- This topic has 9 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Topic
-
I ran across this article today and thought I’d pass it along. What it shows about the work of visual art is also true of the literary world. Every writer feels comfortable with a different level of peer engagement—the range can be defined roughly as between Emily Dickinson (on the reclusive side) and Norman Mailer (who knew, drank with, and/or slept with just about everybody). In any case, networking is necessary if you want to develop a writing career, although—in art as in life—the work does have to be good!
By the way, I’m not linking to the site because it has an annoyingly persistent pop-up, but the link is embedded in the attached PDF if you want see the article in its natural habitat.
-
Replies
-
-
I just read this fascinating article about writing with a partner. It seems like a great way to stay accountable and write. What do you all think?
9 Questions About Working with a Coauthor-
I’ve worked with other writers on journalistic stuff but never my creative stuff. Of course, with poetry it wouldn’t make sense. I am part of a poets group that’s been meeting monthly (until the pandemic got to roaring) for a decade or so. I do find that the expectation of bringing a poem every month has been a good spur to draft or revise new work. Other than that I’ve had very little experience with collaboration of this kind. But based on my poets group experience, I’d say that developing that expectation of new work could be really helpful to almost any writer.
I wonder if we should establish a thread specifically for draft exchanges and responses? I say this rather sheepishly, since I have a manuscript I’ve promised to comment on but my job duties have been expanding, so I’ve fallen behind with it!
-
I absolutely love the idea of a thread specifically for feedback! I’m a little tapped this week (I’ve been working the past few months as a judge for NYC Midnight), but a big batch of stories wraps up next week and I’ll be free to pour my heart into some January feedback. A set place for us to ask for each other’s thoughts would be really helpful, I think. :))
-
Joe,
Maybe a new thread would be good for that. I know for myself, meeting live (and only the 2nd time for me today) has already helped me get a bit more focused on writing. I’m thinking about what I want to accomplish and have a specific date and time to work, even if it’s only for 30 or 45 minutes. It’s like gold.
But I am intrigued by the idea of writing a longer work with a partner, where each one takes on a particular character POV. -
-
-
-
I find this kind of exciting! The idea that, out there, the more friends you make, the more readily your future might unfold is thrilling. It is something that gives folks an upper hand systemically, but it also means that the path to success is more than random luck. It’s building a web of social capital to help you and others grow together.
After reading this last night, I went and texted my filmmaker bestie and we agreed to reach out and foster one existing artist connection today! -
I don’t see it as depressing, amiga. I see it as the way things are and have always been. Read the biography of any writer and you’ll find that the ones we still read were read in the first place because of what we today call “influencers.” There are examples of brilliant writers who wrote in isolation, but when this or that book of theirs was finished, they had to set about helping it find an audience, and this has always been a matter of getting the word out through one’s network of friends, family, and professional admirers. The issue, I guess, is that the networking process can also elevate works and artists that aren’t really good. Only time can help us sort that out. Time and the influencers and networks of subsequent generations….
-
-
Joe,
It makes me think about all the best sellers that are written by celebrities in any circle. They are famous and so their book sells whether or not it’s any good or that they even wrote it.
It’s downright depressing. And it apparently hasn’t changed all that much as the article seems to conclude that famous was equal to social circles and not to talent or creativity.
Or did I miss it completely?
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.