Guys playing pickup basketball on the playground don’t usually think they can step in and compete in the NBA.
Someone who doesn’t own a guitar doesn’t usually think he can become the next Jimi Hendrix.
Someone who can’t draw doesn’t usually think they’re the next Georgia O’Keefe.
Why is it so hard for us to tell if we’re good writers or not?
Just about every writer at some point has struggled with the Am I Crazies, not really knowing if they have the chops or the ability to make their writing stand out.
And, on the flipside, it sure seems like the majority of people in the world think they can write a book. And not only write a book, but write it as well as a published author. And not only just as well as a published author, but just as well as bestselling published authors who are among the elite in terms of building an audience and having their work catch on with readers. There are lots of people out there who think it’s easy, think they could do it, and all but a handful are wrong.
What is it about writing that makes people put on the blinders and fail to recognize their limitations and makes the talented unable to recognize their own goodness?
Steve Will says
People who have never tried it think they can do it because everyone learns to use the basic tools, but they do not learn the complexity. I know what a wrench is, what a soldering iron is, but I can easily see how complex building a machine is. Looking at a piece of good writing, a novice cannot see the complexity. They see words and sentences.
People who have tried, but still delude themselves, have a similar problem but not quite the same. They put effort into it, and think effort is enough, because they cannot recognize the difference between hard work with the proper tools and creative skill, and hard work without them.
IMHO.
Bane of Anubis says
Because our only validation is through publication and even then, unless we reach a wide audience, we're still wondering what the hell we're doing wrong.
Playing pickup, jamming on a guitar with your buddies, etc. are releases from the day-to-day stresses of our so called lives, so we can do those at marginal levels within our own peer groups.
Writing, though a relief for some (I imagine), isn't one for me. It's a stress multiplier as I constantly search for that elusive path to goodness.
Lisa says
I agree with Missives From Suburbia. I'm an art director (magazines) as well as a writer – and everybody and their universal brother thinks they can design.
Not uncommon. Don't you all secretly look at a page/ad/movie and think you could have done better? It's human nature!
But I find the whole everybody-is a-writer thing so darn irritating because there's a difference between being a long distance runner and fashion victim out for a stroll.
And the difference is the PAIN.
"Don't talk to me until you've done the pain," I want to scream at the unaware fellow telling me about his fabulous idea for a novel that'll sell millions. Yes, scream. Even daydream of violence.
Apologies All, I don't mean to rant but this is a topic that touches a nerve!
Do the pain, then talk the talk!
Okay, I'll shut up now!
Becca C. says
It's so easy to get lost in your own writing. It pretty much always sounds good to you, when you're writing it all for the first time. The first time a guitar player plays a song, it sounds bad to the player's own ear because they can physically hear it. Writing is all in your head, so you don't get that physical sense of "oh, this is bad/this is amazing."
I don't know xD
Mira says
Also, after putting in so much work, it's very disappointing to accept writing as hobby. It's an unsatifying hobby because it requires a reader. Easier to think the agent/editor was mistaken.
And sometimes they are mistaken! That confuses things.
Also there is a strong mythology that writing doesn't require training and practice. Unlike a violinist, for example, who understands he'll benefit from a good teacher and hours of daily practice.
Also, everyone's words look beautiful to them.
Finally, writers CAN improve. Dreams are important. I think, given the topic of this post, that's important to remember.
I know my writing is improving just through posting on this blog. Someday, I'll write a book and it will be wonderful. 🙂
cheekychook says
"Everybody thinks they have good taste and a sense of humor but they couldn't possibly all have good taste. "—Carrie Fisher (as Marie in When Harry Met Sally)
Cheryl says
Nathan,
I have to agree with you on the "trash" talk. I will freely admit that I enjoyed the Twilight Series. If I took it apart and critted the book, no, I wouldn't. But the things she did well, she did *really* well. I read a book wanting to get caught up in it. I don't read a book to analyze it's writing unless I'm intentionally looking for it in order to figure out how I'm doing in comparison and hopefully learn a thing or two.
I got caught up in Twilight. It really irritates me when people trash the series. Not because I think it's some great work of prose but because what she's good at, she's really good at and it's unfair to try to take that away from her. She is *really* good at discovery. Discovering love, discovering pain, discovering a new underground society and way of life, etc. I have plenty of complaints but I didn't care too much about the complaints (which I won't go into) because they didn't matter. I still enjoyed the journey.
