Sounds like a Nike ad.

I know what Ray says: "To hell with what anybody else thinks." Someone elsewhere responded that artists do what they do because they NEED to, so to do what you yourself like.

I forgot to mention just one little detail. And, fjpalumbo, this is relevant to what you said, too. I just decided by the time I was 12 that writing MUST be my main source of income and prime line of work. Money made by any other means than in artistic and creative endeavor was to be as dust and ashes, not to count or bring any achievement or satisfaction. I've been embarrassed of most of the jobs I've held so far. So I would EXPECT people to be critical of my writing, and, to some extent, my photography, since I WAS looking to go professional--not just fulfill the requirements of an assignment or so on. What's so unexpected is what people choose to criticize--it's never what you expect but always something you thought was fine in the first place! The criticism also hurts much worse than if directed against something I was just doing as a hobby. For instance, I put a LOT of time and effort into my garden and it isn't great, but I was never planning to be a professional landscaper or gardener!

Well, it's been over 30 years and I have yet to make my full living from writing, even combined with other artistic/creative work. So each failure or rejection is like a statement that I HAVE nothing of worth or relevance to say, and am not here for any grand or larger purpose, just to sort of "prop up" the lives of those nearest to me. Of course, I appreciate when they call on me at all--at least someone knows I'm alive--but I still don't feel I'm where I should be, doing what I should be doing!

That's why I asked, what is art? I thought maybe if I knew the answer, I'd know how far off I am now and how much further I need to go to be achieving what I "should" be!

Dandelion,

I�m gonna be blunt so forgive me:

In all of our talk about art and artistic endeavors, one point we have failed to mention is the adoption of a professional attitude. You grazed it briefly in your latest post but I don�t think you�re aware of what I think is missing in your 30 some years of pursuing an artistic livelihood: a professional attitude. That is, you may have desired to support yourself in some kind of artistic or creative endeavor but I don�t think you ever really believed you could do it. That�s a sure way to failure, if you ask me. Take a look at your statement about your gardening: Your garden isn�t great because you�re not a professional landscaper or gardener. Fine. Gardening is, indeed, a hobby, which it is for many of us and that�s all it has to be. Writing can be a hobby, too, as well as photography. Pursue them as hobbies if you wish but remember this one thing: amateurs do the things they do for the love of doing it; (check out the root of the word amateur) professionals do it for money. By stating your desire to support yourself solely through your writing, you�re telling me you rather be a professional rather than an amateur. And I say, Great!

Now, the question is, how do you become a professional? Some of us are blessed with talent but much of what you need to know about writing and photography can be learned. You�ve already published a book so you already know something about the business but if I were you, I�d find ways to hone the talent I already have: take some courses, join a writer�s group, get a job on a small newspaper or website, shoot, just write, write, write. Hurtful criticism? Too bad. You�re a professional, remember? You�re trying to create the best piece of work you can. Don�t take it personal, see if you can learn from it, and move on. The critics don�t have anything useful to say? I wouldn�t be surprised; they seldom do. But if you�re getting the same criticism time after time, buck up, and listen up. They might be trying to tell you something that you�re blind to.

There�s all sorts of stories out there about writers who have spent a long time trying to succeed. Writing�s hard and I suspect a long, hard, solo slog is more the rule rather than the exception. No doubt, if you were Hemingway or Steinbeck or Bradbury, we wouldn�t be having this discussion, but you can be these kinds of writers in your own way. That�s what sets writers apart from each other: their individuality. There just aren�t that many stories to tell. What you�re selling is the way you tell that story. That�s what people will pay money for. (I know you already know this so I�m not bursting your bubble, but few writers earn enough on their creative writing alone to support themselves, let alone a family. The bestseller lists account for only a tiny fraction of the writers working out there.)

But is it art? Well, spend as much time as you want trying to pin down that definition but I�d say it�ll do you no good. I don�t think any artist goes in with the intent to create a masterpiece of art. Well, okay, maybe that�s what they�d like to do but more times than not they fail. Self-consciousness will snuff that spark out quicker than anything. Read, and re-read, Ray�s Zen and the Art of Writing. Is his essay about the proper care and feeding of a muse, he likens a muse to a kitten. If you try to coax it to you, the animal will run and play hard to get. But ignore it and the next you know its rubbing its back against your shins.
One more thing: Ray has said to jump off that cliff and build your wings on your way down. Sounds good. But a weakness I find in his fine book is that he spends precious little time on the art of re-writing. Because that�s what good writing is. (Yeah, I know, he mentions something about creating the work in a white-hot heat but revising with a cold eye but that�s about all he has to say about it.) Ray�s book is very good about inspiration but entirely lacking in the area of professionalism. Sure, follow his advice to get the inspiration down. But then the real work, and I�d say the creation of art, begins in the revising. That�s what professionals do. So do it.

Best,

Pete

um...r u guys in colledge or something? im only 13. i have a question. do u think it odd that some of ray's futuristic veiws have come true? and do u think they would not have come true if he had never suggested the possibility of them?

One comment. There was a time when even Hemingway wasn't Hemingway. I have read that he had to go to over 19 publishers before anyone would take him on. Bradbury's own publisher was not interested in The Chapbook, so he had to take that to another publisher. The life of a writer can be a hard, lonely, tedious one. Or, you could be Danielle Steele or Stephen King or Anne Rice and hit a market that allows you to crank out one "hit" after another. Who knows?

As Bradbury told both of us (Dandelion and I and my daughter were there together), you just have to write, write, write.

I'm long out of college! And yes, I think things would have been invented whether or not Bradbury predicted them, but he may have helped some of them come to pass sooner.

Well, Ray's philosophy is certainly paying off for the Boston Red Sox! When asked what the team was thinking now, center fielder Johnny Damon replied, "We don�t think. If we use our brains, we�re only hurting the team." This was said Sunday night after his team took a two-games-to-none lead in the series with a 6-2 victory.

All I could think when I heard that was "Zen and the Art of Baseball!" Still, one could conclude that enough hard PRACTICE went on, and continues to go on, that these professionals don't NEED to think--they KNOW when they are DOING right or wrong!