# LOL! So just what IS a writer, anyway?



## patskywriter (Aug 28, 2018)

While perusing posts on a couple of writing forums today, I came across at least four people questioning whether they were writers … and asking how you know for sure that you’re a writer. I didn’t want to hijack their threads, so I thought I’d start my own.

I used to hesitate when wanting to call myself a writer, especially when I compare myself to my older sister (who still thinks she’s the boss of me). Cookie is flamboyantly creative. She can imitate Shakespeare, has a knack for dialects and accents, and is insufferably witty. I, on the other hand, plod along, writing factual, useful (and very short) news stories for the online community paper that I publish for residents of my city (Durham NC). 

And yet, I’m considered the writer of the family. Could it be because I’m making money with it? If I had my sister’s creative flair, maybe I’d churn out lowkey murder mysteries like my man Georges Simenon. Maybe not. Right now, I enjoy seeing how my writing brings local people and organizations into the public eye—even if I rarely get the opportunity to use alliteration unwisely or to throw adjectives and adverbs around like Frisbees. I have recently discovered (by way of posts that I leave on writing forums and on Facebook), that I might be developing into a decent essayist. I’m taking this seriously and look forward to seeing where I go with it. 

If you were to ask me what a writer is, I’d say—at least in my case—it’s someone who enjoys writing words that people read. Technically speaking, I guess you could write something that’s for your eyes only, but what’s the fun in that? My sister only writes when she has to. She’s the office manager of her church, which does require writing every now and again. But I can say with certainly that Cookie  doesn’t recognize her talent, or simply doesn’t have the drive to exploit it. So, maybe if you’re wondering if you have what it takes to be a writer, you should look objectively at what you’re good at and go from there. I’m good at short-and-breezy nonfiction writing, so I chose something that works nicely with my writing style. 

Try writing something you’d like to read. Don’t choose a genre that happens to be popular at the moment, especially if you know next to nothing about it. Get really thoughtful and make an honest assessment of your likes and your skills and see if you can put them all together that, with some work (and perhaps even some sacrifice), can put you on the path of becoming a “writer.”


----------



## QuixoteDelMar (Aug 28, 2018)

The only people who can't call themselves writers are those who don't write. Full stop.


----------



## luckyscars (Aug 28, 2018)

I always thought writer as being somebody who actively creates material to inform, educate and/or entertain, aspiring to achieve a professional standard of end product through the medium of words.

That was until I found the internet, where I learned these are also "writers":

- Somebody who thinks/dreams about writing yet never actually does it
- Somebody who talks incessantly about "their WIP" on forums but never actually writes it
- Somebody who agonizes endlessly about trivial details and allows those to hamper their productivity because Not Perfect = Don't Bother.
- Somebody who thinks they don't have to practice writing and reading the works of those better than them to improve
- Somebody who spends more time designing cover art and a website than editing and refining their work.
- Somebody who refuses to write anything that isn't essentially a clone of Stephen King/George RR Martin/ Tolkien/etc and retches at the idea of experimenting with different genres/styles 
- Somebody who refuses to listen to criticism/feedback and generally responds in a defensive manner.

At the risk of sounding like a grouchy old fart, what I don't see a whole lot of these days is anybody _enjoying _writing for the sake of simple, honest storytelling. I know very few writers who read outside of their chosen genre and fewer still who attempt writing it. 

Much of what I do see, particularly in the self-publishing sphere, lies somewhere between hobbyists who don't take it seriously enough (as shown by the quality) and solemn poseurs who take it so seriously their every.sacred.word is taken from the glossary of [insert popular trope here]. That isn't writing, it's fancy dress for narcissists who happen to hold Liberal Arts degrees.


----------



## Sir-KP (Aug 28, 2018)

Yeah, I wouldn't call myself to be a writer just yet until at least my book is published somewhere. The fact that I'm just suck at it no matter how many stories I got in head and how many stories have fired up on a script so far, when people ask what I'm doing, I would say that "...I'm also trying to write."


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Aug 28, 2018)

I prefer to think of myself as an Indie publisher.
Sure, lots of people _talk the talk _about writing, and may even pen some prose. But to me an Indie writer/publisher indicates a higher level of commitment and experience.
I don't just futz about with stories, I write 1.5 books a year. My life is strictly partitioned so I can write from 0400-0800 Mon-Fri, 0400-1200 on weekends. 
I study books in my genres, I obsess about the story to such a degree that I have rewritten entire books because they were not right. In more than a few cases I have discarded 40-60k worth of work and started over from scratch.
I don't waste my time in the nuisance threads.  If I am in the forum I am either mentoring or talking about writing. Don't give a damn about _'ban the person above' _or the other non-writing threads.
During designated writing hours I don't play around on facebook, or create clever memes about what it means to be a writer...because I am busy writing.
If I am not writing, then I am marketing, or maintaining the web site.  
My goals are: Write full time, get an Indie book on the NYT best seller list, and have at least one of my books turned into a movie or TV show.