I think that as writers, if you don't take off your crit hat when you sit down to read, you won't find much enjoyment in reading because we always have an opinion on how to make something better. I don't want to read that way. I want to be entertained.
If I have just half as much of Stephenie Meyer's bad writing skills, I'd say I'm doing at least something right.
Molly Hall says
I read somewhere that most people overestimate their intelligence. In actuality, we're all probably a lot lower on the IQ scale than we think we are. Maybe it's the same with writing? What I like about good writers who think they suck is that–no matter where they are now–they are aiming higher.
Amanda Sablan says
Simply because we want so hard to believe we're awesome, which leads to failing to notice all that's wrong. I suppose it's this way with writing because the basics of writing is something more people know how to do than the basics of basketball; being able to write at least half-way decent is something ALL of us are encouraged to do.
And for those who think it's EASY? Either you are a complete and utter freak of nature, or you're sadly in denial. Enjoying the craft can, I believe, take out some of the difficulty, but writing a truly great book takes very hard work. Successful authors are simply willing to DO the hard work necessary.
Anonymous says
Ah, FICTION ENVY has raised her ugly head. Anyone who has taken at least a community college writing workshop has met her…Fiction Envy. "She wears low-cut blouses!" "He's a lit major in disguise!" "Her nephew's best friend once dated the professor's second cousin. Or was it twice!" It's not a far leap to: "It's been on the bestseller lists for 78 weeks, and it's absolute crap!" After many years in workshop I learned this: the writers who are willing to listen, to take the honest opinions of their teachers and peers, and USE them, are far more likely to succeed than those who are convinced they are god's gift to the literary universe. So. Listen, learn. It's not all that hard to tell when it's good, once you've figured out what "good" is.
Sarah says
I think subjectivity is only part of why everyone thinks they can write.
I think it's mainly because writing is common and there's little analysis of that writing. Almost everyone writes something each day. But those e-mails and blog posts and journal entries (let alone actual stories) are rarely subjected to real critique. Stir in the delusion that idea=completed novel*, and there you have it: anyone can write a best selling novel.
*Does that happen with painting? Do people think that because they have an idea for painting that they have the skill to execute it? "It'll look like the Mona Lisa, only better."
Jeff Abbott says
I have always said the difference is between those who want to write and those who want to have written a book.
The first group wants to learn craft, wants to rewrite, wants to read and understand a variety of works (maybe even some book they don't like but can respect for their success or craftsmanship). They understand there are many steps between idea in head and words on page/screen.
The second group just wants their name on a book. You can't give them advice because they don't want to hear it. Craft has nothing to do with getting them to their goal. They think the idea in the head just automagically appears on the page. They are the writing equivalent of the tone-deaf.
Katie says
O'Keefe makes painting look easy until one picks up a brush and realizes there's a huge difference between the mind's eye and the hand's control.
What makes this difference harder to see in writing is that everyone has to write words at some point during the day. There's no difference between an email and a novel, right?
It's the same idea that plagues teachers. A lot of people think they can teach because they spent twelve plus years in a classroom. The problem is that there's a huge difference between the role of a student and the role of a teacher. Just like there's a huge difference between a thank you note and a poem (even if the first is longer).
<>< Katie
Richard says
Most of us are asking the wrong question. There is a huge difference between writing being 'good' and simply being 'good enough' for a book that's going to sell because of subject, brand or platform.
To continue the basketball analogy, it's as though people decided to buy a ticket based on something other than the quality of the players in the game.
I go into this in more detail on my own blog:
https://historicalmayhem.blogspot.com/2010/07/so-you-think-you-can-write-ok-who-cares.html
Greg Mongrain says
Hey Nathan Cranky–
You're right. I did not mean best selling authors were inseparable from the slush pile. And I do look at the good things from the work of these successful authors. For instance, vampire romance is obviously still hot, and mysteries always will be.
lora96 says
My gut tells me that people think it's like transcribed talking and since any two year old can talk, ergo any verbose moron can write a book better than (fill in the accomplished bestselling author name).
I also think it's like parenting in that, if you're afraid you're screwing it up, you're probably fine. If you think you're awesome and competant, your 13 year old will get knocked up/your book is crap.
😛
Bryan Russell (Ink) says
I think the difficulty with writing is that it's symbolic representation, rather than literal. You hear a song, and it's all right there, good or bad. You see a painting and the image is clearly there before you. But a story… just looking at it there's a bunch of words that from a distance don't look much different than any other story (usually).
