Creative Consultation with Ian Rankin
Writer and filmmaker Nora Ephron said, “The hardest thing about writing is writing.” Yet there have been hundreds of – probably more – instructional books published on how to write, how to write the next bestseller, how to write your masterpiece, written by writers, editors, and academics. If you were to seek out writers who do write and publish, they will very likely all tell you that the best way to learn to write is to read fiction. “If you want to be a writer, you must do two things above all others: read a lot and write a lot. There's no way around these two things that I'm aware of, no shortcut.” (King). How to get published is an entirely different matter. When I consider my own writing, I think of it in those binary terms: writing and publishing.
In aid of my writing, I do read. A lot. One of the authors I read is Ian Rankin. He is a Scottish author known primarily for his crime fiction series based on the character Detective Inspector John Rebus. He has won numerous awards, had several bestselling books on several continents, been translated into twenty-two languages. He has written novels, short stories, plays; his books have been adapted for television and stage; he has written, hosted, and been the subject of several tv specials. Recently Rankin was awarded a knighthood for his contributions to literature and charities (Rankin website). Rankin is an accomplished author, but it would be incorrect to think of him as a genre writer; his prose demonstrates creative narrative structure, understanding of language and the skills to use it to best tell his stories. This is one of reasons I read his books, they are miles above most books in the genre. Genre writing tends to belong to a school of writing that uses tropes and formulas to tell stories that vary only in their details. The writing itself doesn’t have to be good, it’s the story that counts, the more heart-stopping the better. It is obvious that Rankin has that affinity for language that sets him apart.
I chose to contact Ian as a role model because he is a genuine, real person, not a ‘celebrity’, as some authors tend to become once they reach a certain level of fame; because I like his novels and his writing; because he has written so many; because I like his protagonist, John Rebus; because he is persistent: he wrote several novels before he had a breakthrough novel (Rankin); and because I thought that I could learn a lot from him.
One of the chief concerns I have about my future as a writer is a fear that if I sit down at the computer, I won’t have anything to say, or that I will ‘write myself into a corner’ where I can’t go any further with the plot or the characters. I’ve done this before. It is a gripping and real fear, whether or not it is founded. I am afraid of not writing. Inspiration and motivation have both been on my mind lately, and I was happy to have the opportunity to ask Ian about these things. At this point in my life and my career, I think it worth addressing myself to Teresa Amabile’s Componential Theory of Creativity, examining where I sit within that model and how I compare to where a successful author and role model sits within that model.
The first component, domain-relevant skills, includes talent, knowledge, expertise, technical skills, and intelligence. Ian Rankin believes in talent. I have met writers who claim that there is no such thing as talent in writing. “But” Rankin says, “that talent can be learned” (Rankin, 2022). According to Rankin, “untalented writing is usually ponderous” (Rankin, 2022) and I agree with him. However, another well-known, award-winning author, John Irving, denies having talent himself (Amabile, 2001). If Rankin believes that talent can be acquired, and Irving believes that talent is unnecessary to achieve success in the field, the truth may lie between these two disparities. Talent is a frequently debated issue within the domain of fiction writing, and I believe firmly, despite the subjectivity of talent, that the domain of fiction writing, and other creative arts requires a very clear definition, free of the usual discrepancies of semantics.
The OED defines talent as:
1. Special aptitude, faculty, gift
2. High mental ability
3. Those who take odds relying on their own judgement and knowledge (citing bookmakers) (The Oxford English Dictionary).
I have included the third definition even though the reference is specifically related to
bookmakers and gambling because the ability to take risks and rely on your own judgement and knowledge in the continued creation of a work is a relevant characteristic of talent. Risk tolerance is included in Amabile’s Creativity-Relevant Processes component of creativity (Amabile, 2012). That ability to accept the risk of self-sufficient thinking is essential to the act of creation. Any act of creation is itself a risk.
Turning to the first definition of talent, “special aptitude or faculty” is a vague definition.
Domain-relevant skills in creative writing mean a knowledge and expertise in the crafting, application, and use of language (and its various components: vocabulary, grammar, abstract as well as specific understanding of words and language) and storytelling (and its various components: theme, plot, character, etc.). Cognitive skills such as critical thinking, comprehension, and intelligence can easily be seen to be part of the domain-relevant skill set of the writer. Along with these, a talent for combining all these things in a complete, novel, and pleasing way is what separates the talented from the untalented; almost an instinct for the right combination of words. Steve May, Head of Creative Studies at Bath Spa University writes in his 2007 book Doing Creative Writing that “the work will be striking and original; phrases, lines, characters, descriptions, moments, dramatic events, or explorations of fictional settings may be eloquent and memorable. The subject matter of the work will have been explored intelligently, with insight and breadth of viewpoint. An impressive knowledge and understanding of both form and subject matter will be evident…will show a clear understanding of the readers’ needs and those of the genre” (May, 2007, p. 73) (Mozaffari, Hamideh, 2013).
