Is writing a young person's game?

some creative fields like music, acting and maybe even screenwriting or journalism do favor youth (at least to start out) but i think in the field of general writing fiction or nonfiction and even art age is not a matter because the artists are 'invisible' and they dont have to be a year long bus tour that taxes their stamina and its probably a field where age actually adds to the creativity - knowledge, wisdom, experiences and skills favors maturity than youth

I'm another who read this and is glad that I'm not looking at screenwriting. With prose at least one's judged on the quality of their work.

Define "young."

Of course, younger writers also have an advantage in that they usually have a lot of free time in which to write. Their overhead is a lot lower (no family or mortgage), and they're happy to work at lousy jobs and live in tiny little apartments. Compared to some older guy who writes on the weekends and at night, it's a big advantage.

I don't think I could have written a very good book when I was 15 or 20. I am 40, and I think the extra 20 years of life have given me insight that I can put into my writing. Also, I personally just didn't have the discpline to do what it took to write a novel when I was 20, or even 30. If others can do it in their teens. more power to them!

It is interesting to think all the stuff I saw in the movie, "The Player" might be true. In the movie, the writer got screwed, then killed. (The screenwriter, Michael Tolkin, also wrote the novel on which the screenplay was based. He was born in 1950.)

The world of screenwriting may be for the young, and I have been in places where looks and enthusiasm were enough. It was fun, but I am further along now, and interested in other things. It seems a shame that a whole section of creative endeavor would be closed to older participants who may be able to produce a product but cannot participate satisfactorily in the meeting-and-looks department.

In some artistic endeavors (classical music, ballet, opera) one must start young because of the amount of formative time it takes to become seriously proficient. In other arts (painting, writing) age and experience can be a powerful factor in artistic expression and performance of craft.

It is too bad that the Hollywood screenwriting model is skewed to exclude the work in favor of the personality, but a look at the level of entertainment available today in films and television should give us a clue. I still see independent and foreign films which are truly breathtaking, and the screenplays are by a variety of individuals of all ages and backgrounds.

Merchant-Ivory - the great production company whose three main participants were producer Ismail Merchant, director James Ivory and the screenwriter, Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, - brought some of the most riveting and comic masterpieces to the screen - Shakespeare Wallah, A Room With a View, Howard's End. Ruth Prawer Jhabvala was born in 1927. Her novel, Heat and Dust, won the Booker Prize in 1975. Two of her screenplays won Academy Awards for best adapted screenplay.

I know the Merchant-Ivory model is not the Hollywood model. And I think that's too bad. But it does illustrate that the Hollywood model is not the only one.

While all writers need experiences to write from, some are born with such talent that they transcend the need for extensive experience and make fine young writers. But many writers need the experiences of life - and the honing of the craft of writing - to become good and even great writers. Age should never be a discriminator in good writing.

Shadow_Ferret said:

Are there any first-time writers out there who became successful as they entered their second half century of existence?

Click to expand...

Jasper Fforde (my favorite author) worked in Hollywood for years until he decided to start writing.

I_Shrugged said:

Big for all of us so-called mature writers.

Click to expand...

Definitely!

I_Shrugged said:

Big for all of us so-called mature writers.

Click to expand...

Hugs back to you! I loved your post. I feel sorry for people who have lost their imaginations. They miss out on so much joy.

I'm off to inhale my crayons. The best part of being a grown-up kid: you can buy the huge 96 pack of Crayolas yourself!

Edit: and you don't need to share them either.

MeowGirl said:

Hugs back to you! I loved your post. I feel sorry for people who have lost their imaginations. They miss out on so much joy.

Click to expand...

That's why I'm a writer. Got to keep that imagination sharp!

MeowGirl said:

I'm off to inhale my crayons. The best part of being a grown-up kid: you can buy the huge 96 pack of Crayolas yourself!
Edit: and you don't need to share them either.

Click to expand...

On my "to do" list for tomorrow: But that 96 box of Crayolas.

Philip64 said:

Most of the answers to this question agree that there is no "ageism" in publishing. Unfortunately, the record says otherwise. I wish it were not so; but it is undoubtedly an advantage in the fiction markets of the UK and US to be young and preferably attractive - the more so the better.

....Snipped.

Click to expand...

Forgive me for asking, but could you perhaps give us some sources for this information? That way anyone here could verify your claims, and we could read for ourselves what the experts have to say.

There is a writer who just nailed a sweet contract, and he's in his fifties. His day job was doing voice-over work, and he was an audiobook reader. He had ten completed novels under his belt, and convinced the publisher to let him read one. Stephen King picked it up at the local library, loved it, pulled some strings and got the man a writing contract.

I can't remember the name of the author, sorry, but one thing's for certain. He doesn't have to worry about the short career; he's got ten books done already.

