To be a writer
by A.W. Berry
To be a writer has many levels, wrapped with definition, meaning and creativity. Of those levels, knowing which is that of a writer is somewhat subjective. This article will discuss why being a writer is an elaborate enterprise with many angles. Ultimately however, to be a writer is in the mind of the writer him/herself. If a writer believes to be a writer, then what else is needed? Perhaps being a writer and being recognized as a writer are two different things. Either way, both contribute to the experience of being a writer and are thus relevant in at least some sense of the word.
For starters, some people may fit more of a hobby writer description than a professional description, and may be more like 50% hobby writer 25% professional writer and 25% struggling writer. On top of that, in regard to Type A and B writers discussed in a writer's workshop forum on www.helium.com, type B writers may not be as inclined to follow those self-marketing techniques in writing that do lead to publishing and consequently publicly confirmed self-worth. In this instance, it is my opinion, a Type A writer may be more suited to have less trouble getting published.
Also, what if someone is a type Z4 Turbo for Zarkon double class 094 writing calibration process type with a hint of poetic fluff. Poetry may be a distant star in your literary solar system, but the art and the writer of poetry are not necessarily subject to the same general rules of writing as other types of writing. Therefore what defines a real poet is not de facto the same criteria as what defines a 'real writer', as defined by other types of writers. Moreover, 'real poets' are 'real writers', and not all real writers are real poets. Therefore, given the nature of poetry, can the marketing side of the writing equation really be considered a realistic expectation for the nature that often accompanies the poetic mindset? Perhaps.
Onward, if publishing makes a writer, many writers are not actually writers. This makes the published label somewhat fallible, especially when those who are published know the agent or publisher on a personal level. Nepotism one or two steps removed is a possible conflict of interest, or maybe it's just a mildly incestuous professional camaraderie however this is not to say all published content is the result of such. What makes content genuinely marketable then? Also, while we're at it what makes a great and real writer? A few answers are listed below; all of which may be correct depending on the circumstance(s) and perspective.
A) Connections with publishers
B) Relentless pursuit of publication
C) Absolutely amazing prose supported by intense talent
D) Commitment to creating a marketable book through constant editing, market scoping, agent seeking etc.
E) Love of writing
F) Passion for a cause
G) Luck
H) Other
The 'Professional Writer', with real dedication and commitment to the writing process is a writer but may not have the best chance of book publication by virtue of dedication. John Grisham however, comes to mind when one thinks about this type of writer for he was an attorney before becoming a writer and therefore probably familiar with due diligence, and bureaucratic process of one sort or another. In other words, as a professional writer, Grisham likely embraced and followed all the logical steps for publication before publication. Some of these steps are in this linked to article, and in and specifically, interviews with Grisham discussing his writing career.
For a 50% 'Hobby Writer' with a stronger B'ish disposition, the prospect of the book publication process seems like not actually writing which is fun. i.e. I'm alluding to the displeasure of book publishing bureaucracy that so many writers seeking print publication have to deal with. What's more, book publication may not be worth it because a book doesn't necessarily make a great deal of money once published. i.e. If one has capitalist tendencies and is actually motivated by money more than the love of writing, is that persona still a 'genuine writer' ?
So, there are contradictions and multiple levels of meaning in what makes a writer. Some love to write but loath getting published. Some proliferate text but prefer to be a reflective introverts. Perhaps the publication process dampens your enthusiasm to write a book which is actually fun to write without the process? Here are two 'character's' opinions on the matter:
Fictional B Character: "Bollocks to the publication agents and publishers with their mountains of manuscripts and full message machines. Who needs them, who cares. Who said real writing gets published anyway?"
Fictional A Character in response: "Focus your writing energy, write small manageable yet controlled pieces everyday and contact one agent a day for 30 consecutive days thereafter and you will find the publishing process manageable. One more thing, be sure to edit, edit, edit for a better, cleaner more smooth flowing text."
So what makes a real writer? Perhaps it's just in the eye of the beholder the way it was supposed to be. There are numerous traits of a writer, not all of which are required to be a writer. Publication is just one of these traits and doesn't always have to imply one is not a 'real writer' Moreover, the holy grail of writing, if publishing, is possibly only such for those writers seeking affirmation unable to be provided from the self. Any stigma associated with being unpublished then, is potentially unfounded for this very reason. Writing like many crafts does not require professional status to be exquisite. To be a writer is to enjoy the linguistic act of creativity and expresson among other things, for writing is an art, and art is variable by its nature unless the literary artist deems otherwise.
=========================================
Sources:
http://www.helium.com/smf/index.php?board=27.0
http://www.helium.com/smf/index.php?topic=5327.0
http://www.helium.com/items/229164-writing-mentors-a dvice-on-overcoming-self-doubt-what-makes-a-real-wri ter