But Rankin, Irving and many other successful writers insist that success in the broad commercial sense of writing can be achieved through hard work. In fact, according to Irving, “writing is one-eighth talent and seven-eighths discipline” (Gussow, 1998, p. 3) (Amabile, 2001).
The creativity-relevant processes identified by Amabile in her Componential Theory of Creativity correlate to practices and work styles that encourage unconstrained creative ideation, incubation, as well as the personality and work ethic to take ideas to the concrete, physical stage of innovation, which, in the case of creative writing, is publishing.
Undoubtedly there are countless millions of manuscripts occupying drawers and boxes and files that have never been published. It takes a disciplined, hard-working writer to hurdle that stage of the process. It also requires a tolerance for risk and failure. If no one sees the manuscript, can it be called a work of art? It cannot have the opportunity to contribute to the canon of literature. It remains non-existent, an idea, regardless of the effort that went into its creation.
Another key creativity-relevant process is one of ideation, incubation, insight, or inspiration. Rankin notes that ideas “sometimes…appear like lightning bolts. Other times a vague idea may linger at the back of my mind for weeks” (Rankin, 2022). It takes a writer with experience, talent, and skills to recognize these moments of insight as creative fetal matter.
In a 1996 paper based on a study of writers, Csikzentmihalyi noted that “all [writers] agreed that it is important to listen to their unconscious” (Csikzentmihalyi, 1996) (Sawyer, R. Keith). Writers in his study told of hundreds of mini-insights and noted that the “real work began after that, when those insights are analyzed, reworked, connected” (Csikzentmihalyi, 1996) (Sawyer, R. Keith).
Bob Dylan has felt the benefit of Graham Wallas’ incubation theory. After ending a gruelling tour fuelled by drugs, he had a motorcycle accident and retired to the New York countryside, determined to leave the music industry. Instead, freed from the burden to create, “Dylan wrote song after song in a kind of fever dream that lasted until 1966” (Remnick, 2022). Dylan himself notes, “The best songs to me – my best songs – are songs which were written very quickly. Just about as much time as it takes to write it down is about as long as it takes to write it” (Remnick, 2022). Bob Dylan, too, has described moments of insight that seemed to come from nowhere. “’I found myself writing this song, this story, this long piece of vomit,’ Dylan said. ‘I don’t know where my songs come from.’ … Dylan was describing, with characteristic vividness, the uncontrollable rush of a creative insight” (Lehrer, 2012). “Those six minutes of raw music would revolutionise rock ‘n’ roll” (Lehrer, 2012).
John Irving’s comment about writing being seven-eighths discipline applies to creative processes as described by Amabile. Ian Rankin agrees: “This is not to say that hard work and perseverance don’t play their part – they do!” (Rankin, 2022). Rankin counts getting his first book deal and being published as important measures of success for him (Rankin, 2022). His discipline extends to focus as well, “Distractions are always there for the easily distracted” (Rankin, 2022).
Characteristics of Rankin’s personality and cognitive style play a significant role in his creativity as a writer. “I start work on my books not knowing where the story will take me. This gives me a freedom” (Rankin, 2022). Rankin’s tolerance for risk and ambiguity, non-fixedness, and openness to novelty and learning contribute to his continued long-term creative power. These processes are transferable to other creative endeavours; Rankin recently recorded an album with Scottish recording artist, Jackie Leven (Ian Rankin, 2022).
“Writing isn't about making money, getting famous, getting dates, getting laid, or making friends. In the end, it's about enriching the lives of those who will read your work, and enriching your own life, as well.” (King). Writers will tell you, even those ones whose income is astronomical, that it doesn’t work to write to make money, or become famous, or for critical acclaim. A writer must be motivated for the art, the work itself. Rankin has made his motivation for writing clear; “the most pleasure I get is still from writing a great sentence or paragraph or creating a character or plot that thrills me” (Rankin, 2022). John Irving agrees: “the book, that’s where the obsession comes in. When you’re writing you only think about the book” (Amabile, 1989, 2001). According to Irving, “it’s not work for me” (Amabile, 1989, 2001).
The quality of the work must be taken into consideration. While there are very few writers who will criticize or condemn their peers for earning a healthy income, it is perhaps an unspoken acknowledgement that to be a commercially successful author does not necessarily mean that one is an exceptional, or even good author. Many commercially successful books do not qualify as novel and original, Amabile’s definition of a creative product, but are merely retellings of the same story with the names and places changed. Authors who attempt original and novel plots, or characters, or ways of telling a story either in language or in form tend not to be motivated by commercial success but by the excitement of the work itself.
