How terrible where you when you first started writing? (Or rather practice vs. natural talent?)

Writing is a craft and for all but the very gifted few - and like any other craft - it has to be learned before one becomes proficient in it.

Practicing anything usually improves one's proficiency regardless of what talent one has to start with, if any.

Part of me wonders if the talent lies in this: when people point out the importance of things like POV, tension, proper sentence construction, characterisation and so on, and a light goes on and you 'get' what they are talking about, then you probably have talent.

If all those things are explained myriad times and you keep running in circles without a clue no matter how much research and practice you do, then perhaps not.

However, innate talent is but a part. There are successful, best-selling authors (especially self-pub) who I personally think have zero writing talent, but they did something right to get where they are. Somehow they made the right connection to the right people even if it's only in managing to appeal to a particular type of reader. Patience, a work ethic and persistence are also major factors.

I also got started in fanfiction, and while my writing's never been technically bad, certain storytelling skills benefited from extensive practice and continuous refinement.

I wrote my first novel when I was 23. It didn't sell, and eventually I got over the disappointment and went on to write the next, which did. Many years later, I came across a copy of that early novel and started to read.

I should mention that in the intervening years, I'd worked in publishing as an editor and then as the head of my own literary agency; so I'd done a ton of evaluations and edits. It had been so long since I'd looked at that first novel that as I read, I forgot it was mine and started evaluating at it as I would any submission. And the thought that came into my head was: This is hopeless. This writer's got nothing.

Then I remembered, of course, that it was my book; and that it was followed by other books that did sell, to publishers like S&S, Morrow, Doubleday, Viking and (as of today!) Penguin. Books I'm proud of, btw.

So the moral of the story is that yes, OF COURSE we improve with practice. Writing is a craft; you learn through doing. Talent counts, too, of course. I could shoot baskets all day long for a year, and no one would ever mistake me for Michael Jordan. Same with writing. Talent and hard work have to go together; but writers must also learn to persevere even through the stink of their own worst first drafts.

I think you can definitely go from bleagh to great. I don't really like the concept of "innate ability". How can someone be innately good at writing novels? Surely our brains are older than the medium of the novel? Look at Indigenous Australians, for example. They were in Australia for +40,000 years before European invasion, and many of the different language groups didn't actually have written language. Yet today there are Indigenous authors. To me that authors probably have some innate skill in storytelling/communicating and understanding how all the bits we've given names (character, theme, pace, POV, etc) work together, but the words on the page are a skill that can be learnt.

tl;dr - keep working on it.

Barbara R. said:

(as of today!) Penguin.

Click to expand...

Hey, congratulations!

You grow, you learn, you improve. I think the "talent" part of writing is more the passion than any innate ability. As long as you're willing to put the time and effort into it, along with the willingness to listen to suggestions, to be told what's wrong, and to be patient with your story through all the stages, you can be, if not great, then good enough.

I'm just finishing up my first novel. I wrote it more-or-less beginning to end. By the time I got to the end (along with some reading on this forum) I had improved enough that I was no longer satisfied with my opening chapters and had to rewrite them. And did a significantly better job.

Whether or not you have talent, practice counts.

I'd guess I was never really "bad" (first fiction I ever wrote, in the 7th grade, won a contest with several hundred entrants -- admittedly all 7th graders!) but since then I've made 3 or 4 major increments in skill. Which probably makes more difference than any innate talent. My talent consists of a good ear and a hypertrophied Node of Extrapolation. But it took a lot of practice to get the words to sound right to my ear.

You can have all the talent in the world, but if you don't develop the appropriate skills, that talent will either go to waste, or won't get used to the fullest. Skill shows you what you can do with your talent, in ways you might never achieve with talent alone. In my observation, most writers go through a series of stepwise improvements as their skill improves, which are probably sudden leaps of understanding as a new skill is absorbed into their talent.

Thank you! Sort of a dream come true...I lived on used Penguin paperbacks as a kid.

Reziac said:

My talent consists of a good ear and a hypertrophied Node of Extrapolation. But it took a lot of practice to get the words to sound right to my ear.

Click to expand...

I agree with this. I think talented writers have an ear for it, even if they can't reproduce it from the get-go. I started off in fanfiction and collaborative fiction, and at the time, I thought I was good. Compared to other fanfic writers around me, I guess I was, and other writers liked reading my work and wanted to write with me. I think I have an innate talent for plotting and for characterization, but as I got more serious about writing for publication and started reading more about the craft, I started to understand how clunky and overwrought and unnecessary a lot (a lot) of my prose was. I wrote fanfiction for ten years and then spent five years learning the craft.

