# Does anyone else feel like their writing and ideas are a bit too high-brow for most?



## Geminus (Aug 1, 2012)

Although I have full confidence that the subject matter and actual writing I produce is quality stuff, it only seems to attract a very niche audience of readers. This niche audience is generally comprised of people who write, roleplay or read on a more "advanced" level than the average joe. In a world where the shining pinnacle of literacy is considered to be _Twilight,_ the _Hunger Games, 50 Shades of Grey_ or any other might-as-well-be-fanfiction book with a Mary Sue protagonist, I find that the average quality of writing has gone down substantially. This doesn't apply only to this forum, but to every other writing/roleplaying forum out there on the web which I've visited. I see plenty of online authors that write, what I would personally consider, literary masterpieces. Certainly many of these writers produce material that is vastly more interesting and holds just as much emotional depth as classic American literature. 

And yet, it will never be treated as such. It's too high brow for the average reader to absorb. Just the other day, I spoke with someone IRL and she was telling me how she doesn't really read books and she'd much rather read fanfiction. Not to belittle anyone's fanfiction, I'm sure there are amazing fanfictions out there as well - but the fact that this girl has an aversion to actual literature is a bit weird. Are people more likely to skip over your writing if it's of a "higher caliber" than, say, a Harry Potter Draco x Harry fanfic? I blame the education system.


----------



## Sam (Aug 1, 2012)

I don't see how you can blame the education system. Last I checked, _Twilight _wasn't been taught in English lit.. 

Blame the young people who don't read quality writing and spend their time sending texts in which half the alphabet is missing.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 1, 2012)

I think this debate has been going on since literacy became widespread. 

It's easy to look down on these novels but it's also worth thinking about what they do well, what it is about them that captures the popular imagination so well. Is "Fifty Shades of Grey" a stupid book? Heck yes (IMO). But clearly something about it really appeals to people. You can learn much more from figuring out what that is than you can from patting yourself on the back for your good taste.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 1, 2012)

For every book that one person calls trash, there's another person who says it's great. If I recall, some of the authors who are today considered 'masters' were frowned on, ignored, and called any number of derogatory names. For example, Charles Dickens:

Charles Dickens Overview

"After his death, his literary reputation waned and his novels tended not to be taken seriously. The novelist George Meredith found them intellectually lacking:

_Not much of Dickens will live, because it has so little correspondence to life. He was the incarnation of cockneydom, a caricaturist who aped the moralist; he should have kept to short stories. If his novels are read at all in the future, people will wonder what we saw in them._"


----------



## Bloggsworth (Aug 1, 2012)

The main quality a book needs is readability, without that it is nothing, whether highbrow or lowbrow doesn't matter. Taste has little to do with the education system and everything to do with snobbery and and perception of social class. If you are ill educated but want to know, you will read Tolstoy, it is known as autodidacticism; if you went to Eton and Oxford but want to piss off your parents, you read the Twilight collection. My poems are strictly no-brow...


----------



## Geminus (Aug 1, 2012)

lasm said:


> I think this debate has been going on since literacy became widespread.
> 
> It's easy to look down on these novels but it's also worth thinking about what they do well, what it is about them that captures the popular imagination so well. Is "Fifty Shades of Grey" a stupid book? Heck yes (IMO). But clearly something about it really appeals to people. You can learn much more from figuring out what that is than you can from patting yourself on the back for your good taste.



I definitely don't look down on anyone's writing, because you can always improve. I do, however, look down on someone that puts no effort into their writing. An extreme example of this would be _My Immortal (_Home - My Immortal rehost).

Something written by Stephen King is not necessarily more profound than something written by a 1st year English major. That being said, I don't think there's any shame in grouping writing into "good/captivating" and "bad/uninteresting" categories. Unfortunately we live in a world of convenience. Most of our entertainment and advertisement is condensed and the result of countless hours of market research into what humans will like. The food industry deliberately manufactures food that is addictive and tickles our taste buds in way that no natural food is capable of. I feel as though many novels nowadays implement a very similar method; the focus has shifted away from producing quality to producing a book people will buy. It seems really common nowadays to produce movies based off books and as a result, the sales of the book will increase dramatically.  



Sam W said:


> I don't see how you can blame the education system. Last I checked, _Twilight _wasn't been taught in English lit..
> 
> Blame the young people who don't read quality writing and spend their time sending texts in which half the alphabet is missing.



I blame the education system for having absolutely no variety. In addition, many of the books my students read now in middle/high school are the same books I read while in middle and high school. Classic literature is fine and all, but realistically it holds very little relevance to a modern society. Especially a modern American society. We need to expand this diagnostic box of what is considered appropriate reading material for students. 

Most of the required reading books such as Lord of the Flies or the Crucible or To Kill a Mockingbird are despised by students. 
I do English translation and tutoring at a supplementary education center where I live and I've seen more distaste for books that are required reading than the Bible. Students nowadays _hate_ Lord of the Flies just as much as the internet hates Twilight. 

In an ideal world, students would be reading Little House on the Praire AND Tolkien.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Aug 1, 2012)

Hating a book is pointless, one might as well hate a rock.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Aug 1, 2012)

Bloggsworth said:


> Hating a book is pointless, one might as well hate a rock.



