Why do you write?

[MillyBecker]

Hi, I'm fairly new here...lurk often, but I'm not real chatty....maybe that will change. I just wanted to pose to you all the question of 'Why do you write?' and tell you my answer. I'm curious to know how many are like me.

I'm probably never going to be famous, at least not for this. I don't care really about making money. I write because I have to. I have these people in my head that have to get out on paper. I don't think I could ever ignore the urge I have to write; to create, to play God to fictional people. I think I'm good, but it wouldn't surprise to me to find out that I'm not.

I've written 2 complete novels. One was 120,000 words; it's sequel was 80,000. I'm sure both could editing (again), but the folks who have read them have had nothing but good to say about them. Yes, and some would have told me if they were bad.

The other night someone asked me if I had written anything else she could read. That's why I write. If one person enjoys it and wants more, tben it's worth it. I'm not doing this to get famous or even rich.

Does that make me weird?

[mdmkay]

Does that make you weird???????? uhhhhhhhh no it makes you a writer.

I'm both an artist and a writer and I could actually go longer without painting then I ever could writing. I've written for as long as I can remember. It started out just on pieces of paper, then diaries, moved on to journals, poetry in journals, stories, onto books................what can I say....at least I'm evolving.

[Crista]

I write mostly because I can't NOT write. I've been making up stories in my head about imaginary people since I was a very little girl. I've tried to talk myself OUT of writing, but I always seem to come back with another story or another character just burning to get out of my head and on paper. I guess it's just a habit that I can't escape.

A small part of it is ego as well. I get a rush when people read my work and are moved by it, whether it be to laughter or tears or both. I like entertaining people and writing has always felt like the perfect blending of my two loves; amusing people and telling stories.

[DeZertFairy]

Hello, Im also new here and my reasons are nearly identicle to Becky's. I get these people ( characters ) in my head and they just wont let me alone, until I get them out. My love of writting started when I had a teacher that was all about creative writting in grade school. I'd set my mind to whatever story and next think I knew I had a notebook full! It only got worse as I got older.
I dont claim to have much tallent, but I used to let my dearest friends ( I dont even let my husband read my stuff ) read and even now they'll ask if I've written anything else.
The only time my characters were even quiet was after my daughter was born, but a year or so ago they started up again, so Im back at it. Who knows, maybe someday I'll acutally finish a project and submit it... just for the heck of it :)
~Dez

[Jamesaritchie]

I write because I'm good at it, because I enjoy writing, and because I get paid for it. Take any one of these three reasons out of the mix and I'd stop writing in a New York Nanosecond. Life is way the heck too short to spend it doing things I'm not good at, or don't enjoy doing, and there are enough things I'm good at and enjoy that I may as well spend my time doing the one that pays.

I certainly don't have to write. I don't even believe in the concept. Like everything else, writing, or not writing, is a choice.

[willietheshakes]

To woo women...

[Paul J. Andrew]

In the hope of eventually getting paid to... because I've decided that following the dark side and becoming a retail grocery store manager isn't my cup of anything.

[GPatten]

I write because I’m a storyteller. I like to tell about the neat things I see, or think of. I guess I would like to gather a few people around me as I sit on the porch and unfold a story of interest to them. I’d like to watch them listen to something they enjoy listening to.

I may even wish that I could stand up and stuff some corn silk in my nose and around my ears as I dance in front of them, tell a few lines, sing a sone of doo-dee-doo all day while slapping my knee - -one foot up and the other foot down, and continue on with my story. Pass the popcorn out and have a little myself. Chewing and talking, but heck! Ya can’t do that in a novel, can yah?

Can anyone think of how much fun it would be write a book and watch people read it and enjoy your work?

[Mistook]

I write because fiction offers the most bang for the buck (so does speak). With painting, you spend a small fortune on supplies, and spend weeks or months to capture one little moment on a finite canvas.

With music you must work out ego issues with several band mates, and logistical issues as to playing out. If not you must learn to use complicated equipment and master several instruments before your vision can materialize. Either way it costs ten times the fortune that painters incur.

Sculpture requires too much elbow grease. Dance is even more physically demanding. Theatre is frought with backstage melodrama. Screenplays are too limiting. Poetry is too mysterious.

I write because, with a cheep word processor, and the strength of my ten fingers, I can give life to the fullness of my imagination, complete with characters, plot, lyricism, scenery, and all five senses, in a nice long story that might just make me a buck.

[Garpy]

money, fame, the groupies.....

[Garpy]

I write because I'd hate to go back to my old day job. Hang on, thinking about it...I actually don't like writing. I don't like having to force myself to sit down for three hours a day and peck out words....I hate that.

But...I love the fact that people who have read my inane, shallow , artless gibberings...really get sucked into it and enjoy it, and that alone makes it all worthwhile....that and the few sheckles I might earn at the end of the day.

[zornhau]

I write because that's who I am.

Hippy-sh#t answer I know, but really it's what I've always done; used the page as a brain extension so the stuff in my head becomes more vivid.

I write seriously because I'm also a craftsman at heart, and because it would be nice to be paid.

[loquax]

I'm, sure there's the whole immortality thing about it, too. How cool would it be if people were reading your stuff 500 years after you died... teaching it to school kids.... school kids hating it... oh yeah, that's what I want.

[BenMears]

Becky, with such a beautiful signature, one can only hope you will post more often.

I write because it gives me pleasure. Pleasure has to be seen in a "big picture" sense, since if you were watching me day-to-day you might begin to suspect I write because I like pain. But no, there is big pleasure in finishing something challenging, and lots of little pleasures along the way. Each word written can be a source of joy if you choose to look at it that way.

I don't have adoring fans asking me for something else to read. I haven't gotten to the point of reading the stuff over yet myself. But I choose to take pleasure in creating it day by day.

[MadScientistMatt]

Well, I've written a few short stories, poems, and even a few aborted starts at science fiction novels simply for the fun of it. I even started on a screenplay about cars after walking out of The Fast and the Furious thinking, "I could write a better script than that," and nearly finished it. But then after talking with a few people who were interested in learning to modify cars, including my girlfriend, I got the idea to write and publish a nonfiction how-to book on the subject.

I've just finished the rough draft on that. But that project kind of got the ball rolling and made me realize that if I can finish one book-length work, I can finish more. So right now I'm writing as much for the fun of it as anything else, but I definitely hope to be able to get readers and money from my writing, too.

[Princesstilly]

I have always written, it's always been my identity, deep down inside. I have chosen to ignore this identity off and on over the years but I find that when I write I am happy and when I don't there is a low-grade sadness over my life, like nothing else is truly enjoyable unless I am writing.

