I do think we need to note the difference between first "published" novels and first novels just written. Harper Lee had written several longer stories prior to Mockingbird, so she wasn't exactly new to writing. Some authors can do it, of course, but it's like referring to how many rejections some famous authors received - there's usually a bit more to it.
Well, if your writing isn't improving that could be scary - when I look back at the first draft of a novel I wrote ten years ago I could cringe. But that being said - how did all five books get published if they were rubbish? I think that's a bunch a bull. Nabokov's early books - Mary, King Queen Knave, The Defence, The Eye and Glory might not be in comparison with Nabokov's later works - but is that due to technique or idea or maybe change. Sometimes you have to live a through something, go through a change ( Nabokov came to America in 1941 which shows in his writing ) to find that great story.
Everyone seems to be working in absolutes. Don't take the 5 novels rule as an absolute. I doubt the authors intent when they made their statement really was "if you've written 4 books you suck." I also notice just about EVERYONE wants to talk about talent. Talent, talent, talent. Let me insert a story here about someone who did something without really trying because they were INSANELY talented at it. All this talk about some people being more talented than another is feeling like a dick measuring contest between two drunk men fighting over a girl. In truth, some people out there are talented enough to do some amazing things faster, or with less work than others. But for the vast majority of us, good works don't fall out of the sky. We work at them and slave and practice. I am not insanely talented at writing, or I'd have been published by now. I see this 5 novels rule as a good guideline. Does that mean I will throw my first 4 out? No. I'll give my first to my fiance because she's the only one I trust to read my first, and then brace for impact. As I write more, I'll expand the pool of beta readers and gauge where I am. I have no illusions. If it took published, best selling authors 6 tries to get published, I won't expect my first try to be gold. Don't take this 5 books as a rule, but don't kid yourself that your better than others as you sit down to write your first work, which you expect to sell over a million copies. Because let's face it, you're just talented. I realize what everyone is saying about it, but no one on this site is the Mozart of writing. If you were, you wouldn't be here. Making it will take work. And alot of it.
There's something to be said about the quality of works written late in a writer's life. The thing with younger writers (or people new to writing) is that they lack the experience to really produce anything great. At the other end of the spectrum, you have older writers, who I think lack the mental endurance to produce a great novel/play/poem/whatever. You see this with a lot of great writers. They have a peak period sometime between their mid-30s and early 50s. After that, the quality of their works drops. The only two writers I can think of who continued to produce good writing late in their lives are Goethe and Yeats.
Ahahaha, thirdwind; As soon as I read the line about younger writers, I thought of Goethe. xD He was already gaining literary renown by the time he was 25, so it's funny you cite him as an example of someone who kept producing well as he aged, when you say younger writers can't produce anything great. Ah, but perhaps he's just a special case, eh? Silly geniuses, always breaking the mold. - Alexandria de Loraine
There are always exceptions. In fact, he happens to be the only writer I can think of who wrote great stuff at a young age and also when he was older. Still, I'd say my initial observation is fairly accurate.
The best quote I've ever heard on this subject was 'Writing's like a muscle, you need to exercise it until you gain strength' I don't think that anyone can throw down a good novel without prior experience. I think most great young writers probably had a lot of experience beforehand.
Heh, well Gogol was publishing in his early twenties (20 / 21-ish), Chekhov began writing and publishing in his twenties as well, and though they both died far too young, I'm pretty sure they would have continued to write well. On the other hand, Tolstoy also began writing and publishing in his early twenties, and clear through to his old age. Alexander Pushkin began publishing while he was still a teenager, but again I suppose you could argue he died young. Dostoyevsky published his first novel at the age of 25, and went on to write and publish until his death ~ 60 years old. Nabokov also began publishing in his early twenties. Maybe it's just those Russians... - Alexandria de Loraine
Sure, they all published when they were young, but none of their early works are really considered to be great. Compared to their masterpieces, their earlier/later works are fairly mediocre. By the way, I should mention that I haven't read all of those authors' works, so my judgement is based on what critics and academians think of them and how often those works are discussed in academia. The only author I feel like I have read enough of is Dostoevsky. His earlier works are good, but they aren't anything special, especially when compared to his later novels.
Hmz... Well Amazon has some reviews of Dostoyevsky's first book, Poor People, available here: Poor People on Amazon Then there is Childhood, Boyhood and Youth, one of Tolstoy's earliest published works: Childhood, Boyhood and Youth on Amazon Admittedly, this early work from Tolstoy may not measure up to the grandness of some of his later work, but I'd say it's still a pretty great book, written by a youngin'. Pushkin's first major published work was a version of Ruslan and Lyudmila, but since he was a poet most of his material really doesn't translate adequately into English. v.v' I'd say his work is reason enough for any bibliophile to learn Russian, but that may just be me. Meanwhile, Gogol's first major work to gain him renown was Evenings on a Farm Near Dikanka, which doesn't seem like too shabby a starting place for someone 21 years old. Admittedly, Chekhov started writing for the extra money it earned him, but his work ended up being pretty dang spectacular. That's one author I truly, truly wish hadn't died so young. I think good writers get better with age, no doubt about that, and sure you could compare the early works of these writers to their later works and point to how much they improved or changed in writing style and prowess over time. I definitely think there are (and have been, and will be) young writers who are capable of creating great books despite their youth, though. ^.^ Oh, and if you ever have the time, 19th century Russian literature is really pretty awesome, well worth the time to read, explore and enjoy. Cheers; - Alexandria de Loraine
Not sure about that - I mean, considering I've edited my novel about 5 times and rewritten it from scratch at least 3 times over the course of 3 years - I mean, sure, it's the same novel, and I'll still only have one novel at the end of it. It'll still technically be my first novel. But is it "rubbish" that should never see the light of day? No. Because if it were, I'd never publish it. By the time I publish it, you can be damn sure it's not gonna be trash. And I don't like starting new projects til an old one's done, so I'm never gonna get my physical "five" novels - but rewriting something from scratch 3 times, I do feel like I've technically written 3 novels.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on what "great" means. Taking Dostoevsky as an example, I don't think any of his earlier works can be called great, and his first work of any significance in my opinion was Notes from Underground, published when he was 43.
I don't think that the advice assumes that they got published--in fact, I think that it assumes that they didn't. I read it as meaning that your first half million to one million words will be rubbish.
I've heard this said a lot too, but I don't always believe it. If you love your first novel enough and are willing to work really hard, I don't see why it can't be a success.
