Can anyone who makes the required effort become a “great writer”? I don’t think so.
- Thread starter Ronald T.
- Start date
JK Rowling is a good example, because she's really funny and her imagination is wild and fabulous. She may not write the kind of incredible prose of someone like Faulkner, but she has a moments there too. She does everything well, and some things she does incredibly well.
I have to agree with @MWagner -- having kids made me re-evaluate how in-built some aptitudes seem to be. My kids aren't twins, but they grew up in a vaguely similar environment and whereas one was ripping into big philosophical questions, making up stories and messing around with language as soon as he could speak, the other is far more 'normal' (and does much better at school!). The one who plays with language all the time is in the top something-ridiculous for verbal intelligence, and he's also dyslexic -- I don't know if that influences the way his mind works, except for the obvious, but there are specialists (like John Stein) who suggest that people with dyslexia do have a different vision of the world. So, if that's true, why can others not have a different natural aptitude for language and writing etc?
I have to agree with @MWagner -- having kids made me re-evaluate how in-built some aptitudes seem to be. My kids aren't twins, but they grew up in a vaguely similar environment and whereas one was ripping into big philosophical questions, making up stories and messing around with language as soon as he could speak, the other is far more 'normal' (and does much better at school!). The one who plays with language all the time is in the top something-ridiculous for verbal intelligence, and he's also dyslexic -- I don't know if that influences the way his mind works, except for the obvious, but there are specialists (like John Stein) who suggest that people with dyslexia do have a different vision of the world. So, if that's true, why can others not have a different natural aptitude for language and writing etc?
I think this nails it!
psikeyhackr
Physics is Phutile, Fiziks is Fundamental
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2013
- Messages
- 2,179
Well that's a can of worms
I've only read the Potter series, so my opinion is most likely outdated. I personally found her an entertaining writer.
I watched 6 movies and read two books out of curiosity about the frenzy. I regard them as kids books so I am not really sure what I would have thought of them at 9 when I first started reading SF. I consider the movies to be good interpretations of the books I read and would have loved the movies as a kid. As an adult I found the books only tolerable and wouldn't have read them except out of curiosity.
Mostly I do not concentrate on the "writing". For me it is mostly the plot and good writing just makes a good story better.
psik
I broadly agree with you: I think that "talent" is a deep part of someone, often entwined with their nature or character.
My disagreement, -which is perhaps guessable from how I phrased my almost-agreement-, is that I think talent can be synthetically constructed, if one is able to break down and analyse what it takes to be good to great at something, (or rather to be great at it in a certain way one will pursue), and if one is able to inculcate such abilities or, when necessary, changes. (and willing)
-And that talent constructed in this manner can surpass natural talent, as there is no inherent or hard limit on such self improvement and modification.
Of course such an ability to inculcate talent in oneself sounds like a literal life hack, but bear in mind that such a process may take twenty years of obsession to raise someone from allergic-to-something to a master at it, or it could take five, or even one, but it might also take a lifetime to reach advanced or even basic competency, even for someone who has a capacity for and commitment to such extreme self improvement.
It's just that everyone has the ability to change and improve themselves in small ways, and I see no innate limit on that ability. Don't we all start out not knowing how to so much as move our own bodies?
My disagreement, -which is perhaps guessable from how I phrased my almost-agreement-, is that I think talent can be synthetically constructed, if one is able to break down and analyse what it takes to be good to great at something, (or rather to be great at it in a certain way one will pursue), and if one is able to inculcate such abilities or, when necessary, changes. (and willing)
-And that talent constructed in this manner can surpass natural talent, as there is no inherent or hard limit on such self improvement and modification.
Of course such an ability to inculcate talent in oneself sounds like a literal life hack, but bear in mind that such a process may take twenty years of obsession to raise someone from allergic-to-something to a master at it, or it could take five, or even one, but it might also take a lifetime to reach advanced or even basic competency, even for someone who has a capacity for and commitment to such extreme self improvement.
It's just that everyone has the ability to change and improve themselves in small ways, and I see no innate limit on that ability. Don't we all start out not knowing how to so much as move our own bodies?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2007
- Messages
- 6,403
Most of the poets from WWI would have known the mechanics of writing poetry, and many undoubtedly wrote it. But it was the experience of the trenches that made the poetry that they wrote 'great'.
You can have ability , but you also need to put in the time and effort to hone it.
