- Thread starter
- #21
Ronald T.
Troubadour
Clearly I have angered and perhaps offended certain people with the way in which I discussed this topic. That was never my intention, and I’m saddened to discover this. I have only respect for each of you here at Mythic Scribes. I have learned an incredible amount from being a member, and I thank you all.
I mentioned in my original post that I believe some sort of “innate talent” is required if a person is to achieve greatness in writing. I still do. In fact, I believe that is true in all the various endeavors of life.
Let’s look at a few examples of people who reached what most would call a level of “greatness” in their chosen field — Mozart, Vladimir Horowitz, Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Frank Lloyd Wright, Julia Morgan, Enrico Caruso, Maria Callas, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Celine Dion, Josh Groban, George Lucas, Quentin Tarantino, and nameless others.
These are only a few who have reached such elevated status. The list could go on and on. But I’m very aware that what one person would categorize as “greatness” in a particular area, someone else might see as merely “adequate”, perhaps even trash. The concept of “greatness” is subjective. I think we all accept that.
However, what I referred to in my post was the idea of “greatness” as perceived by a majority of the populace. No one can please everyone. And they shouldn’t even try. They should please themselves first, and hope they do so for others. I am also a true believer in the idea that most of us are the worse judges of our own work. If we are ever to reach a level that might be considered some form of “greatness”, that will be for others to decide.
And one other thing — I agree that “greatness” also exists in works that have yet to be discovered. I think that goes without saying.
Now here’s the most important part of “this” post.
I absolutely do not believe anyone should give up, or stop trying to achieve greatness as a goal — and that includes me. My point was to suggest that in striving for a less lofty goal, such as becoming a “good” writer, which seems a more realistic goal, one is less likely to be disappointed in the end. (From your responses, perhaps the use of “adequate” was a bit extreme. So I will accept your various points of view on that issue.) With that said, if setting the highest goal possible, and then settling for something short of that works for you, then by all means, go for it.
As I mentioned in my second post -- as a child, it wasn’t a wise thing for me to show an egotistical point of view. And it seems all but impossible to shake the influences of those early years. At least for me it is. So I’ve learned to give the impression my goals don’t soar with the eagles. However, that is in direct contrast to my true nature. It’s just that I can’t rid myself of the feeling I will pay an unwelcome price if I allow my ego to show even slightly. Of course, in that ongoing attempt, I’m quite certain I fail miserably.
But if you can aim for some point over the rainbow without fear of repercussion, then more power to you. I wish that was something I could do.
And I wish to make something else as clear as possible. I think most of us involved in writing can distinguish the difference between great writing, good writing, adequate writing, and poor writing. And I think we can do that even with works that don’t fall into our preferred genres.
I’m not sure how to define that ability, or where the dividing lines lie. If I gave the impression in my original post that I actually knew these things, then I apologize. My point was that I believe most of us know when we’re reading a book that seems to rise above most others on the subject or in the genre.
And some people can make that distinction quicker than others. We all have greater or lesser gifts in particular areas, and that is true with writing as well. However, writing is such a huge and complex subject that it usually takes years to master even a few of its elusive skill-sets.
So, I suppose I might’ve made myself clearer and somewhat less offensive had I suggested that “great writing” is an author’s ability to use most of these varying elements in his or her writing, and do so proficiently.
I have no doubt that those we label as great writers never gave up or stopped trying to improve. As we all know, the quickest path to failure is to give up. If I gave any of you even the slightest impression that is what I thought you should do if you were unable to be the best, then I apologize once again.
As long as we work at improving our skills, and continue our studies to increase our knowledge concerning each aspect of writing, I have little doubt we will become better writers. How high each of us can fly is up to the various gods.
As always, my best to all of you,
-- The hermit in the woods --
I mentioned in my original post that I believe some sort of “innate talent” is required if a person is to achieve greatness in writing. I still do. In fact, I believe that is true in all the various endeavors of life.
Let’s look at a few examples of people who reached what most would call a level of “greatness” in their chosen field — Mozart, Vladimir Horowitz, Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Frank Lloyd Wright, Julia Morgan, Enrico Caruso, Maria Callas, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Celine Dion, Josh Groban, George Lucas, Quentin Tarantino, and nameless others.
These are only a few who have reached such elevated status. The list could go on and on. But I’m very aware that what one person would categorize as “greatness” in a particular area, someone else might see as merely “adequate”, perhaps even trash. The concept of “greatness” is subjective. I think we all accept that.
However, what I referred to in my post was the idea of “greatness” as perceived by a majority of the populace. No one can please everyone. And they shouldn’t even try. They should please themselves first, and hope they do so for others. I am also a true believer in the idea that most of us are the worse judges of our own work. If we are ever to reach a level that might be considered some form of “greatness”, that will be for others to decide.
And one other thing — I agree that “greatness” also exists in works that have yet to be discovered. I think that goes without saying.
Now here’s the most important part of “this” post.
I absolutely do not believe anyone should give up, or stop trying to achieve greatness as a goal — and that includes me. My point was to suggest that in striving for a less lofty goal, such as becoming a “good” writer, which seems a more realistic goal, one is less likely to be disappointed in the end. (From your responses, perhaps the use of “adequate” was a bit extreme. So I will accept your various points of view on that issue.) With that said, if setting the highest goal possible, and then settling for something short of that works for you, then by all means, go for it.
As I mentioned in my second post -- as a child, it wasn’t a wise thing for me to show an egotistical point of view. And it seems all but impossible to shake the influences of those early years. At least for me it is. So I’ve learned to give the impression my goals don’t soar with the eagles. However, that is in direct contrast to my true nature. It’s just that I can’t rid myself of the feeling I will pay an unwelcome price if I allow my ego to show even slightly. Of course, in that ongoing attempt, I’m quite certain I fail miserably.
But if you can aim for some point over the rainbow without fear of repercussion, then more power to you. I wish that was something I could do.
And I wish to make something else as clear as possible. I think most of us involved in writing can distinguish the difference between great writing, good writing, adequate writing, and poor writing. And I think we can do that even with works that don’t fall into our preferred genres.
I’m not sure how to define that ability, or where the dividing lines lie. If I gave the impression in my original post that I actually knew these things, then I apologize. My point was that I believe most of us know when we’re reading a book that seems to rise above most others on the subject or in the genre.
And some people can make that distinction quicker than others. We all have greater or lesser gifts in particular areas, and that is true with writing as well. However, writing is such a huge and complex subject that it usually takes years to master even a few of its elusive skill-sets.
So, I suppose I might’ve made myself clearer and somewhat less offensive had I suggested that “great writing” is an author’s ability to use most of these varying elements in his or her writing, and do so proficiently.
I have no doubt that those we label as great writers never gave up or stopped trying to improve. As we all know, the quickest path to failure is to give up. If I gave any of you even the slightest impression that is what I thought you should do if you were unable to be the best, then I apologize once again.
As long as we work at improving our skills, and continue our studies to increase our knowledge concerning each aspect of writing, I have little doubt we will become better writers. How high each of us can fly is up to the various gods.
As always, my best to all of you,
-- The hermit in the woods --
Last edited: