T.R. Napper says DON'T GIVE UP!

[Coragem]

There's a somewhat … realistic (or cynical) tone here that won't please everyone. But it really spoke to me.

And I related to the comments about the "arse" agent who "punches down" when he attacks an unpublished writer. Earlier this year I had a horrible experience with an author who bullied me simply because he didn't consider me successful – as if we can have lives, families, careers, feelings, but still be sub-human if we're not a "big five" publishing success.

http://nappertime.com/the-difference-between-success-and-failure-in-publishing/?unapproved=5732&moderation-hash=20d12ae3c5bd53a18c8c54fdc6aa797e#comment-5732

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Seems like the criticism came from someone who was already his agent (not someone he was approaching for the first time). I think that changes the dynamic somewhat. The nicest comment I ever received from an agent was "I liked this. But, as you probably know, it is completely unpublishable." I took that as a compliment.

 

[sknox]

The line was clear enough to me. The book was rejected by a variety of publishers for a variety of reasons, not all of which have anything to do with the quality of the book. The book won an award because it was competing in a field of ... what, a dozen, a score? ... of other books and was judged by a handful of people to be the best of that litter. IOW, entirely different audience with entirely different criteria.

This happens all the time, in all fields of art. The movie that's panned by critics but loved by the audience; or, hated or ignored by everyone but goes on to become a cult hit. Bands that are loved by their fans but never get beyond that fan base. Authors who are declared "overlooked". It's a big world and there will be many different reactions to any given work of art, and those reactions will change over time.

The advice never to give up always comes from someone who made it. I'd argue there's definitely a time to give up, or at least to get on to other things. If it's with trad publishing, the time to move on would be when your agent says they've tried everything, knocked on every door, and every publisher has declined. What would not giving up even mean at that point? Save, of course, going self-pub. (here, self-pub would mean getting oneself down to the pub)

My advice to Mr Napper would be to redefine success. Getting the book done is success. Getting an agent to take it on would be a second success. Getting a publisher would be third. Awards would be another. Selling N copies would be yet another. There are opportunities for success everywhere! They all are contingent upon that first one, though.

And even there, I'd say, give up if you can. If it's possible for me to give up on a story--that is, not to finish it--then that wasn't my story. I've had a couple of those. They sit even now in the corner, like outgrown toys. But because I "gave up" on them, I wrote other stories. So there's that.

 

[msstice]

1. He has an agent
2. The agent read the book
3. The agent wrote a three page book report on it
4. He's still complaining

Yep. He's an artist!

 

[Coragem]

1. He has an agent
2. The agent read the book
3. The agent wrote a three page book report on it
4. He's still complaining

Yep. He's an artist!

He's not complaining, he's encouraging. Inspiring.

Frankly, publishing is fickle. Napper is saying that despite that, and just because the industry doesn't now, today, recognise a novel's promise, that doesn't mean we should be down on ourselves, or conclude that our work or future work will never find favour.

I'm absolutely certain he would not be against any of us pursuing whatever "success" we choose – it's just that trad pub happened to be what he was going for, and the fact that he made it, eventually, just, is a story that can give us hope.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

That agent did seem unnecessarily and inappropriately snarky. How is that constructive? Sometimes agents give bad advice. Sometimes they give good advice—but it's not such as will be helpful to you in achieving your personal goals. If you don't think your agent is giving constructive and useful advice, don't give up on your writing, fire your agent. Remember, that agents don't represent some malign controlling influence—they work for you, not the other way around. (Though they are people you employ that don't get paid until they sell something of yours to a publisher. Understandably, they focus on what your book needs to increase its chances of being sold to a publisher.) As you are (ultimately, and if all goes well) going to be paying for their advice, it makes sense to give it a fair reading and fair consideration. But if you and your agent aren't a good fit—the one mentioned in the article was at least thorough—then move on to someone else.

I'd argue there's definitely a time to give up, or at least to get on to other things.

I have to agree with this. If you have lost your joy in writing, or in writing a particular story, then it is time to to move on to something else, whether that something else is writing another story or choosing another career path. But don't give up because of one harsh critique, or even because multiple agents and/or publishers have judged your book unsellable. Your next book may be more successful, or the market may change.

 

[Steve Harrison]

I'm on a lot of writer's boards, mainly because I like the sound of my own typing, and whenever someone asks if they should give up, I say yes, absolutely. From experience, it's a great way to test your commitment to the craft.

It rarely goes down well - they are usually seeking reassurance and, I suspect, have grown up under the mistaken assumption that you can do, and succeed at, anything they want - but I figure that just like everything else in writing, you don't know what you can do until you try.

 

[msstice]

I'm on a lot of writer's boards, mainly because I like the sound of my own typing,

1. First image in my mind: Large wooden benches at which you sit with other writers hammering away on your typewriter, while someone comes up and asks "Please sir..."
2. Second image: Wooden paneled offices, expensive boardroom table and chair, champagne, tinkle of glasses, successful writers discussing the state of the craft and where it will be in ten years and what to do about it
3. Last (and correct) image: Same as me. Sitting before a computer, chatting with fellow writers on electronic message boards.

 

[AnRoinnUltra]

you don't know what you can do until you try.

Exactly @Steve Harrison , spot on. Anyone who says otherwise has obviously never read Peter Thiel. You can do anything -if you believe you can.

And it doesn't need to be something as technically difficult as creating electronic immortality. You might just want to do something basic, like drive an articulated lorry while playing Super Mario Brothers. In which case, you'd place the Nintendo on the passenger seat, lay across the cab, and simply steer with your kneecap.
As Peter says, you can do anything -if you believe you can*

*Provided you don't mind the end result being fiddelsticks horrendous.

