So here I am, a writer (of science fiction, predominantly, but there are some fantasy ideas in there as well) married to another writer (also of science fiction).
Fahim, the writing spouse, has recently finished the first draft of his first novel. (Yay, Fahim!) He used to say he'd never write novels because he changed his mind on what he wanted to write about too much. Well, evidently, and this is something he admits, being around me and talking novels for so long prompted him to write his own. It took him about four months, or thereabouts, to finish the first draft. Now he's on to editing.
And this is where I come in.
He's asked me for his help in editing. So I happily start by finding some of his major problem areas - passive voice, adverbs, and over-using the same words over and over again (this is the Redundancy Department of Redundancy). He's working on those (I high-lighted them for him.)
Now I'm on to giving him general critique of the overall story line. Yeah, I know, I don't do things in the right order.
And I had some actual comments to give him. Stuff I see that could be improved. Stuff that he didn't see.
Finally! After all of his help with my plots, I get to give back! Yay! Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
Let us know when he's published so we can see your name in the acknowledgements. Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
Neato!
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Or, when I'm published, and you get to see his name in the acknowledgements. Either way. Posted by Miro (Member # 1178) on :
Why not both? Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote: So here I am, a writer (of science fiction, predominantly, but there are some fantasy ideas in there as well) married to another writer (also of science fiction).
Have either of you been published?
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
We both have had articles published (newspapers, magazines, and the like), Fahim much more so than me, but for fiction, no. Not there yet.
Miro - um, of course. *slaps head* It'll be both for sure.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I have a friend of mine who is a wonderful writer of fiction -- he has read many of the beginnings of his stories to me over the phone, and they are totally captivating.
His trouble? He never finishes a story. He has a great idea and gets maybe half the book written, then quits and moves onto something else - a new idea, a new story. But he has never finished one to submit to a publisher.
Any advice on how I can encourage him to actually follow one story on through all the way to completion? Is this a normal writer thing?
FG
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Tell him he's not allowed to call himself a writer until he's been paid for something. Until then, he is at best "aspiring."
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
>>Any advice on how I can encourage him to actually follow one story on through all the way to completion? Is this a normal writer thing?
:buries head in hands and weeps, and weeps, and weeps:
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: >>Any advice on how I can encourage him to actually follow one story on through all the way to completion? Is this a normal writer thing?
:buries head in hands and weeps, and weeps, and weeps:
I do this too. I cannot tell you have many stories I've struggled with, only to dismiss them as terrible and move on to something else and then I dismiss that as terrible too. I need a writing mentor to look at my raw stuff and tell me what's wrong and right about it. As many people as possible.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Well, what I need is the desire to sit down and write.
It isn't time, and it isn't writer's block. I'm just more interested in doing other things that aren't as fulfilling (or as difficult) as writing.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
That too. I keep thinking about the story, and tweaking it in my head, but it seems to turn into fertilizer when I try to type it out for some reason.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
quote:Tell him he's not allowed to call himself a writer until he's been paid for something. Until then, he is at best "aspiring."
Well, Tom, he doesn't actually call himself a writer. I call him that. His profession is advertising/marketing. But I've read his other stuff -- very few have. He COULD be a great writer, but I think he's afraid to take that leap.
Scott R -- do I interpret that to mean this is common? Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I hear other people have the same problem. Even folks on the neo-pro writers board I hang with have the problem.
Maybe that's why we're all neo-pro, and not pro. Alas, feel the angst.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Tonnes of people want to write that "Great American Novel". . . someday. Far fewer ever get around to actually writing it. Writing is hard work. There are no immediate rewards. If you manage to sell the thing, the first usually hits the market at least a few years after you started writing it. Writing a novel is no fast way to riches and fame.
Having said that, if someone is serious about writing, like Synesthesia or Farmgirl's friend, I can pass on advice that I've been given. You don't really know how to write a good story until you've done it a half dozen times. The first half dozen are the ones you learn on - how to string the words together at least halfways intelligibly. So, Synesthesia, that you feel like your writing is crap (my words, and no reflection on your actual ability) is because it probably is. Compared to how you know it can and should be. But that's to be expected.
You can't just sit down at a piano and start playing piano concertas. It takes work and a whole lotta practice, years of practice. Same as being good at any profession. What makes you think that writing should be any different?
