created by Far-Carpenter3098 on 13/01/2025 at 12:44 UTC
0 upvotes, 9 top-level comments (showing 9)
Recently, I shared a deeply emotional piece of writing with my sister. My intent was to explore and accept my flaws, vulnerabilities, and emotions, but her response left me disheartened. She described my work as carrying vanity, deceit, and conceit.
This reaction stung, as it felt like my genuine attempt at self-expression and reflection was entirely misunderstood. My writing was not meant to project superiority or falsehood but rather to convey my struggles with self-acceptance and emotional complexity.
I’ve since been reflecting on why such interpretations occur. Are we conditioned to view vulnerability in writing as self-centered, or is there something inherent in emotional writing that gives this impression?
I believe expressing emotions—especially those dealing with flaws and personal growth—should be celebrated, not dismissed. But perhaps I’m overlooking a broader cultural or psychological factor here.
Why do some people perceive raw emotional writing as vain or deceitful? Is this a misunderstanding based on individual perspectives, or does it point to something deeper about how we engage with personal writing?
Comment by AutoModerator at 13/01/2025 at 12:44 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Welcome to r/TrueAskReddit. Remember that this subreddit is aimed at high quality discussion, so please elaborate on your answer as much as you can and avoid off-topic or jokey answers as per subreddit rules[1].
1: https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAskReddit/about/sidebar
2: /message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAskReddit
Comment by Hunterofshadows at 13/01/2025 at 12:56 UTC
24 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Not to sound like an ass but have you considered that it was your writing specifically that invoked that reaction and not some general theme about how humanity reactions to raw emotional writing?
Comment by wingspantt at 13/01/2025 at 14:10 UTC
9 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Without seeing the the writing there is no way for anyone here to answer your question.
It is quite possible her reaction was unwarranted. It's also possible you wrote a cruel and digging piece that hurt her.
Comment by sean_bda at 13/01/2025 at 14:17 UTC
4 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Imagine if someone just came to you and gave a 20 minute speech about how they feel? With no consideration for their perspective or how they feel. Personal writing should be personal. You showed it to her because you wanted to say how you feel without equal rebutall or recourse. It is selfish. An unknown author writing about how they feel and you choosing to read it is not the same thing as what you did.
Comment by mfrench105 at 13/01/2025 at 14:27 UTC
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Some interesting answers here. One thing to consider...if you write something and show it to 20 people you will, over time, get about thirty different opinions. Anything you write, once written, means what the people who read it, want it to mean. You don't get to decide. It's not a flaw, just the condition of having written. All you can do is express things. You cannot control how they get perceived. Write honestly, and let the chips fall where they may.
Comment by samsathebug at 13/01/2025 at 14:19 UTC
4 upvotes, 1 direct replies
But perhaps I’m overlooking a broader cultural or psychological factor here.
This is my understanding/interpretation: After WWI and WWII, the general mood/prevailing attitude in the arts was that the type of sincere expression you're describing rang hollow and that new modes of expression were needed. And that effect on private and public poetry.
Each world war had a massive cultural shock and affect on the arts. WWI saw the widespread use of the machine gun, trench warfare, and gas. WWII had systemic genocide and human experimentation in the name of science.
Sincerity and grand expressions of emotion didn't sit right in the shadows of these atrocities. They seemed naive, out-of-touch, or self-indulgent. It was almost like you were going to have these Grand expressions you are going to have to reckon with the grand atrocities of the world. And That's how you end up with Sylvia Plath comparing her father to the Nazis in her 1962 poem "Daddy."
But I meant that if you weren't going to do something as controversial as that, poets were looking for subjects and means of expression. Poets, and the arts in general, we're looking for a way to break with the past. That could be seen in form - there's the Advent of free verse, surrealism, cubism, serialism/12-tone and music, etc - but also content .
Sincerity was out, and irony was in. Although the caveat is that if you were going to be sincere, it had to be subtle, subdued, quiet. Loud displays of emotion in poetry are and were labeled as sentimental.
I suspect there will be a shift back towards more sincere expression. I have seen it creeping in, but it's not like it used to be.
The major caveat to all this though, is that I'm talking about public poetry. Poetry meant for a public audience. Public poetry is the stuff you would analyze in an English class.
Private poetry is different. Private poetry is like a journal entry, and should be treated as such. The author and the audience are really the same. Private poetry shouldn't have the same demands put on it that public poetry has. You don't read a novel in the same way you read a journal entry.
But what ends up happening is that someone will write a private poem, give it to somebody else to read, and that other person will interpret it as a public poem. And so that they are looking at it with all the cultural and artistic demands that comes with everything I described above regarding irony and sincerity and sentimentality.
Comment by 00rb at 13/01/2025 at 20:41 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Real real answer? I find when I'm being "raw" and "honest" I am actually being low key manipulative, in a deeply subconscious way. It's taken me a lot of soul searching to discover that about myself.
This may apply to you, too. You may be tempted to reject what I'm saying outright, but keep in mind that maybe you have a blind spots others can see that you can't.
Comment by shadowsog95 at 13/01/2025 at 14:42 UTC
1 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Because some people haven’t experienced extreme emotional circumstances so it’s either viewed by readers who have as not genuine or by readers who haven’t as overly dramatic. This paired with authors that have and haven’t experienced those situations and you get people calling out each other for inaccuracies when their personal experiences don’t match up with a fictional scenario.
Comment by Big-Afternoon8608 at 13/01/2025 at 20:26 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I think your question is a bit nuanced. I do however think that if you are writing. It should be about how you view your piece. Convey your emotions however you'd like, but don't get upset if someone takes it another way. Raw human emotion can be interpreted in anyway. Words are a blessing and a curse. Try to make your intent clearer in your writing if thats not what you want to convey.