Thursday, 7 May 2009


PS An extra thought to add to last post (below, obviously), and one which I believe so strongly that I didn't want to add it to the post but say loudly and in shouty coloured letters, is this:

The writing by a published author is not necessarily "better" than that of a writer who has so far failed to get published. There are many unpublished writers out there (including, doubtless, some of you) who are way way better as writers than some published ones.

Publication is not the badge of brilliance: it is the mark of having written a book which a) fits perfectly within its intended genre (even if that genre is full of, er, what you might call crap) and b) ticks all the boxes of publishability, literarily flawed though some of those boxes may sometimes be and c) an editor wants, loves and believes can sell to the specific market which that editor understands.

That's it. Now go and write beautifully and don't forget to read the post below, otherwise my point above will be pointless, which would be a shame.

No comments: