Yeah, I wasn't clear. It's really the motive for writing that's different. I brought up the matter of reviews only because motives are revealed by the attitudes in posting and towards reviews.
The Artist (in the extreme case) is the "James Joyce" sort who doesn't give a damn about accessibility. Though they're happy to publish and receive responses to their works. But their focus is on the Art of Words and they do it on their own terms.
The Storyteller is the "J. R. R. Tolkien" sort who set out to tell a "ripping good yarn" never mind it's been done before or even better. They seek to give something to the readers - the first reader being themselves - that little gasp, that surge of joy (what Tolkien called the "eucatastrophe" - a sudden and piercing joy - is his essay On Fairy Stories).
It's a fairly subtle difference (motives always are).
My point is, the two types of writers tend to misunderstand each other. The Artist seems a selfish primadona to the Storyteller. The Storyteller seems an unoriginal attention-getting hack to the Artist.
In fandom the Storytellers are called review-whores who write populist stuff that's been done before. epicyclical's Draco Trilogy is a perfect example.
Meanwhile in fandom the Artists are sniffed at, largely ignored by the teeming masses, and considered in-group primadonas. cedarlibrarian's The Palmer Method, about Percy Weasley learning to cast the killing curse, is a perfect example of a challenging story written because it is challenging, nevermind that not everyone wants to watch Percy Weasley kill.
I've deliberately chosen these two to point out the misunderstandings that arise when people don't realise the difference between the two motives for writing and their equal value.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2004-07-12 03:00 am (UTC)The Artist (in the extreme case) is the "James Joyce" sort who doesn't give a damn about accessibility. Though they're happy to publish and receive responses to their works. But their focus is on the Art of Words and they do it on their own terms.
The Storyteller is the "J. R. R. Tolkien" sort who set out to tell a "ripping good yarn" never mind it's been done before or even better. They seek to give something to the readers - the first reader being themselves - that little gasp, that surge of joy (what Tolkien called the "eucatastrophe" - a sudden and piercing joy - is his essay On Fairy Stories).
It's a fairly subtle difference (motives always are).
My point is, the two types of writers tend to misunderstand each other. The Artist seems a selfish primadona to the Storyteller. The Storyteller seems an unoriginal attention-getting hack to the Artist.
In fandom the Storytellers are called review-whores who write populist stuff that's been done before.
Meanwhile in fandom the Artists are sniffed at, largely ignored by the teeming masses, and considered in-group primadonas.
I've deliberately chosen these two to point out the misunderstandings that arise when people don't realise the difference between the two motives for writing and their equal value.
Icarus