----------



## Ace (Aug 28, 2018)

I mean...  I'm not going to lie...  I've been attempting to write stories and things since I was in my teens and have always found like a complete and utter failure due to my never finishing anything.  And with the replies of others, I can see that that's not exactly an uncommon ailment.  Perhaps writers are doomed to have crippling self doubt?


----------



## moderan (Aug 29, 2018)

A writer is someone who writes things. A professional is one who sells those things. It's that easy.


----------



## Phil Istine (Aug 29, 2018)




----------



## JustRob (Aug 29, 2018)

In Scotland a writer used to be someone who wrote down what other people were doing or planning to do, so the profession equated to what we now call solicitors and lawyers. The term still appears in modern Scottish legal roles such as "Writer to the signet". It's a sobering thought though, that a writer potentially writes about the things that other people do.  

When I went a little mad and started writing fiction some years ago I regarded myself only to be a fictional writer. I think the claim to be a writer is itself fiction until others acknowledge that one really is a writer. In this sense I regard the term as meaning a person who writes works that others read voluntarily. 

When my angel and I were on holiday in Europe some years ago we really enjoyed ourselves and I indulged in some of my somewhat expressive dancing, to attempt to describe such a performance. While talking to another couple I mentioned that I had written a novel and the lady told me to contact her after the holiday as she might be able to get it published for me. I emailed her some weeks later and she had trouble remembering me but then I received a reply from her which read,"Now I remember you!! You're the dancer!!!" Evidently not a writer in her eyes then.

To illustrate how the designation "writer" can be a perception by others rather than the view of the author of a work, my writing is predominantly dissociative behaviour intended to flush unwanted thoughts and feelings out of my mind. If others happen to find the product of this activity entertaining then that is simply a side effect, not the objective. It is only my desire to maintain my reputation for doing all things as well as I can that results in my writing having any quality. 

One of the things that I find irksome is the way that society invents rules where none need to exist in my opinion, so to fulfil its primary dissociative purpose the more I discover what are claimed to be the rules of good writing the more my writing strives to break them in creative ways. No doubt on WF I appear to be a rebellious novice who thinks that he knows better than more experienced writers, but I don't claim to be a writer and this isn't modesty but is based on my personal objective in writing. I actually write far more than I ever show to anyone else because doing that is not essential; it is enough just to have locked away those unwanted thoughts and feelings inside my computer.

LuckyScars demonstrated the point earlier by highlighting that there are both self-declared writers and acknowledged writers and these can be quite different in nature. I doubt that I fall into either category but then I never intended to and originally only joined WF out of curiosity. Given that a writer is someone acknowledged to be one by others it makes sense that my angel and I focus more on beta reading here than writing because it is ultimately the readers who make others writers in that sense.

And now I must get back to my WIP. Yes, I do actually have one now.


----------



## Pete_C (Aug 29, 2018)

Reading this thread, I found myself wondering if somewhere there is a plumbers' forum why they endlessly debate what a plumber is, or a surgeons' forum where they discuss what constitutes a surgeon, or a bricklayers' forum where people who have never laid a brick, or even own any bricks, ask endless questions about mortar mixes they never intend to make.


----------



## Bayview (Aug 29, 2018)

A writer is someone who writes.

I think any other qualifiers should come in the form of adjectives - a _prolific_ writer, a _novice _writer, a _professional_ writer, a _reluctant _writer, or whatever.

I've known writers with a hell of a lot more talent than I have who've never gotten anything published, generally because they haven't tried, and I won't think of them as in any way less than other writers just because publication isn't one of their goals.

I've known writers who are publishing a book (maybe not a novel, but at least a novella) every month, generally because they're committed to making a living as a writer and they've chosen the frequent-publication business model, and I won't think of them as in any way less than other writers just because "art" isn't their primary goal.

If you write, you're a writer. If you don't, you aren't.


