# The Major Difference between an Amateur and Professional Writer



## Justin Rocket (Sep 10, 2013)

Jack Truby, famous screenwriting instructor, has some very good words to say on this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E7ZwyRY_1g


----------



## shadowwalker (Sep 10, 2013)

Don't have time to watch the video right now, but as far as I know, the only difference between an amateur anything and a professional is that the professional has gotten paid for doing whatever it is they do.


----------



## philistine (Sep 10, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> Don't have time to watch the video right now, but as far as I know, the only difference between an amateur anything and a professional is that the professional has gotten paid for doing whatever it is they do.



Considering the dross that is out there at the moment (the same dross that has more than amply remunerated-financial and otherwise-its authors), this statement is completely true.


----------



## Justin Rocket (Sep 10, 2013)

I really don't know how to respond to people responding to something (this video) they haven't even seen.


----------



## shadowwalker (Sep 10, 2013)

Justin Rocket said:


> I really don't know how to respond to people responding to something (this video) they haven't even seen.



I wasn't responding to the video - as I noted because I don't have time to watch it - and so merely pointed out the definitions as I have always understood them to be. If you wish to disagree with my statement, that would be one method of responding.


----------



## Blade (Sep 10, 2013)

Justin Rocket said:


> I really don't know how to respond to people responding to something (this video) they haven't even seen.



The response is to the issue and not the video _per se.
_
I did watch the video and it does not seem to be about professional versus amateur at all but rather the value of professional structural criticism and interaction with other writers in a critical way as the only ways to improve one's writing.

He continually refers to 'the quality of the script' and I wonder if he is referring specifically to plays or TV material here. It is certainly a 'top down' view of writing in any case.


----------



## Kevin (Sep 10, 2013)

I watched.  Okay... seems pretty basic to learning anything. The guy speaks well.


----------



## Justin Rocket (Sep 10, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I wasn't responding to the video - as I noted because I don't have time to watch it - and so merely pointed out the definitions as I have always understood them to be. If you wish to disagree with my statement, that would be one method of responding.




A person can be a professional without getting paid.  They could be paid as a percentage of profits where profits won't be available until months or years later or get swallowed up by someone else.  It might take two years between when a script is accepted and a movie comes out.  You could have your writing accepted, but not receive payment yet.  By your definition, you aren't a professional.  You could be a novelist and have your story accepted for publication at a major publishing house.  But, due to bad marketing, a downturn in the economy, whatever, all the profit gets swallowed up by the distributor, press, etc.  By your definition, you aren't a professional.

That having been said, the point of this thread is to discuss the qualities which amateurs need to develop if they want to become professionals.


----------



## Blade (Sep 10, 2013)

Justin Rocket said:


> That having been said, the point of this thread is to discuss the qualities which amateurs need to develop if they want to become professionals.



The gist of the video, as much as I could infer, is that real effective criticism, either from a professional or other writers, will improve a writer's structure and hence enable him or her to reach the quality of professional. (I gather)

That may be all well and nice but assuming quality work is 'professional' or visa versa is too big a leap for me.:apthy:


----------



## shadowwalker (Sep 10, 2013)

Justin Rocket said:


> A person can be a professional without getting paid.



Not really. If they are supposed to get paid, or would under normal circumstances get paid, then they are professionals. My brother is an attorney - there have been cases he's handled where he doesn't get paid (pro bono). Does that mean that for those cases, he was not a professional?


----------



## escorial (Sep 10, 2013)

one has been discovered and the other hasn't


----------



## Ripslaughter (Sep 10, 2013)

One does it for a living--a _profession. _Simple as that. The professional writer makes writing his primary occupation.


----------



## Jeko (Sep 10, 2013)

Haven't watched the video, but I won't unless it's a ten second clip saying this:



> the only difference between an amateur anything and a professional is that the professional has gotten paid for doing whatever it is they do.



A writer makes the transition from amateurism to professionalism once his/her audience is willing to pay him/her for his/her work.


----------



## Sintalion (Sep 10, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Haven't watched the video, but I won't unless it's a ten second clip saying this:
> 
> 
> 
> A writer makes the transition from amateurism to professionalism once his/her audience is willing to pay him/her for his/her work.




My thoughts exactly, except that I watched the video.