Writing is what I do for me, like taking long bubble baths, even if it's only for an hour a day. Unfortunately, it is too easy to put myself on the bottom of my "to do" list, so I am just getting back into writing after about a year away.

Leanne

[JerseyGirl1962]

I guess it's a combo for me. I have stories in my head that I must get down on paper, and I think others might enjoy the ride. Not only that, I would love to become a career novelist because I'm sick of the commute to work and work itself.

It pays well, so I'm not about to give up this job any time soon.:tongue

But my job isn't creative, and the stories I have are the creative juice that keeps me going. I think everyone should have a creative outlet to get through life, whether it's to eventually make money at or just for fun and stimulation.
:)
~Nancy

[maestrowork]

As a wise friend used to say (quoting his father):

1. choose something you love to do and could do better than many/most people
2. do it and do it again and again
3. better yet, do it for money
4. quit when you lose your passion for it and move on. Repeat.

[ANNIE]

Words are magic, and I want to be a wizard

[icerose]

I have always made up stories in my head, characters, worlds ect. Imagination has played a big role in my life. I started writing my first novel when I was 12, I stopped because of a stupid unreliable computer and floppy disks. I picked back up when I was 17 because I had a story in my head and I held the desire to write it. But what helped pushed me into my writing role is this. I married when I was eighteen, right after I graduated early and we had a baby girl before I was nineteen. I went from going to school full time, working full time, going to the gym, taking classes such as martial arts to being a stay at home mom with nothing to do but to take care of a newborn and staring at the TV. I was going insane, absolutely losing my mind. I started writing again and what can I say, I'm addicted. I hope to someday be paid for it, but I love writing and I could not give it up at this point even if I never sold a book ever. There is great pleasure from having others read my work and love it, but I would still write even if they hated it. Writing challenges my mind and my senses and keeps me from banging my head into the wall as I stay home raising my kids.

Sara

[DTKelly]

I write because it quells the voices in my head.

[Dhewco]

This doesn't seem to equate perfectly with the others, but I write to escape. When I'm putting words on the paper, I'm in that world, on that spaceship, fighting that bad guy. I have a strong imagination and put it to use.

It's what makes revision so painful. That's when I'm in this world and have to concentrate on perfecting my sentence structure, watching for homonyms that I accidently switched, and other such things.

David

[aka eraser]

It pays better than fishing. ;)

[maestrowork]

It pays better than fishing. ;)

Smells better, too.

[wideawakesoh]

At the risk of sounding (or being) a little bit rude, I would just like to say that all you who said you're writing for the money or fame who weren't joking should be shot, stabbed repeatedly with a steak knife dipped in battery acid, and then slowly disemboweled one inch at a time with a pair of wooden ice tongs. I'm sorry, but if you're writing for the money, you're writing for the wrong reasons and you're probably not any good anyway. I was very glad to see that most people write for the same reason I do, I'm far too insane not to put the voices in my head on paper, but I was shocked to see that some people actually said they do it for the money. I hate to tell you, but with the exception of those chosen few on the racks at your local bookstore (and compared to how many of us wish we were there, there are very few), most of us will never know the joy of writing for a lot of money, getting paid for what you love to do. You may hack out a living in freelance or journalism, but bestsellerdom is beyond the reach of many of us in the end, so those of you who are writing for the cash may as well quit while you're ahead and save us all alot of time and bad writing. Once again, sorry, but it's the truth. Writing is not a trade of dollars, it is a trade of words, very simply. If you don't write because you love words, your own words will not be loved by others. The late great John D. MacDonald believed that, and I believe it too (not that I'm in the same league with MacDonald, but I'm trying to make a point, so bear with me). Write for the love of it, write for the pride of seeing your story spill out on the page, write to please yourself, and your writing will be a great deal better.

And above all...
Keep writing,
wideawakesoh

"Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things that escape those who dream by night."
Edgar Allen Poe

I LOVE THIS FREAKIN' BANANA!!! :banana:

[Mike Martyn]

Why do I write?

Like I have a choice?

I was perfectly happy not writing until last October when the Muse landed on me hard.

If someone had told me the above say, last September, I would have told them they were full of crap. Actually I would have thought it, being far too polite to actually say it.

So far I've completed one novel (rough draft 100,000 words), a novella and some short stories as well as 10,000 words into my second novel.

My question is this. Will the Muse, for want of a better word, disappear as suddenly as she appereared?

[Promoman]

Words are magic, and I want to be a wizard

I like that! :)

I write because it's my job. I write fiction because it gives me an escape from the job and life itself. I'm in control of the whole picture when I write a story, even when the characters tend to develop a life of their own. In a way, it makes up for the fact that I'm so not in control of "reality."

I also write because I hope to please people with what I have written. I still remember writing stories in school that my classmates enjoyed reading and WANTED to read. That feeling, to me, is one that never really leaves you and only gets stronger when you feel that there is a story inside you that needs to get out.

[PattiTheWicked]

I write because otherwise all the stuff in my head would have no place to go.

Seriously, I can't imagine not writing. When I was married to my first husband, he wasn't real supportive and so I stopped writing for about five years. I felt like something was missing, not just from my life, but from me. I had no choice -- I *had* to start writing again.

The fact that some folks are willing to pay to read my work is an added bonus.

[cwfgal]

I write because I can and because I want to.

Beth

[aka eraser]

wideawakesoh, despite your nick I don't think you've quite smelled the coffee yet.

Is it okay for plumbers, engineers, waiters, actors and store clerks to do their jobs for money? How about nurses, airline pilots and those in the military?

I know! They should all just do it for love! What a blissful world we'd have then!

There is zero, nothing, absolutely zilch wrong with writing to make a living. Think John D. didn't cash his cheques? Think he didn't bother reading his contracts or negotiate better advances because he was writing for the heck of it?

Many young writers (and some older ones) are in love with the idea of being a writer. That's fine. But if you want to twin the concepts of "writer" and "make a living," reality, in the form of $, needs to be acknowledged.

It's entirely possible to write for fun, for self-expression and expect to be paid for it.

And contrary to your claim, some of us who do, are also darned good writers.

[wideawakesoh]

I don't mean that its not okay to write for a living, but that's not all you should do it for. That's all I'm saying. Its great to make money, and if you can, you should, but honestly, if you're not doing it for love it, there's no point. It's the same with any other profession. I'm not trying to deny the reality of money, just the idea that writing is something you do just to get paid. Maybe I'm idealistic, but I really think there's more to it than that.