I don't think there was any way I could have gotten anything trade published back then, but these days, I feel like I have a fair shot.

Nogetsune said:

Can practice really make you go from bleh to great, or like singing do you need to have some base, natural talent to work off of to actually do well? If so, how much? If your writing is kinda lousy to start off, can enough practice make your writing good enough to market to publishers? Or, like singing, is there just no help for somebody who has no natural talent to work off of?

Click to expand...

Even writers with natural talent (and I do think such a thing exists) improve with practice. Nobody starts out knowing everything or possessing the ability to put what they do know into practice.

What seems to make the difference, oftentimes, is the ability to learn. I've observed writers who write and write and never improve, because they are unwilling or unable to learn from mistakes and correction. I've known others who started off very humbly, and a year or two later you would hardly recognize their work.

With the ability to learn, even a person who has no particular affinity for language or storytelling can improve their writing. Without it, the most promising amateur will never amount to anything.

I started writing when I was about 8 and I was terrible at it, obviously.
I finished my first novel, an action/adventure thriller, when I was 16 and it was incredibly bad. Beyond bad. It made Mack Bolan look like the collected works of Shakespeare by comparison.
I finished my second when I was 19, a Mary-Sue action adventure novel that was also horrible.
I started writing my first two SF novels in college and by then I was a little better at it. I honed my craft under the tutelage of a couple different professional editors that worked for my literary agent (that was the only good thing that came out of having her as an agent) and I think by about my early to mid 30s I had progressed to a writer that some people might like to read. But I don't think I hit my stride until 2 years ago, in my mid 40s, when I wrote my third book. It was SO much better than the stuff I'd written ten-fifteen years ago.
I think the key to being a good writer is being a good and avid reader and also experiencing life. Not just living through it, but experiencing it and contemplating it. Observing people and doing your best to crawl into their heads and see the world through someone else's eyes.

BethS said:

Even writers with natural talent (and I do think such a thing exists) improve with practice. Nobody starts out knowing everything or possessing the ability to put what they do into practice.

What seems to make the difference, oftentimes, is the ability to learn. I've observed writers who write and write and never improve, because they are unwilling or unable to learn from mistakes and correction. I've known others who started off very humbly, and a year or two later you would hardly recognize their work.

With the ability to learn, even a person who has no particular affinity for language or storytelling can improve their writing. Without it, the most promising amateur will never amount to anything.

Click to expand...

I was nodding in agreement with this post even before I noticed that the author is the always sensible Beth S. I've been teaching fiction for nearly 20 years, and what I've found is that the measure of the writer isn't where he begins, but how quickly and well he learns. And a lot of that starts with the ability to metabolize good critique.

Nogetsune said:

As the title asks. How bad was your writing when you first started writing fiction for fun and/or profit, how old where you at the time and how much difference did practice really make? I started about ten years ago, I like to think I was better than average, but still utter shit. Too self-aware, and my writing showed it. Some if it makes me want to beat the piss out of myself for what a smug dick I was. Note this is important, we'll circle back to it at the end....

I ask because I want to know how much of writing is practice and how much is just having inborn talent? depends on the individual A good friend of mine who has been pushing me to get writing for a while said that when she started, she was not much younger then she is now and that what she produced was far worse then the rather bleh starting writing I showed her, and told me not to be discouraged and that I'd be really good if I just practiced. could mean you're on solid ground, or she's biased, or being kind, or a dozen other things....haven't seen the writing, so we'll side-step this However, I want to know, how much of that is true? Can practice really make you go from bleh to great, or like singing do you need to have some base, natural talent to work off of to actually do well? I already disagree here. Singing is very much like writing; you may start with natural talent, or not, but it too can be worked on. A lot of singing is learning to actually relax your neck, vocal cords, etc., so to some extent a large majority of folks have the basic equipment, they just need to un-learn bad habits that diminish what they have, as well as to maximize what they do have...folks love to talk aout inborn talent, then point to someone like Michael Jordan, but they ignore the fact that guy worked famously hard in college--I heard the day he lost a season final, he was back in the gym practicing that night already. There's the rub: A lot of "natural talent" is willingness to work, and to admit to needing to work.If so, how much? If your writing is kinda lousy to start off, can enough practice make your writing good enough to market to publishers? maybe Or, like singing, is there just no help for somebody who has no natural talent to work off of? again, I really think this is less "special" than you think

Thoughts/Opinions on this would be appreciated!

