Salon
re the salon article, I found it very interesting, as a naive writer. It made me wonder a lot about why she writes. Seems like fame and big money are the incentive for her and that she has very little satisfaction from her good reviews. The tragedy here seems to me that she can say she has "adoring reviews" and still feels so dispirited about herself.
I thought being a good writer was the goal here (sigh, how utterly quaint.) Being a huge freaking success should be extra, right? How can it truly be your goal? Is it in your control as a writer? That seems to me like trying to be a painter and getting mad because your work, though brilliant, isn't auctioning off like Van Gogh's.
I see the advice offered here, on this site - of how to present your work to potential publishers - as just that. If we want our work to be seen and enjoyed by anyone other than our families and friends and make any sort of impact on the world (be it a tiny *poof* of dusty impact) then we do that best by getting published.
(In science , where I work for money - not much, but some - we "publish or perish" - right? There are lots of types of jobs that depend on producing information that will further other people's work. It is satisfying to see my name in print there, to be a "first author" but the thrill is not the goal, it can't be. The whole purpose is simply putting information, the best information I can produce, out there for others to use.)
If our goals are really the cranking out reams of pulpy money-making prose, seeing our names and pseudonyms in glowing lights, then that seems to me a very different sort of thing, kind of like hoping to grow up and be Julia Roberts. Nice work if you can get it, certainly not worth crying over.