yesterday! Some of you agree with King and some of you don't. From reading through all the comments, I'd say King's view of the bad, competent, good, and great writer looks something like this.
Great = Innately talented, has something that can't be learned or taught.
Good = The majority of successful published writers (and those aspirees with this level of drive and talent).
Competent = Potential to become published, potential to become "good," but maybe never quite good enough if the drive isn't there (the line walker).
Bad = Actually incapable or unwilling to reach competency.
Which would put most of us in the "competent" and "good" categories, including beginners not stuck in the (unfortunate) bad category. Would you agree with assessment?
I've got a different but related question for you today though. What PERSONAL greatness do you aspire to? Is it becoming a published author, prolific, renowned, a bestseller, an award winner? Or is it more related to craft... is there a level you're trying to reach, and how are you gauging it?