Click to expand...

OK, so I sort of hit my thoughts on talent above; it helps, yes. Some folks start out ahead of others, yes. But in many cases, that difference is surmountable if you work hard enough.


Here's the flip side I wanted to circle back to: Talent is only part of the equation. Work is the other part. But work also comes in 2 flavors--I have seen LOTS of talented folks here who started out higher than I did, but not ready for the big leagues....who took criticism personally, refused to work to hone their craft and eliminate their weak spots, etc. Talented folks, who refused to accept they had issues. THAT is also part of what makes a writer....or singer, or athlete. Admitting you have flaws, and working to overcome them.

Because few if any people are so talented they don't need to also work, hard.....but some of the folks with a high degree of innate talent refuse to acknowledge that, so they block their own growth.

Which isn't the same as just working--some of those folks read lots of how-to books, and wrote a hell of a lot more pages than I did. But they were just rearranging deck chairs on their Titanic, they weren't going in and fixing what needed to be fixing, just becoming better-read about and more prolifically making their mistakes.

I do believe in innate talent for things; I also believe that those without it can reach a certain proficiency by hard work and, as BethS noted, an ability to learn (which itself could be considered a talent or innate). But just because one has a talent for something doesn't mean automatic success - one still has to hone that with hard work.

I started seriously writing at fifteen, and it was a pile of steaming crap. My stories were okay, but the writing itself was so awkward. I had no feel for the rhythm of good writing. I had never heard of showing instead of telling. There was headhopping everywhere. My dialogue tags were creative to say the least. I wrote a lot of needlessly complicated sentences because I thought that was the way you were supposed to write.

Now I'm 24. I'm not published yet, but when I read through my books, I actually feel like this is something that could be published. Back when I started, it wasn't even close.

Most of my improvement has been in the last two and a half years. With school taking up my time, I didn't do much reading. Now, through the combination of reading a ton and finding advice here on AW, my writing has improved greatly.

So, yes, there might be geniuses who write pure gold when they start out, but they're rare. Most writers have to work and work and work some more. Reading is essential.

Well, I started writing fiction for fun when I was like, six, so yeah, unbelievably I've got a little better since then. Just a little mind you...

But since I started writing seriously, and started going onto writing sites and trying to get better, yeah I've improved a lot. I think I was okay back then, but nothing was anyway near publishable standard (which I like to think I'm near now, despite that not being proved... sob). I used too many adverbs, too many cliches, never thought about pacing or character arcs ect ect ect.

The way I see it, is that any skill can be learned. However, I do believe some people have a natural knack of putting down what they're thinking onto paper, which some people find very hard to do, but I've always found relatively easy.

Here's a hypothesis for you: writing technically well is a skill no one has completely naturally, but some people are born with the ability to tell a good story with interesting characters (though it can be taught, and improved mind you). Of course, both need to be honed and trained to make them really good, but it's a lot easier to tell a good story with no practise than to write one.

RikWriter said:

I think the key to being a good writer is being a good and avid reader and also experiencing life. Not just living through it, but experiencing it and contemplating it. Observing people and doing your best to crawl into their heads and see the world through someone else's eyes.

Click to expand...

Very good point. Think of how you read now, with your experience of life, compared to how you read when you were a teen. Compare your level of understanding for the very same book. The same applies to your writing... a level of mature understanding changes how you view stuff.

J.S.Fairey said:

...but it's a lot easier to tell a good story with no practise than to write one.

Click to expand...

I know someone who is a wonderful natural oral storyteller, both of fiction and nonfiction; he can hold a roomful of hypercritical and readily-bored folks enthralled for hours. But he couldn't write two coherent lines of story to save his life (not only because he's profoundly dyslexic, but also because it just doesn't flow out of him that way). Oral and written storytelling seem to be entirely different talents, tho no doubt easily cross-pollinated if you have both.

BethS said:

What seems to make the difference, oftentimes, is the ability to learn. I've observed writers who write and write and never improve, because they are unwilling or unable to learn from mistakes and correction. I've known others who started off very humbly, and a year or two later you would hardly recognize their work.

Click to expand...

This!!!

Tho with regard to writing, I suspect some of whether one can learn depends in part on whether one started with a good ear. Someone with a tin ear for words may simply not "hear" what they're being taught, no matter how much they attempt to practice getting better.

