[Guest]

Hey there. Just running into a bit of a crossroads here and trying to find the right direction.

You ever hear of the idea that writers get better with practice? I’m still trying to figure out why the novel I wrote last year is a million times better than the short story I wrote today.

I think that there are two kinds of writer in me. The first writer who thinks ‘like a publisher’ and can write any type of story on the fly. The writer who writes to a business strategy. There’s definitely an urgency here to produce as much work as possible. Or at least … sell as much work as possible.

Then there’s my second writer, who writes to create perfect art. Sometimes, this means outlining, rewrites, extensive edits, writing pages and throwing them away, writing some more and throwing them away. Until you reach the perfect moment.

You see, that writer wrote my first novel. And then I banged out the second novel with a decent idea and a lot of personal experience helped get it over the line. Problem is now, I’m caught between the demand to write as much as possible, and the slowness of perfection.

So I’m asking the experienced writers to look back to where you were in similar experience.

Did you find that just writing the first thing that came to your head was the successful strategy? IE making sure you maintained your daily word counts no matter what?

Or was it important to extensively labor over each project and make sure you were bettering each work that preceded it?

 

[vrabinec]

I thought I knew everything there was to know about badly writing, but I'm not sure what the answer is on this one. I'm still on my first WIP, but I've got a backlog of other ideas I intent to tackle next, and I don't see me rushing through any of them to get the next work out.

 

[Patty Jansen]

My answer to that is:

Write only if you can find something to write of which you are fairly certain it will end up in the final draft.

When I first started writing, I used to write thousands of words a day, like 14K. These days, I write 1-3000 words.

The trick is recognising when you are writing useful stuff and when you are writing crap.

My first novel took me four years to write.

Last year, I finished three novels, two novellas and a bunch of short stories.

 

[Guest]

My answer to that is:

Write only if you can find something to write of which you are fairly certain it will end up in the final draft.

When I first started writing, I used to write thousands of words a day, like 14K. These days, I write 1-3000 words.

The trick is recognising when you are writing useful stuff and when you are writing crap.

My first novel took me four years to write.

Last year, I finished three novels, two novellas and a bunch of short stories.

Well done, Patty. While I don't always comment, I follow yours and other successful indie writer's with admiration.

I totally get your thinking here. Thing is, I have also been inspired by certain other experienced writers who promote finishing everything you start - IE never giving up on a story. I am in essence, a prolific abandoner of stories. Sometimes it's one or two chapters in, other times I'm three quarters of the way. Thing is, if it wasn't for another writer telling me how great the first chapters of The Park (my first novel) were then I would have abandoned that on the onset. Now I am confident it's a great story, and I am in debt to others' encouragement that I finished it.

Seeing it finished, without much outlining, but plenty of rewrites, I was totally taken in by the idea that you should finish everything.

This weekend I wrote a 5000 word short, I know is bad. Wasn't trying to be bad either. Didn't know it was that bad until I finished it. I seriously think it ranks up with one of the worst pieces of writing I've completed. And then, following the brave method, I will write everything, I will finish everything, I will always meet my word counts, I will publish everything - and then I get this turd.

I seriously was contemplating forcing myself to publish it too. I won't however, because I just can't. I thought the secret was to just make sure you finish, because after all my abandonments (both good stories and bad) I thought that was the way.

Now I wonder if I need to outline more. I don't know.

 

[Morgan Gallagher]

The vast majority of trad published writers who paid rent on time every month, produced writing on demand that they had little to no investment in.  A few, a very few, made it making money by writing what they wanted, but doing it quickly.

Decide what type of writer you are.  Or wish to be.

There is also room for having a pen name for one type, and not publishing the two under the same name.  You can build audiences for both.

Quickly written okay books with good storytelling and interesting plots sell.  Well written books that require some work on behalf of the reader take much longer to build an audience for.  Sure, you might get lucky and get good sales on that side too, some do, but it's a hard slog.

But at core, you need to decide if you are first of all paying rent, or building art.  As I said, both are options. 

 

[Joe_Nobody]

I go through cycles of writing that remind me of my appetite for music.
Sometimes I want to listen to simple rock 'n roll, just like I sometimes write simple prose.
Other times I like small combo jazz, just as my mood is to write snappy, fast paced dialog.
These periods can last a day or a month or more.

Where I experience a conflict with past writing is when my taste is for rock and I go back and read words written on a jazz day.

 

[Guest]

The vast majority of trad published writers who paid rent on time every month, produced writing on demand that they had little to no investment in. A few, a very few, made it making money by writing what they wanted, but doing it quickly.

Decide what type of writer you are. Or wish to be.

There is also room for having a pen name for one type, and not publishing the two under the same name. You can build audiences for both.

Quickly written okay books with good storytelling and interesting plots sell. Well written books that require some work on behalf of the reader take much longer to build an audience for. Sure, you might get lucky and get good sales on that side too, some do, but it's a hard slog.

But at core, you need to decide if you are first of all paying rent, or building art. As I said, both are options.

Okay, well this is like saying write badly to make money, and write well for no one.

