One of the very most difficult parts about the writing process is knowing whether you have “it,” as in the talent that it takes in order to have a book published.
This is one the biggest challenge in battling the “Am I Crazies.” How in the heck do you know if what you’re writing is actually good?
Sure, your friends and family might think you have a talent, there may have been a teacher who was supportive, but they’re often biased. So how do you really know?
I know there are writers out there who would stop now if they knew for sure they’d never find publication. But should they? How can you tell?
Short Thoughts says
That is a great question, it's just not a question I ask myself. The only publication I have had so far has been very small time. I do want to be published more traditionally, but, if I never am, I will not stop writing.
I should say that I am intensely interested in improving. I want my writing to be the best it can be, but I am not sure how best to discern the amount of talent you have.
Jen C says
Honestly, I don't think that question has a concrete answer. It's all subjective.
MBA Jenna says
Not all talented writers seek publication.
Crafting a book that will sell is not necessarily the ultimate achievement of a writer with talent.
The ability to effectively structure and communicate ideas uncommonly well does not always correlate with the desire or ability to write books, or to do the work required to get published
Publishing is a business that is swayed by trends, fads, random celebrity gossip as well as the desire to publish great writing.
I don't see being published, or not being published as being a true metric of talent.
Evas värld says
But who is to judge if you are good or not? Does publication mean that you are good, does many sold copies say that you are good…? No, if you feel the need to write your stories, keep writing. You don´t write for fame or a famous name, not even for money, you write because you must, so have self confidence, believe in what you are doing. If you think that what you have written is good and true, then it is good and then even more people might think it is and maybe you will even be published…
Brian, the old man says
I think it is all a matter of perspective. What one person likes another will not like; this is life. For example, there have been numerous books published which have gone through numerous rejections and still have made the best sellers list like the Harry Potter Books.
Hope you have a great day.
Francy says
I was at The Etheridge Knight Tribute Reading/700 hundred people in the house/I said my poem,an epic alled Battleground/five minute piece that I know from heart/Dudley Randall got up after me to introduce Etheridge/ He said " Not only does one have to know their piece by heart and have it well crafted but they also have to have the big "G",and Etheridge has it." I know that I only have a minimal amount of genius but that after plying all these years I have lucky breaks and natural developed talent. Yes someone important will usually tell the writer that they have it in one way or another. An endorsement or financial gain enough to keep marching. Of course I disagree that parents and friends are really not important in the process/read you work to friends and siblings/they know/they're readers/feel their reactions/keep going/the rewards are great-spiritually and concretly,and often it's true,artists are the ones who can't do anything else,picked on by society for being lazy,hanging around thinking or playing.
Anonymous says
1) You've been paid to write (five figures)
2) You've won awards
3) Praise from professionals
4) You got the agent you wanted
Shalanna says
I don't know whether someone in the previous 260 comments has mentioned this old parable, but it's worth telling. A young man is torn between the violin, which feeds his soul, and a business career in the family dry cleaning biz, which feeds the family. He goes to The Great Master, who consents to listen to him play. He plays his heart out. At the end the master shakes his head sadly. "Feh," he says. "You have no talent. You'll never amount to anything." Crying, the young man puts away his fiddle and returns to dry cleaning. Years later, he attends a concert of the Great Master's and is allowed a brief audience. He asks the great man, "Do you remember my playing for you? You told me I didn't Have It and advised I go back to business. Apparently you were right. What I want to know is, how did you know?"
The old man leans forward. "I don't remember you at all. That's what I told EVERYONE who played for me. I figured, if they let that stop them, they didn't have IT. The ones with The Real Thing went on and didn't let whatever I said stop them."
Talent seems to matter far less in this business than sheer luck and being tuned in to the Zeitgeist.
I can only write what I would want to read. I can't live with a book for as long as it takes to write and revise one if I don't like the book myself. Thus I can't do "Twilight," and am a prisoner of my own point of view. Until I find someone who likes that POV, I have to be content with knowing that I did my best and stayed true to the books, caring about artistic integrity more than current fads.
a-r-williams says
I think, first, it starts with you believing in yourself. If you don't believe in yourself then it doesn't matter what you have, you will not be successful. Especially, in an industry that is going to reject you so often.
