Jody - Thanks for the close and thoughtful read! I'm thinking here of "writer" as someone who writes but is also pursuing the publication of that writing, and I agree that isn't true for all writers at all. Many write and never share that work beyond a few friends, and others might self-publish in some way or another (like I do here!) rather than deal with the world of editors/agents/submissions/etc. Nothing wrong with that at all! For me the distinction between "writer" and "author" comes between when I'm doing the actual writing work and then, in author-mode, shifting into that publishing/publicity phase of the process, where I'm now focused in some way on "selling" my work or even selling myself (doing self-promotion) in order to bring my work to a wider audience. It's worth a whole other newsletter post sometime for sure!
I love this one. Just what I needed to read today as I spent the morning building a mail chimp email list for my upcoming book release and thinking, this is the writer's life?
I'm going to need more time to digest this whole post. It's a sweeping, thoughtful argument that deserves a deep thinking on.
The one element that stands out to me is the clarity problem. How we define "writer" and "author" determines whether we consider ourselves imposters.
If a writer is one who writes, and an author is one who authors works, all anybody needs to do to be a writer or author is write or author written work, but if there is more to the definition, it makes sense how we could begin struggling with feelings of being an imposter.
Like the women in the study, the definitions we carry with us matter. The women felt like imposters because they were imposters, and the were imposters because they had self-determined standards that surpassed their performance. Judging by those standards they were failing to achieve and yet they were being compensated as if they were achieving.
The conversation about mental health in self-determined standards is another topic. What we pick as our definition of "is" is the subject of being and whether we are or are not. That's why Bill Clinton's statement was not as foolish as the video clip wants us to think. No penis in vagina, no sexual relations. Many people would agree with that assessment. Others wouldn't. Your sense of being an imposter is based on "is".
Okay, I'm feeling didactic. The reason I wanted to reply now before having the whole article digested was because you mentioned control of the process and money, intermingling those concepts with being a writer. If selling books or making money is wrapped into your definition of what it means to be a writer, then if you fail to do those two things but continue to call yourself a writer, it's no wonder you (royal you being used in this sentence) feel like an imposter.
Anyway. Love your work, Mr. Jansma. Looking forward to dig all the rest of the way into this post.
Illuminating as ever, Kris... et félicitations pour la parution! :)
Jody - Thanks for the close and thoughtful read! I'm thinking here of "writer" as someone who writes but is also pursuing the publication of that writing, and I agree that isn't true for all writers at all. Many write and never share that work beyond a few friends, and others might self-publish in some way or another (like I do here!) rather than deal with the world of editors/agents/submissions/etc. Nothing wrong with that at all! For me the distinction between "writer" and "author" comes between when I'm doing the actual writing work and then, in author-mode, shifting into that publishing/publicity phase of the process, where I'm now focused in some way on "selling" my work or even selling myself (doing self-promotion) in order to bring my work to a wider audience. It's worth a whole other newsletter post sometime for sure!
I love this one. Just what I needed to read today as I spent the morning building a mail chimp email list for my upcoming book release and thinking, this is the writer's life?
I'm going to need more time to digest this whole post. It's a sweeping, thoughtful argument that deserves a deep thinking on.
The one element that stands out to me is the clarity problem. How we define "writer" and "author" determines whether we consider ourselves imposters.
If a writer is one who writes, and an author is one who authors works, all anybody needs to do to be a writer or author is write or author written work, but if there is more to the definition, it makes sense how we could begin struggling with feelings of being an imposter.
Like the women in the study, the definitions we carry with us matter. The women felt like imposters because they were imposters, and the were imposters because they had self-determined standards that surpassed their performance. Judging by those standards they were failing to achieve and yet they were being compensated as if they were achieving.
The conversation about mental health in self-determined standards is another topic. What we pick as our definition of "is" is the subject of being and whether we are or are not. That's why Bill Clinton's statement was not as foolish as the video clip wants us to think. No penis in vagina, no sexual relations. Many people would agree with that assessment. Others wouldn't. Your sense of being an imposter is based on "is".
Okay, I'm feeling didactic. The reason I wanted to reply now before having the whole article digested was because you mentioned control of the process and money, intermingling those concepts with being a writer. If selling books or making money is wrapped into your definition of what it means to be a writer, then if you fail to do those two things but continue to call yourself a writer, it's no wonder you (royal you being used in this sentence) feel like an imposter.
Anyway. Love your work, Mr. Jansma. Looking forward to dig all the rest of the way into this post.