So I'm an INTJ. A lot of people don't care much for Myers-Briggs personality types, or any personality typing, and throw it off as of no more importance than zodiac signs. But they aren't arbitrary, they are assigned based on your personality, so they match. They aren't meant to be specific -- they are meant to be general enough to encompass lots of more specific personalities, but still distinguish those from others. People have a hard time understanding others who aren't just like them, so classifying personalities can be a helpful cheat-sheet.
The thing about writing is, there's no good general advice to give. Most good writers will not say that there is a write way or a wrong way to write. They can offer advice, tips, suggestions, stories from their writing experiences, but they can't tell you how to do it. It just depends.
That's something we forget so often. Writers, in talking to other writers, often feel pressured into doing things in what seems to be the "right way." But we all have different skill-sets, as writers. The right way is different for everyone. And not considering skill-sets is something that hurts a lot of writers, I think.
Okay, so I'm an INTJ. As an INTJ, I know my strengths and weaknesses fairly well and fairly objectively. So let me share some strengths-and-weaknesses talk about myself to get you thinking about your own. INTJ's are system-builders. They are "the masterminds." They are good at observing logically, objectively, and analytically, and then at using their imaginations to take those observed building blocks and thinking of something new and better. They are also good at understanding how to get from the observed reality to their new creation. The down side? They tend to run at full-speed through the steps to achieve the end goal, and this can cause them to loose sight of some of the other things around them (emotions and empathy tend to be big points of weakness, here, for instance).
I described INTJ's focusing on those particular aspects because that is how I write. At my best, I am actually really, very good at putting together the big-picture of a story. I have a set of observations from reality that I want to include as themes or statements to make in my book. I have a great set of characters, which interweave with each other and play off of each other nicely. Very balanced. I am good at making a multi-layered plot, with very nearly the right amount of meaningful sub-plots working through that harmonize so well with everything. Basically, I'm good at making the system of the story. I really am. They're just beautiful.
What am I not good at? Pacing, balancing the energy throughout scenes, small things like awkward wording. Balancing detail, description, and dialogue (I always tend to have too much dialogue in novels). Also, when I write fast, like 1000 in 30 minutes, I do not just make typos, I practically invent a new (gibberish) language. I make so many typing mistakes. And I don't really care. I know what the words are supposed to say. I'll have to make it sound prettier later, anyway, so why bother fixing as I'm writing it? I'm also bad at some other things, but those aren't the point quite at this moment. Let's continue.
Good. Strengths and weaknesses. The problem? The problem is that other people have different strengths and weaknesses. I'm sure of it. People talk about how the "big-picture" first round of revisions takes months and months to get everything just right. The big-picture is one of my strengths. But because it must not be the particular strengths of others, I get nervous. I think I must just be thinking to much of myself. If they need to spend months working on that revision, then I must, too. I shouldn't think I'm better. But I am -- at this one particular element of writing, at least. Much of the time, anyway. And I shouldn't have to deny myself that strength. We really need to use our strengths and we need as much of them as we can get!
The other stages of writing, though, that's where it gets more difficult. The planning? I don't plan, but I do need to play around with the ideas until I've got my perfectly balanced story system, all the characters and plots in just the right places. And getting that just right? That actually isn't something I can force. I can try -- I know waiting for the Muse isn't in vogue these days -- but it never turns out nearly as well. The first draft? Well, I can do that just as well as any WriMo! The first revision -- that's where my strength lies. The second revision? Just like everyone else, maybe worse.
It's not wrong to identify your strengths and manipulate them for all you're worth. As long as you have weaknesses, it's not wrong to have strengths. Sometimes I feel like it is. But then I know it's not. So I'm writing this to convince myself, and to convince you my lovely reader, that it's not wrong to be better at some parts of writing. As long as it's not all parts, you're good.
So maybe try considering your personality type, how you view things and how you do things, and it may give you the courage to look harder for your strengths and weaknesses as a writer!
So, have you looked? What are your strengths that you hopefully aren't afraid to own up to? In what ways are you a better writer than most?
The thing about writing is, there's no good general advice to give. Most good writers will not say that there is a write way or a wrong way to write. They can offer advice, tips, suggestions, stories from their writing experiences, but they can't tell you how to do it. It just depends.
That's something we forget so often. Writers, in talking to other writers, often feel pressured into doing things in what seems to be the "right way." But we all have different skill-sets, as writers. The right way is different for everyone. And not considering skill-sets is something that hurts a lot of writers, I think.
Okay, so I'm an INTJ. As an INTJ, I know my strengths and weaknesses fairly well and fairly objectively. So let me share some strengths-and-weaknesses talk about myself to get you thinking about your own. INTJ's are system-builders. They are "the masterminds." They are good at observing logically, objectively, and analytically, and then at using their imaginations to take those observed building blocks and thinking of something new and better. They are also good at understanding how to get from the observed reality to their new creation. The down side? They tend to run at full-speed through the steps to achieve the end goal, and this can cause them to loose sight of some of the other things around them (emotions and empathy tend to be big points of weakness, here, for instance).
I described INTJ's focusing on those particular aspects because that is how I write. At my best, I am actually really, very good at putting together the big-picture of a story. I have a set of observations from reality that I want to include as themes or statements to make in my book. I have a great set of characters, which interweave with each other and play off of each other nicely. Very balanced. I am good at making a multi-layered plot, with very nearly the right amount of meaningful sub-plots working through that harmonize so well with everything. Basically, I'm good at making the system of the story. I really am. They're just beautiful.
What am I not good at? Pacing, balancing the energy throughout scenes, small things like awkward wording. Balancing detail, description, and dialogue (I always tend to have too much dialogue in novels). Also, when I write fast, like 1000 in 30 minutes, I do not just make typos, I practically invent a new (gibberish) language. I make so many typing mistakes. And I don't really care. I know what the words are supposed to say. I'll have to make it sound prettier later, anyway, so why bother fixing as I'm writing it? I'm also bad at some other things, but those aren't the point quite at this moment. Let's continue.
Good. Strengths and weaknesses. The problem? The problem is that other people have different strengths and weaknesses. I'm sure of it. People talk about how the "big-picture" first round of revisions takes months and months to get everything just right. The big-picture is one of my strengths. But because it must not be the particular strengths of others, I get nervous. I think I must just be thinking to much of myself. If they need to spend months working on that revision, then I must, too. I shouldn't think I'm better. But I am -- at this one particular element of writing, at least. Much of the time, anyway. And I shouldn't have to deny myself that strength. We really need to use our strengths and we need as much of them as we can get!
The other stages of writing, though, that's where it gets more difficult. The planning? I don't plan, but I do need to play around with the ideas until I've got my perfectly balanced story system, all the characters and plots in just the right places. And getting that just right? That actually isn't something I can force. I can try -- I know waiting for the Muse isn't in vogue these days -- but it never turns out nearly as well. The first draft? Well, I can do that just as well as any WriMo! The first revision -- that's where my strength lies. The second revision? Just like everyone else, maybe worse.
It's not wrong to identify your strengths and manipulate them for all you're worth. As long as you have weaknesses, it's not wrong to have strengths. Sometimes I feel like it is. But then I know it's not. So I'm writing this to convince myself, and to convince you my lovely reader, that it's not wrong to be better at some parts of writing. As long as it's not all parts, you're good.
So maybe try considering your personality type, how you view things and how you do things, and it may give you the courage to look harder for your strengths and weaknesses as a writer!
So, have you looked? What are your strengths that you hopefully aren't afraid to own up to? In what ways are you a better writer than most?