Talent is not enough - and other things I tell myself to keep me running the race.

I agree. In most cases talent isn't enough. Aside from the other things you mention (which also hold true), talent needs to be honed. It needs to be polished and tuned. Just because someone can throw a ball far, doesn't mean he'll be a great baseball or football player. I think it's the same with writing.

LightShadow said:

A writer must insist to write, want to write at all times. Such a passion must erupt into a fire in the belly, a madness of the art. A writer must be driven, obsessive and ruthless.

Click to expand...

You lost me here. This sounds like romanticized bull****.

I agree that commitment to the craft is essential. I don't think obsession is required for success.

Talent is certainly not insignificant. A talented writer must be prepared to learn like any other artist - opera singers, actors...but with talent he has a flying start.

But without talent, I don't think he'll make it to the very top, no matter how obsessive or ruthless. And that is not intended to indicate I endorse obsessiveness or ruthlessness as either desirable or necessary factors.

I agree with saaenach. I' ve wriiten 3 books in a year and managed to find a great agent, but it's not my life. THAT is currently sleeping on my lap. I write when I can which is not often.

perserverence is the key though.

Commitment, timing and luck help.

talent

Talent is not insignificant, and darned few have enough to be successful, I don't care how much fire they have in their bellies. Talent alone probably isn't enough. You also need the wherewithal to actually sit down and write on a regular schedule.
But: With talent a writer must also posess discipline, love, luck, and endurance. Talent cannot sustain a writer, but must be accompanied by a ruling passion, an obsession, a calling - - perhaps to be called by some as dumb persistence. A writer must insist to write, want to write at all times. Such a passion must erupt into a fire in the belly, a madness of the art. A writer must be driven, obsessive and ruthless.

The trouble with this kind of stuff is that new writers tend to believe it, and it just isn't true.

Yes, a writer has to sit down and write, and it helps if he or she enjoys the process, but many a very good and very successful writer hates the process of writing.

fire in the belly, a madness of the art. A writer must be driven, obsessive and ruthless. No, a writer just has to have enough talent to be able to put stories on paper than people want to read. A fire in the belly, a madness of the art, whatever the heck that is, just means you need to take some Rolaids, and maybe see a shrink. As for driven, obsessive, and ruthless, again, see a shrink. These are some serious personality flaws.

As for many talented writers never reaching success, name me three.

Talent will take you further and sustain you longer than any amount of fire or passion. If you have enough talent, you don't need much of anything else, except the willingness to use that talent, which most certainly does not take passion, fire, obsessiveness, ruthlessness, etc., anymore than getting up and going to any nine to five job you can name takes these things.

I'm a firm believer in doing whatever it is you enjoy, but there's nothing mysterious about writing. It takes no special attributes. You just have to have the talent, and show up for work. You could say the same thing about a plumber or a fast food grill cook. If you enjoy your job, great, you'll show up with a smile on your face.

And in all honesty, 99.9% of the luck in writing comes after you get published, not before.

Jamesaritchie said:

... many a very good and very successful writer hates the process of writing.

Click to expand...

Bless you! I am one of these - some days, when I've stared at the screen for an hour but nothing is coming, I suddenly find the laundry to be a seductive lure. Or cleaning the bathroom. Anything but the writing.

Jamesaritchie said:

Talent will take you further and sustain you longer than any amount of fire or passion. If you have enough talent, you don't need much of anything else, except the willingness to use that talent, which most certainly does not take passion, fire, obsessiveness, ruthlessness, etc., anymore than getting up and going to any nine to five job you can name takes these things.

Click to expand...

Huzzah to that. I've run across a good bit of writing from people with fire and passion and not one lick of discernable talent. Just because someone wants/needs/burns to write doesn't mean he's writing anything I want to read.

After eleven years, this is what I've discovered:

1. Talent isn't enough, but it's a start.

2. Writing is a craft. Learn it! Read, study, join workshops, and for crying out loud, learn basic grammar rules. And learn to spell. If you don't, no matter how much you know, you're going to look like an idget. If you don't understand that you can't just sit down and throw words on paper - you don't have a chance. And this means learning lots and lots about your own genre.

3. Build up a reputation so that people know you. Being a member of a popular forum like this can help you to make contacts. I reviewed books for eight years, and I joined several writers' organizations. That's how I found my agent.