When you have talent, then you are naturally better at something then most people are without even trying. Your writing will gain notice from teachers with little or no effort on your part. You will most likely have a love for reading and words. And reading will be one of the ways you entertain yourself. Then the writing will come a little later as you try your hand at creating some stories.
I think if you never loved reading as a child, that an ability to write well, will not manifest as a talent. I think it’s the reading which shapes the talent and gives the initial ability with words.
Whirlochre says
The first thing to do is keep writing, irrespective of circumstance. Without that, there is no answer to the question.
Then, look at the credentials of anyone who's read your stuff. Parents and friends will probably say they like it, even if it's drivel, and schoolteachers are paid to be encouraging so their real interest is probably only saying the right thing just to pay the rent. If you've been writing for long enough, they may even be dead as well as insincere.
So that leaves people like blogging friends, crit groups and agents.
Who are they? What do they write? Is it any good? And in the case of agents (if you're at that stage), who do they represent? What kind of feedback did they give in that last rejection?
Hunches about our aptitude — in writing, as in other things — can be terribly unreliable, and sometimes we need a mirror to see clearly what's going on.
Blogging friends, crit groups etc — use them as you would a mirror.
If you're on the right track, it should be clearer from this — but be prepared to see plenty of zits.
Alena Thomas says
Nathan,
One of your previous postings prompted me to write a blog here about almost the same thing. While I know I will never stop writing, I would love to hear other writers' opinions. Thanks again for another thought provoking topic.
Lauren Hutchin says
In my opinion, ones talent in the publishing world is very different to the 'writing world'. Talent in the publishing world is defined by dollars… in other words, if your book will sell, then it is classed as a good book. You could be a great writer, but if your story isn't guaranteed to capture a large enough buying audience, then why would publishers waste their time and money on you?
As an aside, write what you like writing about if that's what you enjoy doing. If you love writing *and* have the dream to get published, then pick your audience. Pick the topic you write about based on the the publishers target market.
Just because you are talented and can write a perfect story about a chalkboard that talks, does not put you in front of an average writer that picks a popular genre.
Rowenna says
I feel like the voice of dissension, but I don't think talent has anything to do with hard work. They aren't the same thing. Perserverance and dedication do not mean that you have talent–they mean that you will be able to use the talents that you do have. And I think that perserverance and dedication only take you so far–if you don't have the ability, you'll only frustrate yourself. So–there's my answer. If, after a few years of writing, rewriting, rejection and small successes you're still writing, still improving, still finding joy in the words you create, you must have some talent for it, or you'd have given it up long ago.
pjd says
Shalanna, that is a nice tale of the violinist. I think every person who has bombed out of American Idol auditions must have heard it since they all say "I am going to keep singing no matter what they say." Nearly all who do so are, quite tragically, devoid of talent to the point where no amount of effort will ever see them past singing at their mother's (next) wedding. And I think that is at the heart of this question.
Debra says
I've always believed that talent can be as much as curse as it is a blessing in the respect that if something comes easy, it's often taken for granted. Take something for granted too long, and you get sloppy and lazy – hey – it's human nature isn't it? Stay sloppy and lazy long enough and one day you'll find you've lost ground to those with far less talent than perseverance.
Adam says
"There's a common sentiment in this thread that anyone can be a published writer if they just put their minds to it. I'm afraid I just don't believe that's true."
Nathan, I dont think that's the sentiment. The common sentiment is "I can write better than the guys being published instead of me." Which of course, isnt a healthy sentiment, but I think it's natural to feel that way at least to some degree.
The real question that I must put to you, knowing what an optimist you are: Is talent and hard work enough? We all want to believe it is but it's pretty tough at times.
