When I was an emo teenage writer, I would always say that I was a lot more prolific when I was sad. I could never find something interesting to writing about — let alone force myself to write — if I was content and happy.
Now I know that procrastination is often the main thing holding me back from writing (see tips on “how to actually get some writing done“). For my style of writing, which features healthy doses of self-deprecating humor, a little distance is needed. If I’m too “in the moment” of despair, all I can do is write to attempt to resolve. Why am I feeling this way? Why do people suck? Why can’t I get out of this slump? Once the melancholy has passed, I can write in a way that’s less self-conscious. And I tend to think that being able to make fun of yourself is a key characteristic of a good writer (or a good person, I suppose).
So that’s why this post from Maude Newton about the “Evolutionary (and writerly) advantages of depression” really rubbed me the wrong way:
…I enjoyed the novelist Margaret Drabble’s recent observation that depression is useful “for stripping off ways of getting through life that prevent you from having to think.”
Depression is a mental illness. It can make you obsessed with your own moods. Of course some brilliant works of literature have been written during or about depression, but for most writers, depression will just be another way to delay writing. And while you’re in the depressive state, you may think that what you’ve written is the most brilliant thing ever, but it may not be the most “camera-ready” — you’re too in your head to make it relatable to a reader.
What do you all think?
