4. After doing all of the above (although learning your craft never stops), I finally hit a bulls-eye. How? It goes back to the advice I received when I started writing but never, never listened to. Give the publisher what he wants! I can't tell you how many times I was told this - and didn't listen. I wrote what I wanted to write. (Trying to stay true to myself, be unique, allow my creative juices to flow, blah, blah, blah, and blah.) All these platitudes sound good, but you're going to be writing a lot of stuff for youself and your friends if you forsake common sense when seeking publication. Wait until you're Stephen King. Then you can afford to let your juices out. (Ugh..) Find a publisher you like. Make absolutely certain that you can write what they publish. Ex.: I liked a certain publisher and sent in a manuscript I thought fit their needs. However, when I read the comments from one of their readers, I knew that this publisher and I were not a good fit. It had to do with their main goals and mine. Totally different. Once you find someone you like and who you think you can work with long-term, buy some of their most popular books and read them. Take them apart. Find out how and why they work. Then write something like it - in your own voice. (Borrowing a little bit of someone else's voice is okay, but you don't want to be told that you're just not unique enough because they already have someone who writes like that!)

After only being published by small publishers while I was writing what I wanted to write, I was given the chance to send in a proposal for a cozy, inspirational mystery. Now mystery is my passion, I don't like sex, profanity, or graphic violence in mysteries, and I'm a committed Christian. However, I must not be the sharpest crayon in the box because it took me all these years to figure out that these traits scream cozy mystery! I sent in a proposal to this large, inspirational publisher who has a very successful book club, and within two weeks, my proposal was accepted (with a nice advance). Thank God I'd read all those cozy mysteries as a reviewer! I finished the first manscript and sent it in. They loved it, even calling it the "perfect cozy mystery." I am being signed for a series, and after the book club, my novels will be sold in retail stores across the country.

And who wouda' thunk it...I love writing cozy mysteries! It's fun and fulfills all my writing needs.

You may write something totally different, but the premise is the same. If you've already done 1 through 3 - then start working on 4. Don't let it take you eleven years to figure this out!

Nancy

Talent may not be enough...but it sure as hell is the MOST IMPORTANT SINGLE MITIGATING FACTOR FOR A WRITER

Yes there are famous writers who write dribble
and famous people who have books that are not worth the paper...

But if you think that Talent is just "one small part" and all the rest is luck or just hanging in there, or being obssessed and driven... IMHO you are headed for total disaster...

Talent is critical...and must be developed, practiced and honed again and again....

I will take talent over obsession any day...and fires in the belly are great until you need anti-acids...

talent is everything.

Give the publisher what he wants! I can't tell you how many times I was told this - and didn't listen. I wrote what I wanted to write. (Trying to stay true to myself, be unique, allow my creative juices to flow, blah, blah, blah, and blah.) All these platitudes sound good, but you're going to be writing a lot of stuff for youself and your friends if you forsake common sense when seeking publication

This attitude has been my biggest course correction and it's taken me 15 years to figure it out. I don't write what I'd love to write anymore. I write for the publishers now--the publishers have a better handle on the readers than I do. I thought I did. I was wrong. I write for great concept and premise now in the most popular genres. Cliche has been my death nell. Great intricate multiple plot structure also helps. It's been a painful lesson to learn.

tri

Give the publisher what he wants!

Click to expand...

Or, you know, find a publisher who wants what you write. Maybe it won't be Simon & Schuster, but there are a lot of small presses out there who focus on areas that are too "niche" for the biggies.

Me, I believe in writing what you want to write. It's worked for me so far.



Of course, it helps that I'm talented.

it's all in what you want for yourself.

Talent is not enough - and other things I tell myself to keep me running the race.

Click to expand...

Well, I agree that talent is not enough, but I think it's the foundation. That and a love for writing. Is it also a skill that can be learned? Well, up to a point, surely. But there is a difference, imho, between people who can manage to hit the right keys on a piano and those who have a talent, a gift, if you will, for the instrument. And I think the same goes for writing.

And once that's in place, you just have to find the right agent and/or publisher for you.

but talent is enough.

I notice this thread has progressed along without anyone actually stopping to say what talent is.

To me, talent is the stuff that comes easily. Maybe you have a knack for dialogue, or your characters spring to life, or you come up with brilliant plots without having to try.

So what? I've yet to meet anyone who can do it all. Talent is your starting point. It's not enough. And it's not something any of us have any control over.

It's amazing the number of writers I know who have worked their asses off for years and years to develop their "talent." Or those "instant bestsellers" who leapt to the top of the New York Times Bestseller list with their first book. (Their first published book, at any rate. We won't count the fourteen earlier novels sitting in the trunk.)

And maybe there are folks out there who can just sit down and do this all without having to work at it. I've yet to meet one, but I won't claim it doesn't happen.