Letters and words are symbolic markers – you have to translate them. This symbols means this, that symbol means that. YOu string together meanings, and so part of every text comes from the reader, from how they translate these symbols into a vision they see and hear and feel. And the skill of a writer is in providing words that create a vivid and seamless vision for the reader, creating a sort of film inside their head.
But for the writer, we already have the vision in our head. We have it there as we write, or even before we write. The translation operates in reverse: we must try to allocate a bunch of word symbols that capture and relate the vision in our head. The problem, of course, is that when we look at our own writing we still have that original vision in our head. We don't see the one created by the words on the page, but rather the words evoke the original story.
The trick is learning to see the story provided by the actual words, and not by our original vision. What are the words doing? Once we can see what the words are actually doing, we can manipulate them to shape the vision as needed
Jonathan_Priest says
There's writing and there's creativity and they don't necessarily come together. There's writing and humour, and they're not always in the same bed. And then there's story telling and visual imagination, insight, anger, passion, an urgency to express ones feelings, having a good ear. People talk of writing as if it was one thing on a sliding scale from average to exceptional, but I think there's a lot more to it than that. What are the qualities that make a writer other than the ability to write?
Anonymous says
Nathan,
I have noticed that you get a little…snappish let's say, when folks suggest that a lot of what's out there is "trash" or "garbage" or "low class" (my personal fave).
But I'd like to ask you an honest question. While many agents, like you, may very well be looking to represent quality work and quality writers, aren't you really just looking for the thing that you believe will sell? And if that's true, then haven't we seen that typically what sells is what appeals to the most common denominator, and necessarily what's quality?
And if that's the case, are people so unjustified in their gripe that low-quality makes it through the gates all the time simply because it's the current hot vampire, teen, wizard, celebrity, or whatever genre at the moment?
Carol Riggs says
Because (and I ditto many people here):
1. Proximity. We're way too close to our own writing. Letting our work SIT helps, instead of dashing it off to the first agent we see (*cough Nathan coughcough*)
2. Subjectivity. Whatever the finished quality, other people look at our work through the lens of their own experiences and selves. If it resonates with them, the writing is more apt to be proclaimed "good."
I do my best writing (I think) when I ignore the fact that I want validation and publication, and just write for the sheer joy and rhythm of putting words on a page. Same goes with artwork (only with paint or pencil), which I also do. SUMMARY: Readership may give motivation, but ya can't ignore or underestimate passion and a LOVE of writing. Woo!
Robert Guthrie says
Everybody has a story… but not everybody knows how to tell it.
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
Yeah, this is definitely a topic on which I get snappish.
In response, I'd point again to this post, which explains in detail why I bristle.
But really, I think there are a couple of factors at work:
1) People compare apples to oranges when it comes to books. If you're reading THE DA VINCI CODE and hoping for DUBLINERS that's your fault, not Dan Brown's. Dan Brown did what he set out to do really, really well.
2) Saying a bestseller is trash is kind of like saying a bench warmer on an NBA team is a terrible basketball player. Um. Yeah. He's no LeBron, but he's in the top 0.000000005% percentile of basketball players in the entire world.
3) A book has to do something really, really well to make it through the publishing process and to attract readers in huge numbers and prompt people to wait in line for the next one.
4) We're smarter and better than that. We're writers, right? Use your words, say something a little more nuanced than "That book sucked."
Katrina L. Lantz says
Okay, that definitely deserves a Thank You blog:
https://katrinalantznovelist.blogspot.com/2010/07/why-i-love-nathan-bransford-platonic.html
G says
I don't think it's completely hard.
I do know that sometimes we can be our own worse enemies when it comes to our writing, and even when we do get "hurrahs" when something we write connects with a reader/readers, we have a tendency to downplay it just the same.
Sometimes though, one needs to be slapped upside the head like Larry from the Three Stooges, in order to accept a compliment about our writing.
But a cheesy answer would be this: every friend we got is a yes man/sychopant who would like nothing better than to stay in our good graces, so they tell us what we want to hear. Presto! Our ego is stroked so hard and so fast that we become immune to criticism.
I'm sure I have a point in there somewhere.
D.G. Hudson says
We all do some writing every day, and probably have since we learned that skill. Perhaps because it's so familiar, people tend to think it's something anyone can do.
I think it's hard to know if our own writing is good, because we're too close to it. Creative endeavors are hard to judge — music, art, and writing — we need experience to train our eye and ear to what's going to appeal to the consumers.
Stephen Prosapio says
What most everyone else said and…
This comment section is 106 comments long and it's already hard to say something original. Writers with talent know they're competing against hundreds of thousands of other books. "Fantasizers" compare themselves to the last horrible book they read (or heard of, or movie that bombed).