Not even remotely comparable.  A rock didn't have a publisher that approved it and an author that made money off of it (especially at the cost of other, more deserving rocks).


----------



## garza (Aug 1, 2012)

Personally, I'm such a high-brow person I make myself sick. I mean, I don't drink any common beer as long as I can afford Belikin Premium. That's an extra 50 cents but it's worth it to show the common folk how high brow I am. So of course what I write is far beyond the reach of the herd, strictly high brow all the way. If you are not super sophisticated you ought not even be reading this.


----------



## philistine (Aug 1, 2012)

Bloggsworth said:


> Hating a book is pointless, one might as well hate a rock.



Outside of geology meets, rocks aren't discussed with any degree of either praise or anathema, unless of course, we're taking about the movie, featuring the delightfully hirsute Connery. 

And yes, though I don't care at the moment.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 1, 2012)

Like, OMG garza, if you have to TELL people you're highbrow, you are totally not highbrow. Like SERIOUSLY. :wink2:


----------



## patskywriter (Aug 1, 2012)

Geminus said:


> … I blame the education system for having absolutely no variety. In addition, many of the books my students read now in middle/high school are the same books I read while in middle and high school. Classic literature is fine and all, but realistically it holds very little relevance to a modern society. Especially a modern American society. …



Absolutely no variety? We obviously didn't go to the same schools, but I used to marvel at how my teachers were able to show how the "old-school" classic writers' stories related to us as big-city, African-American kids. When I was in junior high school, the local public-school system was just beginning to acknowledge black and Latino kids by—in addition to the classics—allowing us to read books by "our" authors as well. Although I enjoyed Steinbeck and Hesse, I was enthralled by the black author, Richard Wright. The last scene of his book, "Native Son," was set in the neighborhood I was familiar with (and later moved to). For a black kid, whose schooling until then had been Eurocentric, that was absolutely mind-blowing. The neighborhood had changed drastically since Wright had written Native Son, and the events of the book were eagerly discussed in class. I think that for most of us, this was the first time we _personally_ identified with a book. I didn't need much encouragement to read, but reading and discussing Native Son was a _very_ big deal. 

Later, I discovered Georges Simenon, whose stories are set in turn-of-the-20th-century Paris. Our teachers taught us how to actually *read* books both modern and classic, from writers with familiar backgrounds and those totally foreign, and to dig for the ideas/ideals that we could relate to on some level, while also gaining understanding and knowledge from them. That's why I scoffed when "experts" would look at us so-called minority, inner-city kids and describe us as "disadvantaged." They were completely clueless. I wish _everybody_ had the wonderful teachers I had.


----------



## Potty (Aug 1, 2012)

I think shadowalker sums it up nicely. Today we think that most of the books are never as good as the likes of tolkien etc... but in 50 years time, they may well be taught at school. As the English language changes with the times, the way we right now will be thought of as "high brow". It's a bit like classical music... back in the day that was probably top of the pops... nowerdays its an aquired taste. 

Things change. I look forward to the day when I will be thought of as a literary hero... won't be in my life time though.


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 1, 2012)

In my opinion the answer to the question indirectly posed by the OP--Why do people seem to prefer "low-brow" literature?--is pretty simple:

The majority of people read for emotions first, and for intellectual stimulation second (if at all).

You can still have high caliber writing filled with staggering genius, but it better be woven into an emotionally engaging story, otherwise very few people are going to spend their time reading it.

It's like cooking. Your food can have all the vitamins and minerals and protein essential for a healthy diet, but if it tastes like cardboard (or worse: crap), nobody is going to want to eat it. :cower:


----------



## garza (Aug 1, 2012)

lasm - My point exactly. The OP sounds like someone saying what I said, only meaning it.


----------



## namesake (Aug 1, 2012)

IMO books are art, truth, and politics.Sub-cultures are everywhere and I know because I have seen some in other countris, in some cultures in society. I think culture as in the mainstream is good high brow culture. Becuase people judge others they will always be a culture.


----------



## alanmt (Aug 1, 2012)

Poor old lower classes.  Can't even choose their reading materials properly.  But honestly, what did one expect would happen when they were given a surfeit of income and opportunity without adequately instilling in them a proper sense of culture and responsibility?

But yes, I do continue to fulfill my unique burden of laboring away with brilliance for the few capable of adequately appreciating it, knowing all too well the heights at which I soar are inaccessible to the ants upon the ground.  Noblesse oblige.

Except, of course, for the occasional archly base piece I deign to post in the horrible writing thread.


----------



## namesake (Aug 1, 2012)

Art is subjective, this follows my previous post and can be debated as it has already been.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 1, 2012)

My brow is getting higher with each stroke of the hairbrush!  My writing hasn't caught up yet however.

I think it's dangerous to dismiss the "average" reader.  To engage them a writer must be either a great craftsman, a skilled artist, or a wonderful storyteller.


----------



## Kevin (Aug 1, 2012)

Art rhymes with fart, hence 'artsy-fartsy'.


----------



## namesake (Aug 1, 2012)

I don't know but I think high brow is the obvious culture, and low brow is something else altogether. At least that is what I understand, since high brow means you get at least a good perspective. The low brow culture stuff is controversial most of the time. High brow and low brow culture is in my opinion for both kinds of readers and masses. They are the same.