Here's a question - Do some experienced writers here believe that everything you write should be finished / published? Or that you should wait until you're sure it hits your level of 'quality'? I get that you can write something great fast, of course, but you can also write crap fast. So after writing a piece of crap, do you move it to the backlist folder and start doing the opposite of what you did in order to write that (IE plan instead of discovery write), or do you publish the piece of crap with a smile, thinking every 99 cent sale is thirty cents towards rent, and then carry on writing your word count every day like a pro (Braveheart style)?

 

[Guest]

I'm certainly capable of writing crap, but if I start writing something that's crap I probably won't end up finishing the story... so no I wouldn't publish crap.

Then again I do usually edit several times in the middle of writing which helps me detect if it's crap coming out.

 

[Mathew Reuther]

Writing is personal and we're all different.

That said, I know a lot of the "professionals" who have had long careers say that the important thing is to sit down, write, and get the work finished so you can move on to the next one. They say that not everything is a work of art, but that's ok because we never know which piece of writing will really resonate with people anyway.

I'm new. (To publishing at least, to writing this much as well.) I'm learning. But I'm doing it the way I think is going to give me the best start on my career.

And that doesn't involve PERFECTION. It involves getting things to a "good" point. For all I know, I'd ruin what I've written going for perfection anyway.

 

[Morgan Gallagher]

Okay, well this is like saying write badly to make money, and write well for no one.

Here's a question - Do some experienced writers here believe that everything you write should be finished / published? Or that you should wait until you're sure it hits your level of 'quality'? I get that you can write something great fast, of course, but you can also write crap fast. So after writing a piece of crap, do you move it to the backlist folder and start doing the opposite of what you did in order to write that (IE plan instead of discovery write), or do you publish the piece of crap with a smile, thinking every 99 cent sale is thirty cents towards rent, and then carry on writing your word count every day like a pro (Braveheart style)?

Well, if you think that quickly written as a sit on your bum do the job every day is 'crap' you are going to drive yourself nuts.

If I go to my plumber, and ask him to fix a leaking tap, he does it quickly, with less skill than it takes to put in an entire central heating system. It's cheaper and faster and is what I needed on that day.

The quality of his skills isn't the issue, its the task at hand, and it's demands.

Readers read for different reasons. A quick light easy read is not 'crap'. It's a quick light easy read. And a good quick light easy read is a thing of beauty. And if you can do it, you deserve to get paid.

As I said, decide who you are, and be it. But you can be both. But don't do both types of writing, under the same name - the audience needs to know which one they are buying.

If you don't want to be the person who can produce faster easily read less perfect stuff, don't. Never fix a leaky tap. Only ever put in the full central heating system.

Up to you.

 

[60865]

And that doesn't involve PERFECTION.

Ah, perfection ... just thinking about perfection and it's instant paralysis!
We may as well stop what ever it is we're doing since it may not be perfect!
I'm going back to bed.

 

[Mathew Reuther]

I love the "cartoon you" on your site, for the record, Lady O.

If there's one perfect thing you can be proud of for the day, maybe that's it.

 

[60865]

I love the "cartoon you" on your site, for the record, Lady O.

If there's one perfect thing you can be proud of for the day, maybe that's it.

Well thank you, you've made my day
I've asked the same artist to do drawings for my next covers so I will have some original work.

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

I respect those who finish a first draft.

I don't respect those who publish a first draft.

[rant on] I think that many (e-)books published are in the rough draft stage, not in the edited, polished phase. And some, despite the sloppy writing and dismal editing, sell like crazy. Why? Because the audience is inclined to forgive the errors, as long as the story is engaging. Does that mean you should write fast and sloppy, and publish just to make money? Well, you can. And if you're in this only for the money, and you have no integrity or respect for your audience, you should just take the path of least resistance and publish crap. Most of your intended audience (the ones who read crap and don't give a crap) will probably buy your crap and read your crap and even like your crap. You won't have many writer friends who will love and respect your work, but then, they are not your audience. Right? [rant off]

 

[Quiss]

There are some discussions on my G+ writer circles about the business of writing.
I see posts like "no matter what, write x number of words per day".  I don't get that. There are times when I am so completely NOT able to write that those x number of words are just going to be x numbers of crud. Other times I have to remind myself to come up for air because the words, good words, just keep coming for hours at a stretch.

The idea of cranking out material because you have to (in order to pay the bills) is just not feasible for me. Maybe that is why there are so many complaints from readers about the quality of indie work.
If you can blast out consistent work like MacDonald's, congratulations. But I still think that quality can't be rushed like that for most of us.

 

[Ruth Ann Nordin]

Here's a question - Do some experienced writers here believe that everything you write should be finished / published? Or that you should wait until you're sure it hits your level of 'quality'? I get that you can write something great fast, of course, but you can also write crap fast. So after writing a piece of crap, do you move it to the backlist folder and start doing the opposite of what you did in order to write that (IE plan instead of discovery write), or do you publish the piece of crap with a smile, thinking every 99 cent sale is thirty cents towards rent, and then carry on writing your word count every day like a pro (Braveheart style)?