You can have ability , but you also need to put in the time and effort to hone it.
Cathbad
Level 30 Geek Master
"Great Writer". A very subjective term. I do believe that everyone who has a story they wish to share - should share it! For every story told, there is at least one fan. I love sharing my stories, whether in oral or written form, as a GM or a writer, or just telling them to friends! I hope those that read/hear my stories will like them, but mostly, I tell stories because it's what I love to do! I am not looking to be a "Great Writer", especially if that is defined by how much money you make doing it! There are some crappy writers out there making fortunes, and others who are very underrated! A plethora of wonderful writers can't even get published with "main-stream" publishers! Some, not mentioning names (Stephen King), should have stopped writing some time back!
So, my advice is always the same: Tell your story. Damn the naysayers, and don't fret the sales figures. If you are satisfied with what you've put out there, you're a "Great Writer"!
Just my two cents!
So, my advice is always the same: Tell your story. Damn the naysayers, and don't fret the sales figures. If you are satisfied with what you've put out there, you're a "Great Writer"!
Just my two cents!
Inca_UK
Well-Known Member
(EDIT: Bit of a long post. Skip to the third last paragraph for conclusion if you can't be bothered reading it all)
I spent much of my teen years into music. I played quite a bit of bass and was in a series of bands. After a few years of that I moved over to music production (electronic). As much as I try I can see that its clear that I do not have a natural talent or aptitude for music. But I carry on anyway, as I love the hobby and do enjoy what I create even though I can see its never really going to be considered great. My best mate, on the other hand, is pretty much a virtuoso. He was amazing at guitar by the age of about 15, better than many professionals. By this age he was also an excellent drummer and since then he has learnt to play many different instruments and produce music electronically. He far surpasses me, or anyone we know in music ability, and there is a very solid underground music scene where I'm from. Most people I know would dabble in some aspect of music creation and while some may be better at their instrument or whatever, his diversity still stands out.
Now he did study music throughout school, college and uni, whereas I did not (I'm pretty much self taught), so he's bound to be better, but he always had the raw talent and the passion to pursue it. His dad was very musical, and while mine can play a few instruments, he never really did growing up. It does make me wonder how much talent really has to do with passion for the craft. Did he have an innate talent, or did he just have the passion to develop it further and faster than someone like myself.
As a kid I used to draw lots and draw big scenes of stickmen fighting it out in massive battles and stuff. I'm told it was very imaginative, but I can't really remember and I don't think there are any left. I used to write a lot, as well I'm told, but as I got older, video games and going out with friends and stuff got in the way. Growing up, I wanted to be a games designer as I always have lots of big ideas for settings and worlds and plots and etc. I was always a worldbuilder, whether I knew it or not. I studied computer science at uni, and while I got a 2:1, I struggled, and the kids all round me were highly skilled, some having practiced their craft since practically their childhood. I do not feel I have an aptitude for that either, and I know I definitely put the time and effort in there.
Following uni I got into worldbuilding via the subreddit which has lead me back to writing. It feels like a better craft for me than music, art or programming, which do not come naturally. I now think writing is the best way for me express my creativity. Which leads me to my conclusion.
Its not about whether you simply have raw talent or not, or just about putting the effort in. Its somewhere in the middle. Its about finding the method that's right for you to release your creativity, and embracing it, working at it and developing it as much as possible.
My advice is create what you want to create, learn you craft and create it to the best of your ability. Do not aim for it to be a success, or to make lots of money. Just aim for it to be the best creation you can make. Eventually the people who like it will find you. Personally I would rather write something that is remembered after I'm gone, than something that made me a load of money and then was forgotten.
Sorry for rambling there haha, I didn't plan to give you the summery of my lifes artistic endevours, it just happened.
I spent much of my teen years into music. I played quite a bit of bass and was in a series of bands. After a few years of that I moved over to music production (electronic). As much as I try I can see that its clear that I do not have a natural talent or aptitude for music. But I carry on anyway, as I love the hobby and do enjoy what I create even though I can see its never really going to be considered great. My best mate, on the other hand, is pretty much a virtuoso. He was amazing at guitar by the age of about 15, better than many professionals. By this age he was also an excellent drummer and since then he has learnt to play many different instruments and produce music electronically. He far surpasses me, or anyone we know in music ability, and there is a very solid underground music scene where I'm from. Most people I know would dabble in some aspect of music creation and while some may be better at their instrument or whatever, his diversity still stands out.