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 10, 2013)

For those who haven't seen the video, Truby asserts that the difference between a professional and an amateur comes down to how constructive criticism is received, given, and implemented.

The amateur does not receive criticism well, does not give good criticism, or does not apply the criticism in the correct way(s), while the professional does. Constructive criticism on the craft of the writing makes all the difference. (More or less, that's what he was saying. :encouragement


----------



## Tettsuo (Sep 10, 2013)

KyleColorado said:


> For those who haven't seen the video, Truby asserts that the difference between a professional and an amateur comes down to how constructive criticism is received, given, and implemented.The amateur does not receive criticism well, does not give good criticism, or does not apply the criticism in the correct way(s), while the professional does. Constructive criticism on the craft of the writing makes all the difference. (More or less, that's what he was saying. :encouragement


Smacks of elitism to me.


----------



## Ripslaughter (Sep 10, 2013)

Tettsuo said:


> Smacks of elitism to me.



So not getting angry or offended by criticism is a sign of elitism? Methinks you don't know what that word means...


----------



## Sintalion (Sep 10, 2013)

"Truby asserts that the difference between a professional and an amateur comes down to how constructive criticism is received, given, and  implemented.The amateur does not receive criticism well, does not give  good criticism, or does not apply the criticism in the correct way(s),  while the professional does."

This is exactly why I fall into line with believing that the difference between a professional and amateur has to do with pay and little else. You can even be a master of the craft without making it your profession (example: that novel you kept in a shoebox is made famous after your dead. You taught scuba lessons your entire life.). Were you a professional? No.  The only way you would be considered as such is if you stretched the definition of professional to mean simply expert. 

There are thousands of amateurs out there that receive criticism well, give good criticism in return, and apply it correctly. Some members on this site have very open minds when they are critiqued and provide excellent advice to others. 

The problem I have with the video lies in its assertions. To get published, the professional at some point will have written a book while being an amateur. If it takes off like JK Rowling, great. Assuming the premise of the video, if they were an amateur when they wrote it, how on earth would it be published? The professional likely had certain skills and talents prior to becoming a professional. Is understanding criticism a fantastic skill? Absolutely. But does that understanding form the distinction between a professional and amateur? Of course not. Some published authors can't take criticism!


----------



## Gavrushka (Sep 10, 2013)

It's a great video, and I found it helpful. I think it is disingenuous to suggest that the only difference between amateur and professional is whether they get paid or not, as the payment is just the bi-product of success, not the distinguishing feature.

As a second-rate amateur writer, who recently evolved from third-rate, I can readily identify with what the guy in the video said (you know, I have no idea who he is!!!) A year ago, I posted my third-rate work on another site and a guy called Morkonan (he's the one who suggested I join this site) came along and dissected my steaming pile of vomit... Now, up until this point, I'd had people patting me on the back and saying how clever I was, and I made the mistake of listening to them, so Morkonan's words were poorly received at first... And then I read them again...

...It was a cathartic moment for me, as I realised the immensity of the journey in front of me, when I'd previously thought I'd reached the promised land. I'm a little way along that journey now, and I have no idea how far I can get before I reach the edge of my talent, but I'm still mobile for the minute.

Perhaps there are those that think they've arrived, and are just waiting for the phone to ring, but perhaps, just perhaps, they may have a little way to go as yet.


----------



## Tettsuo (Sep 10, 2013)

Ripslaughter said:


> So not getting angry or offended by criticism is a sign of elitism? Methinks you don't know what that word means...


No.  Not getting angry or offended at criticism has nothing to do with being a professional or an amateur.

What smacks of elitism is him claiming to know who and who isn't professional based on those he believes is qualified to be called professional and using something so arbitrary as reaction to criticism.  Only people I'm sure he'd believe is at the same "level" of professionalism as he.

Did you even listen to the man?  The first thing he states is his many years in writing.  Then he goes on to say who can and who can't give criticism... mostly addressing what he believe is enough training.

Personally, I listen to all criticism.  Because, even those that aren't trained in anything but what books they enjoy, can point out what doesn't work for them.

The real test is as others have stated, is getting paid for your work and having the readers (those people who are the MOST important) enjoy it.


