A Deeply Personal Work Problem
This is the kind of post that maybe I shouldn’t post… because it is critical of my work.
But I’m agitated about this and am going to say it all here anyway in spite of the fact that three friends tell me it harshly misrepresents me and my work, and should stay private. But I think almost everyone has to deal with some version of this deeply personal work problem and so there’s no need to deal with it alone. In my case, the context is my writing.
The Criticism
The one specific review criticism I’ve had of my most recent novel, My Life On Earth And Elsewhere came from a reader on TikTok who said the main character, 16 year-old Darcy, is “self-absorbed.”
This comment comes to mind now because my husband Bob last night read the 112 pages I’ve so far written of my new novel in progress. He commented that the main character, 68 year-old Coco, is “self-absorbed.”
Well, of course they both are. Both are dealing with big loss and with wildly unsettling contact with the supernatural. They are intensely focused.
A Self-Absorbed Question
Is it me? Am I the one who is self-absorbed? Surely we all are to some degree. How much is too much?
I’m assuming everyone with any responsibilities in life does a lot of intense thinking about what they do. I’m pretty hyper-focused, I know that. And not just on work: I feel emotionally responsible for other people to a somewhat pathological degree. Not that that does them any good. And no surprise: the people in my books are single-minded about what they’re dealing with.
The More Troubling Thing
What is getting to me now is the thought that a trait of mine is getting in the way of my doing the best job I can on what I feel I’m here to do, writing my particular stories. I want readers to feel they can connect to people in my stories.
I did change my self, my personality, on purpose many years ago because I felt it would make me a better novelist. In the mid-eighties, my first readers (my writing group) of early drafts of my first novel said they felt distant from characters.
I concluded that the problem was me, my distance from people.
A Radical Move
So I got myself into group therapy to try to fix this. A rather major move. I told the group why. (“Not here for my health” and don’t want a change in my personal life.) I met with that group for a fascinating and difficult ten months. It worked. That first novel, Revelation, and a few others have since come out and no one has ever said to me, in person or writing, that my characters felt distant.
Okay, it worked.
So do I have to change again? Again? Be less self-absorbed? I’m a fairly happy human and don’t want to change.
But I do feel led/called/driven to do the best I can writing the books I write–all my novels are about the place where the familiar and the supernatural touch. I think of my subject as the big mysteries, the invisible world around us. The stories feel necessary to me. They are my responsibility. So must I change to do my work as well as I can?
Is The Change Even Possible?
If I were to turn myself upside down again, how could I do it? How to be less self-absorbed? Take casseroles to the homebound? Go to med school? Almost all my small volunteering efforts have been political–phone banks, door-to-door, etc. I see humane law as the most effective way to help people, but these activities are indirect. (I did co-author a book about volunteering, The Healing Power of Doing Good.)
My characters and I tend to mull over our problems and goals. Maybe there’s too much mulling. Maybe that’s it. This blog is surely an example; I frequently ponder my dilemmas and decisions on this page, in part for relief and also to see what I think, often to the point of TMI. At the same time, I always hope that other folks can relate and find something helpful in the discussion.
Do I change myself again? What would you do? I’m very tempted to stay exactly who I am.
Peggy
#hyperfocus #selfdetermination #selfabsorption #career #isitme
Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: be less self-absorbed, contact with the supernatural, critical of my work, deal with it alone, distance from people, distant from characters, doing the best job I can, emotionally responsible, group therapy, hyper-focused, intense thinking, intensely focused, is it me?, make me a better novelist, new novel in progress, review criticism, self-absorbed, single-minded, supernatural touch, writing group
Comments
Peggy, as always, I love how deeply honest you are in these posts. It’s not easy to talk about a criticism, whether it’s valid or not. My first reaction: nearly all the characters I read and love could be described as self-absorbed! The stories are about *them,* their personal stuff. As a reader, I don’t think I want to know too much that’s outside the main character’s concerns. Do I really care if Anna Karenina is worried about her sick aunt? 🙂
I think it’s pretty amazing that you did the group therapy as a way to make your writing stronger. Wow! That shows such commitment, and it’s a testament to the power of therapy. You are such a great and successful writer — I wouldn’t worry about this.
Mary, I thank you and I laughed out loud about Anna Karenina’s aunt. My retired-psychologist husband Bob has always been a huge proponent of group therapy. Therapy, both individual and group, has done really good things for me. I had a round of 11 individual sessions many years ago and it resulted in my getting married and starting to write fiction.
Congratulations on the big success your podcast “Recovering Debs” is having.
Thank you, Peggy!
