What kind of writer are you?

What kind of writer are you?  I’m not talking about the form of what you write — article, short story, novel, etc. — though form certainly influences what kind of writer you are.  Rather, I’m talking about motivation, focus and process.  Different writers work for different reasons, in different ways and focus on different aspects of writing, and there are probably as many “types” of writers as there are people who write.  However, I’ve created several classifications here, complete with strengths and weaknesses, based on the traits of writers whose work I read and whom I’ve worked with.  Why?  Because knowing yourself is the first step to improving yourself, and this is as true in writing as it is in any other endeavor.

1.  The Expressionist (unrelated to the expressionist movement in art):  Expressionists write to, well, express themselves.  They tend to choose topics that are emotional, often in poetry, fiction and creative non-fiction,  and focus on emotional impact.

• Strengths: Expressionists are passionate, and their writing is heartfelt and sincere.  At their best, expressionists can make us cry, laugh, or shout;  expressionist writing can be extremely powerful.
• Weaknesses: Expressionists may focus too much on emotion, and not enough on craft.  They may avoid revision and feel that changing their work will make it less “authentic.”  This is especially true of expressionists who are very new to writing; “But it’s how I feel” is a common response to criticism in beginner-level writing classes.

2. The Artist: Artists tend to focus on the literary merit of their writing.   They are often concerned with creating multi-layered works,  and with the sound or “texture” of their work.

• Strengths:  Skilled artists write pieces which speak to the intellect and the soul.  Theirs is the work that is often remembered for generations (sometimes to torture high school and college students in literature classes).
• Weaknesses: Ego and elitism can be big problems for many artists; this is when writing becomes pretentious.  Artists may reject criticism if comes from someone they perceive as “pedestrian.”  They may also become so concerned with literary merit that they forget to keep their readers’ interest.

3. The Scholar: Scholars tend to be concerned with the intellectual aspects of writing; they write for an audience who is well-educated and knowledgeable.  They may focus on technical issues, such as research and grammatical correctness.  Many scholars write non-fiction, but they may also write well-researched fiction and technically difficult poetry as well.

• Strengths: Scholars have great knowledge in the subjects they write about, and if they don’t, they’ll research until they do.  Scholars are precise and accurate in non-fiction, and enlightening in fiction and poetry.
• Weaknesses: Scholars may have a tendency to get lost in their own research and hung up on the correctness of their work; there is a tendency toward perfectionism in many scholars that actually stymies their progress.  Moreover, because of their vast knowledge, scholars’ writings are sometimes abstract and opaque;they may be difficult for others to read.

4. The Pragmatist: Pragmatists focus on the practical aspects of writing: pay, guidelines, reader expectations, etc. The pragmatist writes what needs to be written, no more and no less.  Many pragmatists are freelancers who write business copy and non-fiction articles, but there are certainly many fiction writers who are pragmatists.

• Strengths: Because pragmatists always keep their intended reader in mind, their work is clear, concise, and to-the-point.  Pragmatists generally avoid anything that smacks of pretentiousness or sentimentality, and they have the potential to become highly marketable.
• Weaknesses: Pragmatists sometimes fall into the trap of “hack” writing: writing whatever it takes to make a sale.  As a result, they may forget the joy of writing or the beauty they can create, and become burned out.  Also, if their readers’ expectations are not high, pragmatists may not pay enough attention to such issues as craft and correctness.

So, which type of writer are you?  Is there any type that I missed?

Really, most writers have a mix of all these “types,” but you might see yourself in one more than in the others.  If we understand our own motivation and focus, we can learn to accentuate our strengths and shore up our weaknesses.

Confessions of a procrastinating writer

Today at Procrastinating Writer, there’s a post asking writers to examine what they get — and lose — from procrastination.

I confess.  I procrastinate.  I am the queen of procrastination.  Once, when I was taking a lit class, and I had an eight-page paper to write, I waited until 2:00 p.m. to start writing, and the paper was due at 6:00.  I made it, with two minutes to spare.

Nobody needs that kind of stress.  But, ironically, that kind of stress is precisely why I procrastinate; when I’m stressed out while I write, I’m not agonizing over the minute details of my prose.  Left to my own devices, without any kind of deadline, I tend to rewrite each sentence several times and overthink my draft into utter uselessness. It’s a strange kind of perfectionism; if something can’t be made perfect, it’s easier to just avoid making the attempt at all, or to wait until I have no choice.

Another problem arises on those days that I have a lot of energy; I decide that I can fix everything all at once.  I line up all the bills that need to be paid, all the laundry that needs to be done, and all the articles and stories that I want to write.  I make lists.  I make plans.  But the sheer amount of work that must be done in order to clear the board is so overwhelming that I give up before I start.  It’s related to the perfectionism problem; if I can’t do something perfectly in the time I’ve allotted to it, I don’t want to do it at all.  I’ll do it later, when I have more time.  And the cycle continues.

Fortunately, I’m making strides toward overcoming my procrastination problem.  I still keep lists of things that I need to do, but I break them into bite-sized chunks, organized by priority.  Even if I decide that I need to have 10 articles finished by the end of the month, I don’t list all ten articles on my to-do list.  I don’t even list one.  Instead, I break each article into smaller tasks.  Instead of “article on language learning tools,” I might write “research pros and cons of Rosetta Stone,” and so on.  I also try not to list too many items on any given day’s to-do list; if I do, I get overwhelmed all over again, and I accomplish nothing.

Overcoming the perfectionism aspect of my procrastination is more difficult; my sense of self-worth is irrationally tied to how my writing is perceived.  If someone thinks that a paragraph or sentence that I’ve written is sloppy or awkward, then I must be sloppy or awkward.  No, it doesn’t make sense.  Thus, my new mantra is “I am not the story.”  I try to remember, each time I sit down with paper and pen or with my fingers at the keyboard, that whatever flaws there may be in my writing do not reflect upon my worth as a human being.  It’s a touchy-feely idea, with more than a hint of motivational-speaker sentiment.  But so far, it works for me.

If you’re a procrastinator, it might be worth your time to examine why you put things off.  What do you gain, and what do you lose?  Once you have an answer, you can begin to address the problem and find a solution that works for you.