I’m always amazed when talking to other writers who tell me they don’t do much reading.  They make all kinds of excuses:  I don’t want to steal anyone’s X, where X could be plot, characters, settings, and so forth.  Sure, outright stealing is plagiarism, and it’s not recommended for writers, newbies or old-timers.  Another excuse: I want my ideas to be fresh, not stale and formulaic.  I don’t know how you can be fresh if you don’t know what other writers are doing in your genre.  And, if you don’t, how can you avoid becoming stale and formulaic?  The most stupid excuse: I don’t have the time.

I don’t buy any of these excuses.  In particular, I don’t know how someone can want to become a writer without being an avid reader first.  Way back when, I decided I liked writing after reading so many books that I thought I could do that too—maybe not better, but differently.  Life’s financial obligations delayed my ambitions (fortunately, I’ve never had to make a living writing), but during that delay I still read, preferring reading to most other forms of entertainment.

I tried golf, bowling, Zen Buddhism (maybe that’s not entertainment?), protesting the war, discovering all sorts of wine and spirits, eating fine and varied ethnic foods, learning the Colombian tiple (look it up)—you name it.  Reading beat them all save one (don’t ask—this is a PG-13 blog).  Books are generally available everywhere.  Nowadays it’s a reader’s world—there are so many books to choose from that you must become an educated consumer.  But, unlike buying a smart phone, it’s not costly to make a few mistakes, if you stick to indie books, in particular.

I learned a lot from other writers just from reading their works.  I’d be reading along and say to myself, “I like what she did there—that’s clever,” or, “jeez, that’s too much back story all in one huge glob—boring, boring!”  I’ve been influenced by books you’ve probably never heard about.  I was trying to remember Robert Heinlein’s Friday (her story has the same title) in the panel discussion section at the book fair BooksNJ the other day—I remembered the character, but not the name (I’m terrible with names).

Anyway, a wee bit of Friday is in many of my smart, kick-ass female characters.  I just read the Wikipedia article on the book and realized that Sirena, one of the protagonists in Evil Agenda, owes a lot to Friday, for example (I’m working on a new book featuring Sirena).  I also realized that maybe the seeds for my ideas about the Chaos originated there (see “The Chaos Chronicles Trilogy,” my version of the Foundation series).  That’s not plagiarism, but it’s possibly a bow to Heinlein, the old master, who gave me many hours of reading pleasure.  (His The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress is one of the best sci-fi novels ever written.)

This forgetfulness (signs of early senility?) reminded me of my search for mystery writers when my muses were beating on me to write a true mystery involving Detectives Chen and Castilblanco (Teeter-Totter between Lust and Murder was the result).  During that period when I read many mysteries, from classic to modern, I discovered Ian Rankin.  He turned out to be a definite influence on me.  But, I’ll have to admit, I already had read one mystery writer who influenced me a lot more before I even gave in to the muses’ nagging—Isaac Asimov.  Primarily known as a sci-fi and popular science writer, his two novels, Caves of Steel and The Naked Sun, are sci-fi classics that are mysteries (the android Daneel Olivaw, detective Elijah Bailey’s partner and possibly the model for Star Trek’s Data, is found all through to the end of the classic and extended Foundation series).

Writers who aren’t avid readers can’t hope to get into the minds of readers.  If you pick up a successful book, you know that success is determined by the number of readers—there aren’t many other useful metrics.  (Note that I’m saying readers, not buyers.  The former is harder to count, I realize, but it’s a fact of life that libraries and people lend books!)  I’m not implying that a writer should figure out what readers see in a successful book and then write for that same audience, even if that were possible.  I’m talking more about a genre and subgenre thing.  By understanding the readers of genres and subgenres, a writer can understand what’s expected while she also figures out where she can “write outside the box” to keep her writing bold and fresh.  There’s a subtle difference there.

I can’t imagine writing what I’ve written without these influences and many others.  Writers who write without being avid readers are in danger of writing in a vacuum.  If you’re a writer, what’s your opinion on this?  If you’re a reader, you probably have some thoughts on this subject too.  Can readers really connect with a writer who is so self-absorbed that he or she has no idea what other writers are doing?  Or, what readers are reading?  A more modern question:  Can a writer successfully promote his or her books without connecting them to the broad world of readers?  (As always, comments are welcome.)

In libris libertas….

[If you enjoyed this post, please support this blog: buy, read, and review some of my books.]

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 20th, 2013 at 4:00 am and is filed under Writing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.