The Traditional Writer is Dead

The traditional writer is dead. More than that, the “traditional” writer never existed in the first place.

“But Stephanie,” you say, “what about those writers who use the old-style formats, formal writing, those who don’t break the rules? Aren’t they ‘traditional’ writers?”

NO.

At least, they aren’t “traditional” writers in the sense that we have come to know the term.

You see, “traditional” writers have come to be known as a sort of…boring class of writer, as someone who sticks strictly to the rules and does not stray—the kind of writer that “traditional” publishers (there’s that word again) might prefer. But that isn’t what they are at all. No, they are a style of writing, one that does prefer form and rules but that can still be seen breaking the rules on occasion, if it fits their work’s needs.

Throughout history, writing, like with art, has had many styles pop up out of the woodwork, and we classify them in many different ways. Sometimes, we classify them based on historical periods, such as Victorian era, Modernism, Postmodernism, Contemporary, etc. Sometimes, we classify them based on genre, such as romance, science fiction, fantasy, contemporary, young adult, new adult, etc. Other times, we classify them based on the type of writing that they are, such as poetry versus prose.

Traditional writers are just that, another way to classify our writing. However, we need to reexamine how we look at that style of writing. We cannot just look at them as the kind of writers who don’t bend the rules, the kind of writers who are preferred by publishers, or even as the kind of writers who prefer to sell and market their writing through traditional publishers. It’s not fair to that classification of writer. They take an older form of writing and make it new again, as we have seen in the wonderful Mike Singleton on Vocal with his poetry.

Sonnets, villanelles, haikus, senryūs, if you have used any of the “form” poems, then you have been a traditional writer as well. It does not mean that you have been a lesser—or even a greater—writer than anyone else, it just means that you have delved into a different style. You have forced yourself to think a different way than you normally would, jumped into a different world than you normally do, and did something that you normally don’t do—and isn’t that fantastic?

The famous painter Bob Ross would say on his show, The Joy of Painting, that he became a better and happier painter once he stopped trying to be a “traditional” painter. That’s his prerogative. Not everyone is made to be that style of artist or writer. Some of us have to break the rules in order to feel more comfortable in our work and get done what we feel we have to accomplish. That does not mean that the traditional artist or the traditional writer is a bad thing to be. In fact, great works can be done in so-called “traditional” ways; you just have to know how to manipulate that style to your liking.

Perhaps I was too harsh to say that the traditional writer is dead, but that is how I feel. The way that we originally thought of the traditional writer is dead. They are not just form-stuffers, rule-followers, and publisher-kissers. They are their own style of writing, free to follow their creativity wherever it may take them, and if that so happens to include form poetry or following stricter rules of grammar, then so be it.

The “traditional” writer is dead. Long live the traditional writer.