In my subjective opinion, whether writing amoints to deep attention depends on what sort of writing you're doing.
Reading fiction is a form of low stakes entertainment. Writing it, in many cases, is probably only a bit more difficult for someone whose mind is naturally attuned to the task.
Writing an immersive epic that involves extensive world building is probably a few steps higher up the "ladder" of cognitive tasks. Tolkien's legendarium took a lot more mental labor to construct than your average novel. There's a reward side to it as well, of course, which is why books about writing fantasy often warn the reader of how easy it is to get lost in world building forever and never complete the novel it was all supposed to be for in the first place. Drawing maps of imaginary places and building imaginary historical timelines are child's play compared to the labor of writing the tale itself.
This probably has something to do with why, also in my opinion, history books are often far easier to write and also much harder to read with any level of engagement than a well-written work of historical fiction.
The thing that makes the difference is the characters themselves. All those other forms of writing don't include the thoughts, actions, experiences, and motivations of human beings. It takes much more effort to place yourself within a character's perspective and write what they experience than it does to simply use static description to relay what happened, which is what history books do.
Very different levels of attention are required, in my opinion.
Agreed with this a million percent. The reason why reading fiction is a deeper attention activity for me is because I’m reading those harder, immersive stories. I actually get annoyed at the easier reads because it doesn’t engage me in the same way.
In my subjective opinion, whether writing amoints to deep attention depends on what sort of writing you're doing.
Reading fiction is a form of low stakes entertainment. Writing it, in many cases, is probably only a bit more difficult for someone whose mind is naturally attuned to the task.
Writing an immersive epic that involves extensive world building is probably a few steps higher up the "ladder" of cognitive tasks. Tolkien's legendarium took a lot more mental labor to construct than your average novel. There's a reward side to it as well, of course, which is why books about writing fantasy often warn the reader of how easy it is to get lost in world building forever and never complete the novel it was all supposed to be for in the first place. Drawing maps of imaginary places and building imaginary historical timelines are child's play compared to the labor of writing the tale itself.
This probably has something to do with why, also in my opinion, history books are often far easier to write and also much harder to read with any level of engagement than a well-written work of historical fiction.
The thing that makes the difference is the characters themselves. All those other forms of writing don't include the thoughts, actions, experiences, and motivations of human beings. It takes much more effort to place yourself within a character's perspective and write what they experience than it does to simply use static description to relay what happened, which is what history books do.
Very different levels of attention are required, in my opinion.
Agreed with this a million percent. The reason why reading fiction is a deeper attention activity for me is because I’m reading those harder, immersive stories. I actually get annoyed at the easier reads because it doesn’t engage me in the same way.