  For Authors
This week: A Writer's Purpose Edited by: Jaeff | KBtW of the Free Folk  
More Newsletters By This Editor 
1. About this Newsletter
2. A Word from our Sponsor
3. Letter from the Editor
4. Editor's Picks
5. A Word from Writing.Com
6. Ask & Answer
7. Removal instructions
"The two most engaging powers of an author are to make
new things familiar, and to make familiar things new."
-- Samuel Johnson
Trivia of the Week: While Agatha Christie has been cited as the author with the most copies of her books sold
| (among authors for whom there is some metric of measurement for both sales and number of works. William Shakespeare The Bible are not included) |
|
| ASIN: B01FST8A90 |
Product Type: Toys & Games
|
Amazon's Price: $ 24.95
|
|
A WRITER'S PURPOSE
At the risk of starting with a heavy philosophical question, what is your purpose as a writer? What are you hoping to achieve with your writing? What a nice, light topic of conversation for an editorial, huh? 
I'm not talking about the theme of an individual work, or what you're trying to accomplish in terms of narrative construction, character arcs, or any of that literary stuff like allusions or allegories to modern day issues. I'm happy to leave all that stuff in some professor's literary theory class! What I really want to do is have an honest conversation about our motives for wanting to be writers which, as almost anyone who's tried can attest, is not the easiest or most clear-cut of career choices.
The two most common purposes that I've heard writers take ownership of are (1) the desire for material success, and (2) to fill some kind of emotional need. Material success can be defined as extreme wealth or even just making ends meet with words on a page rather than hours punching a clock in an office, restaurant, retail store, factory, etc. Similarly, it can mean fame, respect, or any of a number of other worldly rewards of a successful career. Emotional needs, on the other hand, can be defined across a much wider spectrum ... everything from "It's my passion," to "I can't not write," to "I have something to say."
I think most of us, especially those that have been writing and keeping at it for a while - through frustration, revision, rejection, and everything else - probably fall somewhere between the two camps. Most aspiring writers who are purely in it for the material rewards and have no passion either get what they want right away, or tend to look to other more stable sources of securing those things when things don't pan out after a time. After all, a writing career isn't a linear progression where hard work over time automatically or even typically equals the kind of success you can find in most other fields after investing years and years of hard work. And most aspiring writers who are purely in it to satisfy some kind of emotional need without any desire for material success tend to be happy with their own writing endeavors and steer clear of the anguish involved in the hoops that need to be jumped through in order to get something onto bookshelves and into the hands of consumers.
And this editorial, I suppose, isn't for writers firmly in either group, since they clearly know what their purpose is. Instead, this editorial is for those in the middle, who want the best of both worlds and may or may not know how to strike the right balance between the two extremes.
Like the "hard work vs. talent" debate, I think this is another one of those situations where you really need a healthy dose of both if your goal is to be published and/or to make a living or build a career with your writing. You have to want that material success if you're going to keep at it until you get there. And there has to be some kind of emotional satisfaction that comes from the process so that you can push through the frustrating times when things don't work out as well as you hope.
If you're passionate about writing or find yourself compelled to write, it's easy to find that emotional satisfaction from the process. You feel it naturally every time you put words on the page or screen. But what's one to do if they don't derive that intrinsic sense of accomplishment from the writing process? I think that's where having something to say is of the utmost importance. Find an issue you care about, a message you want to get across, a philosophy or concept that you want to impart ... and then find a way to work that into your stories. It doesn't have to be heavy-handed or even all that "weighty" ... it's just as legitimate to want to write sci-fi stories that convey a passion for science as it is to write a moral piece that promotes a particular set of religious beliefs. And it's okay if your "something to say" is about the ups and downs of small town life or how beautiful the natural world is; it doesn't have to be some hot-button issue like corporate malfeasance, political corruption, or the ethics behind industrialization. Write about a topic that you're passionate about and let the purpose of sharing that with the world guide you.