I say that not to discourage you, but rather, so you can feel free to write crap and learn from it. Write the stories you want to write, and don't worry about whether they're any good or not. Just write. And you'll learn how to write a good story in the process. Worry about editing later. Not the first draft.
Okay, there's a bit more to it than that, and it's not like I've learned to take my own advice - it's something I need to work on. I need to let go and let me be free to write, no matter how lousy.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
The bvest thing about the current story I am writing is the characters. I love making little changes to them, like changing one character's step dad to a fairly well-to-do guy instead of a blue collar guy. Those little changes make it more interesting and less stereotypical. That story's a major struggle though. I might just be too young.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Nope. You're not too young. You are, however, still learning the process. Like a lot of the rest of us. Whenever any of us are learning something, it's a struggle. Understand that, and work past it by writing anyway. The only way you'll ever conquer the beast is to write the thing.
There are no shortcuts.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:I have a friend of mine who is a wonderful writer of fiction -- he has read many of the beginnings of his stories to me over the phone, and they are totally captivating.
His trouble? He never finishes a story. He has a great idea and gets maybe half the book written, then quits and moves onto something else - a new idea, a new story. But he has never finished one to submit to a publisher.
Any advice on how I can encourage him to actually follow one story on through all the way to completion? Is this a normal writer thing?
FG
Have him read OSC's short story "Prior Restraint". I knew I'd heard that story somewhere.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
An acquaintance of mine (we met at OSC's Boot Camp) has posted some notes from Boot Camp online.
Farmgirl, what your friend is going through is absolutely normal.
Tell him this:
I've been an aspiring writer for years. I'm written many, many things over the years, but like him I usually got interested in something else and moved on.
Four times I actually finished something, and mailed them off to potential publishers.
All four of them sold and were published and I got paid for them.
None of the other umpteen thousand things I worked on and abandoned ever made me any money.
That's the only real motivation I can give.
Advice - I have plenty of. I do find that structure helps me. As in, a proces to go through with deadlines (self-imposed ones) that I must stick to.
I'm further along in my current novel than I ever was in any before (and I probably have 8 or 10 novels that I started but abandoned sitting around) and I think the reason is I started out with a process and have been following it step by step.
Not everybody can work that way. Some folks feel their creativity is stifled when you put too rigid a process on it. You must find what works for you, and stay with it.
I personally use Randy Ingermanson's Snowflake. I met Randy through an email list, and asked him several questions which he was gracious enough to answer and offer me much advice. That was before he launched his Advanced Fiction Writing website, now he actually teaches and mentors and helps aspiring folks like me all the time.
Here's what Randy has to say about it:
quote:It took me sixteen years to get my first novel published. You're probably wondering, am I stupid or just slow? Well . . . neither. Actually, taking more than a decade is kind of normal. So normal, it's scary. You hear all the time about some writer who comes bursting out of obscurity to write a best-seller. And a lot of those breakout artists have been writing for ten, fifteen, twenty years. Or more. That's nasty. Obscurity is a depressing place. Plus it doesn't pay very well. Not to mention that you can die right there in Obscureville with your heartbreaking work of staggering genius still inside. It's nice and heartwarming when you see somebody break out of that pesky obscurity, but heartwarming doesn't pay the mortgage.
Here's what he says about taking time to learn to write:
quote:Fact is, just about anyone can write a novel. The problem is writing a good one. Writing one that you can get published. Writing one that sells to somebody besides your mother. That's a trick. Learning to write excellent fiction takes time. Big surprise, is that? Hey, learning to do anything worthwhile takes time. Learning to do brain surgery takes time. Learning to fly a fighter jet takes time. Learning quantum mechanics takes time. Learning to write excellent fiction often takes longer. Because, honestly, writing an excellent novel is harder than doing quantum mechanics. It's natural that it should take longer.
When he says writing is harder than doing quantum mechanics, he knows what he's talking about:
quote:I know painfully well how long it takes to publish a novel. Back when I was in graduate school at Berkeley, working on my Ph.D. in quantum field theory, I decided to write a novel. Two years after that, I got my Ph.D. Two years after that, I started actually writing my novel. Four years after that, I finished it. Eight years after that, I got one published -- but not the one I started with.