----------



## Leyline (Sep 10, 2013)

KyleColorado said:


> For those who haven't seen the video, Truby asserts that the difference between a professional and an amateur comes down to how constructive criticism is received, given, and implemented.
> 
> The amateur does not receive criticism well, does not give good criticism, or does not apply the criticism in the correct way(s), while the professional does. Constructive criticism on the craft of the writing makes all the difference. (More or less, that's what he was saying. :encouragement



I've watched the video, and he's wrong. Dealing with criticism has absolutely nothing to do with being an amateur or a professional. In fact, it's a misuse of language and demonizes the absolutely neutral word 'amateur' (literally, one who practices something out of love). Dennis Potter, one of the foremost television writers in the history of the medium, famously refused to take criticism from anyone. He was, still, a professional. Dozens of amateur writers on this very site take and give criticism gracefully and well -- that does not make them professionals.

This may seem pedantic, but it's not. If someone wants to position themselves as a teacher of writing worth listening to, I quite rightfully expect them to understand the meanings of words and use them properly.


----------



## Leyline (Sep 10, 2013)

> I think it is disingenuous to suggest that the only difference between  amateur and professional is whether they get paid or not



No, it's not. Because that is literally the definition of the words.


----------



## Myers (Sep 10, 2013)

He could have just said "professional attitude." And once you get past that, it's a pretty trite message.


----------



## EarnBoogie (Sep 10, 2013)

KyleColorado said:


> For those who haven't seen the video, Truby asserts that the difference between a professional and an amateur comes down to how constructive criticism is received, given, and implemented.
> 
> The amateur does not receive criticism well, does not give good criticism, or does not apply the criticism in the correct way(s), while the professional does. Constructive criticism on the craft of the writing makes all the difference. (More or less, that's what he was saying. :encouragement



Thanks for that. I really didn't feel like watching a video about writing at the moment. For you to be able to sum it all up in a few sentences saved me the trouble. I wonder if that would classify me as an Amateur. :tongue2:


----------



## Leyline (Sep 10, 2013)

Myers said:


> He could have just said "professional attitude." And once you get past that, it's a pretty trite message.



True, on both counts.


----------



## Gavrushka (Sep 10, 2013)

Leyline said:


> No, it's not. Because that is literally the definition of the words.



For clarity, what I mean is that I feel that the 'average' professional writer is far better than the 'average' amateur writer, but there is some overlap.

Ability is what I see as the distinction is between 'us' and 'them'. It'd be comforting to feel otherwise, but it would not do me a power of good.


----------



## ppsage (Sep 10, 2013)

In occupations where the distinction is actually valid, professionals are those who have been officially credentialed. The application of the term in the present instance is at best problematic. Professionalism is an idea whose application has been much broadened but whose utility has not been necessarily increased thereby. There are many many instances where the grey area between professional and amateur is greater than that distinctly attributable to either. It's pretty shaky ground upon which to build a writing lecture of any sort.


----------



## InkwellMachine (Sep 10, 2013)

We can't just go around re-arranging terms to suit our _feelings _about issues. A professional *is* someone who does something as a profession (a profession being a paid occupation). That is the definition of professional. That is all there is to it. It's not up for debate. 

The term I think would be more applicable here is _expert_. We can't distinguish between professionals and amateurs because an amateur could very well make a profession out of their material without learning too much, while an amateur _can not ever be _an expert (because as soon as an amateur becomes an expert, they are no longer an amateur).


----------



## Terry D (Sep 10, 2013)

InkwellMachine said:


> We can't just go around re-arranging terms to suit our _feelings _about issues. A professional *is* someone who does something as a profession (a profession being a paid occupation). That is the definition of professional. That is all there is to it. It's not up for debate.
> 
> The term I think would be more applicable here is _expert_. We can't distinguish between professionals and amateurs because an amateur could very well make a profession out of their material without learning too much, while an amateur _can not ever be _an expert (because as soon as an amateur becomes an expert, they are no longer an amateur).



That really doesn't work either. There are many amateurs who are experts in their fields. My hobby of amateur astronomy is an excellent example. There are a great number of non-professional, unpaid, astronomers who are considered experts in the field Leslie Peltier, David Levy, and Stephen James O'Meara to name just a few.

I'd also suggest that a determining factor between professional and amateur might be how much time and effort one spends trying to define the other. I doubt if professional writers worry much about their status.