[MillyBecker]

I'm so happy to know that most of you have these voices in your head that need to escape, too. I am willing to bet that people who don't have them will never understand.

I had a hell of a ttime explaining to my husband why I was writing a book with really no intention of sending it to a publisher. It was my first one, and I was just writing it to see if I could. I wrote it mainly as therapy after our daughter died. When I was in high school, I used to write stories about my friends, and they loved them. They expected a new one each day. I wrote a novella back then, bound it in a 3-ring binder and it got passed around through 2 different schools before I got it back. That was when I got hooked on the idea that I could write things that people actually WANTED to read.

Maybe one day, I'll write something that I think might be good enough to sell, but until then, I'll keep writing them myself and printing them independently just so I can have my very own lending library of things I wrote.

[brinkett]

I write because I can and because I want to.

I like your attitude.


I write because otherwise all the stuff in my head would have no place to go.

Ditto.

[NeuroFizz]

It's fun. No kidding. All day long, I back up everything I do with experimental proof and controlled experiments. At night, I can just make stuff up. That's fun.

[Thekherham]

Why do I write? Because I want to be rich and famous, like Stephen King. I want to live in a fancy house, and I want to have three or four cars, at least one of them a Rolls Royce. I want to appear on all the major talk shows, hawking my newest work, and when someone weants to turn one of my books into a movie, I want to write the screenplay and be the director... and the star, of course.
*slaps himself upside the head.

No, no, no, that's not why I write.

I write because I have so many stories in my head and I want to let out the words, and the only way I can do that is to write everything down.

Think about your writing first. Never think about fame and fortune. The more you think about them, the further away they will be.

[icerose]

I'm so happy to know that most of you have these voices in your head that need to escape, too. I am willing to bet that people who don't have them will never understand.

The other night a few of my characters who have been playing mute came back and decided to talk to me again. At one o'clock in the morning I might add!! My husband was still up, but I had gone to bed two hours earlier and when he saw me rubbing my eyes and muttering to myself. He was confused. I turned on my computer and muttered some more and began writing.

He looked at me and said. "What are you doing?"

"My stupid characters decided after all this time to start talking to me again and they won't leave me alone."

He looked at me like I had completely lost it. It is true, those who have never had characters in their head, talking to them, will never understand. They will always think you have fallen off the cliff of sanity.

I thought it was funny.

[Sharon Mock]

I've tried not writing. It didn't go very well.

There are any number of reasons why I write, but they all boil down to the same thing: It's what I do. And it's a way of making my voice heard.

[loquax]

In response to wideawakesoh, this is from Phillip Pullman's site; a response to the question "what inspires you to write?"

Three things. (1) Money. I do this for a living. If I don't write well, I won't earn enough money to pay the bills. (2) The desire to make some sort of mark on the world - to make my name known. To leave something behind that will last a little longer than I do. (3) The sheer pleasure of craftsmanship: the endlessly absorbing delight of making things - in my case, stories - and of gradually learning more about how they work, and how to make them better.

Nothing about voices in his head. Quite frankly, I'm worried about most of you guys...

[scribbler1382]

I write when the fear of NOT writing gets too great.

[sassandgroove]

When I don't write, i get very grumpy. I call my journal "Getting out the Grump."
When I don't write my stories, I get twitchy, I get frustrated, I cry a lot.
I write because it is the only thing I am willing to get up at 5am to do.
I write because the characters are like my children and I want to share their stories with the world.

[Azure Skye]

I write because I have an active imagination and the stuff sloshing around in my grey cells has to come out or I'll go nuts.

Now that I'm writing more often I can actually say it's fun and I enjoy it.

And I have absolutely no problem admitting I would love to make a comfortable living off of something I love to do. Money isn't my motivation though.

[Jamesaritchie]

At the risk of sounding (or being) a little bit rude, I would just like to say that all you who said you're writing for the money or fame who weren't joking should be shot, stabbed repeatedly with a steak knife dipped in battery acid, and then slowly disemboweled one inch at a time with a pair of wooden ice tongs. I'm sorry, but if you're writing for the money, you're writing for the wrong reasons and you're probably not any good anyway. I was very glad to see that most people write for the same reason I do, I'm far too insane not to put the voices in my head on paper, but I was shocked to see that some people actually said they do it for the money. I hate to tell you, but with the exception of those chosen few on the racks at your local bookstore (and compared to how many of us wish we were there, there are very few), most of us will never know the joy of writing for a lot of money, getting paid for what you love to do. You may hack out a living in freelance or journalism, but bestsellerdom is beyond the reach of many of us in the end, so those of you who are writing for the cash may as well quit while you're ahead and save us all alot of time and bad writing. Once again, sorry, but it's the truth. Writing is not a trade of dollars, it is a trade of words, very simply. If you don't write because you love words, your own words will not be loved by others. The late great John D. MacDonald believed that, and I believe it too (not that I'm in the same league with MacDonald, but I'm trying to make a point, so bear with me). Write for the love of it, write for the pride of seeing your story spill out on the page, write to please yourself, and your writing will be a great deal better.

And above all...
Keep writing,
wideawakesoh

"Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things that escape those who dream by night."
Edgar Allen Poe

I LOVE THIS FREAKIN' BANANA!!! :banana:

I think, if you don't want to write for money, you shouldn't. But I also think you know nothing of what you speak. There is no wrong reason to write, and talent does not increase because you think you have voices in your head, or decrese because you write for money. You aren't going to be one bit more talented because you love something, as any number of failed writers could attest. Nor will you be one bit worse because you hate something, as many pro writers also attest.

Readers will love what you write solely because of how well it's done, and some of the best and most successful writers I've ever known swore to one and all that they hated the process of writing.

The late John D. MacDonald was a very good writer, but he was also flat wrong on this subject.

It's true enough that bestsellerdom is out of the reach of most, but it isn't because they lack love, it's because they lack talent and dedication. I could name any number of writers who absolutely love writing, and who, after five or ten or twenty years of intense effort, still can't write a decent grocery list. Likewise, I've met far too many writer who didn't like writing at all, who went into it purely for the money, and who succeeded wildly right off the bat because their talent level was far above average.

Now, personally, if I didn't enjoy the process of writing, I wouldn't be a writer. I think life is too short to spend it doing something I don't enjoy. But in all honesty, there are many things I enjoy doing, and some I enjoy a great deal more than writing. Trouble is, I lack enough talent in most of those other things to consistently be among the best, or there simply is no reasonable way to make money off the ones I do very well.