The point is, whether you're naturally passionate about the writing process or not, find that purpose to your writing. Find the issue or topic or subject matter that you want to make your readers aware of or get them interested in. Purpose can sustain you through the difficult times in the writing process, and it can sustain the interest of your readers.
Give some thought to your writer's purpose ... both your goals in what you want to materially accomplish as well as the kinds of things you want to emotionally satisfy you and your readers.
Until next time,
Jaeff | KBtW of the Free Folk
If you're interested in checking out my work:
"Blogocentric Formulations"
"New & Noteworthy Things"
Community Activities ▼
 " The Dark Society" 13+: A horror group that worships all things dark and sinister. Join at your own risk!  " The Cube" E: An exclusive auction & raffle to raise funds for groups and activities across Writing.Com
|
I encourage you to check out the following items:
EXCERPT: In more than one of the essays to be found in my portfolio, I spend time lambasting and berating the Almighty for one reason or another. It only seemed fair, therefore, to dedicate at least one small composition in His (or Her) defense, and make it clear that another side to the story does exist.
EXCERPT: Can free will and destiny coexist? It appears to be generally accepted that free will and destiny are antonyms. The first is commonly defined as the possibility that an individual acts differently once placed in the exact same situation anew. The opposite: having no choice while forever behaving in the same way no matter how many times the opportunity is presented, is the popular definition of destiny. The present essay will argue that freedom of action and destiny are not only concepts which are independent of one another, but are also perfectly capable of coexisting. The claims will be supported by two thought-experiments which will serve as basis for the philosophical aspects of the examination.
EXCERPT: I get tired of having to chant. Mom’s calling us, but my sister and I pretend not to hear. Our dolls are all set up for the fashion show. Within a few minutes, I hear the soft, light steps of Grandma Moonja’s tiny slippers sweeping across the spotless kitchen floor. Grandma’s ceramic floors are so clean you could drop your gum on it, pick it up and put it back in your mouth. “Yuriko-chan…Fumiko-chan, it’s time-u for our Daimoku,” she cheerfully commands with her heavy Japanese accent. We roll our eyes and force a disappointing breath up toward our noses. “We’re coming, Okasan.”
EXCERPT: Our earth faces many man-made complications. One of these difficulties is pollution. The Merriam Webster Online dictionary describes pollution as “the action or process of making land, water, air, etc., dirty and not safe or suitable to use”. There are several forms of pollution. Some forms of pollution consist of air pollution, water pollution, and land pollution. For every category of pollution, there is an interminable quantity of causes.
EXCERPT: We're all physically different despite the fact we inherit things such as our eye colour and blood group but do we inherit our moral values? In other words, can people be born evil? The nature vs. nurture debate has been a psychological debate for many years with conflicting opinions from scientist to scientist and person to person. Nature referring to our charateristics and tendencies inherited from our biological mother and father that influence development, whereas nurture covers the experiences in early life as well as the environmental condition a child is brought up in. But which of these factors determine the level of morality a person is accustomed to?
EXCERPT: I just got back from my bike ride tonight, and I found out that two hundred and fifty is the magic number. Some might say P90x is the magic number, still others may say seven or eleven or three hundred and sixty. Tony Hawk might say nine hundred is the magic number, but I say that two hundred and fifty is the magic number.
|
Have an opinion on what you've read here today? Then send the Editor feedback! Find an item that you think would be perfect for showcasing here? Submit it for consideration in the newsletter!
https://www.Writing.Com/go/nl_form
Don't forget to support our sponsor!
| ASIN: B083RZJVJ8 |
|
Amazon's Price: $ 19.99
Not currently available. |
|
| ASIN: B01MQP5740 |
Product Type: Kindle Store
|
Amazon's Price: $ 4.99
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, click here for your newsletter subscription list. Simply uncheck the box next to any newsletter(s) you wish to cancel and then click to "Submit Changes". You can edit your subscriptions at any time.
|
For Authors: June 10, 2015 Issue [#7042]
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
