Guest Post: The ‘Wizard in the Tower’ Theory

A few years back, I was acquaintances with a writer who was describing her editing process (1). To paraphrase, it included multiple rounds of alpha and beta readers, surveys, and interviews. 

And I just remember thinking — that sounds like a nightmare. 

The process worked for her. She liked the constant deluge of suggestions and feedback; she thrived on it. For someone like myself, this would be akin to building a horse by committee. 

You’ve likely heard of pantsers and plotters (2), but I would posit that there is another dual aspect to writing, and that is whether you thrive in writing as a solitary activity, the aforementioned ‘Wizard in a Tower,’ or if you work best when writing is a communal endeavor, like a Bard in a Questing Party (3). 

I’ve had the pleasure of becoming familiar with a fair amount of writers. Since I write both horror and romance; two genres that on the surface are very different, but in execution use similar skills; I’ve met quite an array of folks that generally sit in those two camps (4). They also have certain values they tie to their writing. 

I want to reassure you that these aspects are largely neutral, and are mostly divorced from whether or not a work turns out good. Like all things writing, there is a benefit to being self-aware and learning the process that works best for you. It’s also a good way to look at your tendencies, good and bad, to capitalize on your writing strengths and address weaknesses. 

It should also be noted that whether you are a Wizard or a Bard, the question of why you are writing is ultimately going to help dictate how you approach writing. 

The Wizard in a Tower

Picture a long-bearded, curmudgeonly old soul, dripping in oversized robes, bent over a comically oversized tome, muttering to themselves. If you felt a kindred spirit with that image, you may be the Solitary-Type writer. Wizards want to muddle over their work, and they largely want to do it alone. They see writing as a challenge that demands mastery, study, experimentation, and solitary work. They want to work mostly in isolation to perfect their craft. 

Most Wizards will limit access to their works-in-progress to a few selected alpha and beta readers. That pool is very small and generally consists of trusted family, friends, or other professionals. Every once in a while, a Wizard will latch onto one or two trusted individuals to bounce ideas off of them, a la an animal sidekick type situation, but they prefer to problem-solve mostly on their own or wait for inspiration. 

Importantly, Wizards see writing as an act steeped in personal creativity, whatever their motivation. They need to exercise a sense of control over the work, and that is done best when you aren’t sharing a cauldron or spell book. 

There are ranges of Wizards. Some are solitary writers because they are impatient for feedback and have very fast production schedules. Some are Wizards because they value artistry over marketability (of course, that isn’t to say that artistry and marketability are divorced from one another; it’s just that one may prioritize one over the other). 

Wizard Strengths

Whatever Wizards may lose in marketability, they more than make up for in creativity. Absent a lot of feedback, they often have a habit of experimentation. They aren’t tied to a need to fit certain models or works. They thrive in small critique environments, like one-on-one conversations about their works. Small writing workshops or retreats can also be helpful on occasion. They are self-learners who seek out solo opportunities to improve their craft. 

Wizard Weaknesses

A Wizard’s biggest enemy is their own ego. They can sometimes ignore decent or necessary critique. Another fatal flaw for the Wizard is not curating the right type of alpha/beta readers. If they are only going to maintain a small pool of critique partners or feedback sources, those people need to be aligned with the aims of the project and have some expertise. 

At their worst, a Wizard forgoes all critique and feedback, which leaves the door open for them to really step in it. 

When a Wizard Plays the Bard

When a Wizard attempts Bardic techniques, they may end up in creativity paralysis. A lot of voices aren’t helpful to a Wizard. For them, it’s very much a “too many cooks spoil the pot” situation. The feedback becomes noise and can feel restricting to the Wizard. 

However, if a Wizard wants to make more commercially successful works, it can be a benefit to adopt some Bardic techniques by expanding their alpha/beta reader pool or working with specific professionals, like a developmental editor.  

The Bard in Battle

Alternatively, Bards are most successful when surrounded by a team. The Bardic writer, or communal writer, feels their work is best when it’s a team sport. This type of writer thrives off of feedback and encouragement, and is often willing to cede control of their narratives to others in pursuit of a better outcome. 

They thrive in sharing, supportive, and critiquing environments. They don’t mind a lot of people being part of the process because filtering through various critiques is creatively fulfilling. They find a lot of validation and support from online communities. A lot of fan fiction writers fall into this camp, since fan fic writers are often sharing their works in progress and have created an environment rich in this type of group analysis.

Why Bards? Because they like putting their work out there. They are energized by the audience (readers) and do best as a member of a questing party. These are people who search out writing groups, conferences, and conventions. They may blog profusely or share their WIPs at various points and openly ask for feedback. Even if you aren’t a Bard yourself, if you’re in any sort of reading or writing subculture, you’ve definitely been approached by one to be a beta reader. 

Bardic Strengths

Bards value their readers getting what they want out of a work. They are very good at producing works that adhere to certain genre conventions and have a lot of marketability as a result. Their joy is steeped in reader feedback. This skillset and desire for feedback recursively lends itself to communal writing environments. Depending on their dialogue work and pacing, they have a good temperament for a writer’s room in film and TV. They play well with other Bards and are good for co-writing. 

They also prioritize reader comfort. They can be particular about listing triggers, hyper-specific about genres and tropes. They excel at cataloging and advertising comps for their works. Many are also excellent editors because they are often not only experienced at critiquing, and they are also often able to effectively give feedback. 

Bardic Weaknesses

If a Wizard’s worst issue is ego, then a Bard’s is insecurity. Some Bards have a tendency to let other voices drown out their own. There’s a large overlap between Bards and writers who are people-pleasers, and that doesn’t always benefit a work. 

Conformity isn’t a bad term, even in the arts. But letting a desire to conform or to bend to too much critique can be long-term artistic detriment. Some Bards need to trust their gut and be willing to let their readers face some discomfort. 

When a Bard Casts Like a Wizard

Bards who have not cultivated a skill for asking for feedback may mistake themselves for Wizards. They can be struck by insecurity and stall on projects because of it. They may lean on formulaic writing too much in fear of falling prey to plot holes or have either too much or too little interiority. 

A benefit of Wizard-ness that Bards could learn from is to try spontaneity. To push for unexpected moments in their work and upset the apple cart.

But That’s Just a Theory…A Writing Theory

You might be saying, “I’m a mix of both,” and while that is likely true, there is probably a part of you that leans more heavily to one side than the other. I know that, as a wizard, the sharing aspect of writing is much less enjoyable than the writing itself. For someone like me, writing is the joy, anything else is in pursuit to do more of it. 

Whereas there are a lot of fantastic writers who thrive off the writing community specifically. Their joy is experiencing their work through others. Neither of these options is wrong or worse than the other, but they do have some determination in how you write.

But let me know: are you a Wizard or a Bard? Or some wholly different category altogether? Perhaps a Pencil Paladin? A Meddlesome Monk? Another contrived alliteration?

Notes

(1) This is an amalgamation of a number of writers I know/have known. I’m just not trying to call anyone out who may not have wanted this info out there.

(2) You’ve probably also seen the hybrids, like “plantsers”.

(3) I probably could have made this argument without the contrived DnD references, but I wanted something snappy, and I have so few joys…

(4) There is also a highly gendered aspect to the way those genres are perceived, and that also affects the writing process — but that is a conversation for another essay.

About the Author

Laura Diaz de Arce is a multi-genre author from South Florida. She is the author of the Curse of the Nobleman Series as well as the short story collections MONSTROSITY: Tales of Transformation and In Absence. You can find out more on her website, LauraDiazdeArce.com.