion prompt comes from a recent interview with AM Homes, winner of the 2013 Women's Prize for Fiction. In it, she said:

"There has to be a reason you ask your reader to stop living their life to read your book."

What do you think about this statement? 

What would be your answer to the implied question: 

Why should a reader stop living their life to read your writing? 

:encouragement:


----------



## bazz cargo (Jun 8, 2014)

> Why should a reader stop living their life to read your writing?


Cos it is far better than spending time working a checkout or watching Big Brother.


----------



## Bishop (Jun 8, 2014)

To expand the imagination, and enjoy a world of rich characters and interesting races.

Also, explosions!


----------



## Reject (Jun 8, 2014)

I disagree. Reading enriches my life.  I have a well thumbed copy of Albert Camus The Myth of Sisyphus next to my bed and in-between "Dad" duties, I have John Grisham's Sycamore Row on the go.  I could live without television, I could not however enjoy life without a book.  Reading to me, is an integral part of living.  Therefore the question, implied or otherwise, does not appertain to me.


----------



## Plasticweld (Jun 8, 2014)

I have already lived most of my life, I know the characters and the plot everything but the ending.  Reading lets me live through someone else, something I have not experienced or seen. As a writer I could only hope to offer someone a glimpse of a life different than theirs.


----------



## escorial (Jun 8, 2014)

escapism from the norm is always a good thing.


----------



## Freezeblink (Jun 8, 2014)

From R.R. Martin's book, A Dance with Dragons.
"A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one."

Reading lets you experience new things through your imagination. Totally worth it.


----------



## Kepharel (Jun 8, 2014)

The sentence is ambiguous at best.  If the quote is correct, and read carefully, it says "There has to be a reason you ask...." This implies the author needs a reason to engage with the reader...or am I getting it wrong?


----------



## Jeko (Jun 8, 2014)

I too find fault with the statement; it encourages writers to write for their readers' escapism when this is only something that some writers do. I write so that my readers can live their lives better; that's the opposite of escapism. That's dealing with the problems life throws at them, instead of running away from them into some fantasy.

Yet, in context, the author says she writes about 'big questions' that she wants the reader to consider; that's her 'reason'. But the thought of the reader always stopping their life in order to explore these questions will do her no favours, IMO.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2014)

I don't see a problem with it. To me, it's just saying you don't want the reader to get to the end of your book and say, "Well, that was a waste of time!". And most of us hope to have readers, I would think; I don't think we just toss a story out there and say, "Well, read it or not, I don't care... ". And yes, reading takes time - time away from other things in our lives. So we should be asking if we've written something worth that interruption.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 8, 2014)

> And yes, reading takes time - time away from other things in our lives. So we should be asking if we've written something worth that interruption.



Going on this forum also takes time away from my life; I wouldn't say my life has stopped right now. Books, likewise, are not an interruption to my life; part of the reason I read is because I have moments in my day (mostly at the end) where the only thing I want do is read. At those times, reading doesn't interrupt anything; it fills a hole that would lie empty otherwise.

In that sense, I want the books I read to have a reason for occupying that hole. I want them to have a reason for being there when other books could be. And the books that I like always do.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2014)

Well, I think the whole point is that when one picks up a book, one wants it to be worth the time invested, time that could be spent on some other activity - including reading another possibly more enjoyable book. Writers should keep that in mind (which is not the same thing as writing for readers, although I have no problem with that concept either, while some do).


----------



## garza (Jun 8, 2014)

The answer is obvious. So that your agent can get his 15 percent.


----------



## Morkonan (Jun 8, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> Today's discussion prompt comes from a recent interview with AM Homes, winner of the 2013 Women's Prize for Fiction. In it, she said:
> 
> "There has to be a reason you ask your reader to stop living their life to read your book."
> 
> ...



It's typical narcissistic babble.

The fact is that you're not asking your Reader to stop living their life in order to read your crap. You're offering a new experience to the Reader in a humble attempt to enrich their life. IMO, someone who writes because they think they have something to say that's so important that the world has to stop spinning didn't get enough attention when they were a kid. _Can_ you have something important to say with your writing? Absolutely. But, you should _thank_ a Reader for taking the time to read your work and you should reward them with a new experience while doing so, not insist that they stop experiencing their own life because you're so darn important...

PS - I also think it's important to warn a Reader that you're going to be standing on a soapbox when writing fiction, instead of slamming them with social commentary and personal opinions on every darn page. Sometimes, writers need to shut up and let the story happen, rather than monkey-wrench it into something that it's not.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2014)

Morkonan said:


> The fact is that you're not asking your Reader to stop living their life in order to read your crap.



Wow.

I don't know about you, but other than kinda automatic things like stirring soup or rocking the baby (both of which still have to watched), I generally do stop "living my life" in order to read. I mean, maybe there are people who can change the oil on the car while reading, or sew up a dress, or weed the garden - but me, I have enough holding the book and maybe eating a sandwich... That is, if I want to actually take in what I'm reading.


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jun 8, 2014)

Reasons are overrated in general lol


----------



## Morkonan (Jun 8, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> ...I don't know about you, but other than kinda automatic things like stirring soup or rocking the baby (both of which still have to watched), I generally do stop "living my life" in order to read....