I have no voices in my head. Neither does anyone else who is mentally healthy. It's just imagaination, game playing, and often babblespeak. . .a way to make writing seem something more than it really is. And if a person really does have voices in their head other than their own, well, that's a treatable ailment.

Now, when I first sat down to write a short story I had zero desire to be a writer, there were no voices in my head other than my own, and I didn't have a clue whether or not I would love or hate writing. As it turned out, I did enjoy the process of writing a good deal. I found it fun. But I sat down to write that first short story purely and simply because I needed some spare cash. I read where Robert Heinlein said he wrote his first short story purely because he had an electric bill he couldn't pay, so I saw no reason why I might not do what he had done.

I wrote that first long short story in two days, and it sold first time out. So did the next two stories, and then a novel I wrote in three weeks. Not one of them sold because of love, hate, or ambivalence. Not one of them was written because of love, hate, or ambivalence. They were all written for the money.

Your writing is not going to be better because you love writing, or worse because you hate it. Writing is good purely and simply because of the talent level, dedication, and experience of the writer. Writing is bad purely and simply because the writer lacks talent. I don't need love to write a great story anymore than I need love drive a car well. Some things just come naturally to some people, even when they hate doing that thing, and some thngs just come extremely hard, or not at all, to some people, no matter how much love and desire they have. The world is full of failed people in every profession who love that profession above all things, and there will always be many who succeed wildly simply because they have a triple helping of talent, even though the love is missing.

Now, again, I do enjoy writing, else I wouldn't do it. I enjoy it, I get a buzz from it. But let's face it, love is a strong word. And enjoy it or not, writing for money is roughly a thousand times easier than shovelling coal for money, farming for money, snaking logs out of a frozen woods for money, or getting shot at for money, all of which I've done.

If love plays a real part in writing ability, it's love of reading, not love of writing that makes the difference. I'm sure I've never met a successful writer who did not love to read fiction. But I've met far too many pro writers, very good, highly successful. much loved writers, who don't even like writing, let alone love it, to believe for a second that love is a necessity. And I've met far, far too many writers who loved writing more than breathing, but who couldn't write with any discernable level of talent, who were lousy and stayed lousy, to think love plays some real role.

Judging from all the writers I've known, I'm really starting to believe, as one editor said, that the successful writer who likes the writing process is the rare exception, not the rule.

So when it comes to love and quality, I'm much more on the side of Samuel Johnson (No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money)than John D. MacDonald.

There simply is no wrong reason to write, and the only real reason to write is because you want to, and you can want to for any reason at all. Love, money, or to get back at you ex, or to prove you aren't a loser, are all fine reasons. For me, it would be doing something day in and day out that I'm no good at, that I lack talent for, that would be without point.

[reph]

...those of you who are writing for the cash may as well quit while you're ahead and save us all alot of time and bad writing.
I see it's time to post the announcement again about how "alot" isn't a word.

I write because I lost my steady editing gig when a publisher of academic journals went to a computer system that excluded me.

[maestrowork]

There's nothing wrong with writing for money, especially if you're good at it and people are paying you for it. Whether you love what you do is entirely another matter.

Most people in the world do things they dislike for money. It's actually a blessing to a lot of people if they can make money doing something they love.

Writing is no different. Some people do it for love. Some people do it for money. Some people do it for both.

Nothing's wrong with either.

[willietheshakes]

Once again, sorry, but it's the truth.

No, that's an opinion. An adversarial, myopic, bitter opinion.
IMHO, of course.

Writing is not a trade of dollars, it is a trade of words, very simply.

Really?
Then I wonder why my publishers keep sending me these cheques?
Perhaps for my good looks. Or my tact.

[Jamesaritchie]

There are certa8nly successful writers who love writing, but while I don't know how many will step forward, there are some pretty darned successful writers who pass through this forum who don't enjoy the process of writing at all.

It has been my experience that those who yell the loudest about writing being a matter of love instead of money are usually not making any money.

Or are making so much money they feel guilty about it. Even Stephen King at one time talked about quitting writing when he wasn't selling. I don't think you talk about quitting something if you're really doing it for pure love.

[reph]

Then I wonder why my publishers keep sending me these cheques?
Just like wideawake said, it's a trade of words. You send them some words, and they send you some words.

"Pay." "To." "The." "Order." "Of." Those are words, every one of 'em.

Nice words, too.

[AncientEagle]

I write so somebody will read it and say, "Hey! This is really good!"

[Mistook]

Man, I love it when a thread gets all bent out of shape and it isn't my fault :)

I'll take James' point to be that a great writer is able to get beyond the love of one's own work (That might not be his point at all, but that's what I'll take from it.)

Mothers of convicted serial killers always love their sons and refuse to beleive their mad offspring are guilty of anything. This kind of blind love is pointless, and probably is at the root of what went wrong with the kid - at least in this analogy.

Point being, that if you love writing so much that you can't see when and where it sucks, or understand why, then odds are, you're submitting crap to editors. Pains must be taken. Nobody gets paid for anything that isn't work, and work is hard. That's just how it is in this world.

What I don't agree with is this idea that there are "chosen ones" who are born with a gift for writing, and unless you're one of these few freaks of nature, you haven't a prayer in the world of ever getting published. My philosophy is, "What one man can do, another man can do."

[AncientEagle]

And when the right people say that, they send me money.

[scribbler1382]

Isn't there a difference between setting out to write for money, and making money as a by-product of writing? I sure think there is. I write (when I can tame the rest of my world) because I'm a writer. It's not what I do, it's who I am. It's how I think and how I see the world. If there is anything that defines me, writing is it.

That being said, if you think I'd look twice at a dumptruck full of greenbacks, you're a fool.

[AncientEagle]

Reph,

In your usage tip for today, you say: "Leave out 'on'." Is it okay if, instead, I leave "on" out?

[Jamesaritchie]

What I don't agree with is this idea that there are "chosen ones" who are born with a gift for writing, and unless you're one of these few freaks of nature, you haven't a prayer in the world of ever getting published. My philosophy is, "What one man can do, another man can do."

I'm not sure this is really an answerable question, but I do believe without doubt that something called talent exists, and that some have it and some don't. I don't think it has anything to do with being a freak of nature. It's a normal and natural thing, and happens or not everytime someone is born. Most people have talent, just not the same ones. Some are born with a natural gift for math, or for music, some are born with a natural bent toward hand/eye coordination, etc. Some are born with the right brain makeup to make writing well come much easier than it does for others.

I don't think it takes a ton of talent to be a successful writer, but I do think talent really helps, and the more talent you have, the easier it is to become a good writer. You can certainly hone whatever talent you have, but you can't hone what you don't have, and the more talent you have the less honing it takes.

