10-26-05
Just a few thoughts on what it takes to be a successful writer. First, what is success?

Success.
I don't know. Only you can define that. Eventual publication? Getting paid to publish? Making a living at it? Making $100,000 a year? Six-figure advances and movie deals and being on Oprah? You decide. For simplicities' sake I'll very, very loosely define it as being paid for your writing in a manner that satisfies you and seeing your work in print.

How to get there?

Talent.
Be talented. Huh. What's talent in terms of writing? Is Stephen King talented? Is Philip Roth talented? Is Joe Konrath talented? And what about Mark Terry, the dyslexic moron? Am I talented?

Yeah. We all are. And here's a working definition for this blog entry. Talent is defined by eventual success.

Don't like that? Tough. It's very workable. There are levels of talent. I don't write like Philip Roth (no shit). Neither does Stephen King, for that matter. Both are talented and both are, on the surface at least, successful. And keep in mind the earlier definition of success.

Persistence.
My most valuable asset as a writer. I'm a regular pitbull when it comes to this. It's probably some "artistic" variety of an obsessive-compulsive disorder. I can't fucking let go. Even when I want to. I threw thousands of hours of my personal time that might have been better spent playing the guitar, working out, traveling, making love or playing tiddlywinks writing and submitting novels and magazine articles. I'm the freaking poster child of persistence. I've had two publishers go under before publication. I've had three literary agents. I had a thousand reasons to quit, but apparently 1001 to keep going. Despite my blog entry of 2 days ago, I believe persistence will win out in the long run. Only you can decide what the "long run" is.

Luck.
Oh boy. Am I superstitious? Not particularly. Do I believe in luck. Bet your ass I believe in luck. Good and bad. Being in the right time at the right place with the right product comes down to luck. I've had some bad luck with writing. Hell, my 2nd novel manuscript almost got picked up by St. Martin's Press back in the late '80s. The editor wanted to pick it up but was talked out of it by one of the other editors. True story told me by the assistant. It took years for me to get that kind of interest again. Was that good luck or bad? I don't know. Sometimes I ask myself this question, just to put it in perspective.

Years and years ago, a gentleman named Bill Gates offered IBM his design for a computer operating system. They turned him down. Gee, that was unlucky, wasn't it? He was forced to start his own company.

These things happen. I like the movie "Bull Durham." One of the most significant bits in that movie comes toward the end, when Kevin Costner is playing pool with an old friend and cussing out Tim Robbins. He notes that his friend had a .330 average in the minor leagues and Robbins says, ".330 in the minors, big deal." Costner blasts into him, saying, "That's a career man." Then he goes on to tell him what the difference is between a so-so career and a great career in baseball--or, underlying it all, the difference between a great career in the minor leagues for practically minimum wage and a so-so career in the major leagues for hundreds of thousands of dollars--luck. A ball taking an odd bounce. A ball falling out of a fielder's mitt. A ball hopping left into fair territory instead of right into foul territory. A pitcher having a bad day or an umpire with a headache. He then says, "God reached down when you were a baby and gave you a lightning bolt for a pitching arm but you're pissing it away."

You can minimize luck's influences. You can hone your craft so your "talent" is obvious to anyone. You can show up so often that if good luck does swing around you can take advantage of it. You can study markets and learn the business so you're not trying to provide products nobody wants or that have been done to death. But don't discount luck.

So, you got those 3 elements? Do you have "talent?"

Best,
Mark Terry