By the way, Randy is a Christian author, so if you don't read Christian fiction you've probably not heard of him.
I have to say that if I ever do finish a novel, Randy Ingermanson and Uncle Orson are two people that would belong in the acknowledgments. Randy for the Snowflake method, Uncle Orson for his Writing Class articles on this site and his book Characters and Viewpoint. And anyone who is writing fiction but hasn't read Characters and Viewpoint needs to get a copy right now. Whenever I was asked to critque for people, which I used to do when I belonged to several online writing groups, viewpoint shifts and problems were one of the most common things.
Oh and one other piece of advice - don't join so many writer's groups that you spend most of your time critiquing others and responding to your group buddies through email or discussion boards that you never have time to actually write.
Writing takes sacrifice. In my case, I most often sacrifice sleep. I worked on my novel last night for two hours, beginning after my kids were in bed and after all my school work for the night was done. That meant I started on the novel at 11:00. Finally made it to sleep about 1:30, and was up early to take care of kids and let puppies out. But, writing is important to me, so I make time for it.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
I'm going to second the recomendation for Characters and Viewpoint. It's a great book, and taught me far more actual information about how to write than any of the creative writing courses I took in college or HS. I have an autographed copy. </gloat>
Finishing things is hard. I have a lot of short stories and a few novels that I started and never finished. Some of them not more than a page or two. Not sure if this is the case for everyone, but I've figured out some stuff that helps for me. Now I allow all new story ideas a longer gestation period now before I start writing them, instead of hopping to the keyboard and getting out a few pages that don't go anywhere. When I get a new idea now I jot down some notes on it, see if I've got a full development arc, and then let it ruminate while I work on finishing other projects. This weeds out a lot of my ideas that don't hold lasting interest and keeps me from getting half done with something and realizing I don't really have an ending, or I need to completely change the characters, or rewrite it all from a different perspective. It also helps me focus more actual writing effort on the stories I've already started.
--Enigmatic
Posted by Spaceman (Member # 8107) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Tell him he's not allowed to call himself a writer until he's been paid for something. Until then, he is at best "aspiring."
No, either you are a writer, or you are not a writer. Period.
Posted by Haloed Silhouette (Member # 8062) on :
(Can't remember URL add-in syntax and I'm in Quick Reply Mode.)
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"No, either you are a writer, or you are not a writer."
I disagree. This is the beauty of adjectives.
If you are trying to be a writer, but have not yet succeeded, you are an aspiring writer. If you tried to be a writer but gave up, you are a failed writer.
And so on.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote: If you tried to be a writer but gave up, you are a failed writer.
Ahem. I prefer, "formerly aspiring writer."
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Only if you create your own symbol.
Posted by Haloed Silhouette (Member # 8062) on :
... And if you're Tom Davidson, you will have a ridiculously high Post count.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I'm still confused as to how writing is bound with publishing. What about the first book? Was someone not a writer while they were working on the book, only to come home to find a letter in the mail telling them that they are a writer. A sort of coronation?
There is something false in relying on the authority of a publisher to determine whether someone is a writer. It's similar to saying that an action is inappropriate because it is illegal or that marriages are over upon the final signing of divorce papers-- when I suspect marriages end much before or after papers are signed. Being published isn't a wholely arbitrary standard, but it strikes me as an inadequate one.
I understand that all people who dare to write are writers, whether the author is a good writer is tricker judgment, and in my esteem, that judgment is still only loosely connected to the dictates of a given publisher.
I think the issue is validation from authority. When is a market institution an appropriate judge and when is the institution an irrelevant arbitrator. (In the work of art, seeking the approval of publishers may not only be irrelevant, it may be irreverent, when we take seriously what is at stake.)
Then again, I believe that getting published is by-far the easiest part of the process, and the faciscination with that part of the writing process is the reason why there are so many bad stories in mass production. Writers have so turned into politicans preoccupied with crafting a message-- a message that the people have been told to like-- that there isn't nearly enough thought and care put into studying into what makes stories more than marketable, but important.
In other words, too many people write to tell an egoistic story and get published, not to wrestle with the keenest wisdom of their age. I think that's too bad. I also think it's indicative of our cultural degradaton and corrupted sense of reverence. (I feel the same about misplaced priorities in education, but that's fodder for another thread.)
