3 ms·

> Writing the one pager forces the author to condense the book. Discussing it honed his thoughts. I find this observation shocking, because it forces me to con

by waqf 4y ago

> Writing the one pager forces the author to condense the book. Discussing it honed his thoughts. I find this observation shocking, because it forces me to confront the idea that the author didn't already have a concise explanation of the book in their head, even during the later stages of finishing and editing the book. Am I unreasonable to feel that I'm probably not interested in reading a book created by someone who didn't have any overall perspective on what they were doing?

bombcar 4y ago
There are many different authors and many different writing styles and not all are compatible with everyone. And people read for different reasons, too. You don’t read Wodehouse for the same reasons you’d read Tolstoy or a Missing Manual. For fiction especially you’ll find that some is meticulously planned out and then “filled in” whereas others are more story idea + characters and see where they go.
SuoDuanDao 4y ago
Depends. There's a saying that 'the second draft is where you make it look like you knew what you were doing the whole time'. 'Discovery writing' is very common and many of the best authors - Niel Gaimen comes to mind - write that way. Maybe you just don't want to see how the sausage is made? I will say based on my own experience writing a book: ideas you can understand without writing a book either don't warrant a book or probably have a perfectly good book written about them already.
- waqf 4y ago
  > 'the second draft is where you make it look like you knew what you were doing the whole time' That's why I qualified with "even during the later stages". It seemed to me that OP implied that the book would be completely finalised for publication without the author having gained the required perspective on their ideas. And that would surely defeat the object, since their insight wouldn't make it into the book; otherwise, I agree with your point.
  - SuoDuanDao 4y ago
    ahh, I understand. Yeah, the back of the book blurb is basically an elevator pitch. I did write it last and it did change my perspective, but not really on the work itself - more on how I could make it relateable.

by waqf 4y ago

bombcar 4y ago

There are many different authors and many different writing styles and not all are compatible with everyone. And people read for different reasons, too. You don’t read Wodehouse for the same reasons you’d read Tolstoy or a Missing Manual. For fiction especially you’ll find that some is meticulously planned out and then “filled in” whereas others are more story idea + characters and see where they go.

SuoDuanDao 4y ago

Depends. There's a saying that 'the second draft is where you make it look like you knew what you were doing the whole time'. 'Discovery writing' is very common and many of the best authors - Niel Gaimen comes to mind - write that way. Maybe you just don't want to see how the sausage is made? I will say based on my own experience writing a book: ideas you can understand without writing a book either don't warrant a book or probably have a perfectly good book written about them already.

waqf 4y ago
> 'the second draft is where you make it look like you knew what you were doing the whole time' That's why I qualified with "even during the later stages". It seemed to me that OP implied that the book would be completely finalised for publication without the author having gained the required perspective on their ideas. And that would surely defeat the object, since their insight wouldn't make it into the book; otherwise, I agree with your point.
- SuoDuanDao 4y ago
  ahh, I understand. Yeah, the back of the book blurb is basically an elevator pitch. I did write it last and it did change my perspective, but not really on the work itself - more on how I could make it relateable.