 

[Toby Frost]

I must admit that my first thought was "This can't be entirely true". It seems like pointless and unprofessional behaviour by the agent, that would waste time which could be spent earning money. I can't help but wonder if someone hasn't got the wrong end of the stick. But then there are some very odd people in the arts.

As for giving up, I would say that it's not proper giving up unless you stop writing altogether. Quite often something doesn't work, or doesn't work yet, and it's necessary to try something else or to approach it from a different angle. Very few ideas are outright terrible - some are more saleable than others, of course - but getting them right requires enthusiasm to do it and the skill to do it right.

The nicest comment I ever received from an agent was "I liked this. But, as you probably know, it is completely unpublishable." I took that as a compliment.

I think that's the right thing to do. I suppose the next question to ask them is "Why?" but then getting feedback out of professionals in this game is never easy.

 

[Coragem]

Honestly, I detest the words "give up". Fine, learn some positive lessons and then try something different, move on, switch things up, keep life exciting. But I'm never going to see that as "giving up".

Beyond that, I will never, ever, give up on what I truly love. Perhaps one day I will put one novel or story aside, learn from it and progress onto another, but sorry, I am not going to stop doing what I love.

Literally all my life I've been writing something. Not always fiction, but always something. It's in my DNA. I've sacrificed for it again and again. If the writing goes, it's not me anymore, I'm dead.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Honestly, I detest the words "give up".

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There's no point in being a damn fool about it."

W. C. Fields

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Beyond that, I will never, ever, give up on what I truly love.

And if you truly love it, you shouldn't give it up. But some people discover after a while that they don't love it all that much. Why should they feel ashamed if they move on to something else? Why should they keep on because others give them pep talks, meant to be inspiring, yes, but based on zero knowledge of them or what they truly love or want. The phrase "give up" sounds so pejorative, and applying it to people who no longer choose to write sounds like blaming them for something that is their own choice to make.

 

[Steve Harrison]

And if you truly love it, you shouldn't give it up. But some people discover after a while that they don't love it all that much. Why should they feel ashamed if they move on to something else? Why should they keep on because others give them pep talks, meant to be inspiring, yes, but based on zero knowledge of them or what they truly love or want. The phrase "give up" sounds so pejorative, and applying it to people who no longer choose to write sounds like blaming them for something that is their own choice to make.

Absolutely. I've seen too many people unwilling to give up on their dreams, even when they become nightmares.

No use not giving up if it makes you miserable.

 

[Wayne Mack]

Making the decision to persevere or to pivot is always a challenge. For anything one does in life, there will be rough spots. There is no answer to the question of whether to muddle through the current period of discontent in the hope of regaining the pleasure tomorrow or deciding that the likelihood of future enjoyment is so low that one should stop. I don't have nay answers, I can only suggest that the situation is quite normal and whatever choice one makes is okay.

 

[Coragem]

And if you truly love it, you shouldn't give it up. But some people discover after a while that they don't love it all that much. Why should they feel ashamed if they move on to something else? Why should they keep on because others give them pep talks, meant to be inspiring, yes, but based on zero knowledge of them or what they truly love or want. The phrase "give up" sounds so pejorative, and applying it to people who no longer choose to write sounds like blaming them for something that is their own choice to make.

I agree with you. I just prefer, where possible (and in the real world I know it isn't always possible), NOT to frame moving on and trying something else as "giving up". It can be a postive new phase, which builds on what came before.

 

[sknox]

>whenever someone asks if they should give up, I say yes,
I have to stop myself every time because I believe it is true. If you can stop writing, then you should stop because you aren't a writer. That's my first instinct.

As is often the case with my first instincts, it's wrong.

For one thing, there are lots and lots of different kinds of writing, requiring different levels of commitment. So at best, it's only partly true.

More importantly, though, writers themselves go through states. There are plenty of writers (and other artists) who needed encouragement early on. They needed time to gain their footing, to discover it was possible to do the thing they so much feared they could not.

At the same time, I don't want to perpetuate the "you can do it if you only believe" myth. So I just stay silent. Well, not entirely silent. There's a fair amount of muttering under my breath.

 

[sknox]

>You can do anything -if you believe you can.

Nope. This is magical thinking. I can believe I can fly, but I'll still fall to a pointless and avoidable death. I can believe I'll play lead guitar in a band, but that won't happen. I'm 71 years old and I have arthritis.

It's true you can fail at most anything, and that if you believe you will fail, odds are you'll be right. I'll buy that maxim. But the other isn't just wrong, it's pernicious, especially for those who are born into the wrong times, wrong social class, or whatever.

It's true that those who have succeeded for the most part always believed they would succeed with their dream. Sure. For every professional sports figure, actor, musician, whatever, there are thousands upon millions who fell short but who believed just as fervently. To say "if you believe you can" is to pretend there's no such thing as external factors.

 

[Coragem]

Of course you're right @sknox.

I'm not a 7ft tall guy who can easily drop a basketball into a hoop.

Even in my youth, I never had the proper limb lengths, muscle fibre types, muscle bellies or the hormonal profile to be an Olympic sprinter.

And I'm never going to be a Steven King, writing a novel in three months.

One in a million talent + 100% hard work will always beat hard work alone.

On the postive side, (1) we can all improve in what we enjoy, and (2) very often we enjoy what we're good at, and (3) we can all choose define our own realistic image of "success".

 

[Cthulhu.Science]

Jason Nesmith says, "Never Give Up! Never Surrender!"