So what? I know I'm not one of them. I know I'm not a particularly talented writer. And I know that for me, working and learning and developing the skills I need is what's gotten me that far. (And a bit of luck hasn't hurt.)

More often than not, talent seems to be an excuse. It's an excuse for not succeeding. I'm just not talented enough to make it as a writer. It's an excuse to blow off other people's work. Oh, they're just such a talented writer, which is why their stuff sells and mine doesn't. Sometimes it's an excuse to not develop your own skills. I know I'm a talented writer, so why should I accept this criticism of my work?

I hope I'm not sounding too bitter. This is a frustrating issue for me. Whether it's real and valid doesn't matter to me, because it's not something I can control. I think it's more important for us to worry about the things we can. Things like the time we spend writing, our willingness to seek out good, honest feedback, and so on.

I was a pretty lousy writer growing up, and I've worked for 11 years to get where I am. And I cringe a bit inside when someone looks at my latest publication and dismisses it with a comment like, "Oh, I could never do that, because I'm not as talented as you are."

Thus endeth my mini-rant.

i agree talent can be developed, and what can appear as a glimmer in youth can be cultivated into something greater over the years.

but talent must exist to begin with. it can't be fabricated through volition.

Persistence without talent is the old "enough chimpanzees in a room with enough typewriters" scenario. Leave them there long enough, and they'll hammer out War and Peace.

Talent would be those same chimpanzees writing an original masterpiece.

Even quantum physics isn't gonna make that happen. Talent can be nurtured and matured, but it can't be created out of nothing.

"but talent must exist to begin with. it can't be fabricated through volition."

"Talent can be nurtured and matured, but it can't be created out of nothing."

Maybe. Maybe not.

To paraphrase Clarke's Law, I'd argue that any sufficiently advanced skill is indistinguishable from talent.

Like I said, maybe talent is an important factor. So what? We can't control how talented we are. The underlying message seems to be that those writers without talent should just give up, because they're never going to make it. I don't see anyone saying that directly, but if talent is truly the most important thing, and some of us just don't have it, then basically it means those of us without that talent are screwed and should go home. (Or should resign ourselves to writing derivative, second-rate hackwork.)

I don't buy it. And I really don't see how anything productive can come from debating or obsessing about talent.

you could take someone who lacks any natural talent on the piano, give him ten years worth of lessons, pump up his ego into thinking he's beethoven, place him behind the keyboard of the most expensive piano available and he would still suck compared to a drunk bum on skid row with natural talent provided you could pour enough coffee down his throat to get him sober and prop him up long enough to play.

Be careful of "writing what the publisher wants" if you don't truly enjoy it.

When I sold my first book my editor left shortly after to become an agent. After turning in my second book everythig else I sent the new editor was turned down. So I tried harder to "write what she wanted to buy". I ended up making myself so creatively burnt out I ended up not being able to write for four years.

I think the talent argument is scary and seductive. It's very tempting to try to hide behind, but I tend to agree with jchines: talent seems to be for one part/aspect of the writing process. If you want to see yourself grow as a writer, you need to focus on the hard work aspect (all of this is just IMHO, of course). I can write fairly well, and my typing's exceptional!, my bugbear is the story itself. So that's what I'm trying to focus on, not the telling of the story, but building the raw material of a story -- creating enough tension, in particular. On the whole, when I get a rejection (and they're pretty standard) I know either the story failed or I failed by sending it to the wrong market.

Here endeth my ramble.

jchines said:

I notice this thread has progressed along without anyone actually stopping to say what talent is.

To me, talent is the stuff that comes easily. Maybe you have a knack for dialogue, or your characters spring to life, or you come up with brilliant plots without having to try.

Click to expand...

Is talent whatever comes easily to you, then, no matter what it is? I don't suppose being a natural at sentence structure and logic, being able to spot what makes sense and what doesn't, is the right kind of talent. That's what I've got, and I'm catching on that it's no good without the storytelling knack. Phhlbbtht!

William Haskins said:

you could take someone who lacks any natural talent on the piano, give him ten years worth of lessons, pump up his ego into thinking he's beethoven, place him behind the keyboard of the most expensive piano available and he would still suck compared to a drunk bum on skid row with natural talent provided you could pour enough coffee down his throat to get him sober and prop him up long enough to play.

Click to expand...

Maybe it's different with writing, but with music this isn't very accurate, and a myth that music instructors have to debunk all the time. If there is a bum out there who can play better than a properly trained musician who doesn't have "talent", then it's an anomaly. Prodigies are quite rare and aren't the rule. Most of the best musicians out there had to work at it like everyone else.