Henry, I don't think it's about productivity, if by that you mean volume. Whatever we chose to use, as writers we have an inherent responsibility to do our best at our profession. I say profession because, for me, it's a question of having a 'professional' attitude toward my thriller writing - just scribbling down the first thing that occurs to me is not acceptable. So if a software tool can help with the quality of my work, whilst not imposing artificiality on my narrative voice and personal quirks, then I will consider its use. If all it does is enable me to produce ten 'novels' a year of dubious quality, that's not for me.
I often wonder if the plethora of cr** out there by some new writers is, at least in part, due to the relative ease with which anyone can bang away on a keyboard. I read an article the other day about the need for Gatekeepers for Indie authors. My initial reaction was to reject the idea out of hand because of the Gatekeepers in Trad Publishing and the stranglehold they maintained on creative literary expression for so long. Yet if more of the peope who wanted to write a novel had some sort of quality filter to overcome, not only would this make them a better writer, but it would help readers find the needle in the haystack with greater ease. Software (speaking as someone who wrote Operating Systems for Supercomputers in his youth) is only ever a tool - all tools can be used for good or bad - a wrench can free a nut and help fix a problem on a car, or take the life of a murder victim. At the end of the day, it's how much the writer is concerned with constantly improving, pushing their own limits, that counts, not how quickly they can push a button.
Currently, survival of the fittest seems to boil down to two things:
a) How much you can automate your writing to get more works into the Wild, and
b) How active you are on Social Media.
Working at quality doesn't seem to give you an edge anywhere. It's sad!
Sorry about the rant - I'm having a cynical day :-)
You are right, but even for a writer who can manage with nothing more than a manual typewriter good software aids may well improve their productivity.
Nabokov used to use index cards to do what we do today with computers. Would computers have made him a better writer? Probably not. Would they have made him a more prolific writer? Quite possibly.
ben corde - 11 years ago
An educated brain beats them all. If you can't write without software aids you should do something else.
Henry, I don't think it's about productivity, if by that you mean volume. Whatever we chose to use, as writers we have an inherent responsibility to do our best at our profession. I say profession because, for me, it's a question of having a 'professional' attitude toward my thriller writing - just scribbling down the first thing that occurs to me is not acceptable. So if a software tool can help with the quality of my work, whilst not imposing artificiality on my narrative voice and personal quirks, then I will consider its use. If all it does is enable me to produce ten 'novels' a year of dubious quality, that's not for me.
I often wonder if the plethora of cr** out there by some new writers is, at least in part, due to the relative ease with which anyone can bang away on a keyboard. I read an article the other day about the need for Gatekeepers for Indie authors. My initial reaction was to reject the idea out of hand because of the Gatekeepers in Trad Publishing and the stranglehold they maintained on creative literary expression for so long. Yet if more of the peope who wanted to write a novel had some sort of quality filter to overcome, not only would this make them a better writer, but it would help readers find the needle in the haystack with greater ease. Software (speaking as someone who wrote Operating Systems for Supercomputers in his youth) is only ever a tool - all tools can be used for good or bad - a wrench can free a nut and help fix a problem on a car, or take the life of a murder victim. At the end of the day, it's how much the writer is concerned with constantly improving, pushing their own limits, that counts, not how quickly they can push a button.
Currently, survival of the fittest seems to boil down to two things:
a) How much you can automate your writing to get more works into the Wild, and
b) How active you are on Social Media.
Working at quality doesn't seem to give you an edge anywhere. It's sad!
Sorry about the rant - I'm having a cynical day :-)
Ben,
You are right, but even for a writer who can manage with nothing more than a manual typewriter good software aids may well improve their productivity.
Nabokov used to use index cards to do what we do today with computers. Would computers have made him a better writer? Probably not. Would they have made him a more prolific writer? Quite possibly.
An educated brain beats them all. If you can't write without software aids you should do something else.