[ June 27, 2005, 05:00 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I don't think the question matters at all, Irami.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
I don't think you have to be published to be a writer. But I do think you should be published to call yourself an author. Maybe that's just my own distinction, but I think of a writer as someone who writes (even if only as a hobby or only for themselves) and an author as someone who's career is based around writing.
Obviously you could interpret that too literally. My job is answering customer service e-mails, so my job is writing, but not in a "being an author" sense.
By this idea, an aspiring writer is someone who keeps saying "I'm going to write a book someday" but hasn't actually started writing yet.
--Enigmatic
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Was someone not a writer while they were working on the book, only to come home to find a letter in the mail telling them that they are a writer. A sort of coronation?"
Yes. For example: you are not a network administrator, even if you know how to administrate a network. You become a network administrator when you are paid for that work.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
<mild> There are volunteer network administrators. </mild>
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Yes. But volunteers are just employees without a salary.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Of course, your criterion was getting paid .
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
They're BEING paid. They're just being paid $0. Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: <mild> There are volunteer network administrators. </mild>
Yeah, they're called college students, and they work for their apartment complex.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Wow. Tom can never, ever, ever complain about my attempts at precision again. Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Why what do you know! I'm a network administrator! I'm paid $0 to admin my home network!
And Boris: lots of non-profits get volunteer help doing things like network administration.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
The distinction is this: these people have been commissioned to provide this service; they aren't merely providing that service to themselves, or "serving" despite the lack of demand.
I still consider a writer a "writer" if they're published in "payment in copy" mags.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Which is a perfectly reasonable distinction, but doesn't have much to do with being paid Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
If I can follow Tom's logic - for a person to be a writer they have to be not just "one who writes" but a craftsperson whose craft is writing. My son plays around with a hammer and nails, it doesn't make him a carpenter. To be a carpenter he must learn the craft of carpentry.
To know whether or not someone has reached that "craftsperson" level, Tom wants to see that someone with some semblance of authority like a publisher has recognized the work of this craftsperson, and has said "Yes, it's good enough to be published," thus propelling the person from the "one who writes" category into the "master craftsman of the craft of writing."
Now, that may not be what Tom thinks, but it's sort of what I think. I consider myself a writer, I've been published and paid, but I don't consider myself a novelist, because none of my novels have ever been sold.
Posted by Spaceman (Member # 8107) on :
It is all a matter of how the writer views himself (herself). A writer writes. A successful writer cashes checks, but that doesn't make the amateur any less a writer. An aspiring writer is a first grader. I'm published in both non-fiction and fiction, but I do not consider myself a master craftsman. I have much to learn.
Posted by OlavMah (Member # 756) on :
It depends on your expectations. I don't consider myself a writer, really, because I'm not where I want to be.
I went to Clarion West, am in a "professionals only" writers group by invitation, have a novel under consideration at Viking, have had an ongoing dialogue with two prominent agents at two different firms about getting representation on another novel, receive regular invitations to submit to "invitation only" anthologies, am invited to exclusive writer retreats that get written up in Locus, and I think I'm pretty well known in mag editor world. Stan Schmidt, Shiela Williams, Ellen Datlow, and the Swensons all write personal notes on their rejections to me. Sheila gave me a personal rejection for one story, then got confused when I got married, thought I was another person because of the name change, and sent me a very kind "I don't know you, but you write really well" rejection for the next story, so it's not familiarity breeding gentleness. My writer friends seem to be moving from mild surprise, to genuine surprise, to jaw dropping disbelief that I'm not published. One accused me of not sending work out, and when I provided him a list of where I'd been sending, he gaped at me for a full thirty seconds and then said, "I'm... that's... why didn't they buy that??!" He's a professional with his first 4 book deal all locked up.
Besides that, I have writer skills. Pros actually listen to me crit their stories, and you'll see my name in the acknowledgments of about half a dozen published novels. This weekend I learned that my husband was panicking over an academic paper that he'd gotten confusing reviews on, and I went into work with him, read the whole thing over, and was able to point out that the reviews were symptoms of a problem, not diagnoses. I showed him what the symptoms indicated and how to treat the problem, and in 1.5 hours we figured out the solution to what he'd been tearing his hair out over for four months.
