Do you think building on your strengths or fixing your weaknesses would help you sell more books? My greatest strength is in writing dialogue. My greatest weakness is in writing description. So, should I concentrate on fixing my descriptions or concentrate on improving and building up my dialogue?
According to a Gallup poll, it seems the majority of us here in the U.S. think that fixing our weaknesses will help us be more successful. But I’m not so sure that’s the case. And neither is Marcus Buckingham, author of Go Put Your Strengths To Work.
According to Buckingham there is this big myth floating around where people believe that over time, they will grow the most in the areas of their greatest weakness when, in fact, we grow the most in the areas of our greatest strengths. When I think of my particular strength and weakness, that certainly makes sense. Because no matter how much time I work on making my descriptive passages more poetic or rich or beautiful, I will never be exceptional at it. But, if I put that same kind of effort into my dialogue, that could definitely be an area I could stand out in.
So, what do you think? Let’s take our on little poll here on RTB.
Which do you think would help you be most successful?
A. Building on strengths
B. Fixing weaknesses
Give your answer, then share with us what your greatest strength and weakness is. And for fun, tell us which you spend the most time on: fixing your weakness or building on your strength.
I know my answer: I believe “A”, yet I spend most of my week trying to ramp up my description.
Wonder what would happen if I spent most of my week ramping up my dialogue?
No related posts.
I question whether this actually has to be an either/or decision, actually. [ponder] I mean, dialogue is one of my strengths, too, and I’m a pretty good plotter, but my descriptions have suffered over the last few years, and I have to really concentrate on my narrative prose to make it anything more than utilitarian.
But when I sit down to work on a story, I don’t make a conscious decision to work on just one of those aspects of my writing. I’m going to keep on writing dialogue, and all my stories have plots, but at the same time I’m making more attempts to work more descriptions in (smoothly! [wry smile]) and to make at least some key passages in the narrative worth reading for their own sake. I have to spend time working on each part of a story as I write it, so I might as well focus on each part as it comes up and work on making it as good as it can be.
Another thing to consider is that you don’t have to approach every piece of writing from the point of view that it’s For Publication. A short story, or just a scene, can exist only on your hard drive and is a safe place to play around, try a new technique, experiment. If it doesn’t work out, it doesn’t matter. That kind of writing is like an artist’s study or a needleworker’s sampler. (Not the kind of “sampler” you work to a pattern and hang on a wall, but a traditional working sampler.) The idea is that the purpose of this work is experimentation, practice and learning. It’s never intended to be seen by the public so it doesn’t have to be perfect. It can be very freeing to work on something you don’t intend to show to the world, and it’s a great place to try those advanced or experimental or just really different techniques you might be reluctant to attempt in a manuscript your editor is expecting in December.
Anyway, I guess my answer is “yes.” Or “both.” Yes, we should work on improving our strengths, but yes, we should also work on our weaknesses. Maybe not always at the same time or in every project, but in general I think at least some time spent on both is worthwhile.
Angie
If you don’t improve on your perceived weaknesses then you won’t grow as a writer. I say perceived because you obviously have a strength in narrative above and beyond the average person. You’ve written a book, you’ve won a Christy, so you obviously have some strength at narrative.
When I first started writing fiction I had a large number of weaknesses. Not all of them were perceived either. Now, I don’t see anyone area of my writing as a weakness, just a strength that I need to work on. My true weakness is detail stuff. Like, I could never be a CSI person or an arson investigator. I would look at all the stuff and go, “I give up.” I wouldn’t be able to process all the little pieces, now put it in a book form and I can do it, it’s the physical details that are my true weakness.
Good point on not everything you write being for publication. For some reason folks who understand musicians must rehearse or painters must experiment with mediums and methods assume writing is simply a matter of applied typing. Practice. Try things. Do exercises. Write scenes for yourself alone.
And I also agree with the “both” answer. M weak suit is plotting. Layered description, dialog, no real problem. Writing short, on target scenes is difficult for me. The plotting — and the sticking to the plot — are tough. I wrote the longest Doctor Who short story in Short Trips history: 10k to a market that expressly states they take nothing over 8k (and the first draft was 13k). That the story was accepted despite the length says something — but that I forced the editor to make a tough call and sell it to the publisher says more, and that not so good. Did I learn my lesson? Nope. Currently working on trimming a 12k story I sold to a 9-10k market (different editor, different market, no room for the extra words).
