Which would you rather . . . ?

[geordiegirl]

Would you rather be an amazing writer whose true talent isn't discovered until many years after their death or a best-seller of pot boilers?

Anyone who says talented and best-seller isn't playing fair

 

[SuzieHarris]

I think I would like to be a best seller of "pot boiler's" to pay the bills while my 'true' talent is discovered after my death to keep my family in the manner  (and manor) they deserve hehehe.


Suzie x

[Gyppo]

I agree with Suzie.  The little nibbles at fame from writing 'potboilers' and other less high profile stuff keep a writer fed and the dream alive.  Posthumous success, whilst beneficial to my family, is no use to me.  No matter how famous you get, dead is still dead ;-(

Bestsellers are often 'potboilers' too.  Just a much bigger pot ;-)

Gyppo

[Jillanne Nehls]

I'll take my fame and fortune while I'm alive, thank you very much.   

Jillanne - Moderator

[crystalwizard]

I'd prefer neither quite frankly.

I'm not interested in being discovered or famous (whether alive or dead), that's not why I write, and by choice I fix computers in order to pay the bills.

[paramour]

As they say: you can't take it with you. Gimme the here and now!

[fordy]

I'd rather be an amazing writer. (period)

[paramour]

I second that one, Fordy!

[geordiegirl]

But that's not the game 

[crystalwizard]

But that's not the game 

But it's a game which automatically refuses entry to anyone that can't pick one or the other answer.

[geordiegirl]

My rules 

Most of us write to share our thoughts and ideas with others which is why I would always say potboiler bestseller because then more people will have read me. I once argued with a lecturer that Ulysses could never be classed as "the best novel in the world" because no-one can read it (well, quite a lot put it back down) and for me, that's not what writing is about. And after all, there's a lot to be said for Catherine Cookson, Denise Robertson and the likes as well as Shakespeare, Austen, Brontes etc although they're worlds apart. If I could write something that got me thinking/feeling the way Denise Robertson has in some of her books, then I'd be ecstatic. A pox on the literary critics!

Any answers are welcome, Crystalwizard, lighten up.

[Amie]

Well, given that I have another full time job that pays my bills, I'd go for the former.  I really have no desire to write things that other people sneer at, so as long as money isn't an issue, I'd go for the posthumous fame.  pre-humous fame I may or may not be able to deal with...  then again, I don't think I'd ever want to be famous... but rich would be pretty cool I think 

[Alex F]

I'd very much like to see some 'fame' when I'm alive, but really I don't like the word 'fame' because of its negative conotations. Writer's aren't really famous as themselves, it is their work that gets known rather than the author. So I guess I wouldn't mind 'recognition' when I am alive for my work. After all a lot of authors use feedback from fans of their work to improve it so its a good thing.

[jojohnson]

I'd definately be the one seeking the benefits whilst I can, but when I die, someone will go through my things and find pages and pages of unbelievably amazing text that will double my fame!!!!
(And then I woke up and realised it was all a dream!)
Jo