Tags
Most likely you tell people you’re a writer. That’s probably the right answer even though it may not be the correct answer. Confused yet? Assuming you said yes, let’s look into whether you should call yourself an author or a writer.
If you’re like me, you don’t particularly care if there is a distinction between the two labels. Who cares, you (and I) ask? I write. I publish. I’m happy.
Technically, at least according to those who spend time debating such things, being a writer and being an author are two different things. Well, maybe. In one camp are the people who differentiate between the two terms based solely on whether you are doing it (writer) or have already done it (author). In other words, a writer is a person who writes; an author is a person who has written.
Too simple? There’s a camp for you. That camp says that a writer is anyone “who writes a book, article, or any literary piece.” An author, on the other hand, is more accomplished; an author “originates the idea, plot, or content of the work being written.” By this definition someone who writes a biography of someone else is a writer, but not an author, even when that biography has been published. So by the this camp’s definition, famed author (or is it writer) David McCollough is merely a writer despite the fact that his Pulitzer Prize-winning book John Adams sold over 1.5 million copies.
Frankly, I’m going with the first camp on this one: McCollough is an author. A published one. A multiple Pulitzer Prize-winning one. ‘Nuff said.
Of course, by this first camp’s definition you can be an author (for works already written, and presumably, published) AND a writer (for works currently being written). If you’re a second camper, well, you have to be more original and write an autobiography. Or if you write a novel you’re good for author since you would have created some original concept, plot, and content, whether you get published or not. The proverbial jury is still out if what you write is fan fiction. Seriously, people, write something original.
This is all so confusing, and in my book, irrelevant. There are people who spend days debating such esoteric topics. I’m not one of them. I’m good with “if you write, you’re a writer; if you’ve been published, you’re an author.”
My definition does differentiate based on the likelihood that some significant amount of people not living in your household will have read your work. There are people who write but their writing literally is never read by anybody (dresser drawer novelists, I’m talking to you). A larger number have work read by some small number of people – family, friends, and stray e-book sales on Amazon. And then there are some small number whose writing has been read by a larger number of people, say like, thousands. [I’ll ignore those who have sold millions of copies because rather than reading this article you’re working on your next million-seller]
Keep in mind that “significant,” “larger,” and “small” are relative terms. The absolute numbers of what constitutes “significant” will depend on many factors. If you’re David McCollough, selling only a million copies might seem a failure. If you’re me, selling in the tens of thousands is not as satisfying as breaking 100,000, but I’ll take it (the average number of copies sold for non-fiction titles is around 3,000). If you’re 95% of all writers, breaking out of the hundreds (or tens) is about all you can hope for.
The bottom line is that whether you consider yourself a writer or an author is pretty much meaningless. All that matters is that you write.
I take that back. Besides writing you have to put it out there for people to read. After all, every writer wants to be read. Don’t be the base of the writer pyramid, put yourself at the tip and give yourself a chance at the roulette wheel.
Now go forth and multiply, er, write. And author.
David J. Kent is an avid science traveler and the author of Lincoln: The Man Who Saved America, in Barnes and Noble stores now. His previous books include Tesla: The Wizard of Electricity (2013) and Edison: The Inventor of the Modern World (2016) and two e-books: Nikola Tesla: Renewable Energy Ahead of Its Time and Abraham Lincoln and Nikola Tesla: Connected by Fate.
Check out my Goodreads author page. While you’re at it, “Like” my Facebook author page for more updates!
Hot White Snow 
I’m reminded of the question about the sound of a tree falling in the woods.
Or perhaps the near futile ramblings of a seventh grade science teacher or anyone else that takes things seriously and with hope.
I do remember the vanity of looking at the Science Citation Index from time to time. In some fields, if one got 10 citations in the first year or two, that was OK.
As with everything though, feedback is more immediate these days.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think its a moot point, something for people with way too much time on their hands to distract the mind (sort of like philosophy). I know that my goal is for people to read, and to learn. If the reader hasn’t learned anything from my writing it seems rather pointless. Of course, fiction writing is different. You don’t need to learn, just be entertained.
LikeLike
I’m just wondering where “literacy” comes into all of this. Does Kim Kardashian’s book of selfies qualify her as a “writer”? And are you really an “author” when your utterly flamed autobiography was ghost-written?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Clearly Kardashian isn’t a writer (or even a reader, and doubtfully a thinker). When your entire basis for celebrity is exploitation of a sex tape and fat asset, you don’t get to be anything other than a waste of space. A rich one, but still a waste.
And the ghost-writer is the author of the ghostwritten autobio. Trump’s “co”-author says Trump not only didn’t write the “Art of the Deal,” he didn’t even read it. Most of Bill O’Reilly’s “Killing [fill in blank]” are written by his “co”-author. These people aren’t authors, they are scammers conning their cult followers. The scary part is that there are so many in their cults.
As for “literacy,” possibly this can be contrasted with “literary.” Most books are not literary, which aren’t necessarily well-written. Personally, I can’t stand Faulkner, and yet others genuflect to the mention of his name. I don’t think you should have to take a full semester course to make heads or tails out of what you just tried to read. On the other hand, I’ve seen some non-literary books that are so badly written I’m can’t imagine how they got published, while others that barely find a reader are a treat to the senses.
Maybe it all comes down to: you write something, someone reads it, someone thinks it was worth reading.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good answer for something written with tongue firmly in cheek. Your points are well-taken, and I very much agree. Maybe if I ever need a buck, I can just go do something really stupid, and then get someone to ghost-write my “memoirs” into an “biography” while I’m still in the news. Going to take a lot of photo retouching to get me to look anything like Kim Kardashian, though. But as long as ** I ** don’t have to read it…
LikeLiked by 1 person
You don’t want to look anything like Kim Kardashian. You’re wonderful the way you are. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Finally back to the connected world after being disconnected for virtually all of a two week foray into the Black Sea. At least these days I can schedule posts for the future and write before I go. Well, assuming I get around to the actual writing before I go.
Now to catch up before the next excursion.
LikeLike