[Steven Lake]

Originally Posted by Poppa1956

Long ago, I became convinced that most tech manuals were written and edited by persons that either...

lol. Funny you should mention that. I actually did tech editing for 5+ years, so I know what you mean, and even though we did information articles, tutorials, reviews, etc that tech sites do, the end result is the same. I remember getting submissions from a couple of people who thought they'd go on to be the next Dana Blankenhorn or Shawn Powers of tech writing, and yet had the writing skills of a three year old. (if you don't know who Dana or Shawn are, you're missing out on some very smart, wonderful people)

Originally Posted by afa

Perhaps an even better analogy is American Idol.

Or my favorite, "America's Got Talent". (with the limited number of people with talent, it should actually be "America's got NO talent". lol)

Originally Posted by DrZoidberg

My first novel I wrote I thought was really good. But it was shit. It was utter and total unpublishable shit. I thought it was good. People I asked, said it was good. Now I've stopped asking those people. The better I get at writing the more painfully aware I become of my mediocrity (I compare myself to all the greats).

Yeah, that sounds like me. I look back on stuff I wrote even just four years ago and cringe. I've actually written books, set them aside, and then came back six months later with a fresh mind and was like "OMGWTF!? Who wrote this !@#$%^!!! Oh...wait...that was me. T_T" I think in the end, one of the best attitudes to have in the writing world is, no matter how great you think it is, it can always be better. When a great author releases a manuscript for publishing, it's never great, or awesome or epic. In their eyes it's always "borderline satisfactory", despite what others may say about how good it is.

Also, in reference to your asking friends for an opinion, I learned that they make a good initial sounding board for ideas and content, but they never make good critics of the final product. For that you need complete strangers. Preferably the ones who will read your book and then send you home with a truck full of recommendations. My favorite critic was a guy I ran into in the tech world. He actually did a lot to help me get better, despite his regular replies of "OMGWTF!? BURN IT!" lol. The other one was an english teacher I had in college who actually sat down with me and explained to me in detail while it looked like a red pen factory had exploded on my paper. Those criticisms are sometimes the hardest to take, but also many times the most beneficial.

Once there's all the rules to follow, most writers think the fun is sucked out of it and it screws up their creative process.

That's interesting you should say that. I've actually found those rules to be somewhat fun and challenging. Left to my own devices my writing is fun and entertaining, but in a median sort of way. But given rules to follow and write within makes the work incredibly thrilling. One of my favorite rules that was given to me by a critic one time is that "For every strength, you must have an offsetting weakness. So the greater the strength, the greater the weakness." And let me tell you, that has been one of the most fun and exciting rules to work within that I've encountered so far. Especially when you create a beautifully awesome monster, and then are forced to take your wonderful pride and joy and find a way to kill them. ^_^

Case in point. In my novel "The Oort Perimeter", I created this awesome, massive, impregnable shield barrier that surrounds Earth. In theory it would completely and totally ensure that Earth was safe from all forms of harm. But you can't have a good book if the defense is too perfect. So I went and wrote a weakness into it. I then went and did the same thing in book 4 (you'll see what it is once the book is out), but in a different way applying a slightly different weakness to achieve the same end result. So in the end, rules can actually be a lot of fun to work with, depending on your viewpoint.

So either they stick their heads in the sand and hope they're Van Gogh, and are a misunderstood genius, and its simply a question for their genius to be discovered. This never works. I think the majority of the 98% unpublishable novels comes from this group. This group will never succeed.

Agreed. That's why I like the idea of self publishing for new authors. It gets their work out there, and they either are discovered as the next Van Gogh (to use your example), or they get their 15 minutes of fame and move on. And for the few who don't move on, they get shown exactly how horrible their writing actually is and in the vast majority of cases they do us all a favor and quit. And I'm not one to bash new writers, but some really need to hear a stern reprimand in order to realize that they don't just sling words onto a page and expect to be the next Michael Crichton.

...ability to take criticism and learn from it.

Sadly, that's lacking in today's world of "it's someone else's fault". Even I fell victim to that for a while, but eventually learned that, if someone says you're wrong, 95% of the time they're right. ^_^;;

All published writers I know, (and its a few now) all were successful for the same reason. They treated it like a job. A fun job, but nonetheless a job. If you do that you're already in the elite, unpublished or not.

Eh, a job it may be, but as one wise man said, "If you love what you do, you'll never find yourself going to work."

Originally Posted by GeoffC

Such imagery is why he's an Author !

Hear! Hear! Fully agree!