Yes, Peggy, stay exactly as you are, expressing your thoughts, your doubts, you insecurities, your motives, your aims and objectives. Figure out for yourself whether the two “self-absorbed” comments you mention make any difference. I’m self-absorbed too, but with compassion oozing from every pore of my being—like you.
Oh, and remove the extraneous “do” from your sentence, “ If I were to turn myself upside down again, how could do I do it?”
Thanks for both of these comment, Moristotle! I do get a little tired of myself sometimes, but that passes pretty quickly.
Perhaps today’s readers are more interested in action rather than self examination. Perhaps readers are uncomfortable with the idea of self and what it takes to move forward and change or not.
You can only be true to your voice. However, it seems as if you are listening to that voice and it is telling you something. Trust it. You’re good.
Thanks, Gail! And best of health to you!
What 16 year old isn’t self- absorbed? And for that matter, many of us at any age? I submit that the people who wrote that to you were unable to “ put themselves into the character” to see why they might act that way. It is they who are lacking – not you!
Sixteen year olds are definitely expected to be self-absorbed, Judy. It does get my attention that I’m even more inward-turned now than I was 49 years ago. To some degree, it’s an occupational hazard, but still…
Dear Peggy, Be you – everyone else is taken!!!!
Labels that are put on others may sometimes be a projection of the labeler rather than the labelee. As you heard me many times in the Vocal Class, be you, be your best, honest, Buddha self . Your intention is what makes you unique in telling a story. Don’t change that.
Thank you for sharing this. Marie
Thanks, Marie. I just hope the written results are better than my singing voice!
I’m wondering if your novels are written in first person? I think if so that might have a lot to do with someone saying the protagonists sound self-absorbed. It’s hard not to when the word ‘I’ is used so often. But that aside, I think you can only write from the depth and wealth of who you are. Maybe self-absorbed isn’t so bad, maybe it’s just a preference. Some people like that kind of a character/story (I sure do) and some prefer more action motivated novels. You can’t please everyone. So why turn yourself upside down again trying to do so? Write what comes naturally to you and is from your heart, and the right readers will find you.
Good thought, Deb. Mostly I do use first person. On this new one, I’m using close third, but only one character’s point-of-view: thoughts, sensations, experience. That probably does have an effect. For me, it feels more intimate.
Peggy, many years ago, when I realized my 1st marriage was falling apart, my younger brother’s addictions were once more raging after years of sobriety, and my mom wanted me as her 1st Lt. in crisis management, I was, as you might easily imagine, going on & on about it to a very close friend. I pulled up short and apologized, half-joking that I was surely the most boring, self-absorbed friend she had. She said, with great matter of factness tinged with affection, “Well, you are self-absorbed, but you’re NEVER boring.”
Like many of your other reader/writer respondents, I will echo: don’t change a thing. Personally, I read fiction for the luxury & privilege of being able to tunnel deeply into a character’s psyche, heart, mind, learn how they think and their motivations (especially those they themselves are not very aware of). That’s what’s always fascinated me about people, generally. We can never know an actual human being as thoroughly and intimately as we can know fictional characters. I find that… absorbing. XO
You had a rough period there for a while, Charisse. And I’m glad your friend’s comments were at least tinged with affection. (You’re still close friends?) Thanks for your don’t-change vote. I too like the character’s inner worlds– love your idea of the motivations they’re not aware of.
I’m don’t really understand why the reader(s) would assume it is “you” that is self-absorbed. When a novelist writes a book about a criminal or almost any other deviant character, does the reader assume that that character is about the author. Is someone that write about an alien an alien? (The kind from outer space)
Yes, as suggested above, that the book(s) is written in the first person may have influenced the reader’s perception, but casting a character in the first person is a common literary technique, and not every 1st person character is the author in disguise.
Write on!
Len, I’m the one to make the leap to: is it me? Because it seems to some that the self-absorption is a feature of some of my characters, I think it might be me. Also, I am unable to see them as self-absorbed. To me, they’re intensely interesting and interested people. I would only want to change myself in order to make my characters easier to relate to. But I don’t feel like doing that. Maybe it’s my age and I’ve become cheerfully immovable.
Addendum to my previous post:
If the readers would like to take issue with self-absorption on a grand scale, perhaps they should look into the “selphy culture.”
Good point, from one accustomed to pointing the camera the other way.
Like Popeye said: “I yam what I yam!”
I do get tired of “self-improvement”.
Though, as you say above, that it is “you” that is making the leap to claiming the fictitious characters reflect you, I kinda’ detect in the readers’ comments that “they” are making that leap, and by writing such, are “cautiously” casting aspersions on you.
