Addendum: You are required to suck

I’ve been saying for years that you should allow yourself the freedom to suck at writing. With the freedom to write horrible things, you get discouraged less, you learn faster, and you understand the difference between good and bad writing.

But lately I’ve been thinking that that needs to be changed. Because, at the beginning, you are going to suck. The “allowing” part means you keep going instead of stopping and wailing that your perfect idea is crap on the page. This is not an insult; remember I love the sports metaphors. If I said I wanted to run a marathon tomorrow, would you say, “Go for it!” or would you say, “You’re going to vomit and fall down from leg cramps before you get two miles in?” If you cared about my well-being and my ability to walk the day after tomorrow, you’d say the second one, which is essentially, “You’re going to suck.”

I just read this eye-opening post by Jason Pinter at The Huffington Post. Will New Technology Ruin Talented Authors? I’ve (and JC Hutchins, and Scott Sigler, and countless other podiobook authors) been saying for years that you should do everything you can to get published if you want to do this writing thing for a living. Only then fall back on the self-publishing/web publishing/podcasting route. That is not just because you will very likely make more traditionally than going it alone*, but it’s because rejection will make you a) tougher, and b) more ready to look at your work with a critical eye. It will put the steel of your soul through the fire of rejection, and you’ll be stronger, both as a writer and as a person facing the constant rejection we encounter.

Do you think if you publish yourself, you’re bypassing rejection? Hell no. You’re just bypassing editors’ and agents’ rejections. You are opening yourself up to rejection of the world, most of whom are a lot less professional and a lot more hurtful than editors and agents. Few books sold, scathing Amazon reviews, and even comments at your blog can be demoralizing. You’re putting a black mark on your publishing record; if a publisher is interested in your next book, they may see your self-published flop and shy away from you.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t self-publish. Long time readers of this blog know I’m not saying that. I fully believe, if you want to, you should self-publish so long as you fully understand everything – and I mean everything – that entails. (Even Cory Doctorow is learning a thing or two about self-publishing. The original article seems to have disappeared from Publisher’s Weekly but a commentary on it is here – Cory Doctorow Discovers Why Publishers Get 90% and Authors Get 10%) There are many people making a ton of money self-publishing, especially with ebooks. A self-published (via web) book, The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making, just made history by winning the Andre Norton Award this past weekend. But all of these authors are veteran writers who have gone through the gauntlet and learned their craft.

What I took from Pinter’s article is every writer has to go through that suck period. You have to acknowledge that you’re an apprentice, not a master. Bypassing THE MAN and thinking that you’ll just publish the first thing you finish can feel liberating, but if you’re not ready, it’s going to be a sad wake up call.

You can be a writer. It’s not easy. It’s not quick. There are many options open to you. But you have to write, to practice, and learn your craft before the world sees your work, else they’re not going to care at all.

* I know the numbers; you can make X% more publishing yourself than the wee percentage you make through a publisher, but my personal experience is having a publisher makes for more books sold. I made a lot more with the Swarm version of Playing for Keeps than the POD version. Kindle and Apple are changing that now, but still, if your work sucks, it’s not going to sell, regardless.