Now he did study music throughout school, college and uni, whereas I did not (I'm pretty much self taught), so he's bound to be better, but he always had the raw talent and the passion to pursue it. His dad was very musical, and while mine can play a few instruments, he never really did growing up. It does make me wonder how much talent really has to do with passion for the craft. Did he have an innate talent, or did he just have the passion to develop it further and faster than someone like myself.
As a kid I used to draw lots and draw big scenes of stickmen fighting it out in massive battles and stuff. I'm told it was very imaginative, but I can't really remember and I don't think there are any left. I used to write a lot, as well I'm told, but as I got older, video games and going out with friends and stuff got in the way. Growing up, I wanted to be a games designer as I always have lots of big ideas for settings and worlds and plots and etc. I was always a worldbuilder, whether I knew it or not. I studied computer science at uni, and while I got a 2:1, I struggled, and the kids all round me were highly skilled, some having practiced their craft since practically their childhood. I do not feel I have an aptitude for that either, and I know I definitely put the time and effort in there.
Following uni I got into worldbuilding via the subreddit which has lead me back to writing. It feels like a better craft for me than music, art or programming, which do not come naturally. I now think writing is the best way for me express my creativity. Which leads me to my conclusion.
Its not about whether you simply have raw talent or not, or just about putting the effort in. Its somewhere in the middle. Its about finding the method that's right for you to release your creativity, and embracing it, working at it and developing it as much as possible.
My advice is create what you want to create, learn you craft and create it to the best of your ability. Do not aim for it to be a success, or to make lots of money. Just aim for it to be the best creation you can make. Eventually the people who like it will find you. Personally I would rather write something that is remembered after I'm gone, than something that made me a load of money and then was forgotten.
Sorry for rambling there haha, I didn't plan to give you the summery of my lifes artistic endevours, it just happened.
Cathbad
Level 30 Geek Master
Well said!
Eli Grey
Well-Known Member
No.
But I say anyone can write, not everyone is gonna knock your socks off. It's a cold truth.
I myself can be a great writer but I'm not saying that to toot my own horn. I realized I am a good storyteller and as such when I put the pen to paper(fingers to keyboard) I leave myself and others in utter amazement. The unfinished works that have been submitted to young new editors for them to get their feet wet were highly praised. I didn't continue because I knew that inkling inside me that told me I could write well too had been satisfied. But I put it off for years. It wasn't until I started writing again that I felt alive and purposeful.
I will be the first to admit that my work has a long way to go because of the world building that needs to be done, but as far as telling an engaging story, I have no worries at all.
But I say anyone can write, not everyone is gonna knock your socks off. It's a cold truth.
I myself can be a great writer but I'm not saying that to toot my own horn. I realized I am a good storyteller and as such when I put the pen to paper(fingers to keyboard) I leave myself and others in utter amazement. The unfinished works that have been submitted to young new editors for them to get their feet wet were highly praised. I didn't continue because I knew that inkling inside me that told me I could write well too had been satisfied. But I put it off for years. It wasn't until I started writing again that I felt alive and purposeful.
I will be the first to admit that my work has a long way to go because of the world building that needs to be done, but as far as telling an engaging story, I have no worries at all.
Eli Grey
Well-Known Member
This is very true.
psychotick
Dangerously confused
Hi,
Perhaps this little pearl from Star Trek will help to put this in perspective:
"Don't try to be a great man. Just be a man and let history make its own judgement." Zephram Cochrane, 2063.
To me it applies as well to writing as it does to starship engineering or any other field of endeavour. The OP asks can anyone become a great writer? Ie can any of us? The answer is a judgement and largely one of time. If the judgement is yes and is made in a matter of months or years, then its likely there will be awards and / or commercial success. If the judgement is yes but not made for centuries then people will go to their deathbeds never knowing.
So can anyone become a great writer? Can we? We don't know. If we achieve commercial greatness or literary awards for merit, then maybe we have some metric to maybe say yes. But in fifty or a hundred years the prevailing wisdom may be that we were actually crap! Likewise if we achieve nothing and consider ourselves as failures, in a century we may turn in our graves as future generations call us genius!
