...i only consider published works to be rubbish if they're poorly written... and, as it happens, just about all books by young writers are... first authors are a different story... some are quite good, many are awful... most are mediocre and we can only hope they improve with time...
I loved reading Eragon. I went through it in a matter of hours because it was such an easy read. The thing that made it a good book was the flow of the story, not the writing. Personally I would think that in terms of writing, sure you would get better with age because you would have deeper understanding and more experience writing with the English language, however as far as writing a good story goes I think the flow of it matters more than the actual writing.
I happen to be a relatively young(well, I presume I am anyway) author, so no, I don't consider it all rubbish.
Pretty much I decided a while ago that I wouldn't even try to get published before I'm 30, being 20 now. For the simple reason that I cringe reading stuff I wrote just a year ago... What if I actually managed to get something published now and had to read it ten years later. I'd want to kill it with fire! Also the reason why I believe young writers should wait and practice more, even if they are already good. Future you will probably be glad you waited. Though this is considering writing ability alone, not storytelling ability.
I agree, I should. But your always going to cringe at your first book lol I bet JK.Rowling cringes at the first book of Harry Potter. But I'm not going to rush into publishing. I want to improve a lot, especially because of the fact I haven't wrote seriously in 4 years since 2010 lol
If you look at your old work and cringe at its awfulness, that's good. That means you're better now. I fear the day that I look at something I wrote a year ago and can't find anything wrong with it. That means I haven't progressed at all since then. Being able to spot your old faults is a sign of progression, not failure.
I concur. There was a draft I remember writing in 2004 when I first began to write. Upon re-reading it, I wanted to go back in time and give my fifteen-year-old self a solid smack upside the head. What in the bloody blue blazes was I thinking writing that crap down. If I could rewrite it, it'd be hella better I have no doubt.
I agree. I'm glad I'm not writing like I did when I started out. On the other hand, I'm also a perfectionist and am occasionally discouraged by the realisation that I will probably find many flaws in my current projects down the road. Anyway, I don't believe that young writers necessarily write "rubbish." Mary Shelley was around 18 when she started writing Frankenstein, and it's very well-executed. I do think many teenage writers haven't had the practise to write really good stuff, but of course this does not apply to everyone. Eragon wasn't my favourite series, but I don't think it was rubbish either. Paolini started it when he was sixteen, I think. It's a whole lot better than the first novel I wrote when I was around the same age. I'm honestly embarrassed that I ever let anyone read my first novel...
I highly disagree with all the people on here saying being a young writer means you won't be as good. True, young writers are more likely to be bad than older writers, but it's not age that's the reason why: it's the level of experience. I've read stuff by kids who have written since they were tiny, and they're writing is way better than beginning adults who've never written fiction in their life. Look at Mary Shelley, S.E. Hinton (wrote "The Outsiders" at 16), Anne Frank etc.
So they really don't have a problem with the writing but the genre? That's the feeling I am getting when they say "fantasy rubbish". Sounds like they are drinking the haterade.
For some reason, there's a stereotype that the only thing beginners write is poorly-done fantasy fanfic. It wasn't the case for me, as I noted but who knows. It's not that anyone is slamming on fantasy in itself, as there is good fantasy out there -- but almost all bad fanfic is in the scifi/fantasy genre.
I think its kind of like when your 16 you say "i was so dum when i was 6 when your 24 you say "I was so dumb when i was 16" when you are 40 "I was so dumb when i was 24 when you are 60 "I was so dumb when i was 40" i wonder how long before people realize that the "teenage" thing is really the fact that as you get father away form things it seems to be deferent so when you pick up a book a year later you SHOULD always see mistakes if it's ever perfect you have failed
Nothing is all or nothing. Wait, is that a contradic-- eh. I guess personally, the themes and things I'm most interested in often require the acquired insight of an adult to write about. So in that sense, I supposed I'd be pleasantly surprised by an exceptional young author, but by no means awe-struck. There are some very clever and creative artists in the world, of all ages. Don't be discouraged by your age, but don't rush to produce art either. Books are like a fine wine and only grow better from prolonged incubation. Usually, at least.
I believe that art, meaning writing, music, etc, is extremely relative and taste and quality is up to the consumer. For instance, some sick kid gets a boost from reading about Prince Cliche and his talking dragon or think Jar Jar Binks in awesome. I'm not going to tell him to read Voltaire and that Jar Jar ruins the epic mood. I dislike classical music and contend that it's not "good" because almost no one likes it. The sound of it either makes me nervous or just does nothing for me. I can't be convinced that it's anything more than a bunch of noise, much like I'd view some kind of thrash rock. But, there's people who love classical and thrash. You get into obnoxious territory when your consumption begins to define you quality and that of others. That's called Conspicuous Consumption and is nothing more than a power tactic to make others feel badly while boosting your own miserable self-esteem. Example: Oh you read Fredrikson, well I read Schmedrikson, ha ha! Who really cares?
I was quoting a person and was simply wondering if others felt the same way as that person did. Also sorry if you thought I was "tooting my horn" because I was not, I even started a new thread about how I don't like my own writing. So please, I honor your opinion but don't make broad statements about people like that. EDIT: Unless of course that was not directed at a single person, in which case I apologize.
Young =/= Bad writer I was... 11? When I posted my first story on this forum. It was, to be honest, a piece of utter crap. I remember something about a magic dagger and an assassin who, looking back, doesn't know much about assassination. I was informed it was good for a first story. Now I'm 12, but I'll probably scream in horror when I reach age 13 and look back on my 12 year old words. Also, most young people write about fantasy, but what's so bad about fantasy? Harry Potter is fantasy. So is Lord of the Rings. And Magician. And some say even Twilight.
No not yet, but that's my goal. Im working on a fantasy novel but im going to be as different and believable as possible. and it works on alot of points and subjects. It will evaluate as you read it. I wrote 3 chapters for it, but i completely rehauled it so im going to write remakes soon.