Debra says
BTW, I also think that writing 'talent' (or perhaps predisposition) can be seen in one's natal astrology chart. There are no end of successful writers who have Neptune/Mercury contacts in their charts – but even that's not enough – you need some cement (like strong Saturn) to hold it together so that you actually get off the couch and start writing.
Anonymous says
You have talent when you can find readers (whether via publication, blogging or at open mike events) who want to come back for more and you know you have to write.
It's more than getting paid for your work as that's a combination of self-promotion and having your work land on the right editor/agent's desk at the right moment. Publication isn't the goal of every writer and most poets get paid a pittance, if they get paid at all, so using a defintion of "you get paid for it" doesn't work either.
Putting in the hours isn't enough. No matter how many hours I put in, I'll never make a decent basketball player because a) I don't enjoy basketball, b) I'm not drawn to basketball, c) I could happily never play basketball if I were injured tomorrow and d) my attempts at basketball have never resulted in an audience.
However, I enjoy writing, I was drawn to writing from an early age, if I were injured tomorrow I would still find a means of writing and my writing has resulted in an audience.
Karen A. Chase says
The best way out is always through.
– Robert Frost
MzMannerz says
I don't know I guess. I just write.
Miss A. Non. Ymous says
I can define "talent" if you define "beauty."
The prettiest, most poised girl in the county easily gets to be Miss Whosis County. She advances to the Miss Whosis State Pageant, and suddenly finds herself up against girls just as pretty and poised as she is.
But the prettiest, most poised girl in the state easily gets to be Miss Whosis State.
She advances to the Miss America Pageant, and suddenly finds herself up against girls just as pretty and poised as she is.
Some 49 (Maybe more — do they have the territories, too?) girls go home as "not-pretty-and-poised-enough" when compared to the one girl who gets crowned Miss America.
Does that mean the lonely, forlorn girl who was the prettiest in her county isn't pretty any more?
Just sayin'.
Blank says
I see, I see. It's all subjective. I stand by what I said though.
A lot of bad writers get published. By big publishing houses. In my humble opinion.
Nathan Bransford says
Adam-
"Is talent and hard work enough?"
I think luck is important as well, as someone else in the thread said.
WitLiz Today says
We were all born to write. Born to be storytellers. Each person's life is a grand story, filled with all the elements of such: pathos, joy, tragedy, comedy, trauma, sickness, or a life devoted to service. Whatever makes for a good book is what we all live in our daily lives. So, make no mistake, each person born is a bestseller waiting to happen.
So, I think writing is a God-given talent we are all born with. Whether you are fortunate enough to get traditionally published, or whether you journalize for your family and future generations to come, everybody should be writing at the end of the day. EVERYBODY.
Unfortunately, life circumstances often dictate how well-developed this talent to write will blossom. And making good decisions will be an important first step on the road to wherever your natural inclinations take you.
And each person is totally unique, and supremely gifted in more than one area of interest. That's in case life circumstances deliver you such a whammy that you're forced to fall back on those other gifts.
I just wish people would not measure or judge other people and their worth by the talents they don't have. For instance, if anybody were to watch me try to dance, or cook, or paint, they'd laugh me off the stage, out of the kitchen, and out of an art show. Loserville here I come. The great thing is I could learn to do these things if I work hard, but there are only so many hours in the day. So I concentrate on what I like to do.
But what does all this have to do with writing to publish? Well, for many, writing will not result in traditional publication. As we see, publishers are not infallible and more often than not don't make it a level playing field for writer's aspiring to publication, when they're shooting for the all-mighty dollar. Writing then becomes business driven.
Agents and editors, if they want to earn a good living, anyway, have to follow what the big publishers are looking for. So the 'fault' lies with the big houses. When 80% of books are not selling through their advance, there is questionable decision making going on.
But that doesn't mean the authors of those ill-fated books are not talented. They are, in fact, maximizing their God-given talent for writing,and should be commended for their efforts, not denigrated.
That is one pet peeve of mine. I don't believe publishers knowingly acquire a crap book. Could the book have used better editing? Sure. Could this have doomed the book with the reader? Sure. Like I said, publishing is not infallible in many ways.