Having made the point that writers are motivated more intrinsically than extrinsically, it is still not without appeal to be paid for that work. As Rankin points out, “And I get paid in the process” (Rankin, 2022). To be able to earn a living, to live off the earnings of writing, must be a goal for most writers, in the larger scheme of things. To be paid to do what you love – isn’t that the goal of many people, writers or not? The allure of money or fame is generally not what attracts people to the very solitary profession of writing, but it may be a more significant motivation for the innovation of writing, that is, publishing. It is not the act of writing that brings either the money or the fame but the act of publishing. “Ambition is necessary for achievement” (Coker, 2021). Rankin does admit that publishing is an entirely separate step from writing (Rankin, 2022).
I asked Rankin about his environment, and the conditions required for his writing. He writes either at his office away from home, in Edinburgh, or at his holiday home north of the city. He cites quiet instrument music as ambiance. But he does “need a base” and finds it difficult to write transiently, in cafes, or while travelling. Conversely, Bob Dylan has suggested that much of his writing has been done in hotel rooms but that, “it’s nice to be able to put yourself in an environment where you can completely accept all the unconscious stuff that comes to you from your inner workings of your mind” (Zollo, 1991). “Now for me, the environment to write the song is extremely important. The environment has to bring something out in me that wants to be brought out” (Zollo, 1991). This speaks to me of meliorism, of deliberate efforts to manipulate the outcome of a creative session. It sounds to me like two descriptions of the same thing. Dylan may seek the ideal environment for each song, whereas Rankin knows the environment that allows him to write optimally. Knowing this about yourself is one of those details stemming directly from experience that help to facilitate creativity.
The takeaway from this consultation with Ian Rankin is a renewed confirmation in myself, my beliefs about how I write, and about my practices. Although envious of Ian’s office away from home, I have learned to make a space for myself to write in my home, and that this is essential to my ability to write and my success at it. Ian confirmed my suspicion that, despite what I have been told by other writers, talent does matter, but his comment that it can be learned leads me to believe that I must also continue to work on the skills involved in the field. Amid the constant work, the rejection letters, and the self-doubt, Ian’s statements about hard work inspire me to keep at it, not give up, and to know that my hard work will, if not pay off, at least be rewarded in an intrinsic sense. That Ian doesn’t know where his stories will end up when he starts them offers me encouragement; the writing myself into a corner has made me think that I need to plan my stories more, but I really enjoy the process of discovery that comes from following characters and story, and from not knowing where they will lead me. I think Ian says it best when he says, “I just got on with the job of writing.” Sometimes I think that overthinking it can be detrimental.
References
Amabile, Teresa M.. (2001). Beyond Talent: John Irving and the Passionate Craft of Creativity.
American Psychologist, 56(4), p. 333-336. https://org.library.sheridanc.on.ca/10.1037/0003-066X.56.4.333
Amabile, Teresa M.. (2012). Componential Theory of Creativity, Working Paper. Harvard
Business School, pp. 3-4, https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/4927777/mod_resource/content/0/TeresaAMabile.pdf
Amabile, T. M. (1989). Growing up creative: Nurturing a lifetime of creativity. Crown House
Publishing Limited. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264563051_Nurturing_Creativity_in_Education
Coker, M. (2021). Publishing Perseverance. Publishers Weekly, 268(6), 68–.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity : flow and the psychology of discovery and invention
(1st ed.). HarperCollinsPublishers.
Fowler, H.W. & Fowler, F.G. (Eds.). (1958). The Concise Oxford English Dictionary (Fourth
Edition). Oxford at the Clarendon Press.
Gussow, Mel. (1998, April 28). A Novelist builds out from the fact to reach the truth: John Irving
begins with his memories. The New York Times, Section E, p. 1.
Ian Rankin: About. (2022).
https://www.ianrankin.net/landing-page/ian-rankin/ian-rankinabout/
King, Stephen. (2000). On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft. Scribner.
Lehrer, Jonah. (2012, April 6). The Neuroscience of Bob Dylan’s Genius. The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2012/apr/06/neuroscience-bob-dylan-genius-creativity
May, Steve. (2007). Doing Creative Writing. Routledge.
Mozaffari, Hamideh. (2013, December). An Analytical Rubric for Assessing Creativity in Creative
Writing. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 3, no. 12, pp. 2214-2219.
Doi:10.4304/tpls.3.12.2214-2219
Rankin, Ian. (2022, November 14). Personal Communication.
Remnick, David. (2022, October 24). A Unified Theory of Bob Dylan. The New Yorker. (October
31, 2022). https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/10/31/a-unified-field-theory-of-bob-dylan
Santelli, Robert. (2005). The Bob Dylan Scrapbook 1956-1966. Simon & Schuster.
Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity : The science of human innovation. Oxford University
Press, Incorporated, p. 324.
Sisterson, Craig. (2022, September). The Rise of Sir Ian Rankin. Good Reading Magazine,
https://goodreadingmagazine.com.au/article/the-rise-of-sir-ian/
Zollo, Paul. Bob Dylan: The Song Interview. Transcribed from GBS #3 booklet.
https://www.interferenza.net/bcs/interw/1991zollo.htm