I'm "only" 24, and I'm just starting to pick up steam as a writer. I like to think it has less to do with my age than my ability.

I wish it were not so; but it is undoubtedly an advantage in the fiction markets of the UK and US to be young and preferably attractive - the more so the better.

Click to expand...

It would be an advantage if you also happened to have written a brilliant book and be talented. But there are so many celebrities out there these days that if a publisher only wants youth and good looks, they're more likely to pick someone who already has a presence, and can be sold on the back of that. So if you're a totally unknown 21 year old beauty queen who's written a piss-poor novel, I don't think you'd be at any kind of advantage.

Most novelists don't tend to be seen much anyway. You do get the occasional person being heavily promoted on the back of youth and beauty, but it's rare. The one that springs to mind if Kaavya Viswanathan - that good looking 18 year old who was heavily promoted and turned out to have plagered the book. If publishers have any sense, they won't be rushing to duplicate that.

I am 55. I've been "writing" since I was 8; I wrote a few stories as a child but aftrer that mostly just thought up developments based on real life incidents.

Like many women, I started writing after I had children and was able to stay home and use my time how I wanted. I had my children late (the second when I was 40) and started writing when she began going to "Kindergarten" (the original Kindergarten in Germany, which starts at 3 - playschool.) My first novel got published when I was 48.

I don't feel at all that my imagination is rusty or in any way lagging. Internally, I am "younger" that I ever was. I am more flexible, more mature, calmer than when i was younger. I've seen things through. I have raised children, have lived with teenagers - one of them particularly wild. That means I've had to understand teenagers. That means I could write for them - if I wanted to. I've been young myself, so I know what youth means. The idea that only the young can write for the young is in my eyes rubbish!

On the other hand, I tend to be bored by books written by young people - even prize winning books such as White Teeth, which somehow lacked a certain depth.

If I had started writing in my 20's I can't imagine what I'd have written. Yes, I had imagination then as now, but I was too much caught up in life and all its shenanigans. Now, I can take a step back and observe better. There's no way on the world I'd rather be a young writer. I'm a far BETTER writer than if I were young, and that's what counts.

I also just found a new agent for my latest novel, written this year. My agent is in her 20's! And I'm in touch with another of her clients, a writer who has just turned 50. Her book is non-fiction, but certanly her age was no handicap.

I don't recall my publisher asking for my age or my headshot...

This thread is as good as the "are men better writers" thread.


No, writing is for whoever has the passion. Age is no bar. Odd question.

Wow... I'm now glad I'm not a screenwriter, and in my thirties...

30 is young? Awesome.

"and ladies of the club" is such a KILLER book. I bought a copy of it for my mom for Mother's Day. She read it.

As a young writer, I have to say that it's true all things get better with age but a young person can be a great writer. Life experience and self-realization go a long way in being a writer; so does imagination, curiosity, and a willingness to listen.

So long as somebody is willing to learn and understand life in general, then they can write. I know a few (scant few, true) but a few teenagers and young adults that are more cognizant of the world around them, mortality, ethics, and philosophy than people twice their age.

Writing has no age requirements either way.

It depends on YOU

Shadow_Ferret said:

I've always heard that most of the entertainment media, writing, music, art, etc. is a young persons field. Meaning, most creative stuff is done by people in their 20s and 30s and that its rare for older people to be successful.

Are there any first-time writers out there who became successful as they entered their second half century of existence?

Click to expand...

I hope it's not a young person's game. I'm 57 and I take great comfort from the knowledge that when you hit 50 you know just a little more than you did at 20, 30, and 40.

Many bestselling novelists are in their 50s and beyond, simply because it takes a long time to get the life experience so you KNOW how people react to circumstances.

Yes, getting hired to write a TV show at 50 is unlikely, but who knows? If you write a spec script that's amazing, you'll get paid.

Some highly successful first novels are written by people in their 80s.

If you want to write, write. You don't need anyone's permission. Nor do you need a publisher; you can do it all yourself. And at age 50, you should know how.

Cheers

Angela

I don't think age is a big factor.

For me the biggest factor in becoming a fulltime writer was having a wife who has a real good job and would patiently stand by me.

I wrote my first short story when I was six.

Then I pretty much did everything I could in order to not write although I did dabble here and there.

Around the age of 40, I realized I was most happy when unhappily writing.

Now at 50, I'm sorta starting to break through with a couple published novels (2004 & 2006, two more under contract).

A part of me regrets wasting my 30s, but another part realizes that it was best I wait and tool around the world a bit, explore for new surf on remote Indian Ocean islands.

johnzakour said:

For me the biggest factor in becoming a fulltime writer was having a wife who has a real good job and would patiently stand by me.

Click to expand...

Yes. Behind every well-fed writer is usually the primary bread winner.