How age relates to publishing

[LJonesy]

Originally Posted by Havlen

Practice is great, and is definitely the number one thing to grow your skill as a writer, but it isn't the only thing needed. Reading and study of the craft are also important... To grow as a writer you need to not only write, but also study the art of writing.

For sure. The same also applies to recieve critique and critiquing others work.

Originally Posted by Havlen

As far as talent goes, I see those talented for fiction being split into two categories. Those talented at writing, and those talented at story telling. Raymond Feist, for example, could be called a talented story teller. But he's not going to ever be confused for Vonnegut.

"Talent" seems like a very fickle and tangible concept to me. Writing is a craft, and something which you can attain skill at. Therefore there's less need to be talented, when you can be very skilled and well learned in the art of writing.

More often than not, talent can be a tag given out of pure perception. For Example (Generalising a real experience): i'll see something my friend's done and think "Wow he's so talented" but then, after talking to the person more about his or her talent, i'll see that his or her talent is actually a skill which has been grown, aquired and learned over a long period of time. The refined technique of that person simply appearing as a talent. Make sense? So more or less, "Talent" can be something difficult to pinpoint or define unless some clear demonstration is shown.

In that case anyone who can somehow pick up a pen or turn on a computer and write a masterpiece by clicking their fingers sounds unrealistic. Even the talented must practice and learn, and like all of us, re-learn.

That makes me think though, that talent can be something inside which does not relate to the technical skill-orientated side. I did a fair few things quite well when i was young without having any previous experience, and, in those instances, it was out of a love for doing it, an enjoyment and satisfaction out of doing that action. Though i know that's no origin for talent, it certainly contributes.

[Anthony G Williams]

Originally Posted by LJonesy

"Talent" seems like a very fickle and tangible concept to me. Writing is a craft, and something which you can attain skill at. Therefore there's less need to be talented, when you can be very skilled and well learned in the art of writing.

You need both, to be a really good writer.

It's like Olympic athletes: they all train very hard to achieve the peak of physical ability, but there's still a huge gap between the first and the last, and the difference is natural talent.

Brains are like bodies: training and practice are very important in developing their abilities but, just as you can't make an Olympic winner out of anybody picked at random, you won't become a best-selling author just through study and practice.

[John Jarrold]

Correct. Some authors sent me material over the entire fifteen years that I worked in publishing. Although their sentences became more technically proficient over that time, they simply didn't have the talent to write fiction and tell stories. And yes, I did mention this, as honestly and kindly as possible.