Writing a quality novel takes ALL the following skills. Many of which even most published authors don't have:
1. Great high concept ideas.
2. Fantastic ability to hook readers.
3. Can write characters that people connect to/aspire to/are intreagued by.
4. Ability to ratchet conflict and tension.
5. Technically construct quality sentances/phrases/structure.
6. Construct a great and believable climax.
7. Show character growth.
8. Leave the reader with an emotionally complete ending.
9. Be at the right place at the right time with the right project.
10. Reach and connect to your audience.
11. Be a bit lucky.
12. Be persistent in direct disproportion to #11!
"Fantasizers", at their best, only know of #1 & #3 and maybe one or two others.
Real writers know which of the above they're weakest on and hence may feel self conscious about it.
Steph Kuehn says
Well, I think the charming combination of blazing incompetence + grandiosity can be found in any profession, hobby, or social interaction on earth. We've all seen it/experienced it/done it.
But artistic mediums are subjective, so it's easy to impose the self-serving bias of "they didn't get me" versus the pretty obvious "Oh heck, I'll never play in the NFL" attribution that happens when no one calls on Draft Day.
It also takes bravado to put oneself out there for rejection in the first place. Maybe the most self reflective, perfectionist writers are the ones least likely to query. Who knows? Interesting post, thanks!
Ladonna says
Because Aunt Betty said it was good.
At times unqualifed people read your work, and tell you it's great. If the writing is good, you'll get a following.
Maggie says
My two cents:
Yes, good writing is subjective, but there is a certain level that you really cannot be under if you want to be published.
People say all the time how "awful" the writing of say, Stephenie Meyer or Dan Brown is, and how they could certainly do better, but truthfully, these authors are probably better than 99.9% of people out there writing.
I worked at a bookstore where people would try to get us to sell their self published work, and let me tell you…yikes. If I saw that much truly horrible writing (I mean, did they even spellcheck, let alone edit?!) I can't even imagine the slush agents have to dig through. So "good" writing is subjective, but only after a certain point, and many, many people out there writing novels do not get to that point. (Sorry for the rant-this drives me crazy!)
I think it's easy for people who have never attempted a full length novel to think it's easy because they used to get A's on high school papers and figure it can't be much harder than that. They think that because The DaVinci Code was not, in their opinion, the best book ever written but did amazingly well anyway, that they could certainly do just that if only they had the time… 🙂
Marjorie says
I do not think it is hard at all to tell if our own writing is good. I think most people who write have confidence and a high level of self-esteem and think their work is excellent.
I think my cartoons are hilarious. I don't care how many rejections I receive. I will always believe my work is terrific. I don't need the approval of total strangers, even if those strangers have the power.
And if my work remains unpublished… so be it.
All humor is subjective anyway. I don't think Jackie Mason cares if a young reviewer thinks his jokes are funny. He knows his audience.
So, it is not a matter of whether the writing is "good," but a matter of finding your readers.
LSimon says
People tell stories all the time- Jokes anecdotes, even dreams. They don't realize that the difference between telling a story and writing a book is vast.
Ann M says
Part of the issue could be because the writer "fills in the gaps." The author might know what the character is feeling, why events unfold as they do, why point A led to point B, but just because the author knows this, doesn't mean that the reader will. So, even though the story might be complete, compelling, and eloquent in theory, it might be hard for the beginning writer to understand that his/her vision wasn't transferred to the page.
Kristin Laughtin says
I think a large part of it is that we can walk into any bookstore and see a huge number of books, with more coming out all the time, but we never see the piles of rejected queries and manuscripts. We don't realize just how many people are writing and how few get accepted for publication and thus we don't have a sense of the odds.
Also, a literate culture surrounds us with writing, for school, for work, for fun, if we so choose. That prevalence might make it seem easier.
Writing is also subjective. If I play guitar, I can hear (or should be able to) if I'm off. If I wanted to play basketball…well, I'm 5'6", so I never harbor hopes of being in the WNBA. And if I tried to draw, I could look at my work and immediately see if it didn't look good. Writing is personal and usually takes more analysis to determine whether it's good or bad, and since it's subjective, people will disagree on whether any given writer is good. I think that makes it easier to dismiss criticism of your own work.
(P.S. I know people who are delusional about any skill/talent one can possess, for the record.)