----------



## Rellek (Aug 1, 2012)

I was going to post something about how ye verily doth my own  tastes in entertainment and mental stimulation tower over that of the  uncouth common masses, but man after a page and a half of sarcasm fire I'd hope you'd get the point by now. Don't rage against the very people you need to be  successful in your aspiring career/hobby. I'd be thrilled if average joe sixpack and the local old lady reading club fell in love with my work.


----------



## Geminus (Aug 1, 2012)

Terry D said:


> My brow is getting higher with each stroke of the hairbrush! My writing hasn't caught up yet however.
> 
> I think it's dangerous to dismiss the "average" reader. To engage them a writer must be either a great craftsman, a skilled artist, or a wonderful storyteller.



You're preaching to the choir. But realistically, I don't know if it's so much an issue of a lack of quality writing out there. In fact, I'm sure that's not the problem. From what I see, there are extremely gifted writers here on WF.com, as well as on the dozens of other forums I frequent. The problem is:



KyleColorado said:


> In my opinion the answer to the question indirectly posed by the OP--Why do people seem to prefer "low-brow" literature?--is pretty simple:
> 
> The majority of people read for emotions first, and for intellectual stimulation second (if at all).
> 
> ...



But what if the person's sense of judgment is clouded? It might not be PC of me to belittle the students I tutor, but I genuinely feel like current society has had a detrimental effect to the average child's IQ. This generation (those born in 1995 and onwards) seems particularly emotionally and mentally stunted. Even for the teenage students whom I tutor and are placed into accelerated learning programs/advanced placement education - I feel like there's not much going on "up there" in terms of emotion or creativity. Much in the same way that if you consume horrible food regularly, your taste buds will never know the true taste of anything you eat. This is compounded even more so by the fact that there are certain species of yeast/fungi which will essentially hijack your sense of taste and your food cravings to keep themselves alive. You may think healthy food tastes like cardboard and that would most likely be due to you not having control over your sense of taste and/or smell (if you use perfume/cologne regularly, the smell binds to receptors in your nose thus altering the taste of food and your sense of smell.)  

There's something fundamentally wrong with the way kids nowadays are either taught information or the way they process the information. I'm not sure why this is, and I'm sure I'll offend some when I say this, but I'm convinced students in this day and age are simply "dumber." Not even speaking about common sense, but it seems as if the average IQ of the average person is dropping. It's disconcerting. And for those students who are intellectually gifted, I see very slow emotional and artistic development. I've been working with children for several years and these are just some observations I made from when I started working in a daycare a decade ago to my current job in a tutoring center.


----------



## Jon M (Aug 1, 2012)

I have yet to see this average reader of which you speak. He is a mysterious and rare creature indeed. Sometimes I wonder if he isn't just the creation of butthurt writers everywhere.


----------



## helium (Aug 2, 2012)

I think people choose to read popular books because they're convenient and already have a reputation. People trust the popularity as a seal of quality. And some people just like being trendy. Whether the trend is hating  something or loving it, it doesn't matter, because in the end it'll have  even more attention and interest from the common people. Its not just the kids, the media affects  everyone.


----------



## Loulou (Aug 2, 2012)

Geminus, a writer who defines his or herself as high brow is usually quite the opposite.  It's like defining yourself as wise.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Aug 2, 2012)

I reckon that in the days of Hemingway and Steinbeck people actually read Agatha Christie most of the time, the books that define a generation are not the ones that sold best on the whole.


----------



## garza (Aug 2, 2012)

Olly - Agatha Christie has always been one of my favourite writers. By definition, that makes her a high brow writer.

namesake - What are IMO books?


----------



## OC-138 (Aug 2, 2012)

I definitely think the world has gone downhill, everyone knows it has, the latest generation of teens are pretty much useless, not all of them, but most of them. You will never be able to convince them that Twilight and all other related bull arent masterpieces because they are idiots. Once they grow up a bit and realise what fools they have been, maybe then will what is written become good to them.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 2, 2012)

I can't agree that the "younger generation" are dumber. I mean, seriously - every generation is condemned in some manner by the generation before it. I do think, however, that depending on the local school system, some young people have been deprived of the opportunities to expand their imagination - and in some cases, have their natural imagination stifled. But it's amazing what happens when they run into people outside of school who allow and encourage that imagination.

I work with a lot of young people, and quite frankly, I find them to be quite imaginative and inquisitive and - gasp! - intelligent. They think about different things than people of my generation typically do, but that's to be expected. But I have, over the last 50 years, realized that people generally live up - or down - to one's expectations. I treat these young people as intelligent beings, and they respond as such. Then I watch them interact with others who treat them as drug soaked morons - amazing how dumb they act then...


----------



## squidtender (Aug 2, 2012)

It's possible that it could be TV and movies giving the general population the attention span of a goldfish, or even the decay of the educational system. Both valid points. But, I think between the constant barrage of depressing 6 o'clock news, the failing economy (local, national and world) and how every one of us is reminded that our future looks bleak, makes the average reader look want to look for a different world to escape to. Why would we want to read a high-brow book that usually deals with every day problems, when I can run off to a made up world of elves, knights and wizards, or do warp 9 to the next galaxy, or spend a weekend in a post-apocalyptic world battling zombies? Sometimes I want to forget about real life and real problems and blast across a wasteland on my jet-bike, with only a shotgun and a bottle of whiskey to keep me company as I hunt down the alien invaders that took my wife hostage. 
Just a thought. . .


