|
Post by K'Sennia Visitor on Dec 3, 2018 18:56:35 GMT
Is there an objective test to know whether you are a good or a bad writer? Or is it all subjective? Is being able to technically write by being able to form letters and spell the closest to a writing objective we'll get? I suppose if people are willing to pay you for your writing that could be an objective test? Unless that choice is being made subjectively, as well?
What do you think? Is there any way to know?
|
|
|
Post by writeway on Dec 3, 2018 21:29:02 GMT
I always look at it like this, if someone doesn't know they are a good writer they have no business publishing and expecting people to pay them money. So it's about confidence too. Anyone who is doing this professionally should believe in their skills. I don't think it's hard to know if you are a good writer or not. All writers have weaknesses but it doesn't mean they aren't talented. I know I am a good writer. I work hard at it and continue to learn as I go. I was also trade published with a big five publisher and other presses. So that gives me some validation that I can write or else I wouldn't have ever gotten contracts. I also look at my readers and fans who keep buying my books and claim they enjoy my writing, etc. And, yes, I also go by my own opinion. I've been reading books a long time and my writing is just as good and even better than some authors who might be selling more. It's not said as arrogance, mind you but confidence. I really don't understand anyone dedicating years to this business (as have I) and not believing in their talent. If I didn't feel I was a good writer, I wouldn't be publishing. I care too much for the written word and for readers to do put out junk.
It is easier to tell if you got the chops if others validate you so that is a part of it but I think most of us have commonsense to know if we are good writers or not. Just like I've seen authors who say they know they aren't the best writers in the world but still have talent, you just know. Sooner or later you will know if you're good or if you suck because people will tell you. That's a big way you know.
For example, people rag on EL James and says she's terrible and though I couldn't get through one page of the book, she can't be that terrible if her books have garnered millions of dollars, movies and has become a literary phenomenon. She might not be the best writer in the world, but she's got some talent or she wouldn't be where she is. It sure is funny that the main people who make fun of EL are romance writers who have done everything under the sun to emulate her success. Without EL the billionaire romance boom of the last three years wouldn't be here. Sure, we always had biillionaires and alpha males but it was Christian Grey that made these types of romances more popular than they ever have before. So some romance authors ridicule her but turn around and try to make money off something she made famous in hopes to become as big as she has yet none of them have.
EL is not the only big author who people claim are horrible writers. It's the same with Meiner, Brown, the Hunger Games woman, and every other mega-selling author people wanna dog but they sell millions all over the world. You don't get a certain level of success with just luck alone. So for every big time author people claim aren't good writers, they're doing something right. Luck might make someone check out your first book but it doesn't make an author as big as Patterson or King. There is some talent in there too even if not everyone sees it. My point is, even though some might call these authors hacks, I am sure they all believe they are at least decent writers because of their success. People can say they can write better than all these people if they want but these people are making gazillions off their work and if you criticize them but aren't doing the same...talk is cheap. You might be better than these people but they have millions of fans backing them up. If you've sold millions of books all over the world you can say you're a darn good writer all you want whether folks agree or not.
Just like we can tell if others aren't good writers, we can tell if we aren't either. Your style of writing might not fit some people but it doesn't mean it isn't good.
I can see though how it can be hard to tell for those who start off in indie publishing. Maybe except for editors or beta readers in the beginning they don't have readers to go by so I can see how they might not be sure. But still, if you read at all you can judge your work by other books and can kinda tell if you are on the right track or not.
|
|
|
Post by dormouse on Dec 4, 2018 0:09:11 GMT
There are thousands of individual skills in writing that are capable of being measured objectively. But decisions about the correctness of the answers will be subjective as will decisions about which skills are the most important. Also dependent on purpose.
And audience. I might know that x is correct and y is not, but, if most people don't know (or have it wrong), am I still right?
|
|
|
Post by davidvandyke on Dec 5, 2018 6:09:01 GMT
Ask someone you're sure is a good writer to tell you.
|
|
|
Post by gehenna on Jan 20, 2019 20:54:53 GMT
There are technical writers (Those who are grammatically up there in the astral clouds) and there are storytellers (Those who grip you by the shorts and don't let you go until after you've signed up for their mailing list) The rest of us fall midway between the two. So, the criteria of being considered a good writer is down to other things, like popularity as a writer with your peers and your fans. Or, you may consider the financial returns as an indicator, or perhaps the downloads you achieve over the life of a book.
The short answer is you don't ever know if you're a good writer. You can tell if you're a popular writer, or a successful writer. It doesn't follow that you're also a good writer.
|
|
|
Post by corabuhlert on Jan 21, 2019 2:07:46 GMT
"Good" is such a subjective thing. Spelling, punctuation, grammar, etc... can be quantified to a certain degree, but "quality" can't be. There are a lot of books, which I personally think are awful, but which have still sold millions, so someone must like them.
Critiques, reviews, editors willing to buy your work and readers willing to pay for it can point you the way. But in the end, beyond the technical basics (and grammar rules that should be followed for a non-fiction text don't necessarily apply to fiction, never mind that much of what is framed as a grammar rule is actually a style issue), writing quality is too subjective for a definitive judgment.
|
|