Writers write

This is one of my best hawk pictures, taken just a few days ago -- and the reason why I take my camera everywhere I go.

Today was my day to try and get caught up on some of the DTF work and the Vision work. I did a fair job, to be honest. I still have to print out some checks and envelopes for Vision, but mostly I’m caught up there. And I'm almost doing as well on the other. I at least have all the novel submissions listed on the tracking page finally!

Now I need to get back to writing work for the night. I've kind of had to move everything else off my desk so that I don't get distracted by things I think I should be doing instead.

Hmmm... I've discovered that doesn't actually work if you have something like a link to Bryce sitting on your desktop and you suddenly remember something you MUST try..... (Okay, forced myself to close that EVIL program down before it sucks up any more of my time!)

Just can't remember how to do it. Have to go look that part up again, but not right now. Right now I'm going to do some writing.

On that note...

People are probably wondering why I'm still interested in the 'wannabe' conversation. Part of it is just that I enjoy finding out what others think and trying to see what makes their vision of the world different from mine. As many of you here know, you aren't required to agree with me. I will not call you jerks or demand that you don't post on my blog if you say something contrary to what I believe. It's a big world and I'm not a little 'artiste' who has to be pampered. People disagree with me all the time.

One of the sayings at Forward Motion -- one that Holly had put up there -- is 'Writers write.' At FM there was never any other qualification to call yourself a writer. There's a lot more to being a published or professional writer, but that's true of many professions. I knew a singer who started out performing at fairs and open mike nights at local clubs. She now has a few paying gigs. She was, nonetheless, a singer before she was paid. I've known people who draw pictures or paint who do so only for themselves, but they are still artists. I've known some incredibly good photographers who have had less material than me printed, and they are quite obviously photographers.

Why should writers be any different? Why do you have to be a wannabe if you have not been paid for the work yet? What makes the difference in you if something you wrote six months ago is suddenly published? How can you suddenly -- having had no further contact with that story -- suddenly be transformed from a wannabe to a writer by the acceptance? Does that mean you weren't a real writer when you wrote it? And now, suddenly, you are changed. You no longer want to be a writer. You suddenly are!

It just doesn't make sense to me. In some ways, I suppose, even aspiring writer or any of the other terms, have the same problem -- just less of the negative impact that wannabe has for some people.

I think this is the interesting point in the discussions going on the last few days. One attitude seems to come from a need for outside vindication of the work and the other comes from an acceptance of the work as important just for itself. Both groups will still keep moving toward the same goals, but (at least I feel) the ones who accept that they are already writers have a more Taoist approach to the work, in some ways. The work flows over them, and they become part of the work. They're not worried about whom they will sell it to later. The work alone is what matters.

Or maybe that's just my approach. Personally, people, I think if you are out there writing stories, you are writers. If it helps, remember that in my own little way, I am also an editor and a publisher. I give you permission to be writers. (grin)

With continued hard work you'll all be published writers, too, and likely do far better than I have. I've read material from some of you. I know you have talent. You are not wannabes. You are writers. Some of you just aren't published writers yet.

It works best if you have a lot of time to experiment and you're willing to write something that may not get published. You write for the love of writing, in other words, and sometimes you find the right story and the right place to sell it.

I'm not driven by publication. I love being published, but it is not what makes me a writer. I have stories to tell. I like it when others enjoy them, and I enjoy selling a few now and then -- but if I have an idea I want to write, I never consider whether there is a market for it or not. I just write it.

And writing is what writers do. (grin)

Every writer is different

I'm not sure how this term can ever be considered arrogant, but there it is. It is apparently arrogant to admit that what I do may not work for other writers, and what they do will not always work for me. It's arrogant to admit that everyone has to find their own path when they learn to write, and while some things I do may help others, not everything I offer will. We are not all the same writers working on the same stories, with the same free time to work, and the same abilities and needs. I've spent most of the last eight years working with new writers, and I think I'm pretty well qualified at this point to say that there is no single answer. Is it arrogance for me to admit that I have some qualifications in making that statement? No more so than saying that I've lived the last eight years with cats, and they're not all the same either. It's a fact and nothing more.

Personally, I think it's arrogant to accuse other writers of obviously not trying to improve if they don't improve in your own certain way. (Which is what happened at FM.)

Or maybe it's arrogance to believe that if a number of people don't happen to agree with you, that they are all the ones obviously in the wrong -- even when they repeatedly post that what you call yourself doesn't matter, but applying a term like wannabe to others can be taken as negative, and here's why. Ah, but some people are unwilling to admit that they could learn something from others, that they might not be totally correct, and that -- yes, having used the term and gotten a negative response from a few people -- that really does seem to be the case.