----------



## JosephB (Aug 2, 2012)

I write pretty much what I like to read. And while I have a vague idea of the type of reader who might enjoy it – I’m not going to go out of my way to tailor my writing one way or the other to accommodate any kind of reader – whether it’s highbrow or lowbrow or something in between. I write what I write. 

So the whole question is of little importance to me. I think a lot of people might consider what I write as literary fiction -- so some might put it in the category of high-brow, but I’m not going to do it myself. The whole idea that I might consider my writing as something highbrow, or beyond the grasp of so-called "average Joes" makes me a little sick to my stomach. And even if I thought my work was highbrow, I sure as hell wouldn’t say it out loud.


----------



## Tiamat (Aug 2, 2012)

I always thought you wrote a lot of chick lit, Joe.  But we'll go with literary.  It sounds better.


----------



## JosephB (Aug 2, 2012)

Oh, I like that idea -- all the women in my wife's book club, talking about my book for five minutes before moving on to gossip and putting on a good white-wine buzz.


----------



## garza (Aug 2, 2012)

Found it. 

A Google search turned up a number of pages relating to 'IMO books'. Turns out they are books used to study for the International Mathematics Olympiad. See *here*. Because I am _un sofisticado verdad_, these are books I need to learn more about. Obviously they are not meant for the common herd, but only us high brows.


----------



## Sam (Aug 2, 2012)

Every woman in the world is reading _Fifty Shades of Grey. _There are almost 4,000 1-star reviews of this 'novel' on Amazon. Are they not the slightest bit aware of this? 

Just to see what all the fuss was about, I downloaded a preview for my Kindle. Three chapters in and my faith in our next-generation 'readers' has just evaporated. I thought _Twilight _was a horrible excuse for a novel? I think _Fifty Shades of Grey _was conceived by two 16-year-old girls fantasising about their 'perfect' man. This guy is a 26-year-old self-made billionaire, basically a savant pianist, drop-dead gorgeous, has an enormous 'manhood', and is using his money to combat world hunger despite the fact that most of his time in the novel is used either having sex or 'sexting' the female lead. Oh, and he just happens to be the best lover in the world who can make women orgasm without even touching them. Plus, the author seems to only know two facial expressions: the rolling of eyes and the biting of lips. 

Put all that together and you have the best-selling tripe -- sorry, novel -- that is _Fifty Shades of Grey. _

Is it any wonder people can't read anything beyond secondary education?


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 2, 2012)

Sam W said:


> Every woman in the world is reading _Fifty Shades of Grey._


_

Not every woman. :friendly_wink:_


----------



## Sam (Aug 2, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Not _every _woman. :friendly_wink:



Thank God! At least some of you have titter of wit.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 2, 2012)

_Fifty Shades of Grey_ is best thought of as porn. We can decry the shallow characters, the abysmal writing, and the idiotic plot, but it's a lot like scrutinizing _Debbie does Dallas. _The goal is to get you off and it should be judged on that basis. Now, I find it rather a failure in that sense, too, but obviously it's working for a big demographic.


----------



## garza (Aug 2, 2012)

Now wait just a darn minute. _Debbie Does Dallas_ is a classic. All us high brows think of _Cantebury Tales_, _Hamlet_, and _Debbie Does Dallas_ as, well, classics. I mean. You know what I mean.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 2, 2012)

I'm so highbrow, I could only think of highbrow porn! :smug:


----------



## Baron (Aug 2, 2012)

Sam W said:


> Every woman in the world is reading _Fifty Shades of Grey. _There are almost 4,000 1-star reviews of this 'novel' on Amazon. Are they not the slightest bit aware of this?
> 
> Just to see what all the fuss was about, I downloaded a preview for my Kindle. Three chapters in and my faith in our next-generation 'readers' has just evaporated. I thought _Twilight _was a horrible excuse for a novel? I think _Fifty Shades of Grey _was conceived by two 16-year-old girls fantasising about their 'perfect' man. This guy is a 26-year-old self-made billionaire, basically a savant pianist, drop-dead gorgeous, has an enormous 'manhood', and is using his money to combat world hunger despite the fact that most of his time in the novel is used either having sex or 'sexting' the female lead. Oh, and he just happens to be the best lover in the world who can make women orgasm without even touching them. Plus, the author seems to only know two facial expressions: the rolling of eyes and the biting of lips.
> 
> ...



Of course I understand your reason for downloading the preview, Sam


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 2, 2012)

Sam W said:


> Every woman in the world is reading _Fifty Shades of Grey. _There are almost 4,000 1-star reviews of this 'novel' on Amazon. Are they not the slightest bit aware of this?
> 
> Just to see what all the fuss was about, I downloaded a preview for my Kindle. Three chapters in and my faith in our next-generation 'readers' has just evaporated. I thought _Twilight _was a horrible excuse for a novel? I think _Fifty Shades of Grey _was conceived by two 16-year-old girls fantasising about their 'perfect' man. This guy is a 26-year-old self-made billionaire, basically a savant pianist, drop-dead gorgeous, has an enormous 'manhood', and is using his money to combat world hunger despite the fact that most of his time in the novel is used either having sex or 'sexting' the female lead. Oh, and he just happens to be the best lover in the world who can make women orgasm without even touching them. Plus, the author seems to only know two facial expressions: the rolling of eyes and the biting of lips.
> 
> ...



