Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
This thread is a disaster because everyone seems to be talking about something different.
OF COURSE the dictionary definition of author means anyone and everyone who creates anything. But: If you're at a party, say, and get to chatting with Person X, who tells you he's an author, just what do you think that means? I very much doubt you think it's someone who wrote a forum post that day, even though he IS the author of that post.
Likewise, Person Y says she's a singer, you expect that to mean something more than that she sings lullabies to her baby. If you find out that's all she does in the way of singing, don't you think she's a pretentious fool?
That a book must have an author is true, but that's not the issue, and it's pointless to keep harping on that. Applying a label to oneself, defining oneself as a member of a particular group, sets up expectations for other people, and if you fall short of them, you look like a jerk.
For me, as I said before, the first criterion is, if you make money doing it, you can use the label. (And please don't tell me there are famous authors who are exceptions; OF COURSE there are exceptions.)
Hardback, paperback, e-book, traditionally published, self-published--these may be indications of quality for some of us, but that seems to be another discussion.
|
Exactly. I was thinking about writing something similar but I do not have to do it now. I was especially annoyed by the "all books have an author"-argument and also thought the "protected title"-argument was just silly and missed the point.