As I said before greatness is such a flawed metric. We don't really know what it is. We have lots of competing ideas about it. Many have been listed here. Perhaps the better question is can anyone become a skilled writer capable of conveying their stories / ideas to audiences in a way that is full of meaning. And yes, as I said before, that with very few exceptions we can do. For some it may be easier. For others harder. And everyone will need to work hard to do it. And the value of our contributions to the literary world may not be known for decades or centuries. Early judgements for good or ill may be wrong. So may later judgements. But in the end it's our own judgements and those of our readers - whether that's just one or millions, that count.
We shouldn't try to be great writers. We should try to be the best writers we can be, and to get our visions across in words to people in the best way we can. Leave the judgement of greatness to time.
Cheers, Greg.
Perhaps this little pearl from Star Trek will help to put this in perspective:
"Don't try to be a great man. Just be a man and let history make its own judgement." Zephram Cochrane, 2063.
To me it applies as well to writing as it does to starship engineering or any other field of endeavour. The OP asks can anyone become a great writer? Ie can any of us? The answer is a judgement and largely one of time. If the judgement is yes and is made in a matter of months or years, then its likely there will be awards and / or commercial success. If the judgement is yes but not made for centuries then people will go to their deathbeds never knowing.
So can anyone become a great writer? Can we? We don't know. If we achieve commercial greatness or literary awards for merit, then maybe we have some metric to maybe say yes. But in fifty or a hundred years the prevailing wisdom may be that we were actually crap! Likewise if we achieve nothing and consider ourselves as failures, in a century we may turn in our graves as future generations call us genius!
As I said before greatness is such a flawed metric. We don't really know what it is. We have lots of competing ideas about it. Many have been listed here. Perhaps the better question is can anyone become a skilled writer capable of conveying their stories / ideas to audiences in a way that is full of meaning. And yes, as I said before, that with very few exceptions we can do. For some it may be easier. For others harder. And everyone will need to work hard to do it. And the value of our contributions to the literary world may not be known for decades or centuries. Early judgements for good or ill may be wrong. So may later judgements. But in the end it's our own judgements and those of our readers - whether that's just one or millions, that count.
We shouldn't try to be great writers. We should try to be the best writers we can be, and to get our visions across in words to people in the best way we can. Leave the judgement of greatness to time.
Cheers, Greg.
This is a re-branded form of the old nature vs nurture argument, to which the answer has long been "both."
There are people with a natural talent and aptitude that put them ahead of other people off the bat... Then there are people with a deep fascination and dedication who can surpass those with the natural talent... Then the are those few with both natural talent and a deep fascination (often obsession) who become a rare class of their own.
Unless you are shooting for some kind of literary award, I don't think the limits of hard work without a particular natural talent land you below the published, even best-seller category. Brandon Sanderson has been kind enough to document most of his journey as a writer, and while there can be no doubt he began with a natural disposition, by his own account, his storytelling is learned and honed through trial and error and years of study.
If your goal is to write great stories that might someday become best sellers, I think the formula is one of hard work and luck... Natural talent may provide a shortcut or a step up, but I don't see it as a prerequisite.
If your goal is to win a Hugo award or other literary recognition... Well then you either "got it" or you don't, I suspect.
There are people with a natural talent and aptitude that put them ahead of other people off the bat... Then there are people with a deep fascination and dedication who can surpass those with the natural talent... Then the are those few with both natural talent and a deep fascination (often obsession) who become a rare class of their own.
Unless you are shooting for some kind of literary award, I don't think the limits of hard work without a particular natural talent land you below the published, even best-seller category. Brandon Sanderson has been kind enough to document most of his journey as a writer, and while there can be no doubt he began with a natural disposition, by his own account, his storytelling is learned and honed through trial and error and years of study.
If your goal is to write great stories that might someday become best sellers, I think the formula is one of hard work and luck... Natural talent may provide a shortcut or a step up, but I don't see it as a prerequisite.
If your goal is to win a Hugo award or other literary recognition... Well then you either "got it" or you don't, I suspect.
I'd go with this view of things. Some people's brains might be wired so as to have an aptitude for creating stories, or even through communicating via the written word, so they have a head start on others. However, if that in turn means that said person has a certain amount of arrogance, or a belief that that alone is enough, then they probably won't go far. Everything is a learning experience, and I don't believe you can learn in splendid isolation. Lots of fledgling writers think writing is an activity that you carry out in splendid isolation (I did) and therefore don't need - or can't get - help from others.