And in plain truth, there is no other explanation for the extraordinary ability of some writers at such a young age other than inborn talent.

Whatever talent is, I also believe many who want to be writers lack enough of it to be successful. . .or they never find that area of writing where they do have enough talent. I've seen too many writers read and read and read, study and study and study, take writing class after writing class, after writing class, and write pretty much every day for years and years without even getting close to writing professional level fiction to think that talent doesn't play an important role.

There are those who struggle for years, and then break through, but I've found most writers who have talent write pretty well right from the start. They sell a short story pretty quickly, their writing draws positive feedback from pro editors, thier first novel or two sells, etc. Even if they don't hit the bigtime for many years, the talent is there from the beginning, and some success usually happens very quickly. Maybe not with the first short story, but within a year or two of steady writing, certainly.

I'm not altogether certain exactly what talent is, though the simplest definition "A person who possesses unusual innate ability in some field or activity" is probably the best. Whatever it is, I think it's needed in pretty much any field you wish to be successful at, and I don't believe everyone has the talent for writing anymore than I believe everyone has the talent for math or music or tightrope walking. I do believe the only way you'll ever really know whether or not you have the talent is to try.

But to my mind, there's no reason at all to think we aren't born with or without certain natural abilities. This is just too easily demonstrable through all sorts of studies. No two brains are wired exactly alike, or even work exactly the same way or at the same level. What I would find completely unbelievable is the notion that we aren't born with certain talents and gifts and natural abilities.

I doubt this means you can't succeed without a good deal of natural talent, but it does mean the more natural talent you have, the smoother the road will be, and the faster you'll reach your destination.

As for love and writing, it's probably best to love what you do, certainly it's more pleasant to do something day in and day out if you love doing it, but it isn't necessary. I know what a story is, I know what good characters are, and I have an ear for dialogue. Fiction, for me, is about telling the truth in the form of a story. None of these things require love to do well. They require knowledge, experience, and talent. Making it all work is, for me, an intellectual exercise, not an emotional one.

People fail miserably at things all the time, no matter how long and how hard they try, no matter how much they love whatever it is. And people succeed wildly at things all the time, even when putting in very little effort, and when not liking whatever it is at all.

It more sense to me to think we're each born with individual talents than to think we're all born with equal talents, and we can all succeed at whatever we wish if we just love it enough and work hard enough. We can't. I've found too many things in my life that I simply could not do well, and all the work and love in the world didn't make me anywhere near as good as some around me were right from the start.

I went to school with a kid who had had zero musical training, but in a few months learned to play astonishingly well, and by age ten was already at professional level. His parents didn't play, didn't encourage him, but almost from the moment he sat down at the piano he was amazing. Another kid was an amazing sketch artist, and by the sixth grade, he was better than any art teach I believe I've ever had. And he didn't really work at it. Everything he knew was learned right in the same classes we all took. I worked twenty times as hard as this kid, both at school and at home, and I was never one tenth as good.

Hard work and dedication are very important, no matter how much talent you have, but hard work and dedication without talent just isn't going to cut it.

But my own philosophy of life is pretty simple. I believe the wise person finds something he or she is good at, and something he or she enjoys doing. But good is more important than enjoyment. I don't care how much you love doing something, or how hard you work at it, you still may suck at whatever it is, and I believe one of the worst epitaphs anyone can have is, "Who knows, he may have been good at something else."

[Jamesaritchie]

Isn't there a difference between setting out to write for money, and making money as a by-product of writing? I sure think there is. I write (when I can tame the rest of my world) because I'm a writer. It's not what I do, it's who I am. It's how I think and how I see the world. If there is anything that defines me, writing is it.

That being said, if you think I'd look twice at a dumptruck full of greenbacks, you're a fool.

I think there's a difference between setting out to write for money, and making money as a byproduct, but there is no difference in quality or importance. The difference is only in why the perosn is writing. Period.

I think we all write because we choose to write. If you're a writer, it's because that's how you choose to define yourself. You could as easily have been born in a rotten family in a rotten country and be illiterate. And if you'd never learned to read or write, then who would you be?

And if being a writer is not what you do but who you are, then who are you during those times when you aren't writing?

[reph]

Reph,

In your usage tip for today, you say: "Leave out 'on'." Is it okay if, instead, I leave "on" out?
What are you talking about?

[alanna]

In answer to the original post, I write because I can, and I love it. I also write to fill the time. If I have more than an hour of nothing to do I feel like a lazy sloth the rest of the day. So I fill my time with self-appointed goals. Writing is number one on that list. I write because I hope one day to have a good enough manuscript to be published, and seeing my name on a bookshelf would be the thrill of a lifetime...you know, as long as I'm the author, not just the punchline. I write because I get this funny little tingly itch in the back of my brain, which means that I have something to write about- and I hate an itch I can't scratch.

I also write because my characters will mutiny and slay their creator if I don't keep them busy. That would be bad for morale. :Shrug:

[Mistook]

I'm not sure this is really an answerable question, but I do believe without doubt that something called talent exists, and that some have it and some don't. I don't think it has anything to do with being a freak of nature. It's a normal and natural thing, and happens or not everytime someone is born. Most people have talent, just not the same ones. Some are born with a natural gift for math, or for music, some are born with a natural bent toward hand/eye coordination, etc. Some are born with the right brain makeup to make writing well come much easier than it does for others.

I don't think it takes a ton of talent to be a successful writer, but I do think talent really helps, and the more talent you have, the easier it is to become a good writer. You can certainly hone whatever talent you have, but you can't hone what you don't have, and the more talent you have the less honing it takes.

And in plain truth, there is no other explanation for the extraordinary ability of some writers at such a young age other than inborn talent.

Whatever talent is, I also believe many who want to be writers lack enough of it to be successful. . .or they never find that area of writing where they do have enough talent. I've seen too many writers read and read and read, study and study and study, take writing class after writing class, after writing class, and write pretty much every day for years and years without even getting close to writing professional level fiction to think that talent doesn't play an important role.

There are those who struggle for years, and then break through, but I've found most writers who have talent write pretty well right from the start. They sell a short story pretty quickly, their writing draws positive feedback from pro editors, thier first novel or two sells, etc. Even if they don't hit the bigtime for many years, the talent is there from the beginning, and some success usually happens very quickly. Maybe not with the first short story, but within a year or two of steady writing, certainly.

