Creatively stifled by trying to be accepted and fit in?

Been wondering how you guys feel as writers submitting things, whether to very specific rules or just in general, if you ever feel you're cutting your own wings off.
I've heard that Ted Chiang doesn't do theme requests, how common is that?

From about age 9 to somewhere in my late teens or early 20s I wanted to be able to draw for almost any comic company and I remember the pressure (but not a full awareness) of feeling like I had to fit in, even though it was early on that I knew having your own style was important. Like so many others, I saw a succession of people who gave me "permission" to do things I previously thought weren't allowed in roughly mainstream comics.
One of the worst things a comic artist can do is trying to draw in a "comic book style".

When I'm getting tired of certain things in a prose genre, I wonder how much this might be a result of writers trying to be accepted (not to mention all the writers who write novels as hopeful movie pitches, how sad is that to give up all the freedoms of a novel?).

I remember many years ago feeling like so many people were failing at doing horror right, before I realized that some things just aren't for me and nothing is for everyone. I don't know if small press and genre community diversification have helped kill the idea of appealing to a wider audience, or that horror had to do very specific things; how many people felt like they had alternative markets that fit them very well in previous decades? Who feels like there is nowhere for them to go right now?

I think everyone needs to accept that something they might want to do will break or ruin a genre (or storytelling or art in general) for other people and get comfortable with that.
Just give up on the idea of meeting any external requirements except communicating effectively. Did anyone else see the number of people who said Crimson Peak and The VVitch weren't even in the horror genre? Probably not big readers, maybe not even particularly experienced horror film watchers, but still.
How much mileage could you get out of asking "what would totally ruin this genre?" and then making it satisfying for yourself?

Right now there is the threat of laws that could seriously prohibit what kind of sexual content is allowed online and it has made me think a lot about how I've held my own drawings back in this regard.
I realize more now that years ago I had been thinking too much about what is allowed on which websites. 2020 was an important year for me in realizing that I have been holding back in ways I wasn't aware of and coming to terms with the idea that I could lose friends, family members might cause me trouble, or maybe websites would ban me after complaints. I don't want to hold back anymore, even if someday there are no sites that will have me doing whatever I want.

I feel a little bit frustrated that some people revel in other peoples shock because I would really prefer people were near unschockable. I don't want to shock anyone, I find it very sad that a handful of my favorite artists can only be published by a daring few.
You don't have to be an edgy person to be unpublishable to most websites, it has come surprisingly natural to me.

Forgot to mention technical concerns.

I can't remember who it was but someone talked about how reliably writers start writing different kinds and sizes of books based on what page count book binding allows or what length their markets can publish at.

And maybe I've stuck to A4 paper because I only have an A4 scanner, but recently I've been feeling a bit of need to work on A3 paper at least.

Yeah, I've felt it.
I stopped caring a long time ago, though. I will always write and make music and maybe someday something will hit. Maybe not. I no longer care.
If your goal is to make a living at it you have to bend and break to meet certain stipulations, but I don't think you should compromise on content. There's an audience for everything. I guess the question is, if you do what you want to do the way you want to do it, will you be happy with the size of your audience? Or would you rather appeal to the masses?
I think everyone should do the art that comes natural to them; if it shocks or 'triggers' someone, that's their problem. You're not responsible for anyone's reaction.
It sounds like you have some shackles to crack. I hope this helps.

I think maybe everyone has to keep breaking shackles their whole life, because you keep falling into shackles through complacency?

I sometimes think I might have toned myself down a bit when I worked at places that might have been especially shocked. But it's not just that, I've always had a desire for things to be nice, simple and happy conflicting with a fondness for messy screwed up things and it's not easy to find a balance but I think everyone needs to embrace the complexity of their needs. And sometimes repression isn't remotely obvious and takes a lot of digging to understand. A lot of this is the aftermath of really bad OCD, which creates a desire for certainty.

There's still some subject matter I don't know what to make of and sometimes that's a reason for creating art. So many people treat it like everything is a readymade statement, but a lot of times it's all about discovery and risk is necessary.

Even if you're not trying to appeal to the masses, you probably want the biggest likeminded audience and if several of the biggest refuges for taboo art get taken down then it's possible email might be the last thing left. Today I just seen that deviantart has been banning artists without warning.

I mostly think that everything will be fine, hardly anyone will be shocked and that much of my ideas will transform into something else entirely, but I have to at least be willing to to go wherever I need to.

Robert Adam Gilmour said:

I think maybe everyone has to keep breaking shackles their whole life, because you keep falling into shackles through complacency?