I really liked Linda's line: 'The dictionary is a record of what words meant when the dictionary was written.' I love words and looking up both what they mean and what they meant in the past. The Urban Dictionary -- filled as it is with definitions from people using the words right now -- is a wonderful resource for both contemporary writers and science fiction writers.

If someone says 'if you aren't making sales you obviously need to change the way you work,' is it arrogant to point out that you (and several of the people he was addressing) have had many sales, and don't work in the way that he does, so it's obvious this is not the path for everyone. And for that matter, asking if he has made any sales, since that was the point he brought up. (I had not read his blog at that point and didn't realize he had only recently adopted this new form of writing. I do expect him to be published. He writes very clean sentences, is knowledgeable in grammar and punctuation -- and that puts him a head up over a lot of other people. I cannot say if he actually knows how to tell a good story, though.)

Every writer is different. I guess that's pretty arrogant to admit that none of us has all the answers -- and probably even more arrogant to be willing to help others where you can with what knowledge we have gathered.

Here's some real arrogance for you -- this is a note from an acquisitions editor whom I had worked with before at a different small press/ebook publisher. She now has one of my novels and is reviewing it for another company:

[i]BTW, unless you've lost your touch since last I read something of yours, this reading is rather a formality--I won't keep you waiting long.[/i]

I told her that meant she would absolutely hate the book by the time she was done, but I appreciated the comment.

Yes, I am going to talk about my publications now and then. In fact, I don't do it often enough. Because I'm mostly working in electronic and small press, that means I should be out pushing my work more. What I need is a marketing plan, and I thought this year was going to be the one I got my act together -- but FM, DTF, and Vision have taken every free non-writing moment I have.

My new chapbook has the quote from C.J. Cherryh on it again -- she said to use it on this one too since it was so appropriate for the work. Honor Bound was the first one and Star Bound is the second. They're available from Yard Dog Press, a wonderful micro-press company with a good record for sales and awards.

I will have a short story out in Andromeda Spaceways Inflight Magazine soon, too. I am really looking forward to that one!

I have three more novels in the Dark Staff series to go. I think the next one will either be late this year or early next year. I have also sold the second Singer and St. Jude novel to DDP.

I have only five things out at the moment, but I've made seven sales so far this year. I have two novels almost ready to go out (Muse and Glory for those keeping track).

I have written 80 class/posts for the two year novel course at FM. I have the last 22 listed out and some partially outlined.

I have three more novels outlined and I've started the research on another one -- a very intricate piece that I'm really looking forward to writing, though it may not be until next year.

So far this year I've written eighteen articles, ten short stories, two full novels and three half ones (yes, number of novels is down, and yes I need to get them done!). I've edited two full novels and part of another one.

I write every single day and I have for DECADES.

I have two other rules that I live by -- finish everything you start, and finish it with a year of starting it.

I do not expect the rest of you to adopt any of those rules. I know that you don't work the way I do, and what I find helpful and a good prod to keep working isn't what you will find works for you.

Every writer is different. Don't anyone ever make you believe otherwise.


Edited -- It is beyond arrogance to ignore the fact that nearly everyone who has posted here or at FM has said that it doesn't matter what a person calls himself, but for many people the term wannabe is negative and will get a bad result. You cannot change the fact that these people have that reaction. It's a statement of fact. No one fears the word wannabe; they don't like it. There's a big, difference. I would expect someone who claims to be a writer to be able to read and see that difference.

Oh hold it -- You aren't a writer. You're a wannabe writer: someone who wants to be a writer, so that means you can't be one now. I guess that's the problem. I don't know what you're doing with all those words, but it's obviously not writing after all. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I could be wrong.

I had just thought you were an unpublished writer, but if you insist on being a wannabe, I guess that's what you are.

You can call yourself an armadillo road kill writer for all the rest of us care, but if you call others the same you best be prepared for the reactions.

More on 'Wannabes'

Cat's know nothing about gravity....



This is in answer to the comment on my post about wannabes a few days ago.

It doesn't bother me that he's put up the link to this blog because people will make up their own minds after reading both sides. In fact, I would rather people are able to look from his blog posts to mine in something related like this so that they can see both sides of the issue. I find the circle of communications that goes on over blogs and such rather fascinating, in fact, and I never expect accord. I'm sure there are a number of people who agree with him. That's not going to change the definitions that I found, or the way in which his use of the term provoked some people at FM.

But on this subject of 'wannabes' and definitions, I find it interesting to see someone deny common usage of a term as though we all live and speak strictly by Webster's dictionary. Last time I checked, English wasn't a dead language; it is still evolving and meanings change with the times. I find it very strange to see a writer ignoring the way in which a term -- when applied to others -- can be taken as an insult, as though he doesn't want to understand how language works. No number of dictionary definitions will change that reaction.