Derek H says
I blame Twilight.
christwriter says
I think a big aspect of the disconnect between a writer's ability and attitude is having contentious parents. I'm 24. My parents had "build good self-esteem" drilled into their heads, so I got complimented on EVERYTHING.
Rather hopeless art scribbles? "It's BEAUTIFUL!" (okay, I'm a pretty good artist now. But when I was sixteen I sucked and knew it)
Violin playing ability that makes cats scream? "You're so good, here's a two thousand dollar fiddle."
Dancing like a fence post? A year behind the rest of the class? "Remember, Margot Fonteyn had bad feet, too."
First attempt at actual story-writing, which I burned upon finding several years ago? "OOOOH, lookit this pretty sentence!!!"
So naturally the first time I presented my work to a pretty harsh critique group, I fell flat on my ass. These days I ignore positive feedback and assume I suck, because people only say nice things when you need a lot of hand-holding. Negative feedback is always accurate, because otherwise people wouldn't say it, and it's always worse than what the person indicates because you have to factor in the natural human tendency towards niceness.
If you're honest enough with yourself to improve as a writer, you lose your ability to say, "this is good", because that's what people have told you all along, and that's what gets disproved the second you set foot in the professional arena.
If you can sustain a belief in your writing abilities in the face of negative criticism, you're probably not honest enough to admit when you suck.
Not Totally Anonymous says
Nathan,
I love ya and I'll go with you a long way, but you did NOT just mention Dan Brown and the top 0.000000005% percentile of writers in the same post, did you?
Dan Brown wrote 3 books prior to Da Vinci – that based on his phenomenal "before-it-was-popular" digital self-promotion he managed to sell enough books to continue getting published. Still, relatively speaking not many read those books prior to Da Vinci Code which by almost any account can be classified as a "Black Swan" — a phenomenon which happens maybe once a decade and can't be predicted. It went "viral". Use whatever term you want. It was big.
And yes. It was entertaining. But it was the same formulaic story and same stilted writing which his other books contained. Most even have the same cliché villain and same "surprise" master villain revealed at the end. Those of us duped into reading his other books found that out the hard way.
After his phenomenal blockbuster success of course he stretched himself writing many great diverse novels, right? Or maybe he waited FIVE YEARS and released the same tripe garbage as the previous novels? A novel that can barely maintain a 3 Star Amazon rating. And deservedly so.
Please, Nathan. Do not insult real writers and loyal readers of your blog with 0.000000005% percentile comparisons to Dan Brown. To use your basketball analogy that's like giving Will Purdue (look him up) the $150,000,000 contract while Michael Jordan sits on the bench.
I don't mind people knowing I hold these opinions and didn't want to hide behind anonymous posts, but I also didn't attach my name to this post for obvious reasons…
I don't need the Knights of Templar on my arse…
"Physicist Leonardo Vetra smelled burning flesh, and he knew it was his own."
Gag.
Anonymous says
Trash is not a pejorative word when people use it to describe books they perceive as having less value than literature. It's shorthand for a separate type of reading experience.
I liked THE DA VINCI CODE and have no problem calling it trash; it was fun, silly, disposable, McDonalds instead of French Laundry.
No one reads Harold Robbins today, and no one will be reading Dan Brown in 20 years. Trash as a shorthand serves its purpose.
Josin L. McQuein says
Writing's something everyone learns how to do, but it's also something very few people learn how to define.
In school, everyone learns the basics of how to form and merge letters and how to make proper sentences and paragraphs. We learn the functions of writing, but not the art.
I think most people know the "formula" for perfect essays from high school – the five paragraph model or the inverted pyramid model, or whatever your particular school used. You needed a certain number of words for a sentence to be "correct", and then 4-5 sentences in every paragraph. The emphasis was on information without any room for voice.
People who learn to write like that and get high marks are bound to assume that's how professional writing works.
If you take someone who only knows the academic rules of writing and have them submit a novel, you'll probably find nothing grammatically wrong with it, but it won't have a soul.
I was blessed with 2 English Lit. teachers who didn't use that form of writing. They emphasized voice in our paper and took the restrictions off where language and length were concerned.
They taught together, one for Jr. year and one for Sr. year, because the way our school was set up, and gave us some of the best advice I've ever gotten:
1. Rules are for learning; art requires improvisation.
2. Strive for the unexpected over the easy. When given a choice, pick the subject least likely to be written about by anyone else.