I started writing seriously quite young, writing my first (40K!) novel at 11 years old. I got a lot of consistent feedback from a variety of teachers, and one actual published author who read the novel, that I was exceptionally good for my age. So whatever "talent" is I guess I started with a bit of it. But, more importantly I think, is that even then I took writing very seriously. I wrote a lot (even if I didn't rewrite back then), almost every day, and I read a lot, and I read tons of books about writing, too. I'm sure I wrote over a million words before I was 20.

I'm now 26, and I feel I am only just maybe starting to be good. I've probably written at least another half a million words in the last couple years, mostly all on the same (short!) novel I've been working through as I grow as a writer. I think, finally, it is actually (maybe) a good novel. It's taken fifteen years of taking writing seriously and working very very hard. I had some degree of natural talent I guess, but without the hard work and 1.5 + million words of practice, I never, ever would have gone from "really good for my age" to, potentially "really good."

(oops, double post!)

Angry Guy said:

I'm just finishing up my first novel. I wrote it more-or-less beginning to end. By the time I got to the end (along with some reading on this forum) I had improved enough that I was no longer satisfied with my opening chapters and had to rewrite them. And did a significantly better job.

Whether or not you have talent, practice counts.

Click to expand...

This and what BethS said.

I do not know about natural talent or not, the same way I argue with my brother about him having a natural musical talent that I do not have, yet he insists that I would if I practiced as much as he has. I disagree with him, I might be able to play the piano ok one day, if I practice, ok, I get that, but you can put anything into his hands and he will make wonderful music with it, no matter what it is, and he has self-taught himself to play so many instruments, it's like, crazy raw talent.... we still disagree...

I do not have raw talent at writing either, but I am so willing to learn, and this site is great for that.

I thought my WIP was great, my first three beta readers agreed! Great! Then I turned to this site for feedback and I realised how deluded I was. Since, I have been editing, big time. I will edit again, and probably again, as I learn and hone my skill. I will not start a new project until I have learnt all the lessons I needed to learn from this current WIP.

I thought I learnt a lot, then I read back comments from what I posted on a SYW thread, and realised that I had only taken in the bits that I could cope with then, and now I can see the next layer of work that will be needed.... It is a long trawling journey, but this is how I need to learn, I guess...

So natural talent, I have very little of, if any, but I am sure willing and wanting to learn.

Barbara R. said:

I wrote my first novel when I was 23.(...) I came across a copy of that early novel and started to read. (...)And the thought that came into my head was: This is hopeless. This writer's got nothing.

Then I remembered, of course, that it was my book; and that it was followed by other books that did sell, to publishers like S&S, Morrow, Doubleday, Viking and (as of today!) Penguin. Books I'm proud of, btw.

So the moral of the story is that yes, OF COURSE we improve with practice. Writing is a craft; you learn through doing. Talent counts, too, of course. I could shoot baskets all day long for a year, and no one would ever mistake me for Michael Jordan. Same with writing. Talent and hard work have to go together; but writers must also learn to persevere even through the stink of their own worst first drafts.

Click to expand...

Thank you for that. I am feeling just that little bit hopeful that I might one day get my WIP to publishing standards.

Nogetsune said:

Can practice really make you go from bleh to great, or like singing do you need to have some base, natural talent to work off of to actually do well? If so, how much?

Click to expand...

Since "base natural talent" isn't measurable, "how much?" is not an answerable question.

Nogetsune said:

If your writing is kinda lousy to start off, can enough practice make your writing good enough to market to publishers?

Click to expand...

If "practice" includes a ton of critical and wide reading, including the genre one wishes to master and texts about writing itself, possibly. But just "practicing" the same bad, lazy or unoriginal writing habits with no attempt at making improvements won't get you anywhere.

Two very effective approaches are to 1) critique other people's writing (again, it's a type of critical reading) to learn what works and what doesn't, and why, and 2) edit your own writing over and over until it shines. This way you start correcting your own bad writing habits and eventually develop good ones.

Nogetsune said:

Or, like singing, is there just no help for somebody who has no natural talent to work off of?

Click to expand...

Most people can improve their singing to some degree with instruction and practice.

Nogetsune said:

How bad can you be to start and still turn out great?

Click to expand...

That depends on the individual in both singing and writing. And again, just "practicing" bad writing or singing will not result in improvement.

Just as one can have an ear for music, one can have an ear for writing. And just as those with an ear for music don't automatically master an instrument or musical style, those with an ear for writing don't automatically master the craft. There will always be some discipline involved, even if it's not obvious to the outside observer.



If you want to know more about mastering anything, I recommend reading Effortless Mastery by Kenny Werner. He wrote it about music (specifically piano) but it applies to pretty much everything.