Writers should always be open to learning about language and how it is used in dialogue. Living by the dictionary and grammar books isn't always the right answer.

Being part of a large group of writers, I think I'm probably more aware of how different people interpret words than he is. I had the impression -- and this might be wrong -- that he's had this kind of trouble with written communications elsewhere on the Internet, and it might just be an inability to look outside his own definitions and decisions. Almost everyone I know has had some problem with misunderstood posts at one time or another, but most of us are willing to admit that we did not explain things clearly.

However, as I've said from the start, it's not going to matter what a person calls himself. In fact, the only real point of contention over 'wannabe' in my side came when he used the term at FM. A few of the members took exception -- especially when the statement was made in such a general way that it included people who are not 'wannabes' by anyone's definition. But, again, he pointed out to us that the fault was not in the original statement but in our interpretation of it.

Isn't that communications? Isn't the person making the statement the one charged with being certain the people on the other end will clearly understand what he's saying? And if the communications is not understood by a number of people, then the fault has to be in the communications.

Personally, I'd rather err on the side of politeness when addressing others who are working at becoming published writers. I do use the term to describe those people who occasionally wander into FM looking for someone to write up their great ideas for them. Those are the wannabes in my book -- the ones who want their names on the covers, but don't want to do the work. They'll sometimes talk about the great idea they have, which almost inevitably turns out to be some sort of clone of whatever happens to be the most popular movie or TV show at the time.

So there it is. We all make mistakes in communications and most of us admit to our part in the misunderstanding and try to clarify. Most of us are aware of how language changes and adapts to the times, and how the use of that language can affect others.

Most of us also use terms for ourselves that we would not apply to others, because we have our own definitions or humorous responses to those terms. What we say of ourselves is not always the things we should say about others, however. Most of us know the difference.

Are you really a wannabe?

Sometimes things that bug me stay with me for a while, surface again, and even sometimes hit at a point where I can consider it. This morning, still curled up in bed, I had one of those moments and realized that there was a site on line where I could look into the definition of a word that would not normally turn up in a dictionary. (See Note at bottom of post.)

About a month a go or so we had a slight disagreement about the term wannabe on the Forward Motion site. The person who used the term didn't understand the current negative connotations. I wondered if there was more to the word than I was thinking so I finally went to the wonderful Urban Dictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/) and copied a few of the more than twenty definitions:

1. Desperate person who wants another persons identity so does a pathetic impersonation


2. a person who acts like someone that they are not.


3. Someone who wants to be what they are not. (This is the most upbeat use of the term I could find.)


4. Someone who wants to be something else and fit in a crowd, someone who tries to act like someone they want to be even though it's obvious that they're just a stupid wannabe.


5. an individual who tries really hard to be someone their not, often by copying others


6. Anyone has the potential to be whatever they want, but Wannabes aren't willing to go the extra mile yet claim to already be there.

7. People who want to be something they can't.


The person apparently couldn't understand why at FM we don't call new writers wannabes. We don't because the term has become a judgment call on the person's ability to write, not a statement of their potential. According to the current definitions, wannabes are people who have failed, not people just exploring their skills.

Of course if people want to call themselves wannabes maybe they can get the term shifted to a better meaning. But right now it has a very negative connotation. I could call a new horror writer a 'wannabe Stephen King' and it would not be praise. People use terms in ways that suit them, and that's how the language evolves. But at the same time, a person -- especially a writer -- needs to be aware of how the words are currently perceived.

New writers -- the term we usually use at FM -- are just that: people who are new at the work of writing. Some of them will find that writing is not for them. Some will even become wannabes rather than do the hard work of writing. But new writers are all about potential and not about failure to be more.

Note: Maybe I should look up terms in dictionaries before I make decisions on what will be there.

Wannabe or wannabee -- one who aspires, often vainly, to emulate another's success or attain eminence in some area.

-- Random House Webster's College Dictionary, copyright April 2000

That is a slightly more upbeat definition as well. And Microsoft Word's synonym finder calls up hopeful, aspirant and would-be. Too bad we don't all live in the Microsoft world -- if we could trust its grammar and punctuation, half the work of editing would be done for us!

Back to work....

As you can no doubt guess (or no by experience), this last week has been hell, and I am now behind on nearly everything in the world. My priorities are:

Get Vision updated

Get the site stuff up to date

Get back to writing

Russ is in New York -- just got the email from him, so I know everything is fine there. Becky and Erin should be back to Arizona.

But, back to a bit of calm here. My hope is to finish Silky this month. I think I'm problaby about half way there. I think once I get back into the knack of that work, I'll be fine. It's probably going to take a few days, though.