I'm not altogether certain exactly what talent is, though the simplest definition "A person who possesses unusual innate ability in some field or activity" is probably the best. Whatever it is, I think it's needed in pretty much any field you wish to be successful at, and I don't believe everyone has the talent for writing anymore than I believe everyone has the talent for math or music or tightrope walking. I do believe the only way you'll ever really know whether or not you have the talent is to try.

But to my mind, there's no reason at all to think we aren't born with or without certain natural abilities. This is just too easily demonstrable through all sorts of studies. No two brains are wired exactly alike, or even work exactly the same way or at the same level. What I would find completely unbelievable is the notion that we aren't born with certain talents and gifts and natural abilities.

I doubt this means you can't succeed without a good deal of natural talent, but it does mean the more natural talent you have, the smoother the road will be, and the faster you'll reach your destination.

As for love and writing, it's probably best to love what you do, certainly it's more pleasant to do something day in and day out if you love doing it, but it isn't necessary. I know what a story is, I know what good characters are, and I have an ear for dialogue. Fiction, for me, is about telling the truth in the form of a story. None of these things require love to do well. They require knowledge, experience, and talent. Making it all work is, for me, an intellectual exercise, not an emotional one.

People fail miserably at things all the time, no matter how long and how hard they try, no matter how much they love whatever it is. And people succeed wildly at things all the time, even when putting in very little effort, and when not liking whatever it is at all.

It more sense to me to think we're each born with individual talents than to think we're all born with equal talents, and we can all succeed at whatever we wish if we just love it enough and work hard enough. We can't. I've found too many things in my life that I simply could not do well, and all the work and love in the world didn't make me anywhere near as good as some around me were right from the start.

I went to school with a kid who had had zero musical training, but in a few months learned to play astonishingly well, and by age ten was already at professional level. His parents didn't play, didn't encourage him, but almost from the moment he sat down at the piano he was amazing. Another kid was an amazing sketch artist, and by the sixth grade, he was better than any art teach I believe I've ever had. And he didn't really work at it. Everything he knew was learned right in the same classes we all took. I worked twenty times as hard as this kid, both at school and at home, and I was never one tenth as good.

Hard work and dedication are very important, no matter how much talent you have, but hard work and dedication without talent just isn't going to cut it.

But my own philosophy of life is pretty simple. I believe the wise person finds something he or she is good at, and something he or she enjoys doing. But good is more important than enjoyment. I don't care how much you love doing something, or how hard you work at it, you still may suck at whatever it is, and I believe one of the worst epitaphs anyone can have is, "Who knows, he may have been good at something else."

James, extremely well said. Thank you.

[mdmkay]

Maybe I should rephrase my response a bit.........I may write because I need to.....but I study how to write and practice my writing so I can get paid to do so. If I just needed to just write my journals would continue to do the job quite well. It's kind of like my artwork. I have a closet full of very good paintings but I haven't had the physical wellness needed to get out there, get them into galleries, and get them sold. With paintings it takes much more physical effort to get them seen then it does writing; which is why I'm concentrating on my writing at this point until my health improves to the point I can do both. It also takes more energy to actually paint the paintings then it does for me to write....not that I don't enjoy painting immensly, it just isn't in the cards for me right now as far as an occupation. It's actually a bit maddening at times because as an artist I've already experienced sales and some success but as a writer that is still to be seen.

[scribbler1382]

I think there's a difference between setting out to write for money, and making money as a byproduct, but there is no difference in quality or importance. The difference is only in why the perosn is writing. Period.

I think we all write because we choose to write. If you're a writer, it's because that's how you choose to define yourself. You could as easily have been born in a rotten family in a rotten country and be illiterate. And if you'd never learned to read or write, then who would you be?

Very true, in which case whatever was chosen as a life would be the defining factor. That choice could just as easily be "to be the best whittler" or "to be a great Father and Husband". It doesn't have to be a profession or a job. People do what they can with what they have. If you have a talent for writing and you have the good fortune to live in a situation that allows you to realize it, then that's your definition. Self-awareness is as big a part of it as the talent itself. You could be the greatest cubist ever born, but if you never picked up a brush or a chisel, I doubt very much that you would be aware of the proclivity.
And if being a writer is not what you do but who you are, then who are you during those times when you aren't writing?
There is no such time. Which was kind of what I was trying to get at, though apparently poorly. I don't have to have my hands on a keyboard or even have a pen in hand to be writing. I could be riding a bus, and when the shadows fall across my face in a certain way, the prose comes. It is literally how I think. But even if there are times when I'm not writing in any way, shape or form, it doesn't change who I am anymore than a fish would stop being a fish if you took it out of the water.

[Button]

Because I'm addicted to white pages.

Honestly? I write because I day dream like crazy during the day... got to let it all out somehow. And every time I read a really good book I go "THAT'S what I want to do."

[jen.nifer]

Because it's the only thing that I am passionate about.

[Mistook]

There is no such time. [as the time I'm not writing] Which was kind of what I was trying to get at, though apparently poorly. I don't have to have my hands on a keyboard or even have a pen in hand to be writing. I could be riding a bus, and when the shadows fall across my face in a certain way, the prose comes. It is literally how I think. But even if there are times when I'm not writing in any way, shape or form, it doesn't change who I am anymore than a fish would stop being a fish if you took it out of the water.

Well now it's you, Scribbler, who've gone and made me rethink the rethought I unthunk the first time!

I'll assume you're a talented writer, I have no reason to think otherwise, but your point has got me thinking about "love of writing", so for the sake of argument, let's imagine a "lousy" writer, who never gets published, but is a writer nonetheless, with his whole heart and mind. Is it fair to call this guy a failure?

Often I have defended my own creative efforts this way, "I'm an artist, dammit! I may prove to be a crappy artist, but I'm an artist just the same."

Why is Ed Wood a cultural Icon? Because somehow in those horrible movies, he managed to film his own love of film-making. He may have been a crappy artist, but dammit, he was an artist.

Heart counts. Why God doesn't always pair it up with talent is some secret only he knows, but heart counts.

[Samuel Dark]

I write because it's my passion. I been writing for Lord know's how long, and I don't think I can ever stop. Who knows if I will be famous, but I'd be pamned if I don't get published. I love writing, and I don't think I will be sane if I stop. It's a part of me, inbedded in my soul -- for all time. If I stop, it will be like someone took my heart away...and not with me asleep, but with me tied down...feelings every once of pain.

I would go crazy...

or crazier...lol

:-D

[AncientEagle]

What are you talking about?

I was just joking with you. I noticed that, in that particular tip, as stated, "leave out 'on'" would mean the same as "leave 'on' out." I only notice really earth-shaking things like that. But don't let me upset you. Just continue on.