My personal goal right now is to extend my dialog and descriptive skills as far as I can BUT only write stories in the 3-6k range. Will any of these be worth submitting anywhere? Hard to say. But mastery of a skill, not pulication, is the goal going in.
I’m not a published writer, so my opinions may differ, I suppose, but I think it depends on how strong your strengths are and how weak your weaknesses are. I’m good with dialogue, but with plot. I’m so bad with plot I haven’t even tried writing a novel, because you can get by with snappy dialogue in a short story but for a couple hundred pages? Nah. If a weakness is VERY weak, it will hold a writer back. And if your strengths are VERY strong, then working on your weaknesses only makes sense. Of course playing to your own strengths is smart, but only doing that might stunt your growth, no?
I just woke up; sorry if I’m incoherent. Maybe something to work on for me…
(That should say, “… but BAD with plot.”
See final paragraph above. Ooops.
I’ve spent way too much time working on my weaknesses instead of playing to my strengths. Enough of that! I could work on my weaknesses for the rest of my life and they’d still never compete with somebody else who is naturally great in those areas.
Well, in business,
the policy is to concentrate on your strengths
and outsource your weaknesses.
You simply can’t be good at everything.
Not possible.
That said,
I send my manuscripts to an editorial service
before I send them to an editor
(except for Breach Of Trust…
which I tried to self-edit).
Why?
Because grammar is not my thing
(trained in business,
didn’t take a lot of English courses)
so I outsource it.
I’m told that my greatest strength writing-wise
is dialogue.
I talk to people all day.
Its pretty darn easy to put it down on paper.
I absolutely agree that you should build on your strengths and at the same time, minimize your weaknesses.
I use piano as an example. I played piano well for nearly a decade. I was good enough to teach beginning students for my over-burdened teacher. I could read music and, with practice, play most pieces. But I would never be a musician. I had the technical skill, but I couldn’t create true music. No amount of practice would get me to the level where I was great.
In writing, I always write to my strengths. I can’t write comedy. I write dark suspense much better. I *could* technically write comedy, but it would fall flat. I might be able to get something half-way decent, but it would never be up to par with my suspense.
Regarding individual writing strengths . . . I do think you can IMPROVE on your weaknesses and make them stronger, but you’ll be KNOWN for your strengths, and therefore it is a greater benefit for building your audience to play to your strengths. IMO
Great post!
I say work on your weakness through your strenghts. Like me dialgoue is my strong suit and narration is my strong suit. For me I see narration as dialogue without quation marks. You use the same voice of the character and the same thought process when you narrate. Now making my characters move without them looking like robots I suck at. Finding my plot after I hit the 40k mark seems to be the norm.
What I’ve learned to do is use my dialgoue to see how my character will move. If they are lying do they look away? Would they tense? So on and so forth.
I don’t think my weaknesses will ever be easy for me as much as writing dialogue or narration, but I can get it as right as I can if I work at it.
Like others, I don’t think it’s an either/or.
One should always play to one’s strengths — while identifying and working on weaknesses.
That said, even strengths need to be exercised and honed. One can’t remain static in a changing world.
Oh gawd, I sound like one of those motivational posters!
I would never lead with my weakness. What’s the point? Everyone else out there is playing the strongest hand they have, and doing everything they can to avoid showing where they are vulnerable.
One shares one’s weaknesses with one’s friends, one’s mentors and one’s allies. The rest of the world need not know.
I think my strengths will grow and improve naturally as I write, but I don’t trust that my weaknesses will. I think to improve my weaknesses, I have to put in actual work, to be aware of them and to strive to improve in those areas.
Great comments! I think I am inclined to agree that balance is the best course of action. Like Charlene said, no matter how much time I spent on my descriptive passages, I would still never be as good as those who have a natural gift in that area. By the same token, to be satisfied with sub-standard descriptions in my novels isn’t gonna fly, either.
So, I guess a bit of both is required. Build up those strengths and spend time on improving the weaknesses, but don’t obsess over them.
I think we need to build on strengths and make them stronger and better every day. In doing so, we don’t necessarily minimise our weaknesses, although that can happen, but I truly believe that they end up being hauled along the ’strive for excellence’ ride along the way. In building on our strengths we can subconsciously improve our weaknesses too. And if that makes me sound like a Pollyanna I’m happy
.
What you focus on is what you get, in my opinion, and if all along we’re asking ourselves ‘how can I do it better?’ be it a strength or a weakness, then surely we have to win along the way. If we focus on what we’re doing badly then that’s all we’ll see. JM2cW
I am sure it’s already been said, but I think working on both is the best idea!