I think I've mentioned this quote before, but I believe that all ships rise with high tide - it's therefore in the interests of writers to work together, collaborate, share and generally improve the quality of writing out there. In a crude market sense we may be in competition with one another once we're published, but the truth is that we're all part of the same industry, and what ultimately makes that industry thrive is the quality of the product. Not all of us will be "great" but enough of us can be very good, and passing on our knowledge and experiences will help the next lot of writers. Which is why this place is so good.
On the point of awards; even the literary awards are subjective, as they're chosen by humans (that's not to say robots would do a better job!) but at least with awards you can read the form guide and try to understand broadly what sort of book might grab an award.
On the JK Rowling thing - her crime books, writing as Robert Galbraith, are astoundingly good.
Coast
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2016
- Messages
- 239
Very interesting question... As others have touched on, I think it comes down to how each person defines 'Great'.*
My own opinion is that no, you don't need talent to be great. But yes, you do need talent (I'd rather say a 'Favourable Predisposition') to be the Greatest.
I think that with enough hard work and commitment anybody can get to be great at their chosen endeavour, but to take it to that next level (Jordan, Bolt, Mozart, Einstein) you need to have an advantage, whether it be talent, aptitude, biomechanical advantages, mentality...
What worries me is that talent is often portrayed as the main ingredient in a lot of success stories. When in reality the single overwhelming factor in nearly every success story that I've heard is hard work. What I see creating 'Greatness' is hours and days and years of work and commitment.
I'll also add that there are a lot of 'greats' that are less talented. Are Nick Cave or Tom Waits great singers? Muhammad Ali was not physically gifted compared to his opponents. Michael Jordan didn't make his high school basketball team and was overlooked by NBA teams in his first draft. And how did they all become great? Hard work and trash talk!
* It may just be that my 'Greatness' threshold is lower than other peoples.
My own opinion is that no, you don't need talent to be great. But yes, you do need talent (I'd rather say a 'Favourable Predisposition') to be the Greatest.
I think that with enough hard work and commitment anybody can get to be great at their chosen endeavour, but to take it to that next level (Jordan, Bolt, Mozart, Einstein) you need to have an advantage, whether it be talent, aptitude, biomechanical advantages, mentality...
What worries me is that talent is often portrayed as the main ingredient in a lot of success stories. When in reality the single overwhelming factor in nearly every success story that I've heard is hard work. What I see creating 'Greatness' is hours and days and years of work and commitment.
I'll also add that there are a lot of 'greats' that are less talented. Are Nick Cave or Tom Waits great singers? Muhammad Ali was not physically gifted compared to his opponents. Michael Jordan didn't make his high school basketball team and was overlooked by NBA teams in his first draft. And how did they all become great? Hard work and trash talk!
* It may just be that my 'Greatness' threshold is lower than other peoples.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 8,095
I agree with a lot of that. I think there is a standard story that the newspapers always want to tell about authors, and goes much like this:
Record Book Deal for First-Time Author
Poverty-stricken, yet extremely well-kept and highly nubile, author Ms X is today celebrating the biggest advance in history for the book she wrote while on the dole / working in a charity / asleep / lounging around on a chaise longue in her smalls. The book, entitled [insert non-genre title here] won her an advance of £1,000,000,000 and tells the story of [insert cause celebre of the day here]. Ms X, a penniless yet stylishly bohemian graduate of Y*, says "I never learned to write at all. I don't believe in it. I just open my heart and my characters spill out onto the page".
We look forward to seeing more of her amazing natural talent. More pictures in centre pages.
*If this is in the style papers, she will be the daughter of a rock star or minor aristocracy, because nepotism is brilliant and we need more of it.
Record Book Deal for First-Time Author
Poverty-stricken, yet extremely well-kept and highly nubile, author Ms X is today celebrating the biggest advance in history for the book she wrote while on the dole / working in a charity / asleep / lounging around on a chaise longue in her smalls. The book, entitled [insert non-genre title here] won her an advance of £1,000,000,000 and tells the story of [insert cause celebre of the day here]. Ms X, a penniless yet stylishly bohemian graduate of Y*, says "I never learned to write at all. I don't believe in it. I just open my heart and my characters spill out onto the page".
We look forward to seeing more of her amazing natural talent. More pictures in centre pages.
*If this is in the style papers, she will be the daughter of a rock star or minor aristocracy, because nepotism is brilliant and we need more of it.