Click to expand...

Very well put. I guess people need to keep hitting their own reset buttons.
I must admit that I don't notice it when it's happening to me. I have buddies who are more than willing to point it out when it happens, and I do the same for them. It's always good to have honest feedback.

I checked out your blog and, though I loved the art (I love drawings, maybe because I can't draw at all) I gotta say, it seemed pretty tame. Are you censoring yourself on your own blog?

I'd love to see what an unchained Robert Adam Gilmour could do.

Thanks. The dates on the posts tell that I haven't really done much in recent years, it's been about a decade since I was striding on, so perhaps my talking about things I'll do is further evidence of deceiving myself into procrastination again.

There are many things I've always considered my central subjects that I'm sometimes surprised to find that I've barely drawn at all, like castles. If people asked me what I draw I'd probably have said castles, but I've barely done any. I wonder how many artists are surprised to find themselves far away from their favorite subjects?

Something I'm hoping might go in my favor: it's my natural inclination to try to make my stuff as pretty as possible and animator Keita Kurosaka once said how people are more accepting when art looks lovely. His music video for Dir En Grey has shocking stuff in it but the beauty of it probably softened any backlash it might have gotten. Franz Von Bayros and Aubrey Beardsley could probably go on the walls of posh homes and not bother guests too much, but got trouble in their time.

Stifled

At the workplace, you have to fit in. If not indispensable, at least be regarded as essential. Too weird is often construed as too weird to retain.
With art, I figure almost anything goes, especially if it for your private enjoyment.
Once you start exposing your creativity, however, you crack the door to the critics.
Whether at gallery storefronts or online.
Many of my friends are artists, and I am aware of the expenses involved.
Brushes, paints, oils, pads, canvas, stretcher bars, etc ... As with most burgs, our hamlet holds wine n cheese gallery events twice a year, usually with a few dozen venues. Local artists, almost exclusively, unlike those commercialized "arts n crafts" fairs. At the gallery events, hordes descend, a majority for that free wine. Actual sales, no idea.
Most Pollyannas who get irked by sexual content do not bother with art.
Nonetheless, there should be a receptive space in your area who will cordon off your efforts from young eyes.
You do have to introduce yourself, chat, schmooze, pitch.
Or - keep working in secret. You could be the next Henry Darger.
Good luck. I hope you keep at it.

I'm not especially aiming for public exhibitions, the internet will do me fine.

Someone attacked a Gauguin piece a few years ago and I have to admit that unnerved me a bit. Also thinking about all the nude statues that have been chipped away and paintings censored in churches. I wish there were some supernatural force protecting art from vandals.

I'm quarter way into a Darger documentary too.

I feel a little embarrassed the thread has become about me, maybe writers would rather not reveal themselves too much here?

Robert Adam Gilmour said:

... maybe writers would rather not reveal themselves too much here?

Click to expand...

I think the majority of writers at TLO are "banned" writers.

Really? I think most of them left for the action in the sewers (twitter and facebook) and there's still quite a few writers around here, even if they don't all have much published.

Zaharoff said:

I think the majority of writers at TLO are "banned" writers.

Click to expand...

Are they "banned" for refusing to be creatively stifled in order to fit in?

Usually bullying issues, not that many people at all.

Ah, I recall some animosity. I never paid it much attention.

Sorry. Misfired levity.
Over 20 years, I believe quite a few have received the boot.
Usually for ugliness in the more contentious sections.
By and large, I suspect most lost interest.
I find it hard to believe that those who are drawn to Ligotti would prefer the FB alternative.
Then again, I have learned to never underestimate the folly of species human.

Robert, I hope you are still drawing, if only to retain the skills.

There's lots of Ligottians on social media.
Sadly, I think facebook and twitter are a business necessity for some people, and even sadder is that maybe people feel like knowing the industry gossip has also become important.
In the comics business last year Jae Lee came under fire for drawing a cover for a reactionary movement and afterwards had to clarify that he knew nothing about the movement because he deliberately avoids all the controversy news.
But I guess the Chizine scandal was important news.

I was recently tempted to join twitter because a lot of artists (very annoyingly and bafflingly) only post their work there and there is quite a few really interesting people there and some activity I don't see elsewhere, but I just despise the site too much and the sheer amount of people I could follow is just too much.

I'm still drawing but not nearly enough.

Peter Straub doesn’t do themed anthologies, either.

There are a lot of thoughts in your post that could take pages to unpack, but I’ll make a few comments (most of which will probably be obvious to you and you’ll wonder why I’m saying them).

