How does a writer spell “success”?
Over the years I’ve learned that there’s always somebody ready, willing
and able to define “success” for a writer.
For some, success means making bestseller lists and/or having several
books or novellas out at a time or signing a big deal with one of the Major
Publishers. Writers with this sort of success as their primary goal pay
attention to what's selling and what's not, and then write books designed to
have the broadest popular appeal. They’re
proud of the obvious rewards earned by their hard work and focus.
On the other end of the scale are what I'd call the "artistic
purists." They would never, ever consider writing anything other than
"a work of the heart." If it sells only 200 copies, that's okay, because
those are very discerning, intelligent readers. Such writers absolutely resist
any commercial consideration when it comes to their work. They are artists, and
proud of it.
The "artistic purists" condemn commercial writers as
money-grubbing hacks; to the purists, they are failures. The commercial writers
believe the artists are simply excusing their failure to make it big.
However, shouldn’t we, as writers who aim to create individual, unique
characters, be among the first to realize that there is not, nor should there
be, only one yardstick to measure success?
We simply don’t know another author's backstory, so who are we to define “success” for them?
Each author, and each author alone, should decide what his or her
definition of success as a writer is -- whether it's making a list, making lots
of money, writing only "books of the heart" or something in between. To do otherwise can be stressful and
ultimately, self-defeating. Haven't we got enough to contend with in this
business without that?