But, did the writer demand that you do so? Was that a condition that they placed upon your reception of their offering?

For me, reading is an intimate part of my life, so there's no conflict at all. That's likely true of a great many readers. However, I would never suggest that there's anything I would write that is worth someone stopping their lives for. If I think I have something important to say, it's only as important as I can make it through my writing. If a Reader believes that it's important enough to stop "living their life" in order to read, that's their decision.

I know I often make bold statements in certain responses. There's always a reason for that, ya know?


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2014)

No, the writer doesn't "demand" we stop to read. But when we do stop, it's generally preferred that it be worth stopping for. And like I said, perhaps there are people who can read while doing something else, but I'm not one of them. So that means, as a reality, that other activities stop while I read.

There are only 24 hours in each day. The time we take to read means time we don't have to do other things. It has nothing to do with preferences re: how we spend our time. It means that as writers, we should try to put something out there that doesn't turn out to be a waste of that time for the reader - ie, we should put our best effort into our writing. I don't know what's so wrong with that idea. :confusion:


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jun 8, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> No, the writer doesn't "demand" we stop to read. But when we do stop, it's generally preferred that it be worth stopping for. And like I said, perhaps there are people who can read while doing something else, but I'm not one of them. So that means, as a reality, that other activities stop while I read.
> 
> There are only 24 hours in each day. The time we take to read means time we don't have to do other things. It has nothing to do with preferences re: how we spend our time. It means that as writers, we should try to put something out there that doesn't turn out to be a waste of that time for the reader - ie, we should put our best effort into our writing. I don't know what's so wrong with that idea. :confusion:



I feel like that makes it sound like the reader is doing the writer a favor instead of reading for themselves. The favor was done when I payed. After that the writer is doing me the favor (hopefully). If it's no good, I can put the book down at any time.


----------



## Schrody (Jun 9, 2014)

Because it's interesting. Because you can learn something. Because it enriches and encourages you to explore worlds and your own imagination. The (fictional) world is your oyster.


----------



## Gofa (Jun 9, 2014)

So they can walk a mile in my mental shoes


----------



## Kepharel (Jun 9, 2014)

I'm so jealous of all you people who have such a love of reading.  I haven't read a book since I can't remember when :witless:


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 9, 2014)

Pidgeon84 said:


> I feel like that makes it sound like the reader is doing the writer a favor instead of reading for themselves. The favor was done when I payed. After that the writer is doing me the favor (hopefully). If it's no good, I can put the book down at any time.



Yes, you can put it down - but you've still wasted that time finding out that it was no good. I don't see it as anyone doing anyone else a favor. I see people investing their money and time into something I've produced - and it's my responsibility to do the best I can to ensure they haven't tossed away either.


----------



## J.T. Chris (Jun 9, 2014)

I'm told this all of the time! There are many other things someone can do than read your book--you have to give them that reason. Having your reader ask too many unanswered questions about your story is one of the biggest reasons they will put your book down. You need to be truthful in your writing and trust in your reader.


----------



## aliveatnight (Jun 9, 2014)

As writers, we all want what we write to always be worth the time. But at the end of the day, no matter how you write your story there will always be people who won't like it. We can only write for ourselves. If we like what we wrote, then we succeeded (well, I think so), simply because we cannot make anyone else like what we did.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 9, 2014)

aliveatnight said:


> As writers, we all want what we write to always be worth the time. But at the end of the day, no matter how you write your story there will always be people who won't like it. We can only write for ourselves. If we like what we wrote, then we succeeded (well, I think so), simply because we cannot make anyone else like what we did.



Yes, we have to write for ourselves - but if you've read any fanfic, you'll understand why most couldn't get published and not for any legal reason. Those folks generally write for themselves. If you want to sell, and more than one book, you have to consider the reader. We can't _make _anyone like what we write, no, but we can make darn sure it's not because we only wrote "good enough for me".


----------



## J.T. Chris (Jun 9, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> Yes, we have to write for ourselves - but if you've read any fanfic, you'll understand why most couldn't get published and not for any legal reason. Those folks generally write for themselves. If you want to sell, and more than one book, you have to consider the reader. We can't _make _anyone like what we write, no, but we can make darn sure it's not because we only wrote "good enough for me".



100% to this. Sure, I think we all have to believe in our stories just to get ourselves writing, but there has to come a point where you never fall too in love with your story that you can't revise what may need to be revised. Sure, there are going to be people who don't like your book, but if you're writing with your reader in mind then you have done your job as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## aliveatnight (Jun 9, 2014)

I do agree that there is a fine line between being blind to your faults and writing for yourself while still making sure that everything makes sense and that there is as little errors as possible. I would hope that is something that you would do for yourself though, and not just for the reader.
Both of your points are completely valid.


----------



## blazeofglory (Jun 9, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> Today's discussion prompt comes from a recent interview with AM Homes, winner of the 2013 Women's Prize for Fiction. In it, she said:
> 
> "There has to be a reason you ask your reader to stop living their life to read your book."
> 
> ...