[scribbler1382]

for the sake of argument, let's imagine a "lousy" writer, who never gets published, but is a writer nonetheless, with his whole heart and mind. Is it fair to call this guy a failure?

What's your metric? How are you measuring this "failure"? If someone is doing what they love, what they're passionate about, then I don't see how anyone could classify them as a failure. Don't forget, most artists are never appreciated in their own time. But if you let the subjective mushroom squatters (critics) determine your worth, and you stop doing what you love, then you would be a failure, in my opinion.

You say heart and talent aren't always paired up, but neither is success and talent. Just because someone isn't published or published to the degree they desire, doesn't necessarily mean they don't have talent. And even a scant perusal of the shelves at any Barnes and Nobel will show you that the reciprocal is also true.

I think it's a characteristic of writers to look for approval from complete strangers they wouldn't trust to mow their lawns, and it's a hard trait to rail against, but don't let your self worth be determined by anyone but you. It's an empty approval that will leave you hollow and confused.

[Jamesaritchie]

Well now it's you, Scribbler, who've gone and made me rethink the rethought I unthunk the first time!

I'll assume you're a talented writer, I have no reason to think otherwise, but your point has got me thinking about "love of writing", so for the sake of argument, let's imagine a "lousy" writer, who never gets published, but is a writer nonetheless, with his whole heart and mind. Is it fair to call this guy a failure?.

Wouldn't that depend on what his goals were? If his goals were to become a published writer, to make money from his writing, then, yes, he FAILED.

Why are people so afraid of failure? Faillure is a fact of life, and if failure isn't possible, then neither is success. Anyone who hasn't failed simply hasn't tried enough things. People fail, and failure does not turn into success because you lower expectations to the point simple effort means you succeeded. One of the main reasons so many people do not succeed in life is because they're deathly afraid to admit failure and move on. Failure does not mean loser, does not mean bad person, does not mean anyting except you tried something you couldn't do well.

History is rife with any number of highly successful people who failed at many things before succeeding at something. The difference between these people and average people is that they weren't afraid to call failure what it is.

They say the only real failure is not trying. Balderdash. The only real failure is not admitting that you failed. Admitting you failed means you can move on, find another dream, dust it off, and set to work again. But when you don't admit failure, it often does become permanet. You keep hammering away at a mountain that simply isn't going to move, and you're suddenly a tired old man without the strength to dust off a new dream, and the best life has to offer is a list of might have beens, could have beens, and should have beens.

But as they say, success is easy. Just set your goals so low you'll acheive them no matter what happens.


Often I have defended my own creative efforts this way, "I'm an artist, dammit! I may prove to be a crappy artist, but I'm an artist just the same."

Somehow I knew the word "artist" was going to work it's way into this thread. They say whoever mentions Hitler first loses the argument. I think, when it's writer related, it should be whoever mentions "artist" first. If ever a word was without meaning, that word is "artist." And if ever a word was used as a synonym for "crap," that word is certainly "art."

Why is Ed Wood a cultural Icon? Because somehow in those horrible movies, he managed to film his own love of film-making. He may have been a crappy artist, but dammit, he was an artist.

Because he was so bad at what he did that it's amusing. He's fun to laugh at. Trust me, he never intended his movies or his abilities to be laughed at.
I don't watch his movies because he somehow inserted his love into them, I watch them because they stink more than anything else I can find, and watching something as horrendously bad as Plan 9 is something to laugh at with the guys. Trust me, no one I've ever watched Ed Wood with appreciated him in any way. It's just fun to watch something so bad you can't believe the guy was serious.

Maybe he was an artist, but if so, it just illustrates how little meaning the word "artist" really has.

Heart counts. Why God doesn't always pair it up with talent is some secret only he knows, but heart counts.

Of course heart counts. If it stops beating, you have to stop writing. Otherwise, I see no evidence at all that heart counts for much of anything.

Seriously, I think God does usually pair heart with talent. It's the person who makes the mistake. The person doesn't look around hard enough for something he loves doing AND has talent for.

I do enjoy writing a great deal. I am pretty good at it. I can earn money from it. I think the best possible life is finding something that contains all three of these things.

And, really, there are simply too many really lousy writers who love writing, and too many incredibly good writers who hate writing, to lend much credence to the value of heart.

[Jamesaritchie]

What's your metric? How are you measuring this "failure"? If someone is doing what they love, what they're passionate about, then I don't see how anyone could classify them as a failure. Don't forget, most artists are never appreciated in their own time. But if you let the subjective mushroom squatters (critics) determine your worth, and you stop doing what you love, then you would be a failure, in my opinion.

You say heart and talent aren't always paired up, but neither is success and talent. Just because someone isn't published or published to the degree they desire, doesn't necessarily mean they don't have talent. And even a scant perusal of the shelves at any Barnes and Nobel will show you that the reciprocal is also true.

I think it's a characteristic of writers to look for approval from complete strangers they wouldn't trust to mow their lawns, and it's a hard trait to rail against, but don't let your self worth be determined by anyone but you. It's an empty approval that will leave you hollow and confused.

I hear often that most artists aren't appreciated in their own time, but off the top of my head, out of the thousands of writers, painters, sculpters, etc., I can only think of a rare few who weren't appreciated in their own time. Maybe the critics didn't like them, but the public did. An artist who isn't appreciated in his own time is unlikely to be appreciated in any time. Unless she was a recluse who had no chance to be appreciated, or he was insane enough to cut off his ear and gain fame for artwork of, at best, questionable quality. It's very rare that an "artist" who isn't appreciated in his own time will ever be appreciated, and when it does happen, there's almost always an obvious reason for it.

I also disagree about Barnes & Noble. When you look at those shelves, you're looking at talent. It may not be talent you appreciate, but it's real, honest, substantial talent.

If doing what you love and are passionate about is all there is to success, then good, we're all wildly successful. No one fails, and there's no reason to care whether or not heart matters.

[reph]

I was just joking with you. I noticed that, in that particular tip, as stated, "leave out 'on'" would mean the same as "leave 'on' out." I only notice really earth-shaking things like that. But don't let me upset you. Just continue on.
Well, you certainly have an eye for detail.

[scribbler1382]

I don't know, James. There's merit in some of the things you say, but a lot of it seems just kinda....curmudgeonly. We'll have to agree to disagree, I think, because I doubt you could be dissuaded from the track your on.

[hpoppink]

I write for the following reasons:

1) It is the best tool I have for expressing myself. I consistently communicate better in writing than in speaking, singing, dancing, acting, etc. In other words, I'm good at it ... or at least comparatively better.

