Hubris moves in mysterious ways
Wednesday, March 1st, 2006 12:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rolanniSo there's a discussion over at ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
jaylake's place about the nature of writers, the contention being that interesting writers are interesting people. I disagreed, based on my own wide-ranging uninteresting-ness (with which kaygo begged to disagree), and the even wider-ranging charm of my characters, based on reader report.
This morning at the gym, I fell to talking with a woman who I had worked with during the Bean Christmas Season. She, retired of something to do with accounting, banking, or perhaps both, is casting about for a summer job, to keep herself busy, and confessed that she was looking forward to November, when she would sign on again with Bean. I may have looked a mite dubious, because she asked what I was doing to keep myself busy.
Well, I said, I've been writing a book.
Oh? On what subject?
I did the short form of husband co-author, twelve books, available at Children's Bookstore right here in town, or at Barnes and Noble and Borders, down to Augusta or Portland, and gave her a card.
That was interesting. As in, my being a writer was interesting to someone who is not a writer, and she instantly grasped why I might not be eager to go "out" to work.
Then she realized that, though we had worked together and see each other occasionally at the gym, I had never been properly "placed", which she speedily proceeded to do: Where did I live? Did I know so-and-so? Where had I lived before? Was I related to the Albion Lees or the Waterville Lees?
So, being a writer is interesting, perhaps, to those in other lines of work. But I still don't believe that one needs to be a deeply interesting person in order to write compelling stories. An observer with a good ear, yes. Possessed of esoteric information and a store of bon mots and witticisms, which are delivered with charm and grace in face-to-face situations -- no.
jaylake's place about the nature of writers, the contention being that interesting writers are interesting people. I disagreed, based on my own wide-ranging uninteresting-ness (with which kaygo begged to disagree), and the even wider-ranging charm of my characters, based on reader report.This morning at the gym, I fell to talking with a woman who I had worked with during the Bean Christmas Season. She, retired of something to do with accounting, banking, or perhaps both, is casting about for a summer job, to keep herself busy, and confessed that she was looking forward to November, when she would sign on again with Bean. I may have looked a mite dubious, because she asked what I was doing to keep myself busy.
Well, I said, I've been writing a book.
Oh? On what subject?
I did the short form of husband co-author, twelve books, available at Children's Bookstore right here in town, or at Barnes and Noble and Borders, down to Augusta or Portland, and gave her a card.
That was interesting. As in, my being a writer was interesting to someone who is not a writer, and she instantly grasped why I might not be eager to go "out" to work.
Then she realized that, though we had worked together and see each other occasionally at the gym, I had never been properly "placed", which she speedily proceeded to do: Where did I live? Did I know so-and-so? Where had I lived before? Was I related to the Albion Lees or the Waterville Lees?
So, being a writer is interesting, perhaps, to those in other lines of work. But I still don't believe that one needs to be a deeply interesting person in order to write compelling stories. An observer with a good ear, yes. Possessed of esoteric information and a store of bon mots and witticisms, which are delivered with charm and grace in face-to-face situations -- no.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-03-01 11:59 am (UTC)I get edgy when I read the parts extolling the superiority of introversion over extroversion--if both types didn't exist, nothing would ever get done--but overall it's a good book.
I enjoyed the part in which, iirc, one introvert described a large gathering he'd attended. He needed a break from the crush, and wandered up to a balcony-type seating area and sat to watch the people. After a while, a few more intros wandered into the same area, and they all decompressed/talked/did the intro thing while the party swirled beneath them.
It's called 'barnacling", I think. I recall anemones mentioned as well, but anemone doesn't lend itself to verbing.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-01 06:56 pm (UTC)Perhaps "encysting" would be a good verb? Along with all the potential confusion with "insisting" when mentioned in conversation.
Now I know what to answer when someone asks me at a party what I'm doing, instead of watching people. "I am barnacling" or "I am encysting" sounds much more dangerous, and will probably drive off those gregarious people who insist on introducing the barnacles.
Thanks.