There are different writing worlds, and in the world of novels from bigger publishers, there will always be a desire to shave off the weird edges of your work to appeal to the most readers. I don’t think of this as writers writing to be accepted, but writers having to face the cold reality that it’s a business, and if a publisher doesn’t think your book will sell to large numbers of people, they won’t publish it. If your dream is to sell wide and far, your work has to be "safer".

But if that’s not for you, and you’re willing to forego potential fame and wealth, then there is room in the small/micro press for almost any sort of work, no matter how weird and/or daring. The question is can you find that room, and will there be readers there to read it.

I used to think we were in a rare upswing in the number of writers working in horror today, but I’ve come to understand that this isn’t a fluke: it’s just the beginning. The internet has come for our medium and will tear down all existing models. We are well on our way to anybody who wants to be a writer becoming a writer, all publishing on their own or with small/micro presses, and the amount of noise will be deafening. Few writers will make any sort of name for themselves. Fewer still will be remembered like we remember Ligotti, because the structure he worked in is gone. Mass recognition, even cult recognition, is past. From now on, it’s micro groups, just as it is with the world of recorded music. The monoculture is dead.

To be a writer now means asking some serious questions about what you want to achieve, and what you’re willing to give up to achieve it, because nothing is without sacrifice. Speaking for myself, I’m aware that focusing on the short story has hobbled my career in very real ways, and caused me to potentially miss out on some of the things other writers I came up with have received by writing novels. But I’m relatively fine with that because I get to always write what I want to write and I don’t feel constrained by anyone else’s rules. I’m lucky that what I want to write isn’t very controversial, but that luck only means a few more people get to see my work. At the end of the day it doesn’t pay much better than being completely unpublished.

Regarding your later comments on social media: I can assure you any writer with an agent is told that Facebook and Twitter are musts. Publishers want writers with large followings because they hope that means a built-in audience. We can’t separate commerce from art, not if we want that art viewed by more than a handful of people.

@nomis: You've summed up what I fear so well. Even mainstream literature is dying. Who read Nobel Prize in Literature or Pulitzer Prize novels anymore? If you want to survive it would be better to write a "How to write" book or fanfiction or pack your bags and join the movie/video game industries.

Thankyou Simon. I'm quite alarmed to find that I've been misreading your second name as "Stranzas" for over a decade!

Before the internet was widely used enough, who were the most daring and esoteric horror publishers?

I'm curious about already established writers on social media. China Mieville has no social media. Patricia Mckillip is of a generation that maybe isn't expected to have an internet presence. Did anyone ask Gene Wolfe to get on twitter? Alan Moore was on goodreads for a short time and swamped with questions. Tanith Lee resented having to have a blog but she gave it up after a while. I don't think Susanna Clarke is on social media.
I guess they're all successful enough to get away with it.

ToALonelyPeace - Are you not at all excited about a proliferation of microgroups?
In Manga Zombie the writer Udagawa Takeo celebrated niche bizarre manga but also lamented how fractured and separate genres had become, as if there wasn't anything for a wider audience anymore. I didn't really get his meaning about why this was a problem.

Robert Adam Gilmour said:

ToALonelyPeace - Are you not at all excited about a proliferation of microgroups?
In Manga Zombie the writer Udagawa Takeo celebrated niche bizarre manga but also lamented how fractured and separate genres had become, as if there wasn't anything for a wider audience anymore. I didn't really get his meaning about why this was a problem.

Click to expand...

I think of books/manga/art in general as food. There are only so much each person can consume. It's good there is a proliferation of art and such a great variety to look at but the abundance makes a person weary. The artists/writers who are increasing every year will make even more stuffs but their fans have not increased as much to consume all their art. So the creators will have to be each other's fans or share smaller and smaller fanbase at which point the published work will have the same number of readers as a piece of fanfiction (maybe even less).

Hopefully there will be increasingly sophisticated ways of finding what you want or even trying new things you weren't predisposed to.

One of the good things about television over two decades ago is that there were slots for niche interests (usually late at night) and you could stumble on new things. Some of us are reveling in niches and micro-cultures but I think there are some less curious people who may never escape monoculture.

Borders used to have a huge magazine selection for all kinds of things and the vast majority of these magazines either moved to the internet or were replaced by it and we can no longer gaze across all these varied interests and subcultures in the same way.
Although I've been bashing twitter, I think it has retained a bit of that quality of stumbling on unexpected wonderful things more than a lot of other sites.

I hope people don't become defeatist about the kind of audience they can have. Perhaps cultures will emerge that wont be so easily dominated by blockbuster entertainment.