----------



## JustRob (Aug 29, 2018)

Pete_C said:


> Reading this thread, I found myself wondering if somewhere there is a plumbers' forum why they endlessly debate what a plumber is, or a surgeons' forum where they discuss what constitutes a surgeon, or a bricklayers' forum where people who have never laid a brick, or even own any bricks, ask endless questions about mortar mixes they never intend to make.



Well yes, I have wondered whether a plumber and a central heating engineer are the same profession and to what extent they are capable of doing electrical wiring. Nowadays with so many regulations about who can do such tasks it is essential to have precise definitions, so perhaps they do discuss it somewhere. The plumber who installed our bathroom suite also tiled the bathroom, which is hardly plumbing by any stretch of the imagination. Also it is quite reasonable that a client who has had a brick wall constructed might enquire about appropriate mortar mixes to determine whether the tradesman did a proficient job just as a reader of a story might wonder whether its author has any right to claim to be a writer.


----------



## midnightpoet (Aug 29, 2018)

A writer writes, and having writ, moves on...

Sorry about that, but it's true (a little humor never hurts).  Some people nowadays are obsessed with labels, it seems.  As some others here have intimated, being a "writer" is not complicated.


----------



## patskywriter (Aug 29, 2018)

Pete_C said:


> Reading this thread, I found myself wondering if somewhere there is a plumbers' forum why they endlessly debate what a plumber is, or a surgeons' forum where they discuss what constitutes a surgeon, or a bricklayers' forum where people who have never laid a brick, or even own any bricks, ask endless questions about mortar mixes they never intend to make.



I don’t know about plumbers, surgeons, or bricklayers, but DJ forums are plagued by so much hand-wringing.   Plumbers and bricklayers probably have licenses, and surgeons have lovely framed diplomas, so as long as the work keeps coming in, I doubt if they have much self-doubt.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 29, 2018)

Bayview said:


> A writer is someone who writes.
> 
> I think any other qualifiers should come in the form of adjectives - a _prolific_ writer, a _novice _writer, a _professional_ writer, a _reluctant _writer, or whatever.
> 
> ...




This sums it up pretty well. I would add, though, that the writer's attitude makes a difference. I think of myself as a writer because that's my primary method of self expression. I do something completely different to earn a living, and state _that_ when I'm asked for my occupation, but inside my skin I'm a writer. I also dabble in photography with some degree of success, but I'm not as invested in that hobby so I think of myself as a photography 'enthusiast' not a photographer.

You probably know what you are. At the very least, most of us know what we are not.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Aug 29, 2018)

QuixoteDelMar said:


> The only people who can't call themselves writers are those who don't write. Full stop.



That's as bogus as saying we're all beautiful because we're all humans.  If a word applies to everything, it doesn't mean anything.


----------



## ScarletM.Sinclaire (Aug 29, 2018)

I like to believe a writer is one who actually writes their stories and publishes them. A person who fantasizes about becoming a writer but never actually does any of the work required, is nothing more than a day dreamer. I also think those who wants _others_ to write their works for them, aren't writers. They're just lazy and want to mooch off profits (or whatever motive they may have.) 

Writing is more than just putting pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard). Its about writing something you personally enjoy or are intrigued about and want others to read about those ideas. Its about putting in countless days and nights into your work. Fixing that damned plot hole, tweaking the development on that one character or thesis, elaborating and clarifying facts or ideas ,and writing (or rewriting countless times) that one chapter/page/paragraph (or even several) until its just right. And when you're finally done with all the labor and edits, and finally publish the piece, then and only then can you be considered a writer. Though that's just my own opinion.


----------



## Bayview (Aug 30, 2018)

ScarletM.Sinclaire said:


> I like to believe a writer is one who actually writes their stories and publishes them. A person who fantasizes about becoming a writer but never actually does any of the work required, is nothing more than a day dreamer. I also think those who wants _others_ to write their works for them, aren't writers. They're just lazy and want to mooch off profits (or whatever motive they may have.)
> 
> Writing is more than just putting pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard). Its about writing something you personally enjoy or are intrigued about and want others to read about those ideas. Its about putting in countless days and nights into your work. Fixing that damned plot hole, tweaking the development on that one character or thesis, elaborating and clarifying facts or ideas ,and writing (or rewriting countless times) that one chapter/page/paragraph (or even several) until its just right. And when you're finally done with all the labor and edits, and finally publish the piece, then and only then can you be considered a writer. Though that's just my own opinion.



So someone who writes only for her own enjoyment/satisfaction isn't a writer because she doesn't publish?

Someone who writes quickly and easily isn't a writer because she doesn't put "countless" days into her work and doesn't "tweak?"