I heard it's a self-published book. Which doesn't mean I'm implying anything bad about self-published books, but the opposite. The author is one of those rare instances where a self-published book earned millions. Quite impressive!

I saw a bank teller with the book on her desk a few weeks ago and I asked if she liked it. She said, "Oh my sister said it was soooo good so I had to read it. I just started. It's a little slow but I heard it's really good so I like it."

One more peek at that last sentence she said: "... I heard it's really good so I like it."


----------



## garza (Aug 2, 2012)

Does that last peek give you a clue about where we as a species may be headed?


----------



## Sam (Aug 2, 2012)

How can you like something from hearing that someone else liked it? Why am I not surprised it was a bank employee. 

It is self-published, but it's not doing anything for the belief that many self-published books are of poor quality. Who knows what the heck the other two in the series are like? It's amazing how something as bad as it can become a worldwide best-selling novel. If I want porn, I'll buy a porno mag. At least it has pictures.


----------



## Baron (Aug 2, 2012)

What was the questions again?


----------



## squidtender (Aug 2, 2012)

Sam W said:


> Every woman in the world is reading _Fifty Shades of Grey._



...and word of mouth has mad another author rich. Maybe all of us here should jump on the Jerry Springer band wagon and shoot for the lowest common denominator. I'm thinking sex obsessed vampires from highschool having to battle eachother in a post apocalyptic _game_ in the woods that is run by a young wizard named Harry. Anyone with me? Million bucks, right there.


----------



## Sam (Aug 2, 2012)

squidtender said:


> ...and word of mouth has mad another author rich. Maybe all of us here should jump on the Jerry Springer band wagon and shoot for the lowest common denominator. I'm thinking sex obsessed vampires from highschool having to battle eachother in a post apocalyptic _game_ in the woods that is run by a young wizard named Harry. Anyone with me? Million bucks, right there.



I know you're joking, but I'd rather quit writing than turn my work into formulaic tripe. 

I hope you're joking. It would be a shame to have to kill you.


----------



## squidtender (Aug 2, 2012)

Sam W said:


> I know you're joking, but I'd rather quit writing than turn my work into formulaic tripe.
> 
> I hope you're joking. It would be a shame to have to kill you.



LOL!!! And if I did fall to that level, I'd help you put the barrel to my head. 
Then again, I'm writing this from my desk at work and making an easy, albeit shameful million bucks, doesn't sound too bad right about now


----------



## Morkonan (Aug 2, 2012)

Geminus said:


> Although I have full confidence that the subject matter and actual writing I produce is quality stuff, it only seems to attract a very niche audience of readers. This niche audience is generally comprised of people who write, roleplay or read on a more "advanced" level than the average joe. In a world where the shining pinnacle of literacy is considered to be _Twilight,_ the _Hunger Games, 50 Shades of Grey_ or any other might-as-well-be-fanfiction book with a Mary Sue protagonist, I find that the average quality of writing has gone down substantially. This doesn't apply only to this forum, but to every other writing/roleplaying forum out there on the web which I've visited. I see plenty of online authors that write, what I would personally consider, literary masterpieces. Certainly many of these writers produce material that is vastly more interesting and holds just as much emotional depth as classic American literature.



Reality television exists. There are even shows that take average people, put them on a stage, then make pop-icons, superstars and celebrities out of them. We have television shows on.. cooking. COOKING! Heck, they even have cooking "battles." Yes, you read it correctly: Battles. You can't even smell the food and that's half of the enjoyment of watching someone else cook! And, don't even get me started on not being able to lick the bowl..

Now, all of this is lowbrow stuff. It's mindless, uninspired drivel. Those who are addicted to such programming are either extremely bored, desperate for entertainment or are unibrow mouthbreathing evolutionary throwbacks. I think all of us "high browed" types can agree on that. But, what about the people that invented this sort of programming? Why, they're rich! They're geniuses!

See how that works? 



> And yet, it will never be treated as such. It's too high brow for the average reader to absorb. Just the other day, I spoke with someone IRL and she was telling me how she doesn't really read books and she'd much rather read fanfiction. Not to belittle anyone's fanfiction, I'm sure there are amazing fanfictions out there as well - but the fact that this girl has an aversion to actual literature is a bit weird. Are people more likely to skip over your writing if it's of a "higher caliber" than, say, a Harry Potter Draco x Harry fanfic? I blame the education system.



Be honest- Most fanfiction is garbage. The rest is simply adulterated and compromised stories, feeding off the work of those that broke open whatever genre they're based on. There's nothing wrong with that. There are plenty of novels and other works that follow the same sort of scheme, probably in identical measure. Some are highly regarded, most are not.

Something that is "literary" doesn't mean that average reader can't understand it. They may not fully "grok" everything contained in a story that qualifies as "literary fiction", but I bet they can understand most of it. That's because literary fiction is written for human beings and it focuses on human things, especially "Big Questions." You don't think the "average Joe" isn't going to make a connection with "Why am I here" and some imagery or struggle taking place in a literary work? That might not be what he focuses on. But, if the writer didn't make other elements of their story in such a way as to help communicate that message, is it the reader's fault? No - It's the writers. (If they're not readers to begin with, it's not really in our job description to address their shortcomings.)

