- Joined
- Sep 23, 2006
- Messages
- 399
- Reaction score
- 77
Where is the line between being persistent and optimistic vs. being realistic in your publishing goals and your self-assessment as a writer?
For example, say A. is a short story writer, who wants to get his work published in what he considers "quality literary magazines." A. does
the usual for several years, submitting & receiving rejections, constantly trying to improve his work, with perhaps workshops, classes, critiques from other writers, reading books and articles on the craft, etc., etc., but is unsuccessful with his goals.
At what point does A. perhaps admit that despite his drive and commitment, he doesn't really have a talent for this, and will continue writing for his own enjoyment, but stop his publishing efforts?
I have the feeling this post isn't terribly coherent, but hopefully someone can make sense out of it.
For example, say A. is a short story writer, who wants to get his work published in what he considers "quality literary magazines." A. does
the usual for several years, submitting & receiving rejections, constantly trying to improve his work, with perhaps workshops, classes, critiques from other writers, reading books and articles on the craft, etc., etc., but is unsuccessful with his goals.
At what point does A. perhaps admit that despite his drive and commitment, he doesn't really have a talent for this, and will continue writing for his own enjoyment, but stop his publishing efforts?
I have the feeling this post isn't terribly coherent, but hopefully someone can make sense out of it.