how do u define a good writer

question
discussion

#21

I think the most important quality of a good writer is the ability to make your readers feel strong emotions. I know when I’m reading, I love getting my heart jerked around and feeling the fear, excitement, curiousity, sadness, joy, and love as the story unfolds. I think that if you can make your story resonates with your readers, you’re doing a good job.


#22

I think a good writer can create a story (doesn’t really matter which genre) and can make it feel somehow real. For example, when reading the Harry Potter books you don’t really question the world Harry is in. It is written out in such a way that that world just works, the magical world has its own set of rules that it goes by just as the real world does. Besides the obvious things like creating characters that feel real (having flaws etc) I think that creating a world that feels real is just as important because besides being able to resonate with the characters, the reader has to be able to place/imagine themselves in that world. I don’t know if this makes any sense but ya know ¯_(ツ)_/¯


#23

Um bom escritor é acima de tudo aquele que ama o que faz. Acho essencial deixar transparecer nas linhas e palavras, o nosso amor e dedicação, capricho e principalmente nossa inspiração. Claro que outros detalhes como uma estória envolvente e personagens apaixonantes são imprescindíveis para que o leitor se identifique com a nossa escrita.


#24

Not to sound all cliche and whatnot, but I really think it’s just how you feel about your work that makes you successful. I know we all complain about our writing, hate parts of it, get frustrated, etc. but in the end, if we’re posting it, we feel pretty good about it (at least I hope so). I think that’s the true measure of success.

:point_up:t2: I know people are going to disagree but really, how much do you really hate your own work if you keep going?

Reads are great, but it’s just a number. It could be people who clicked in and clicked back out, it could be the same person reading it over and over. Votes don’t always say much because a lot of people just don’t vote, and some people vote for anything they open. I wish people wouldn’t get so discouraged by these numbers when there isn’t enough context to measure success with them.


#25

Hmm okay. this is interesting. I’ve always tried to tell myself, and my friends, to never compare their merits to others, but I can see how that can be done in writing since you have nothing else to formulate a basis on since it is kind of subjective.

As for the prose part, that makes a lot of sense. But what if someone is painting this deeper meaning into a novel, and it’s riddled with plot holes. Or not really plot holes per se, but inconsistencies. Would that kind of discredit it in some way?


#26

So here’s the thing, those are all really good credentials to sort of “grade” someone off of, but what is the standard. I think that’s the whole question I’m trying to get at: what is the standard that allows you to look at your work and feel that, at least, if you’re not getting validation, you know you’re a “good” or “decent” writer. Because some people take language and grammar very seriously, whereas others don’t critically analyze things enough to even understand what that message maybe.

But I’ve never thought about this list. It’s actually a pretty good idea!


#27

One that captures the readers attention and maintains it. One that creates a world the reader can get lost in without getting pulled back into reality by the issues.

Some do more showing than telling and vise versa. Some keep it simple, other’s more complex. Some have cliches, some avoid them. Some write in first person, some third. Some past, some present.

It’s about how the writer executes whatever choices they make and how well they are able to make the reader believe the words on the page, even when the story itself isn’t so realistic.


#28

That’s a great qualification, but to play Devil’s advocate, isn’t that also extremely subjective? I know a bunch of people who love certain novels because they feel like they’re immersed in the world, but I definitely don’t feel the same way since my standards are different.

I definitely agree with this. This is kind of the conclusion I was coming to when I was thinking about it. I think that there will always be some flaw in a novel, and there’s no way to achieve a sort of “perfect” standard.

However, I do think there is a standard we should all meet in order for us to be satisfied with what we’re doing and that’s what I’m wondering about


#29

a good writer? someone that writes.
good writing… when it enchants me.


#30

+1


#31

Hmm good standard! I like this!


#32

Thanks! :slight_smile:


#33

I added more, so now I request +2


#34

I liked the succinct version :slight_smile:


#35

I “are” confused


#36

according to me any writer is good who spread positive words not hate, one whose words give hope to others for good future. Anyone who knows any language and knows to write can express their opinions and be writer of their own, but only certain people have ability to motivate other.


#37

I not fully agree. Some books can be great books even if they don’t have a role model as a character.
Hate is a feeling just like love. One can’t be without the other, as they are opposites, therefore they define each other.

Someone can write about hate and provide a realistic view of things. Some books have in the center an anti-hero and still, there are amazing books.
This is my example: ‘Death of Bunny Munro’ by Nick Cave (the musician)


#38

pardon me but I meant to say spreading hate, even if character is anti-hero as u say, I think that book is not giving any negative message maybe showing some twisted event of turns, but eventually you’re learning something out of it.


#39

Indeed.
In many books, the hero is presented as an anti-example, as it’s about the ‘bad guy’ as a center figure.

the book can set an example of how and what not to do. Anyway, a book can just entertainment not necessary something to learn.


#40

I kind of think it is impossible to objectively judge whether or not your own work is any good. We tend to either think it’s awful or that it is great. The standard is that there is no standard. Quality is subjective and some put the bar they set for themselves very high, while others just aim to get words on a page.