Joe Sixpack probably doesn't prowl the Literary Fiction shelves in the local bookstore. That's because he and Literary Fiction Aficionados share a very basic trait - They both wish to be entertained. Those who are in love with literary fiction find their heart racing and their skin goose-bumping its way up the back of their neck each time a new work is released by their favorite bohemian author. Joe Sixpack gets the same feeling when a new issue of _Offroad Racing_ _Stories_ hits the shelf. Readers want to be entertained by writers. A lot of the entertainment that many of us find in our chosen poisons is difficult for readers who are not writers to pick up on. It's not because it's buried in imagery or they're too stupid to understand it. It's because it's intended to be transparent. We get all gushy over how characters are developed, the intricacies of subplots and how they support the storyline and, yes, we like to see the imagery and how it was used, just in case there's another message there we can feel good about picking up on. But, that's not something that is likely going to entertain Joe. Joe can't find much of a common frame of reference to use as a tool with which he can interpret such things. Joe wants mud, action, hot babes and to feel the wind in his hair. There are some authors out there that are _very happy_ that is what Joe wants.

Literary fiction is a wonderful thing, but everyone hates the soapbox writer. There's nothing that's more irritating to read than a novel that has a "message" that the writer is desperately, if not blatantly, trying to convey. But, for some novels, timing is everything. Unless it is exceptionally crafted, regardless of the message, the success of those novels is going to rest directly on catching the latest cultural concern, headline or fad. Few literary novels of that sort end up creating their own audience or trend. Go ahead, find the literary greats and their breakout masterpieces. When were they written? What were they about? What was happening in the culture at the time? Would _Atlas Shrugged_ be picked up by a publisher, today? Probably. Would they mass-market it? Probably not. Would it get an international release? Only in Rand's dreams.

An author must entertain their readers. They also have to eat and pay their electricity bills when the check from their day job doesn't quite stretch far enough. Some authors get lucky, catch a fad and then become bajillionaires so they can afford to spend all their time honing their craft instead of borrowing shoeboxes so they can store their storyline notes. Most don't get that lucky. Most write fairly entertaining stories for their selected genre and manage to either make enough to get by or even, with a stroke of luck, to pay their living expenses. Is either more _legitimate_ than the other? Is either truly a more _legitimate_ writer? What's a writer's job, if not to entertain readers? If millions of readers are entertained, someone did their job, right?

I can't stand fad books and stories. I may be entertained by some of their spin-offs, when people with true imagination start plucking at the strings of a new genre. But, by and large, I have been utterly disappointed by all the breakout novels in new fad movements. Lately, it's been "_Shades of Grey."_ Well, _"The Story of O"_ had its movement, too. Somehow, I think that time will judge _"The Story of O"_ much more kindly than _"Shades of Grey."_ Why is that? Well, it helps if the book was decently written, regardless of its fad genre. But, in a couple of months, someone will come out with another fad book and the turnstyles at the bookstore will spin off their casters. An author becoming the richest woman in an entire country was the best thing that ever happened to trend publishing.



> Are people more likely to skip over your writing if it's of a "higher  caliber" than, say, a Harry Potter Draco x Harry fanfic? I blame the  education system.



I wrote all the above to preface this answer: No, people are not more likely to skip over your writing if you think you're writing at a higher caliber than others. But, that's because people who aren't looking for that sort of writing will never have the opportunity to skip over it. If you want to write for the masses, you have to entertain the masses. If you're shooting for the most common denominator at the bookstore, you're going to have to have the most common appeal. No, it's not "literary fiction." But, if you write a truly exceptional piece of literary fiction, you'll be highly regarded, well known and well paid. Just be sure to catch the latest trend in order to maximize your chances.

Lastly, your success is how you, yourself, measure it. If it's by using common currency, you had best focus on what you think your prospective reader wants. If it's the high regards of your peers, work your butt off to hone your skills and create a lot of "demonstrative" pieces of work that have enough appeal for a Big House publisher. But, if you don't care about any of that and just want to write great literary fiction, then write _directly_ to your customer base. It may be a smaller base than the mass marketed pulp trend publishing genre, but you'll still have a stable of fans to entertain. A smaller stable, to be sure, but readers nonetheless.


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 29, 2012)

It's distressing, isn't it?

But as Goethe noted, where danger grows, so too does the hope of rescue.

And while the world may be dumbing down all around us thanks to the illusion of instant gratification provided by on-demand audio-visuals, it's this very technology which also makes it possible for like-minded writers and readers to connect with an ease that was unparalleled in all of history.

It's called long-tail marketing, in other words.  Sure you won't be a smashing success, but it's possible to still live quite comfortably on one's writing.  The key is to build up a backlist.


----------



## cullmeyer (Aug 29, 2012)

I write for the love of writing. If I happen to make money (on any scale), it's a single cherry topper to my chocolate mouse pie. And I feel that way about any creative feat. I feel sorry for those who write just to make money -- it just takes the joy out of the process.

Though, the Devil's Advocate in me would say that I don't know what I'm talking about, as I have never been paid for any of my creative works.