That's why I'm encouraged to see alternate sources spring up for the writer who wants to publish, but for one reason or another, can't get it done traditionally.
But for those who can and do, I think it's wonderful. Those who want to and can't for whatever reason, then by golly use the new resources that are making it a lot easier to publish with less of a stigma.
And that would be wonderful, too!
Ted says
My take on the NBA analogy:
This resonates with me because I've occasionally argued that LeBron James is worth every penny he can command, while the corporate CEOs who pay themselves tens of millions because their handpicked boards need to "retain talent" are a joke.
What talent? There's no way of objectively measuring the talent of a corporate CEO, since there are no truly comparable reference points (hang on, I'm getting to the writing point.) The CEO got his or her job by competing against a small pool of candidates on a set of arbitrary criteria.
But I'd argue that practically every single US male has been screened — at least in passing — for outstanding basketball talent. It's just that basketball talent is pretty easy to screen for. It's easy to discard the chaff, then pit wheat against wheat repeatedly until the best emerge. In other words, LeBron James has been measured against essentially every other American-born male of his generation.
What are the odds that several undiscovered LeBrons exist out there, wasting away because they were unlucky enough to be discovered? The odds are zero.
Now substitute Zenedine Zidane for LeBron and soccer for basketball. Same story for the rest of the world.
By contrast, what are the odds that several potentially great CEOs are out there, people who could do a much better job than the people currently taking home millions for mediocre performance? I'd submit that the odds are close to 100%.
So what about writing? I'd put the odds somewhere in between. It seems ridiculous to me to argue that being talented is synonymous with being published. There must be thousands of talented unpublished writers.
What if the publishing and book retailing industry continues to contract, and a few years from now delivers only 100 novels a year, all from blockbuster novelists. Does that mean they're the only talented writers?
Katie says
I get so much good feedback on my writing I start to be suspicious. That's why I like rejections; they provide a nice balance with the praise of my friends. But I've been writing for six years and I've only been trying to get published for six months, so I don't think it's likely that I'll quite writing for any reason.
Blank says
If I don't have what it takes to be a published writer, then I will know this eventually.
But I won't know until I try my best at writing a few stories, polish them, polish them some more, and then query and see what happens.
If I've exhausted all of my resources, and know in my heart that I've done the best I can possibly do, then I know I don't have what it takes. I probably wouldn't stop writing, but I would stop trying to pursue publication. It's just time-consuming to come to that realization. But, as with any dream, you won't know unless you try.
Otherwise you always wonder…"WHAT IF?"
But this way, I'll know. Hey, I tried. I suck. Now what else can I spend my time-doing? Painting? Knitting? Watching re-runs of The Hills?
Us writers have got to try, Nathan. I know you understand that!
Hollie Sessoms says
I know I have talent because my mom told me so! She wouldn't lie. Would she? Would she?
Ulysses says
I quote Sam Goldwyn:
"The harder I work, the luckier I get."
I agree that the key is a combination of talent, hard work and luck.
I believe, however, that sufficient hard work can pass for talent in dim light. Although there is no substitute for luck, study and practice can place one in the perfect position to take advantage of what luck may come.
So, Ulysses recipe for success: study works you admire. Practice your craft, refine your abilities.
Really, that's all you can do because talent and luck are out of your control.
Amy Dawson Robertson says
I think if you have a broad reading background you have good instincts for what is good and what isn't. I know for the most part when my stuff is cringe-worthy and when it works. Though I find it easier to do that if I'm writing genre fiction rather than literary fiction.
Just discovered your blog — loving it!
also known as Albert Lloyd Williams (the recluse) says
Well, Nathan, I think I know whether I have writing talent in the same way you know whether I have writing talent. Is there any other way?
Carolyn V. says
If someone really wants to write (I mean REALLY), first they need to learn the craft. Then I believe they need to be humble enough to take criticism (and critiques) and improve their writing. That's where the talent comes from, from persistence. Can they get published after that? One only hopes. =)
John says
Recognizing writing you like is very much like falling in love. You either do or you don't. Attraction isn't a choice; it's either there or it isn't.