----------



## QuixoteDelMar (Aug 30, 2018)

Gamer_2k4 - actually, it's more like saying we're all men because we're all human.

I don't apply the word to everything. I apply the word to people who write. That's what a writer is - someone who writes either for thier own enjoyment, edification, or satisfaction, or for someone else's. Nobody has made any claim that a shoe salesman is a writer because they sell shoes.

Writers are people who write, and the only people who don't get to call themselves that are the people who do not write. So, yes, the daydreamers who never put pen to paper, the lazy artistes who would rather talk endlessly about form but never produce anything, etc ad naseum; they are not writers. But anyone who actually writes is.

Not sure why this is a question. It feels dangerously close to exclusionary.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Aug 30, 2018)

QuixoteDelMar said:


> Gamer_2k4 - actually, it's more like saying we're all men because we're all human.
> 
> I don't apply the word to everything. I apply the word to people who write. That's what a writer is - someone who writes either for thier own enjoyment, edification, or satisfaction, or for someone else's. Nobody has made any claim that a shoe salesman is a writer because they sell shoes.
> 
> ...



But that can't be the definition of a writer.  Otherwise, everyone who posts on a forum, talks in a chat room, or sends a "hay r u ther" text would be a writer.  Everyone writes in all sorts of contexts; it's simply a part of life.  But unless there's a certain degree of craftsmanship in the writing, those people aren't writers, at least not by any definition of the term worth using.


----------



## Ralph Rotten (Aug 30, 2018)

ScarletM.Sinclaire said:


> I like to believe a writer is one who actually writes their stories and publishes them. A person who fantasizes about becoming a writer but never actually does any of the work required, is nothing more than a day dreamer. I also think those who wants _others_ to write their works for them, aren't writers. They're just lazy and want to mooch off profits (or whatever motive they may have.)
> 
> Writing is more than just putting pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard). Its about writing something you personally enjoy or are intrigued about and want others to read about those ideas. Its about putting in countless days and nights into your work. Fixing that damned plot hole, tweaking the development on that one character or thesis, elaborating and clarifying facts or ideas ,and writing (or rewriting countless times) that one chapter/page/paragraph (or even several) until its just right. And when you're finally done with all the labor and edits, and finally publish the piece, then and only then can you be considered a writer. Though that's just my own opinion.





Yep.
There is a difference between a writer and an enthusiast.


----------



## JustRob (Jun 12, 2019)

Time to wake up a dormant thread then, if only because I couldn't think of anywhere to post a thought that I had.

Writing is simply scratching an itch, but a writer is someone who finds out the cause of the itch and works out a better way to scratch it.

Well I liked it.


----------



## Megan Pearson (Jun 13, 2019)

JustRob said:


> Writing is simply scratching an itch, but a writer is someone who finds out the cause of the itch and works out a better way to scratch it.



It is like an itch, isn't it? (BTW, I liked this, too.)

I think I'll be the voice for the "I write for myself & am not published" crowd. It's an itch that doesn't go away. I have gone through seasons of productivity and I have gone through seasons of drought, but still, the fact remains that I see something and think, 'that would make for a good story'. For me, this includes daydreaming, reflection, and a desire to find the right word in order to produce something at a high level of competency and art. It includes letting your muse speak to you and being brave enough to follow it where it leads. That 'a writer writes' seems a silly statement, yet it innately embodies a goal and purpose beyond where the writer began. For some, publishing embodies that goal. For others, it is something more personal. Is Emily Dickinson any less a poet for not having published her poems during her lifetime? Of course not. Similarly, it's silly to think that a writer isn't a writer simply because they are not published. 

Now, I do hope to be published and have begun the rewrite of an old manuscript, specifically toward that purpose. Ironically, I wrote it all those years ago with the intention of publishing--although, I can't say the same for most of my work. An author is certainly someone who is published. From my perspective, it is much easier to be simply a writer than an author, because an author requires polish and a crocodile skin when publishing (and these days, marketing saavy), but I don't think that should keep any writer from trying to become an author.


----------



## bazz cargo (Jun 13, 2019)

Hum-buggery... A writer has a tool kit just like any other craftsperson. At the bottom of the box there is an understanding of word-smithery and a vivid imagination. A writer makes something, they don't just push words around.  :-k


----------



## Megan Pearson (Jun 14, 2019)

bazz cargo said:


> Hum-buggery...



Then let me ask you this. Does "making something" always require outside assessment? 
(In other words, does what we produce bear its own, intrinsic value, or must its value always be determined from without?)