I will say that I can't stand the _cookie cutter_ books that authors put out (i.e. Nora Roberts, Nicolas Sparks, etc., IMO.) But, as it is with almost every form of creative arts, there is a "pop culture" side that is despised by the converse. I, too, am frustrated by the "dumbing down" of this field that pop culture subjects it to. It's just so diluted and dull that I have such a hard time respecting the work. I take pride in my craft, and also those who aspire to innovate and better it.

I also understand that for a select few, writing these cookie cutter books is their only source of income. In which case, you have to make sure that what you're writing is going to sell. 

All in all, I long for the next Fyodor Dostoevsky or Dante Alighieri to arise, to give the industry a big boom in the desire for quality writing. Unfortunately though, as the desire for amusement in a society increases, so does intelligence fade.


_a- _(prefix)
*1.*not, or without

_muse_ (verb)
*1.*to think or meditate in silence, as on some subject.

*2.*_Archaic _. to gaze meditatively or wonderingly.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Aug 29, 2012)

Humankind is getting more intelligent, not less. Daily life has been getting more and more complex over the last 100 years or so, even the most lowly person handles tasks far more complicated than those handled by the elite of society in 1900; on top of which, the speed at which we have to deal with incoming information has increased, what, a hundred-fold, something of that order. In 1900 information processing was handled by reading and one to one conversation, life was lived, in the main, at walking pace. Now we have to deal with phones, texts, emails, screens and cars as we progress through the day - No, the young are not one whit less intelligent, just overloaded, and for the modern young worker, overstreched and with no time to read complex books; maybe when they are older and can put their feet up they will catch up with we oldies.


----------



## JackKnife (Aug 29, 2012)

Anyone who wants to churn out millions writing like Nicholas Sparks need only follow this chart.

Don't say Uncle Jack never done ya' no favours.


----------



## cullmeyer (Aug 29, 2012)

JackKnife said:


> Anyone who wants to churn out millions writing like Nicholas Sparks need only follow this chart.
> 
> Don't say Uncle Jack never done ya' no favours.



HA! That's hilarious! But only because it's true! =P


----------



## cullmeyer (Aug 29, 2012)

Bloggsworth said:


> Humankind is getting more intelligent, not less. Daily life has been getting more and more complex over the last 100 years or so, even the most lowly person handles tasks far more complicated than those handled by the elite of society in 1900; on top of which, the speed at which we have to deal with incoming information has increased, what, a hundred-fold, something of that order. In 1900 information processing was handled by reading and one to one conversation, life was lived, in the main, at walking pace. Now we have to deal with phones, texts, emails, screens and cars as we progress through the day - No, the young are not one whit less intelligent, just overloaded, and for the modern young worker, overstreched and with no time to read complex books; maybe when they are older and can put their feet up they will catch up with we oldies.




I understand that, and I am not disregarding it. What I am talking about is the capacity for reason and critical thinking in the consumer base. Yes, it may require more from our brain to learn and operate such things as new cars and smartphones, but think about the direction that consumer technology is headed at this point. We're trying to invent and innovate ways to make technology do the thinking for us, all we need to know is what button to press. That philosophy is permeating nearly everything in our lives. In North America, we are pioneering a mentality based around the "New York Minute." We want the best, we want it now, and we want to work as little as possible to get it.

And don't get me wrong -- I love technology! I have an iPhone, flat screen TV, and frequent Engadget to check out the new stuff. I just believe that there needs to be a balance between musing, and amusing. In my opinion, we are currently unbalanced on the side of "amusing."

I think I should also clarify that I am not talking about you, Bloggsworth. Just from reading your posts in this thread, I can tell that you are a very, very smart person, and I respect that a great deal.

...

Sorry if I came off preachy. I'm just trying to explain my earlier statement. =)


----------



## playingthepianodrunk (Aug 29, 2012)

Douchetil

"Honestly, the only music I can bear to listen to while writing is  instrumental dubstep/techno music with no words. If the song has words, I  won't be able to focus on my writing. It's easy to "zone into" the  beats of a song, but if there are any actual lyrics, they will break the  immersion and stop the creative writing process for me."-Geminus

Cause music for robots is high brow.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 29, 2012)

Cullmeyer, I think you bring up an interesting question in terms of how technology alters the ways in which we transmit and receive information, the way we're mentally prepared for those activities. At the same time, it's too simple to just view this as something that degrades the ability of the audience to comprehend a text. I feel like there's a frustration in this thread, and maybe in other parts of the literary world/the humanities, that we can't use the forms that we've loved, that they don't work on this new kind of audience. But maybe it's literature and its forms that need to change in some way to appeal to the sensibility that prevails among its audience today. It's not a matter of high-brow or low-brow, it's a matter of learning to connect with people in ways that feel comfortable or attractive to them. If the traditional* novel isn't it, we have to find others, and that's our challenge as writers.

*whatever that is


----------



## Jon M (Aug 30, 2012)

Hard to take the OP seriously when it's essentially a variant of that same old "My genius goes unappreciated" complaint artists sometimes have. Agree with Bloggs and lasm about connecting with readers in new, modern ways. Not terribly intelligent to insult what could be your future fanbase by insinuating that they're all dumb. But I guess if we're speaking in generalities, which always seems to happen in conversations like these, then it's okay.