This is why some agents passed on JK Rowlings while someone else loved her work. This is why you query widely. Just like an internet dating service, except the pool of possible relationships is a lot smaller.
You want an agent who loves your work, believes in it enough to find a publisher to marry your words to paper and send it out so other people can find it and love it.
Daniel Allen says
I think that sort of self-doubt plagues ANY of us *true* artist types. When we write from our hearts and pour our souls onto paper, any criticism can feel like a personal attack.
Personally, I wonder this all the time. I'm making a huge effort to make a go of this (not sacrificing work or family life, of course), and I'd be a fool if I didn't wonder if I was wasting my time with it all.
I make a pact with my wife that I'd be honest about how she looks in her jeans if she'll be honest about my writing…and she's been really supportive. But it's hard to know *for sure* whether her praise is biased at all.
In the end, I think I'm going to have to agree with other posters here. I'm going to just put my work out there and see what happens. I'm confident enough in my ideas and abilities that I'll let the world judge me for themselves. At this point, that's all I can do.
hilltrash says
I see lots of folk who say they right because they have to write.
Really? Because I don't have to write. In fact, as soon as I sit down at the computer to write, there are a million other things I suddenly remember I have to do. Walk the dogs. Fold the laundry. Check my email. Make some tea. And so on.
Whenever someone says they have to write, I am reminded of Anne Lamott's essay "Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life." In the section about first drafts, she writes "The whole thing would be so long and incoherent and hideous that for the rest of the day I'd obsess about getting creamed by a car before I could write a decent second draft."
I don't have to write at all. But because I do write, I sure as hell have to edit. It's like wearing clean underwear. You never know when you might get hit by a bus.
hilltrash says
Err… write, not right.
See what I mean about why I have to edit?
Rebecca Hoffman says
Talent is so subjective. Some people have a vivid imagination or wonderful stories but struggle to REALLY draw people in. Others have bland stories that are told in a spectacular way. Which is better? The fact of the matter is that it is very rare for an individual to have equal talent creating a story and telling it… those authors stand out for a reason.
Rhonda says
I'm pretty sure I am a talented writer because this one time, I had a woman ask for my autograph just based on some ideas I told her I had for books. Granted she had been wine tasting all day before that, but still. I guess there's no real way to know if one has talent, so we each have to go by our own criteria. For some that would mean being published, for others, not so much…
Amber says
A few years after the series finished, I went back and re-read the first couple Harry Potter books. As an older, better educated reader who knew the ending and the characters weren't as shiny as they were when I first read it… ouch. Ms. Rowling's writing definitely improved by the end of the series.
And that leads into my argument: talent is only one part of getting published in today's market. With sweeping successes of people like Dan Brown and Stephanie Meyer, it's hard to come up with an original idea that'll wow the "business people who can get you published." Many of them are looking for the next J.R.R. Tolkien. If the story isn't grabbing, it may not be the fault of your writing. To succeed in today's market, you need more than talent- you need VISION.
That said, if you don't get published, that doesn't mean you don't have talent. Talent and vision alike are in the eye of the beholder. But low-talent, high-vision is more likely to get published, because it'll entertain the general audience. If you have vision, and talent, even better. You'll enchant them.
So, how do you know if you have talent? You have talent if people are reading your short stories/novels and getting to the end. Your writing is enough to get them there. But vision? Vision's harder.
As a writer, I don't know if I have vision or not. But I'm sure as hell going to make my book sparkle and shine and make it look like I do.
Judy Schneider says
I have read (or tried to read) many published novels by authors with little talent. I also know several truly talented individuals who will never be published. The difference? The unpublished lack the essential 99%-perspiration component that completes the process. Even with talent, it's just hard work!
Christine H says
Nathan,
Can I turn this question around on you?
As a soon-to-be-published author, what made you believe that you had writing talent?