And yet, I wouldn't call myself a writer. I want to be like those in my writers group that sell novels regularly, that have agents and deadlines and bad cover art (or even good cover art). Whenever anyone says to me, "you're a writer because you write" or "if you call yourself a writer you are one," my instinct is to stick my finger down my throat. It's not enough. I want to be a writer and be able to say it with the same kind of straight face that I can use when I call myself a lawyer. I want a career.
But it *is* a matter of expectations.
Posted by OlavMah (Member # 756) on :
Tom, volunteers are more like independent contractors without a contract. They're not even close to employees because they have no benefits, aren't agents, aren't subject to withholding....
Okay, I'm being a geek....
(Although as a writer, you'd want to be an independent contractor. If you were an employee, your works would be for hire and not copyrighted in your name. So... yeah.... *nods as if an important point has been made*)
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
quote: I still consider a writer a "writer" if they're published in "payment in copy" mags.
Wow! I'm a writer! Even by Tom's exacting definition!
Honestly, though, I have thought of myself as a writer my whole life, almost. I've had a compulsion to be a writer ever since I was five and my sister had me writing stuff in the dirt with a stick. I wrote songs when I was six, then stories. It's just something I *do*. You could call it OCD, if you wanted to be nasty.
I would not introduce myself as 'a writer' at a coctail party, however.
BTW, (since I know that just *everyone* is dying to hear about ME ) I am now a technical writer for a consulting company. What I write is frequently creative, though not fiction. Heh. They're paying me $27.00 an hour for it, which is, I believe, the highest hourly wage I have ever earned. And it's for doing something I'm good at and something I enjoy.
It *is* a bit depressing that the highest I've ever been paid for something creative is actually less than I make in an hour of research, but... Well, it's something I'd be doing anyway, so anything I earn from it is gravy. Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
That's awesome, Olivia! Congratulations!
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
quote:For example: you are not a network administrator, even if you know how to administrate a network. You become a network administrator when you are paid for that work.
Then, like Olivia, I am a writer. :) That makes me happy.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
quote: I would not introduce myself as 'a writer' at a coctail party, however.
There were a few months, when I was unemployed, that I would introduce myself as "a writer and stand-up comedian." I'd had a few things published previously, and was doing amateur night once a month at the local comedy club. I was unemployed, so both seemed more like an actual career than anything else I was doing at the time!
--Enigmatic
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
There is still something fishy about the whole business.
Are you are writer in the eyes of God? The community? Yourself? Or the market institution?
I guess I've been slow to seek credence from market institutions in other aspects of my life, it shouldn't be surprising to find that writing is another one.
I wrote a book. It's about courage, savagery, decisions, gods, music and love.
I'm writing a second one now, and I can't imagine doing anything different with this second book, even if the first were on the best seller's list. Maybe I'm not a writer, but it sure feels like I am. Maybe being a writer is a lie I tell myself to get through the day, but I don't think that that is the case.
[ June 27, 2005, 10:25 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by OlavMah (Member # 756) on :
Some people use "writer" to describe their career, what they get paid for.
Some people use it as a descriptive term, to explain what they do during the day.
And then there are also people that use it wistfully, as something they wish they did (or think they wish they did.)
For some people art is a personal, introspective process, which is where I think you're coming from, Irami. It's a position I only understand intellectually. For me, art has always been about expression to others.
I'm all for market institution validation. Writing, for me, is about communicating an idea so clearly and precisely that for a moment the reader is in your world and not their own, and this world is a worthwhile place to be, and they leave with something they wouldn't have had if they hadn't come in the first place. I think that's what publishers are looking for too, not to mention readers. I've never been a big fan of the "no one understands my brilliance" or the "publishers don't know quality" mindset. A very accomplished author once said to me, "the moment it's not your fault that you're not published is the moment your career is over." She pointed out that trying to write the kind of garbage you think publishers publish will probably get you nowhere, while improving as an artist and craftsperson is really the only way to go towards publication.
My $.02
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I think that OTHER people call you a writer if you've been paid for your work.
My title for myself isn't writer, though it's the occupation I want. Even if I make it big, I don't think I'll ever label myself with my own soul stamp, 'WRITER.'
