Welcome to Literary Rambles! While you’re rambling around and exploring the site enter for a chance to win:
THE MAKING OF NEBRASKA BROWN through April 12th here
DEAR KILLER through April 19th here
ACID through April 26th here
AGENT TINA WEXLER QUERY CRITIQUE & CAMISAR giveaway through May 3rd here
On the Potential of the Bad, Competent, Good or Great Writer
"...while it is impossible to make a competent writer out of a bad writer, and while it is equally impossible to make a great writer out of a good one, it is possible, with lots of hard work, dedication, and timely help, to make a good writer out of a merely competent one." (p. 136)
I don't know how I feel about this. The horde of hopefuls in my head want to beleive that, wherever I'm at talent-wise, I have a chance at becoming good or great. But then, I also don't see myself developing the talent of, say, Markus Zusak or Suzanne Collins—ever.
So I see what he's saying, and I think it comes down to how one defines or views such words as "good" and "great." A writer can improve greatly, for example, as I think many of us have, but will never be a [insert author that fills you with awe]. And yet, I still find myself balking at the idea that we have a built-in cap to our potential, and wondering if it really is impossible to cross these thresholds. Even if a good writer will never become one of the greats, does a bad writer really have no chance at becoming competent or good? I'm not sure. I find myself agreeing and then disagreeing in the span of two thoughts.
What's your take?
Posted by Casey Something on Friday, October 16, 2009