posted
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.
posted
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.'
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
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. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
*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.
posted
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.
posted
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.)
Posts: 700 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