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Writing, for me, is about communicating an idea so clearly and precisely that for a moment the reader is in your world and not their own, and this world is a worthwhile place to be, and they leave with something they wouldn't have had if they hadn't come in the first place. I think that's what publishers are looking for too, not to mention readers. I've never been a big fan of the "no one understands my brilliance" or the "publishers don't know quality" mindset.
For the most part, I agree. So let's leave the idea that being a writer is about payment for services rendered.
Even if we commit ourselves to understanding one as a writer in virtue of one being widely read, there is still something small about that.
It's almost like saying that one isn't religious until one preaches. It seems as though you are privileging the effect rather than the attention to the process.
Let's continue the religious analogy. There is something wrong with the idea that a person is more or less of devotee of God, based on whether he/she has a pulpit.
If someone is an inventor, are they more or less an inventor before they are approved for a patent?
I'll be the first to admit that novel writing has a public dimension that isn't captured by the pious or inventor analogies, but I'm pretty sure that being a writer-- at least a writer I respect-- is closer to a religious disposition rather than that of a salesman.
I'm wonder how many people look at a priest and say, "Look at the size of his congregation, he must be pious." That's similar to, "Look how many books he/she has sold, he/she must be a good writer."
I do believe that the size of ones congregation or novel sales will tell you how fashionable the preacher or publisher is-- and maybe a little bit more-- but I'm not sure that anything as important as religion or art should be decided upon by standards of fashion.
I'm not one of those, "Publishers don't understand my brilliance" writers. I'm one of those, "If it's good enough, it'll get published, so why don't I spend my time and energy writing and thinking and figuring out the work of a good story and let the publishing take care of itself," type of guys.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:For the most part, I agree. So let's leave the idea that being a writer is about payment for services rendered.
Even if we commit ourselves to understanding one as a writer in virtue of one being widely read, there is still something small about that.
What's small about having a job? I'm not saying that the QUALITY of your professional writing correlates to your sales; I'm saying that you aren't doing professional writing -- and are therefore not a writer -- until you're writing professionally. Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
*emerges from long term hibernation to throw in his $.02*
For what it's worth, I generally find it useful to draw the distinction as between being a writer, and being a professional writer...
I wrote my first three novels while working as a full time secondary English Literature teacher. All were published, they won several awards - and during this time, while I considered myself a writer,my profession was education.
After my third novel, I took the plunge and quit teaching, to try to eke out a living from writing full time. (so far, so good...) and since then have published two further novels, and signed a trilogy which is my current work in progress. Since leaving teaching, I have felt quite justified in describing myself as a professional writer. It's not to take anything away from those who don't earn a living off writing, it's simply the easiest way to describe my job.
I think the two terms, while similar, denote markedly different phases in my writing life to date. One doesn't have to be a professional footballer to play football, and the fact that one isn't doesn't in any way have to negate your enjoyment of or dedication to the game. I believe the same is true for writing.
Cheers t
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
Scythrop's distinction between "writer" and "professional writer" is basically the same as the one I made earlier between "writer" and "author".
I'm a published writer. I've been paid for a fiction short story, and some lesser things, technically that makes me a professional writer, since I'm no longer amatuer. I don't say "I'm an author" though because I'm still far from making my living through my writing.
But obviously other people will have other distinctions that are equally valid.
--Enigmatic
Posted by Scythrop (Member # 5731) on :
True - though I tend to reserve the term 'author' as a simple descriptor for the creator of a piece of work - published or otherwise.
That might just be me, though. And when I think about it, the exact same set of rules could be applied to being a 'writer'.
And I did think you summed it up nicely
t.
Posted by OlavMah (Member # 756) on :
Irami, my church doesn't pay preachers, or bishops, or stake presidents, or seventies, or area authorities, or anyone for doing a church calling. The best you can get is a "reasonable living allowance" if you're on the Quorum of the Twelve. Soooo... your analogy doesn't work for me. Furthermore, religion, for me, is *not* about expression but *is* an introspective process of growing closer to God. It isn't art.
If you write and give stuff away to people or like to publish under creative commons licenses, then I think you're either a major nusiance to your friends and society, or both a writer and a philanthropist, depending on whether your writing is worth reading. (And yes, yours is of course. I've read enough of it to know.)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)