----------



## cullmeyer (Aug 30, 2012)

I am shamed to admit that I let myself go on a rant in my last post. I realize that in speaking with generalities, one can become a devil. My wife has called me out on that several times. I am still learning -- childhood indoctrinations and all.

lasm put it quite beautifully, and I wholeheartedly agree. Here I am talking about innovation, and in the same stroke complaining about an issue that is not widespread. Wasting my time with the complaint, rather than working to innovate and make some sort of progression.

My apologies for the "explosion," and thank you or the proverbial slap in the face. =)


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 30, 2012)

No shame, apologies, or slapping required!  Everybody goes on a rant now and then.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 30, 2012)

I wish I thought my ideas were too highbrow for most. I'm pretty shallow though  I'd like to think my writing can be read and enjoyed by anyone with a taste for dark/modern fantasy.


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 30, 2012)

Noxicity said:


> I wish I thought my ideas were too highbrow for most. I'm pretty shallow though  I'd like to think my writing can be read and enjoyed by anyone with a taste for dark/modern fantasy.




"High-brow" doesn't necessarily mean "unenjoyable"...it's like vegetables -- depends on what you do with them.

The term "high-brow," at least among those for whom it holds more affection than mere pride, refers to the fact that there are nuances to the work, originality of vision involved in its thesis, and semantics beyond itself.

It's the difference between pure sex -- which everyone enjoys, basically -- to sex on top of romance.


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 30, 2012)

Jon M said:


> Hard to take the OP seriously when it's essentially a variant of that same old "My genius goes unappreciated" complaint artists sometimes have. Agree with Bloggs and lasm about connecting with readers in new, modern ways. Not terribly intelligent to insult what could be your future fanbase by insinuating that they're all dumb. But I guess if we're speaking in generalities, which always seems to happen in conversations like these, then it's okay.




But the general public is dumb.  That's a fact, "intelligent" or not to say so.

Dumb people want things simple.  Dumb people like it plain.  The very fact that enough money can buy elections goes to show how truly stupid people are.  The very fact that it's actually cool to not be "too smart for your own good" is a sign of how dumb our fellow human beings are.

I'm over that fact, however.  I'm going to be a successful romance and thriller writer -- because I know how stupid people are and how easily manipulated they are.  I've met some truly asinine people in my life so far -- not the least of which was my many younger selves -- so I know from experience exactly what it is that will get girls to open their legs and everyone else to give up their money!

Sorry if such sausage-making truths are impolite in the world of fiction, but I'm a realist...working for romantics though I may be.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 30, 2012)

AspiringAuthor said:


> But the general public is dumb...



Wow.

Just... wow.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 30, 2012)

They also have the average reading level of a fourth grader, our congress men are only a little better, they average an 11th grade reading level.


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 30, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Wow.
> 
> Just... wow.




You're just learning this???


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 30, 2012)

Noxicity said:


> They also have the average reading level of a fourth grader, our congress men are only a little better, they average an 11th grade reading level.




Indeed -- so what does that say about the general voting public??

It's okay to be dumb...folks are only as smart as they need to be (hey, we're generally only as healthy as we need to be) -- it's just a life principle: the path of least resistance.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 30, 2012)

AspiringAuthor said:


> But the general public is dumb.  That's a fact, "intelligent" or not to say so.
> 
> Dumb people want things simple.  Dumb people like it plain.  The very fact that enough money can buy elections goes to show how truly stupid people are.  The very fact that it's actually cool to not be "too smart for your own good" is a sign of how dumb our fellow human beings are.
> 
> ...



And you are not currently on tour promoting your wildly successful written for the moronic masses best seller because...?


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 30, 2012)

Terry D said:


> And you are not currently on tour promoting your wildly successful written for the moronic masses best seller because...?




Because I'm still writing.

Aren't you?


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 30, 2012)

AspiringAuthor said:


> But the general public is dumb.  That's a fact, "intelligent" or not to say so.



The chances of success in the novel-writing business are such that if you're knowingly churning out work that you yourself do not enjoy or find interesting, there's a good chance you're wasting your time. And that, my friend, is stupid.


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 30, 2012)

lasm said:


> The chances of success in the novel-writing business are such that if you're knowingly churning out work that you yourself do not enjoy, there's a good chance you're wasting your time. And that, my friend, is stupid.




But you're assuming I'm churning out stuff I don't enjoy.

I do what I have to do to get into a girl's panties (or thong, as is often the case nowadays).  I'm enjoying it, even though I know it's stupid the things I have to do.

You really think our politicians truly believe in God??  Yet they will bow their heads and dutifully nod at any number of plebian platitudes to appeal to the voting public.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 30, 2012)

You sound like you have a profound insight into the human condition. Good luck in your future endeavors.


----------



## Jeko (Aug 30, 2012)

He who writes for the general public, however dumb they are, is dumb.


----------



## Sam (Aug 30, 2012)

Admin Note: Keep the comments on the topic, not the posters. Thank you.


----------



## Bilston Blue (Aug 30, 2012)

Popcorn cat hasn't had so much fun since Nacian left these hallowed halls... 






​*apologizes in advance for inappropriate behaviour*


----------



## AspiringAuthor (Aug 30, 2012)

Bilston Blue said:


> Popcorn cat hasn't had so much fun since Nacian left these hallowed halls...



Tell "popcorn cat" Teddy Roosevelt observed that "far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat" if s/he has need of thrills.


----------