(BTW, great word choice. I'll toss you a munchy for that.)


----------



## MichelD (Jun 14, 2019)

I was at a thrift store in Surrey, B.C. a suburb of Vancouver one time and a fellow I know who works for the David Suzuki Foundation recognized me. He used to work for West coast Environmental Law and when  I was at The Fisherman newspaper we went on a tour to view a logging site for its environmental impact. The site was actually very clean.

Anyway, years later, at this thrift store he said Hi and asked what I was up to these days.  I said that I'd quit The Fisherman in 1995 and had been freelancing since then for two different U.S. mags, a commercial fishing publication and a shipping magazine.

He left shortly after that and this older guy came up to me and said "I often wondered what a writer looks like."


----------



## JustRob (Jun 15, 2019)

Megan Pearson said:


> Then let me ask you this. Does "making something" always require outside assessment?
> (In other words, does what we produce bear its own, intrinsic value, or must its value always be determined from without?)
> 
> 
> (BTW, great word choice. I'll toss you a munchy for that.)



As ever my strangely pre-emptive novel written as a total novice in 2011 contains an answer to this question. What we write are nothing but the instructions that guide the reader's mind into creating its own perception of our story. I only ever designed and wrote computer software, not literature, during my working life but the process is similar. I knew that my software would work before it was ever acted on by a computer, but that turned out to be an unusual way of working for programmers back then and most of them relied on a lot of "beta reading", so to speak, by computers before they got their software to work. No, writing is only half of the process and the other half depends on the reader, so the intrinsic value of the work on its own cannot be that great.

I wasn't happy with the original opening chapter of my novel, which I posted HERE soon after joining WF, so in my frustration towards the end of it I twisted it into a preface and directly addressed my misgivings to the reader. I suggested that even at that early point the story appeared not to merit being read any further, but then wrote the paragraph quoted below, which seems to answer your question. Later I revised the chapter, including removing my remarks, and posted the replacement version in the same thread.



> And yet, in closing the book so peremptorily wouldn’t we ourselves be  determining the fate of this young woman, to lie pressed into two  dimensions between the pages like a flower deprived of all its  nutrients, a flower which may have had life if we had given it the  chance, for no matter how flowery the prose there can be no reality  within these pages if they remain unread. _‘How can something be real if it isn’t happening?’_  she asked. Indeed how can something happen without being touched by  reality? We are well acquainted with the sensation of reality, how it  envelops us, clinging more closely than even her fantastic nightdress,  continually stimulating every nerve in our bodies with the overwhelming  itch of existence. Scientists can analyse every fragment of its nature,  even down to the most fundamental quantum particles, themselves so  fantastic that ultimately only mathematics, not any plain language, can  describe them. They dream of creating a model of reality, exact and  complete in every detail, and yet if such a thing ever existed who could  say which was the reality and which the model? In fact it happens all  the time, in every human mind, creation of a model so precisely matched  to our own perception of reality that we hardly know where the boundary  between the two lies, as this young lady has discovered. Only when the  two diverge do we ask ourselves, ‘Is this real?’ but if we have no basis  for an answer we ask someone else, ‘Did you see that?’ for if their  experience was the same as ours we feel justified in believing that it  was real. Therein lies the essence, that an experience shared defines a  reality, be it merely a model or otherwise, and therefore this young  couple can only truly experience the events in their existence and share  them with us if we in turn share our reality with them and augment the  imperfections of the written word with our own perceptions, restoring  these pressed flowers to life and giving them the dimensions that the  words lack, for though they may presently lack life they have unique  identities, traits and personalities which once created can never be  denied. Perhaps given this opportunity they may gain insight into the  nature of their reality and maybe even ours.


----------



## Winston (Jun 15, 2019)

Someone who enjoys hearing the word "no" a lot.  
A masochist with the sadistic tendency to share their tortures.


----------



## bazz cargo (Jun 15, 2019)

Ta for the munchy.
Consider the unlucky traveller who through unfortunate events becomes cast away upon an island paradise. He has his dog and an everlasting supply of writing materials. Does he become a writer? If his manuscripts are discovered decades after his death, would an assessment mean anything? Is it relevant or relative? Toss a coin? 


Megan Pearson said:


> Then let me ask you this. Does "making something" always require outside assessment?
> (In other words, does what we produce bear its own, intrinsic value, or must its value always be determined from without?)
> 
> 
> (BTW, great word choice. I'll toss you a munchy for that.)


----------