Nathan Bransford says
christine-
I had serious doubts until I found an agent. Once that happened I began to breathe easier. Luckily I have an insanely supportive wife who believed in me and kept me going even when I wasn't so sure.
Nick says
I think this happens with a lot of things. There seems to be a path to true understanding:
1. First try at something. You're just getting acquainted with this new thing (first few days)
2. You start to get the feel for this thing (a couple weeks or a month)
3. You're getting the hang of this, and think you're a bit good(6 months?).
4. You think that you used to be bad, even though you used to think you're good (18 months). You're finally good enough to realize you have a lot to learn
5. This is the hard step, where you finally know what good is. And you just have to get good at it. You could spend your whole life here, but at least you (hopefully) are able to make a good judgement of where you are.
Timelines may vary based on person/subject.
Christine H says
So, basically, you're just a schmuck like the rest of us.
:o)
Anonymous says
Hi Nathan,
Just checked back and saw your response on Graphic Design.
There are lots and lots of bad designers out there. Just as there are lots and lots of bad published writers. I'm not sure if that's a sign of slipping standards or if I'm just getting old.
It's a no-win argument. If I say that bad writers (and designers) should quit, then I'm called all sorts of names like elitist and what not. If I say they should stay in the business, then I'm told that the industry should be held up to a common standard of quality.
You haven't really tipped your hand, though. What are your thoughts on it?
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
I feel like the worst professional graphic designers are still probably pretty good if they're making a living at it. And I feel similarly about published authors: if they're published and people are paying them for it they're generally doing something right.
I just disagree with the sentiment that "there are so many terrible published writers so who can say really?" You may not personally like their work, but published writers are still doing something right. It's not a crapshoot, at least not in the sense that you could throw a dart at a query pile and whatever you hit has just as much of a chance of succeeding as something an expert picks out.
Anonymous says
Nathan,
Sorry if that statement was a little ambiguous. I know that most published writers have some sort of talent. But I'm aware that the world runs on connections and that there are people who get published because they're someone's nephew or wife. And as I write that, I guess your point has rammed home. In a modified, warped way. I suppose you either have to have talent or have to be very well connected.
Just like in graphic design.
Well played, sir.
Anonymous says
Then there’s the Rodmans who never played until community college and became a star. Perhaps not the best, but definitely a star. There are these writers too.
And there's also the Mo Williams of writers, who talk a lot of smack but can't deliver.
J. Nelson Leith says
I don't really understand the idea that "genre" and "literary" are somehow two different things. One is about setting/content and the other seems to have something to do with either philosophical import or artistic style. Or both.
And "YA" … isn't that a target demographic?
So long as a question like "Do you write literary fiction, sci-fi, or YA?" doesn't immediate lead us to question the sanity of the questioner, this entire subject is doomed to confusion, and to otherwise intelligent people talking past each other.
To me, this looks like a 3D matrix with genre along the X axis, pulp-literary quality constituting the Y axis, and children-YA-adult on the Z axis.
And, just to make things fun, let's imagine it as a tesseract with story length as the W axis. 🙂
For example, "The Sneetches" is a fantasy, literary, children's short story. It (x) takes place in an imaginary, low-tech setting, (y) addresses very serious philosophical issues, (z) was written for children, and (w) is *mumble mumble* words long.
Literary vs. genre makes about as much sense to me as liberal vs. height, or expensive vs. color.
Naya Lionsong says
Okay… I'm not reading through over 300 comments, so if I repeat something someone else said, sorry.
Here's how I think of it, though. Some people may have a natural talent for writing and that's great. Some people think I have a natural talent for writing… maybe I do, but I'm more interested in the skill of writing rather than the talent for it.
Just because someone doesn't have the talent for something, doesn't mean that they can't develop the talent for it. For instance, there are people who can just play the piano like a pro from a young age because they have the talent. But I know plenty of people without natural talent who practice for years and years and can still play the piano beautifully.
Writing is the same as anything else… learn everything you can and practice, practice, practice… and eventually you can be just as good as anyone with "talent".
Naya