There are a lot of stories I started that I will never publish. I need to make sure every story I publish is one I'm passionate about writing the whole way through. That doesn't mean I don't have days where I don't feel like writing. I have lots of days where I have to force myself to sit down and write. But if the story itself is engaging me and is something I love, then I know it's worth putting more time and effort into. If I get halfway into a story and realize I no longer care what happens to the characters, I save it in a folder and move on. I might end up caring again and will be able to finish it then, but there are some unfinished stories that will never see the light of day again. I say quality counts over quantity.

Just my two cents.

 

[Mathew Reuther]

There are some discussions on my G+ writer circles about the business of writing.
I see posts like "no matter what, write x number of words per day". I don't get that. There are times when I am so completely NOT able to write that those x number of words are just going to be x numbers of crud. Other times I have to remind myself to come up for air because the words, good words, just keep coming for hours at a stretch.

The idea of cranking out material because you have to (in order to pay the bills) is just not feasible for me. Maybe that is why there are so many complaints from readers about the quality of indie work.
If you can blast out consistent work like MacDonald's, congratulations. But I still think that quality can't be rushed like that for most of us.

I am currently on word 576 of 1900.

I don't get to sleep until I get to 1900. I don't get to keep the words unless they're decent. (Which means I can revise them into something which makes sense.)

It's 6:19AM.

 

[60865]

The idea of cranking out material because you have to (in order to pay the bills) is just not feasible for me.

That's what I do at my day job: I write briefs for other lawyer's appeals.
When it's pre-formated and you've been doing it for 25 years, it's possible.
If I had to do that for the night writing I would just stop and stick to the day job, so far it pays better!

 

[Bilinda Ní Siodacaín]

I respect those who finish a first draft.

I don't respect those who publish a first draft.

[rant on] I think that many (e-)books published are in the rough draft stage, not in the edited, polished phase. And some, despite the sloppy writing and dismal editing, sell like crazy. Why? Because the audience is inclined to forgive the errors, as long as the story is engaging. Does that mean you should write fast and sloppy, and publish just to make money? Well, you can. And if you're in this only for the money, and you have no integrity or respect for your audience, you should just take the path of least resistance and publish crap. Most of your intended audience (the ones who read crap and don't give a crap) will probably buy your crap and read your crap and even like your crap. You won't have many writer friends who will love and respect your work, but then, they are not your audience. Right? [rant off]

Right. Can we be clear here. Writing fast does not equal crap. Writing slow does not equal perfect. You can write crap fast and slow. Amazing or what? What makes crap writing is just that. It's crap. Not the speed at which it is written.

Next amazing lesson for the day. Writing to earn money and being able to write fast and earn money also does not make it crap. Some writers are good. Some writers can write first draft and it is equal to finished draft. *Note, that does not mean said writers don't ensure their work is not riddled with typos, grammatical errors, plot holes, etc. As a matter of fact most good writers won't have a lot of the issues mentioned anyway.

Saying that someone writes fast and earns money from said writing and that makes it crap is plain wrong. And another thing? Why do we need the respect of other writers? If I have the respect of my audience, personally that is all that matters to me. But then I'm one of those "crappy fast writers who churns stuff out and earns a living from doing it." I have the respect of the cheques I earn and the audience I write for, and frankly that's all I need. /rant off

 

[Guest]

Writing is personal and we're all different.

That said, I know a lot of the "professionals" who have had long careers say that the important thing is to sit down, write, and get the work finished so you can move on to the next one. They say that not everything is a work of art, but that's ok because we never know which piece of writing will really resonate with people anyway.

I'm new. (To publishing at least, to writing this much as well.) I'm learning. But I'm doing it the way I think is going to give me the best start on my career.

And that doesn't involve PERFECTION. It involves getting things to a "good" point. For all I know, I'd ruin what I've written going for perfection anyway.

Hey Mathew (yep spelled that right )

You're one of my favorite people here. I've enjoyed watching your journey from no stories till 4 + the box set. Your covers are great. I wasn't converted on the first two, but by the third one I totally got it. I've read some of Daybreaks and the writing is good. You don't have anything to worry about here. Interestingly enough, I think your best writing will be when you steer closer to reality and that of your own life. I'm not ruling out the Dire Mysteries as being great, but there's a unique level of connection coming through your blog / forum posts that didn't carry through to the fiction that I read.

Anyway, point is that your writing is that series is great and you're on the right path.

My theory about not finishing work is that it's bad and I shouldn't bother - but what really sucks is seeing yourself follow through only to regret all the time you spent on it. The writing itself isn't bad because it's a 'lighthearted read' - it barely makes any logical sense. Sometimes stretching those boundaries can work, but when it's done so nonsensically as this last story ... It's just a mistake.

I don't know how I landed myself here exactly... I sort of wrote the same way for the other pieces ...

Does it really all just come down to good idea then?

I think I really need something that is a broadsheet of horror/epicness/emotion that has the imagery of my first novel and realism of the second. Or maybe I should just try to make some money and write that artificial serial I dreamed up called 'Serial Killers' mmmmm...