----------



## Morkonan (Sep 10, 2013)

Just a note to aid in helping people clarify this subject:

Waaaay back in college, I learned what a "Professional" is. Hope this helps, doing this from memory...

1) A profession(al) has a formal organization(s) for its members that establishes certain standards of practice.
2) In many cases, Professionals are licensed by State Agencies or other, Third Party, regulatory agencies.
3) There are often Professional periodicals and publications that contain news, scholarly articles that feature aspects of the profession, etc..
4) There can also be informal, non-regulatory, agencies that Professionals join and which only allow Professionals. (Professional Fraternities, Clubs, Organizations, etc..)
5) Professions often have gatherings where members can come together to discuss concerns and developments within their profession.
6) (There's more, just can't remember it all, atm.)

Being "paid" is often what separates a Professional from an Amateur. But, even an Amateur can get paid for something, once, and never get paid again. In some eyes that makes them a "Professional." In my opinion, one isn't a "Professional" just because they get paid, but, if they're using "pay" as a measure, then it must be significant or either a primary source of income or the focus of their activities. (Some writers don't have to write anymore if they don't want... Residuals are nice.) However, I don't think anyone who wished to call themselves a Professional would ignore Professional Organizations and Periodicals as well as things like Workshops, Roundtables, etc.. that deal with their choice of Profession.

If someone has the output to be a card-carrying member of the SFWA or the Mystery Writers of America, they'd be a Pro in my book, whether they're still getting paid for anything or not. That's an "Achievement" and an honor.


----------



## ppsage (Sep 10, 2013)

> We can't just go around re-arranging terms to suit our _feelingsabout issues. A professional *is someone who does something as a profession (a profession being a paid occupation). That is the definition of professional. That is all there is to it. It's not up for debate. *_


This is doubly or trebly ironic because it's precisely persons taking up the meaningful term (as outlined by Morkoman above) and using it to tout their conduct of non-professional activities like food service or dog grooming which has broadened and diluted the meaning to the basically useless state it now enjoys.


----------



## Myers (Sep 10, 2013)

This is about labels that don't have very much to do with writing. Seriously, what difference does it make?


----------



## Robert_S (Sep 10, 2013)

Leyline said:


> No, it's not. Because that is literally the definition of the words.



Actually, that is one of the definitions of professional, but not the only one. One of the definitions, #3 in WM, defines it as a behavioral approach, which is exactly what the video clip is entirely about.


----------



## philistine (Sep 11, 2013)

Tettsuo said:


> No.  Not getting angry or offended at criticism has nothing to do with being a professional or an amateur.



True. Murakami confessed that he still gets extremely angry when his wife criticises his work. He's only, what, the most famous Japanese author alive at the moment?


----------



## shadowwalker (Sep 11, 2013)

Myers said:


> This is about labels that don't have very much to do with writing. Seriously, what difference does it make?



Really. Probably why I still haven't watched the video...


----------



## Gavrushka (Sep 11, 2013)

I just saw the video as just another perspective to take whatever I could from. I try to form an opinion of such things after watching, and then listen to what others have to say about it too. - I think many people here have been writing a lot longer than I, and perhaps have views that are more focussed than mine. 

I think the semantic discussion of what defined a professional refocussed the intent of the video, which I felt was to listen to constructive criticism. However much experience we have, however good we are, the words we write are not a study in perfection and we should celebrate the critic who points out some of the flaws.


----------



## Robdemanc (Sep 11, 2013)

I watched the video and his idea of professional seems to be that of a writer who shapes his script towards what everyone else things it needs to be.  Which sounds reasonable for screenwriters who have to sell their writing into a film that the mainstream are going to watch.  Perhaps its different for books because readers have different demands than viewers.


----------



## Blade (Sep 11, 2013)

Robdemanc said:


> I watched the video and his idea of professional seems to be that of a writer who shapes his script towards what everyone else things it needs to be.  Which sounds reasonable for screenwriters who have to sell their writing into a film that the mainstream are going to watch.  Perhaps its different for books because readers have different demands than viewers.



He does use the term 'script' over and over. He also mentions at one point that the people who are buying the scripts are unable to offer constructive criticism.

A pitch for professional criticism really and I assume directed at screenwriters or play writers.


----------