This question keeps on deepening inside me and of course this is one of the few biggest questions I cannot answer. If I do 
I will fake myself. I often think I am squandering my life nonsensically reading the books I loathe for the simple reason tjat the book is simply the best.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jun 9, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> What would be your answer to the implied question:
> 
> Why should a reader stop living their life to read your writing?
> 
> :encouragement:



The simple truth is that few, if any, on this site have the capacity to write something that entertains more than a few stalwarts.

My thoughts are that we should write as a self-indulgent pleasure, and edit to make our readers feel less bilious... You can't plan awesome, and you can't will a bestseller into being just because you feel you can answer such questions. You can't.

What you can do, is write, and write some more. AND perhaps, with a bestseller to your name, you can write a simple line of explanation as to how you did it, and have a bunch of talented amateurs debate your words, seeking to emulate your success by way of understanding how you did it.


----------



## Terry D (Jun 9, 2014)

The statement in the OP makes the erroneous assumption that reading isn't a part of life.


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jun 9, 2014)

I think this is a completely subjective thing (not that any of the things we discuss aren't) . I guess it just depends on what kind of place reading holds in your life. To me the writer has done me a favor. The only time I would ever feel as though a writer has jipped me of my time is if I feel they have written a completely unoriginal story. .just don't ape off of other authors and I won't hold you accountable for what I've done with my time.


----------



## Jeko (Jun 9, 2014)

The question is, do you stop living in order to _write? _If you don't, then you don't stop living in order to read either, because reading is an essential part of the writing process.


----------



## Ariel (Jun 9, 2014)

I would extrapolate that quote out and apply it to any form of entertainment.

If whatever you choose to entertain yourself with isn't fun, interesting, and engaging then what reason is there to use it?

Even if something is to "make my life better" why should I read it (watch, play, etc) if I'm not enjoying it?  And as for textbooks: I learn much better when the subject is engaging and interesting and I learn better when the materials I'm using are engaging and interesting.


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jun 9, 2014)

amsawtell said:


> I would extrapolate that quote out and apply it to any form of entertainment.
> 
> If whatever you choose to entertain yourself with isn't fun, interesting, and engaging then what reason is there to use it?
> 
> Even if something is to "make my life better" why should I read it (watch, play, etc) if I'm not enjoying it?  And as for textbooks: I learn much better when the subject is engaging and interesting and I learn better when the materials I'm using are engaging and interesting.



I don't really agree. I hate math, but I want to go to school for astronomy. So even though I have no interest in math it allows me to become better at something I do enjoy.  There are parts of reading and writing we may not necessarily enjoy but they might be necessary to do what we enjoy. Does anybody like proofreading and editing their stuff? Maybe. I hate it, but I do it cause it's necessary to do making what I do possibly professional.


----------



## Morkonan (Jun 10, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> ...we should put our best effort into our writing. I don't know what's so wrong with that idea. :confusion:



I agree wholeheartedly. For myself, the only reason to write is because there are Readers. 

I remember an interview I saw with a famous writer. He said there are generally three types of writers. Writer who write because they think they have something important worth writing. Writers who write, thinking they'll get rich. And, writers who don't have any other choice but to write.

I'm of the latter sort. But, I write because I don't have any other choice but to seek to entertain and, somehow, brighten the days of others. I write because I love people and I like making them happy... So, if I can write something that entertains someone or makes them happy for a day or three, I've succeeded at my goal.

That's a pretty low bar to set for oneself, isn't it? I guess that's so I'll be more likely to achieve it.


----------



## ppsage (Jun 10, 2014)

> Why should a reader stop living their life to read your writing?


This question is again probably limited to the reading of prose fiction or at least art/entertainment literature. The reasons I read a cookbook, or a textbook, seem apparent, as do the criteria by which that writing might be judged. Asking this question of writing with any passing affiliation to art impinges considerably, I'd say, on the basic purpose of such writing, which revolves about making expression of ineffable human verities. We know more than we can understand and art points there. Even in spy novels or thrillers.


----------



## Jared77 (Jun 10, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> Today's discussion prompt comes from a recent interview with AM Homes, winner of the 2013 Women's Prize for Fiction. In it, she said:
> 
> "There has to be a reason you ask your reader to stop living their life to read your book."
> 
> ...



Reading IS living your life.


----------



## Greimour (Jun 11, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> "There has to be a reason you ask your reader to stop living their life to read your book."
> 
> What do you think about this statement?



A person usually takes the time to read as a form of escapism. To leave their life and take a break in another one. The _REAL_  question is; why should it be my work/book they read opposed to someone  elses. In which case, it is merely having the style that fits their  desire and having the words within to keep them entertained and  satisfied. A person will either read or they won't - it often comes down  to just that. Getting the attention of one who will is where  advertisement comes in.



KyleColorado said:


> What would be your answer to the implied question:
> 
> Why should a reader stop living their life to read your writing?



I slip nuggets of real information into my writing. Reading my work may actually let you learn something by accident. A happy coincidence where you learn while [hopefully] enjoying an escape from reality.



+1 to Cadence response.


----------