But what do I know? All of my work in psych was with mice and rats. But I smell a rat. LOL
I think we often don’t know all of our own motivations, Len. I once accidentally said to a guy I crossed paths with on the street, “I tried to get in touch with you but I couldn’t get rid of you.” He and I were equally astounded. I meant to say that I couldn’t get in touch with him.
Peggy. You are not one of the people I would call self ansorbed. I never use that term. I have come to believe I am self absorbed because of awful hard knocks and trying my entire life the “why” or evrrything. Ex. Whu do so many fantastic people I have known get cancer and the peak of their lovely lives, then die. It will always eat me up. I am just as confused as I was when a kid, as I was in college, etc. Quit thinking you have some sort of problem. You don’t. You are a great writer. I’m lucky to have known quite a few. You’re up there, way up there, top five. So very unique. Thanks for the help you’ve given me, often just by your writing and this blog. You’re such a decent, kind person. Take care. RL
Robbie Lane, This is the 2nd time I’ve received this wonderful comment. I’m glad to have it twice.
Peggy. You are not one of the people I would call self ansorbed. I never use that term. I have come to believe I am self absorbed because of awful hard knocks and trying my entire life to find the “why” of everything. Ex. Why do so many fantastic people I have known get cancer at the peak of their lovely lives, then die. It will always eat me up. I am just as confused as I was when a kid, as I was in college, etc. And religion never gives me the answers. Drives me nuts. Quit thinking you have some sort of problem. You don’t. Nothing wrong with being introspective, obsessive, or self absorbed. That’s just the way humans are, in general. You are a great writer. I’m lucky to have known quite a few. You’re up there, way up there, top five. So very unique. Thanks for the help you’ve given me, often just by your writing and this blog. You’re such a decent, kind person. Take care. RL
You’re very kind, Robbie Lane. And I’m sorry for your awful hard knocks. I’m hoping medical research gets cancer completely beat one of these years soon– dementia, too. That’s hitting my friends more than cancer. Hard to watch. I wish you easier traveling in life, RL.
Peggy, so many comments! In reading them (including re-reading my own comment), I’m reminded that the two “self-absorbed” comments you received were about one of your fictional characters, not about you. If there’s a connection between that and self-absorption in yourself, I’d argue that being able to create a self-absorbed fictional character is evidence that you are NOT self-absorbed, but just the opposite! Richly depicting a fictional character requires rapt absorption in that character. I have failed that task every time I’ve tried it. YOU can accomplish it.
Interesting argument, moristotle, and I appreciate it. Thanks.
Oh my! We have a big topic here! And one of my favorites. Being myself among the most self absorbed humans I have come across, I have given a lot of thought to this. Here are a few things that came to mind. You certainly seem to me to have quite adequate skills in attending to others and having an interest in the world outside yourself. So what you did early to expand those seems to have been good work. It also seems to me that writing is a strongly internal enterprise and spending a lot of time thinking about how you think and act, and probably how others think and act, would be a significant part of that. Introspective is a much nicer adverb to use for yourself. We all come with brains differently equipped, and among those differences is surely the tendency to attend primarily internally or externally. And a high level of self-absorption lives with a person’s other tendencies and characteristics that will give the color and flavor to it. If it resides with a lack of generosity then it reads as selfishness. If it lives with too much anxiety it might be fussy and irritable. But what if it lives with kindness and some level of insight about its presence? It might be quite a useful and engaging trait. Informative for developing fictional characters and motivation. Seems to me that any criticism or comment about it as it applies to your work is purely dependent on the work itself and what you were or are tying to do in it. A work about a teenager engaged in a romantic/spiritual relationship–how would you pull that off without self-absorption being a big part? Who has ever written about an interesting adolescent without the self-absorption. Imagine Holden Caulfield without excruciating self-absorption and you have….well nothing. The fact that the character in your current work is coming off as self-absorbed doesn’t seem to me a reason to adjust your own level of mind-minding. Perhaps view it as information that prompts you to ask yourself if that was your intent for this character and if it working to move the work where you’re headed with it. And if it is, all’s well. If not adjust the manuscript as needed. Anyway, it’s a really intriguing topic as are the responses you got. But now I have to get back to thinking about myself.
Fascinating comment as usual, Lee. I accept introspective happily–and there are lots of other possible flavors of introspective that could make for an interesting combo: exacting, nosy, intense, I could go on… In any case, mind-minding is a great way to describe the endlessly interesting practice. I will keep this in mind.