2 ms·

I know folks are trying to be helpful by listing all the handbooks on the mechanics of writing, or on the creative process (closer), but it's off topic. The au

I know folks are trying to be helpful by listing all the handbooks on the mechanics of writing, or on the creative process (closer), but it's off topic. The author is talking about 'being a writer', as in the title. As in: "What do you do?" "Oh, I'm a writer" Not like: "Should one _ever_ begin a sentence with 'but'?" "No, you should _never_ do that. I'm a prig!" It seems that sitting down to write every day and telling people you're doing it brings with it a wrath of psychological goop that sane people need to cope with if they're going to keep remain sane. That's more what this essay is about. All that finger-waggingly-said, some great books recommended. Thank you for that!

dredmorbius 10y ago
Rather. Grasp on that seems lacking here. By comparison, there are many schools which teach (or claim to teach) programming, but few which cover the details of being a programmer: addressing employment contracts, valuing stock or equity options, non-competes, project management, vendor management, operating as an independent contractor, client (or boss) management, etc., etc. There are similar observations made of the medical profession, law, engineering (particularly where independent / small firm work is common), etc. The nuts-and-bolts of the business. Much of what's discussed (in the context of startups) on HN, for example. That said: there are some guides, several mentioned below. The Writers' Handbook is the long-time classic. I'm looking at a few of these now based on their mentions here.
bobwaycott 10y ago
I thought this was obvious merely upon seeing the title.
vonnik 10y ago
I actually think the headline, which the writer may not have chosen herself, is a bad description of the post. The irony of a article about writing somehow missing le mot juste... It's not about handbooks; it's about the blurry edges of the writing profession, where people tip over from "someone who writes" into someone who self-identifies as a writer and is dubbed a writer by others. This is partially because writing, like coding, is an open profession. Unlike medicine for a example. Degrees may be helpful, but they are not mandatory. So there is no clear symbolic threshold separating the hobbyists from whoever deserves to be called a writer. There is no officially accepted imprimatur, no government-certified club that doles out memberships. But there is a clear practical threshold, and that is money. If you make a living writing, then you are a writer as long as you do that. There are also other good indicators, which may involve less (social) currency: If you spend a lot of time writing or thinking about writing, until it becomes your daily and predominant activity, then you are a writer. Being a writer does not mean someone is a good writer. Personally, I don't think Stephen King is a good writer, and I wouldn't read him for advice -- but he is indisputably a writer, regardless of that subjective judgment.

dredmorbius 10y ago

Rather. Grasp on that seems lacking here. By comparison, there are many schools which teach (or claim to teach) programming, but few which cover the details of being a programmer: addressing employment contracts, valuing stock or equity options, non-competes, project management, vendor management, operating as an independent contractor, client (or boss) management, etc., etc. There are similar observations made of the medical profession, law, engineering (particularly where independent / small firm work is common), etc. The nuts-and-bolts of the business. Much of what's discussed (in the context of startups) on HN, for example. That said: there are some guides, several mentioned below. The Writers' Handbook is the long-time classic. I'm looking at a few of these now based on their mentions here.

bobwaycott 10y ago

I thought this was obvious merely upon seeing the title.

vonnik 10y ago

I actually think the headline, which the writer may not have chosen herself, is a bad description of the post. The irony of a article about writing somehow missing le mot juste... It's not about handbooks; it's about the blurry edges of the writing profession, where people tip over from "someone who writes" into someone who self-identifies as a writer and is dubbed a writer by others. This is partially because writing, like coding, is an open profession. Unlike medicine for a example. Degrees may be helpful, but they are not mandatory. So there is no clear symbolic threshold separating the hobbyists from whoever deserves to be called a writer. There is no officially accepted imprimatur, no government-certified club that doles out memberships. But there is a clear practical threshold, and that is money. If you make a living writing, then you are a writer as long as you do that. There are also other good indicators, which may involve less (social) currency: If you spend a lot of time writing or thinking about writing, until it becomes your daily and predominant activity, then you are a writer. Being a writer does not mean someone is a good writer. Personally, I don't think Stephen King is a good writer, and I wouldn't read him for advice -- but he is indisputably a writer, regardless of that subjective judgment.