3. Write as though you're speaking to your reader. Narrative =/= to textbook writing.
What those two women taught us was "commercial" writing. It went completely in the face of what our other instructors had taught, but the writing that came out of those classes was superior to anything we'd done in the others… and, IMO, it was superior to anything done by others assigned the teachers who persisted in the "academic" style of writing.
The other thing to consider is that many people don't understand what style and voice actually mean.
They assume that voice = accent, and churn out something unreadable because they've tried to write it phonetically.
Or they don't understand that even if the author is a 47 year old woman, that doesn't give an 8 yr old boy permission to talk like one. He needs to sound like an 8 yr. old boy.
Or they try to write (painfully) authentic dialogue which consists mainly of "um…. like… ya know…" and many awkward pauses that leave the MS looking like it's written in braille.
Not Totally Anonymous again... says
and oh….
No. Using "was" as the verb 13 times on the first page is not “sparkly” writing either. Giggle.
K.L. Brady says
Provocative question. Rejection–whether it be from agents, editors, or readers–is the ultimate reality check that the vast majority of writers don't subject themselves to. It's kind of like that saying "Better to be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt." Better to call yourself a great writer (with your unfinished or non-critiqued opus), than to finish and put it out there to find out you suck. 🙂
And for everyone of us finishes and puts our work out there–and uses the criticism to make our work better–there are probably ten who ignore any hint of criticism because their egos have convinced them that they are literary geniuses.
Kind of reminds me of those people who audition for American Idol when Simon says a singers sounds like musical wallpaper. They swore down he was wrong–and most people with without tone deafness would agree. Truth hurts. You can use it to make you better, quit, or ignore it. Too many people choose the latter.
My story was good but the first draft sucked, wasn't ready. I embraced that. Embrace the suckiness…and then make it better.
Nathan Bransford says
Not Totally Anonymous-
Dan Brown did what he set out to do very very very very well, and yes, I know what I said.
Claire Dawn says
I live in the Am I Crazies.
But I take it one step further, I think everyone who think sI'm good, either has no idea what they're talking about or they're crazy too. And if I ever become a bestseller, it will be because there are thousands of crazy people in the world.
Alison says
Um, yeah, have you ever watched American Idol?!? We have all witnessed off-key, out of tune "belting" that is not even suitable for the rattiest of karaoke bars! Yet all of the offenders (entertaining as they may be) truly believe THEY will be the next American Idol.
It's not just writing…it's just people.
Ann M says
I think that people today are so incredibly self-absorbed that almost everyone thinks they have a fantastic story or two in them, and that having a basic knowledge of grammar or instinct for plot doesn't really matter. And while it's probably true that most people do have a few good stories in them, most of them would be better off selling those stories to someone who can actually write, rather than blundering through it on their own – the way J. Peterman sold his life story to Kramer. Although I guess that didn't work out so well for either of them.
Micky Leib says
I think that the real reason that so many people think that it's easy to write a book is because of grade inflation. Many students are told that they're are wonderful, creative, and brilliant, when in truth, they're not. I know an 8th grade teacher who grades based on effort. That way an untalented child can receive an A and a 'Good Job' just for bothering to do the assignment. I'm not saying that it works this way in high school and college, but it happens to be that most teachers don't tell students how much their writing truly sucks.
Brian Crawford says
I think about this a lot.
Consider how many unique author names have been on the New York Times bestseller list (which still doesn’t guarantee they’ll be able to make a living as a writer) over the past four years. I don’t know the number, but I can assure you it’s far less than the 11,000 athletes who participated in the last Summer Olympics. And those people were genetic freaks of nature who’d spent every waking second of their lives preparing for the event. Seems pretty unlikely that I’d become an Olympic athlete in my spare time, right? So why does everyone ask me, "if you get your book published, are you going to write bestsellers for a living?"
I’m not bitter about this – really. But lately, I feel like I’m throwing a Nerf football around the parking lot, and people are asking me when I’m going to play in the Super Bowl.
Lucy says
Part of the trouble is that validation only comes at the end of the process when you either publish and make a lot of sales, or don't. Before that, it's possible to believe that even the people who hate your book can be proven wrong. If it sells.
Anonymous says
because we really are all crazy
Malissa says
Everyone has an imagination and everyone dreams. Everyone can write. Add determination and commitment to the craft of writing and you may be a writer. Add blood, sweat and more re-writing than you can count, and you may become a published author.
GuyStewart says
My opinion and belief is that people DO know if they aren't good. It's just hard to admit it. The ones who "know" they're good believe in themselves and just keep sending their work out without fanfare until they hit the right combination of right agent, right place, right time, right project, right publisher.