Last edited:
This is well worth repeating. I can't emphasise the importance of trash talk enough in one's search for greatness.
pH
The Big Peat
Darth Buddha
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2016
- Messages
- 3,762
I'm with the crowd saying both nature and nurture matter, that having a natural talent is huge, that working hard is necessary, that both make greatness, that most can work hard to reach a cool point (although some clearly can't) and so on, and would like to add an appendix on greatness -
People talk about great chefs, or great athletes, or great authors, but the reality is those trades are made up of hundreds of little skills and very few of the greats are great at all those little talents.
Like, Marc-Andre Fleury and Matt Murray are both great goaltenders. But Fleury has better reflexes while Murray has a better ability to read the game. They do their job in different ways. And its not just about technical skills; Murray's big point in favour against Fleury is he's a far calmer personality who beats himself up less when things go wrong.
Or take Heston Blumenthal and Gordon Ramsey. I'm pretty sure Ramsey is a better technical chef than Blumenthal but he's got nothing like Blumenthal's creativity and imagination.
And so it goes with authors. David Gemmell wrote better fight scenes than Robert Jordan but never displayed the latter's knack for immersive world building.
And there's a lot of really successful authors who are great at one or two things and pretty average at a lot of other writing skills. They found what they were great at and milked it for all it was worth. Take Tom Clancy - his characters are like cardboard, but he captured a lot of technical details well and made that work for him. Or David Eddings, who had an interesting style and was pretty lazy on a lot of the details. And so on.
Now, the real greats - by and large they're great at everything and that's what marks them out (although some of them are surprisingly later flowerers). But for a lot of us, just seeking to be as good as we can be, recognising the small things where we are great and maximising that advantage is a pretty significant step.
People talk about great chefs, or great athletes, or great authors, but the reality is those trades are made up of hundreds of little skills and very few of the greats are great at all those little talents.
Like, Marc-Andre Fleury and Matt Murray are both great goaltenders. But Fleury has better reflexes while Murray has a better ability to read the game. They do their job in different ways. And its not just about technical skills; Murray's big point in favour against Fleury is he's a far calmer personality who beats himself up less when things go wrong.
Or take Heston Blumenthal and Gordon Ramsey. I'm pretty sure Ramsey is a better technical chef than Blumenthal but he's got nothing like Blumenthal's creativity and imagination.
And so it goes with authors. David Gemmell wrote better fight scenes than Robert Jordan but never displayed the latter's knack for immersive world building.
And there's a lot of really successful authors who are great at one or two things and pretty average at a lot of other writing skills. They found what they were great at and milked it for all it was worth. Take Tom Clancy - his characters are like cardboard, but he captured a lot of technical details well and made that work for him. Or David Eddings, who had an interesting style and was pretty lazy on a lot of the details. And so on.
Now, the real greats - by and large they're great at everything and that's what marks them out (although some of them are surprisingly later flowerers). But for a lot of us, just seeking to be as good as we can be, recognising the small things where we are great and maximising that advantage is a pretty significant step.
Tanja Bisgaard
Well-Known Member
I think this is a VERY interesting thread!
Very often when I read the reviews of some of the "best-sellers", one of the main comments is that the author has a really good imagination. I have read that about Margaret Atwood, JK Rowlings and Danish fantasy authors. Obviously those authors are also really good at plently of other things! But that started me thinking - are you born with good imagination or is that something that can be practiced and nurtured? Is it like talent??
Someone once said to me when I told them I had decided to start writing - Well, if you have a good imagination that's a good idea
Very often when I read the reviews of some of the "best-sellers", one of the main comments is that the author has a really good imagination. I have read that about Margaret Atwood, JK Rowlings and Danish fantasy authors. Obviously those authors are also really good at plently of other things! But that started me thinking - are you born with good imagination or is that something that can be practiced and nurtured? Is it like talent??
Someone once said to me when I told them I had decided to start writing - Well, if you have a good imagination that's a good idea
Similar threads
-
You wonder if anyone still reads these once well-known fantasy books.- Started by Extollager
- Replies: 48
-
Anyone heard of Caernach Grimm? Apparently one for fans of Terry Pratchett.
- Started by Montero
- Replies: 3
-
Anyone here found their Windows computer crashed today?- Started by Brian G Turner
- Replies: 10
-
-
