A great writer isn’t just good
Posted by Caitlin Smythe on 22 Oct 2008 | Tagged as: Copywriting
Much has been said of the difference between great and merely good writers. For millennia, I think, the latter will aspire to become great, and many will not succeed. I read this post from the CEO of We Build Pages, which is a great site, by the way, and while what the author says is correct (I’ve tabulated it below), I think the difference between great and good writing is far less tangible or attainable.
Pic credit: Concurringopinions
| Great Writers | Good Writers |
|---|---|
| Know how to compose content so that even people who aren’t familiar with the subject will be drawn in. They know what they’re good at, to the extent that not only do they not sound like idiots, but they sound like an authority | Research and write about a variety of subjects without sounding like idiots – also, know how not to plagiarise and be factually accurate |
| Can carry out a task with flair so that not only do they get the job done, but they generate dynamic content. | Can carry out a task, for example – create sound linkbait in the form of an article for ezine publication – without hassle |
| Have mastered the tenements of language, and know how to use it to grab attention | Know how to implement proper spelling, grammar, punctuation – errors are usually typos |
The great and the good may in part have something to do with experience both in what the writer reads and in both who is reading his or her work – and the feedback they’re giving. You’ve heard that old maxim: “A writer is only as good as his editor”. Also important is why a writer is writing and who he or she writing for; also who taught him or her to write.
Steven King, who if not venerable is certainly prolific, maintains that all writers have “sounding boards” or ideal readers that they write for, either real or imagined (he has his wife). Brian Clark over at Copyblogger has the simplest solution of all. If we were to consider writing as a sport, the Olympians are the people who are able to live off their published words. But there lies the difficulty – the haze – of writing, as not all writers are in possession of the same number of words – especially as some have just one precious novella in their hearts, and others have sixty. A discussion over at SE Roundtable suggests that 1 000 words per day should keep a writer at his or her peek fitness, although anything between 500 and 2 000 words seems to be the norm.
There is much argument over what makes a writer great, rather than good, and whether a good writer can become great, some day, or whether it’s a question of genes. But there is no dispute that there is a difference between the two. What do you think?
“There is no royal path to good writing; and such paths as do exist do not lead through neat critical gardens, various as they are, but through the jungles of self, the world, and of craft.” ~ Jessamyn West