2) I have a weak memory, and writing strengthens it. The act of taking notes helps store information in the brain. I wouldn't know much detail about my own life story if I hadn't kept so many journals.

3) It is a career I can pursue from my home office. I want to be my children's primary caregiver, but I also want to make some extra money.

4) I am inspired by other writers. Particularly the truly excellent ones. Reading makes me want to write. It's a shame that I can't read and write at the same time, although I hear that is one of Uncle Jim's many assignments ...

[aruna]

But my own philosophy of life is pretty simple. I believe the wise person finds something he or she is good at, and something he or she enjoys doing. But good is more important than enjoyment. I don't care how much you love doing something, or how hard you work at it, you still may suck at whatever it is, and I believe one of the worst epitaphs anyone can have is, "Who knows, he may have been good at something else."

Great post - every word rings true.

[sassandgroove]

It more sense to me to think we're each born with individual talents than to think we're all born with equal talents, and we can all succeed at whatever we wish if we just love it enough and work hard enough. We can't. I've found too many things in my life that I simply could not do well, and all the work and love in the world didn't make me anywhere near as good as some around me were right from the start.

AMEN! THis may be a little off subject but I've felt that way for a long time. So many people try to fit us all in one cookie cutter (or three). My highschool guidence counselor had three views of students; academic, vocational, and drop outs. I didn't fit any of those catagories. (He pushed me toward academic. While I did well, I was unhappy) As a consequence I researched colleges on my own. I ended up at film school, which was a lot of fun, but after a while, I realized film wasn't my calling. But why not? I love movies. When I was younger I wanted to be a rockstar, but when I got a guitar and practiced, I found I liked playing alone in my room, but I never really got past "Red River Valley," nor did I find I wanted too. But why not? I love music. What was my point? A) We don't all fit one mold. B) Just because you love something doesn't make it your calling. After a lot of soul searching, it dawned on me I'd been dancing around my calling for years. In second grade I wrote stories my class mates liked. Second grade!!! In jr high/highschool, while pining after rock stars and dreaming of my own rock stardom, i secretly imagined what the back of my novel cover would say, and relished writing assignments at school. My time in film school was not wasted. I learned the basics of story telling and have a couple good scripts. But I don't live, eat, breath, sleep, movies. When push came to shove I wasn't willing to sacrifice for music or for movie success. But I am willing to get up at 5am to write, I am willing to spend Saturday mornings with my BIC, I am willing to live, eat, breath, sleep writing. Someone else posted that even when she was not in front of the computer and had no pen in her hand, she was still writing. That is so true. When I excercise, lay in bed, ride in the car, cook, clean, sit, breath, eat, sleep, I am thinking of my stories, my characters, words, plots, and description. When I look back, it has always been that way. And the best part is now that I am actually writing, and not just saying I want to write, the stories are new and fresh daily, instead of the same scene again and again, because I got those old scenes on paper.

As for writing for money vs. for the love of writing, well, I love writing, and write first because I enjoy it. But I work as a secretary for money (which I should be doing right now...) and I recently married. What is wrong with then setting the goal of finishing my novel and sending it to publishers so that I might one day make money so that I can stay home and have children?

[reph]

My highschool guidence counselor had three views of students; academic, vocational, and drop outs.
From the rest of your story, it seems that what he left out was artistic/literary. Welcome to the guidance department. Three pigeonholes, no waiting.

What is wrong with then setting the goal of finishing my novel and sending it to publishers so that I might one day make money so that I can stay home and have children?
What's wrong with it is, most novels don't earn enough to replace a full-time (or half-time) job. A series of writing projects can do it. I'm not sure you meant one novel would bring in that much money, but it kind of sounded like it.

[sassandgroove]

:Thumbs: Reph, you are correct, I don't believe one novel would bring enough to replace full time, but it is good of you to point that out. I rewrote my post in my head several times after i sent it. BUt work -er- my job beckons.

[Kiva Wolfe]

I guess write because I am self and character possessed to do it.

[sunandshadow]

Words are magic, and I want to be a wizard

This doesn't seem to equate perfectly with the others, but I write to escape.

Add these up and you get: writing a story is like casting a spell, hoping that you escape something you don't like about your life. Thus I write romances both to temporarily escape being lonely and as a wish/hope/prayer/spell that if I give my characters their happy ending, a happy ending might come to me.

Also there's the didactic angle - I think the biggest flaw of any human society is that people tend to be closeminded sheep, so I write stories which show how closemindedness leads to unnecessary suffering and openmindedness leads to happiness.

[Mistook]

...Somehow I knew the word "artist" was going to work it's way into this thread. They say whoever mentions Hitler first loses the argument. I think, when it's writer related, it should be whoever mentions "artist" first. If ever a word was without meaning, that word is "artist." And if ever a word was used as a synonym for "crap," that word is certainly "art."

Sheesh... when I refer to myself as an "artist", it's because I make music, draw pictures, and write stuff. These are all disciplines of "the arts" as contrasted with "the sciences" or "athletics". Nearly every day of the past ten years, I've worked on or finished a work of either music, illustration, or writing. Therefore, I am an artist, because "not an artist" is somebody who does not do art.

And as for dusting off dreams, that more or less explains my multitude of hobbies. As a kid I dreampt of being a comic book illustrator. It wasn't meant to be, but I've still kept up on my drawing, because it's enjoyable, and every once in a while I come up with something that's worth looking at.

In my teens my dream was to be a rock star. I learned to sing and play, to write and record. It was a fun period of my life, but again, it wasn't meant to be. Still, I keep up with it.

Two years ago I decided to try my hand at writing fiction. It's still early in the process for me. Maybe I'll fail to get published in this arena to, but it doesn't mean I won't keep up with it.

I consider the value of these artistic persuits to be equivalent to "study" if nothing else. The artworks themselves may or may not be crap, but my love for the arts is such that I'm willing to put my own two hands to the process in the name of a better understanding, if nothing else. And where's the failure in that?

As for Van Gogh, he worked in the style of impressionism, and he is an undisputed master of that style. To say that the value of his work is debatable, is patently ridiculous. You can't compare him to DaVinci, and assert that Van Gogh fails to portray realistic detail and perspective, because the opposite is true. DaVinci fails to be an impressionist.

At any rate, I'd have thought at least the impressionists had "arrived" by now, seeing as the cubists, abstracts, and pop artists are all also dead of old age, and meanwhile the photograph has more or less exposed "realism" as the fakery that it is.