"Hobby Writing"

(Is that right?)

So the real justification of yay-to-hobby-writing is not necessarily, Hey, Let's All Do It. It might well be: there are REALLY GOOD people who are hobbyists in their forms but are better than the pros. Obvious example: Ewing as music critic. Despite his disastrous run as DJ Cockfarmer towards the end of Club Sussed.

But I suppose basically what I'm saying is that art ought to be something like exercise - a thing people are encouraged to do because it's healthy and good for them. And just as you get some people who are very very good at exercise and become famous athletes, there would still be honour and rewards given to people who are very very good at art and become famous artists.

I mean to be this seems so obvious it's banal. But from the way Art and Artists are talked about sometimes around here perhaps it's not obvious. Though it may still be banal.

All of us so-called pros start writing as a hobby, because we enjoy it. In my case, it's just been apparent that this was something I would do AS MY REAL JOB since I was about five, but I am weird that way. I know a lot of hobby writers who should be published, but are not. Part of being a good and canny publisher is being able to spot them and spin them in the face of professional cynicism.

I think there's a third thing besides just being a professional or a hobbyist (tho all three are not mutually exclusive) and that's people for whom art making/writing is a compulsion. People who may not make money from it or just use it to fill leisure time (which they could just as easily replace w/ sailing or masturbating) but for whom having a creative outlet is like breathing. Actually I'd put Emily Dickinson (and K too) in that category.

Now I've got the perspective and have my subject matter and interested publishers waiting, not to mention a family who tell me to write about all of this stuff because the rest of us cannot, I find it very difficult to make time for work that isn't paid, because I have zero outside financial support, freelance status and my own bills to pay. My journalism writing and literature writing are both pretty referenced and sympathetic, and have changed only in the sense that I have a little bit more fluency now compared to when I began (which was for the NME about 10 years ago) and have rejected some fictional subject matter as Not Quite Right, but necessary to write through.

If I were less of a perfectionist and less protective of what I do, I might well have published a book when I was 16 that would, today, make my skin crawl. But I can't say that anything I have published brings out this self-conscious reaction, so maybe I'm too protective and should just stop keeping people waiting.

Think this might be my 200th post. Fuck me - wonder what the word count is (at 20p a word or more wld prob = nice holiday in the sun, rather than slow Saturday in Acton...)

As for me -- well, I find myself in the fortunate situation of doing both 'hobby' and paid writing, and for me the distinction is really only a matter of degrees and potential audience. The AMG work, for example, is meant to be to the point and informative -- can't ramble. There's still a lot I can say, though, or so I have found, so there's still plenty of me in there even if I don't worry about it too much at the end of the day. 'Hobby' writing is, well, here, and FT predominantly, and to a lesser extent some of my e-mail work.

I think there's a strange perception growing up that to be a 'writer' you are therefore going to be an 'author' and write if not the Great American Novel then something fictional, moving and mainstream. Obviously such is not the case, and I've found my metier generally speaking in non-fiction, in a balance of serious/funny, and if not edge pushing then in not-CNN/NY Times style soundbites. But it's a hurdle to get over in your mind, sometimes, and you might end up disappointing others along the way. My mom, bless her, probably still wishes I would be writing novels rather than what I'm doing, but I also know how much patience I have with extended pieces (not much) and what skills I have to create an actual narrative rather than a bunch of disconnected and overly wry set-pieces (again, not much...).

I think I'd go with what Andrew L said.

"Whenever someone says they write "when the spirit strikes me," I go (ahem) "hack." It's all discipline. And it's not about just getting the words out. But doing anything over and over and over, you hopefully get better at it. You start noticing and learning things that you would never have learned, no matter how much someone tried to teach you."

Interpret how you wish. I agree w/ the sentiment, tho when I read Coupland, my faith wavers...

(this is in response to the "anyone can be a writer" idea, btw).

But I suppose basically what I'm saying is that art ought to be something like exercise - a thing people are encouraged to do because it's healthy and good for them. (Tom)

I think this idea has merit. Arts and crafts programs at hospitals amazingly seem to have some benefit. The difference is that one doesn't need an audience for exercise but one seeks an audience for one's writing, and one needs feedback to improve. On the other hand, if the process is valued more than the outcome, maybe feedback isn't critical. Then to be consistent, one shouldn't expect anyone else to be interested.

When most people say they want to write, I don't think they mean to say that another person's craft could be their hobby. I think most people are expressing regret at not having been adventurous and disciplined enough to practice the craft. But as Josh was saying, it's hard to know where to start.

(given my low opinion of many writers' abilities to express ideas, especially in music writing, I find this distinction reason for optimism, actually.)

I am writing a book one sentence at a time - about one sentence per month. I will get there one day

That's how I am doing my hobby farm – I plant one seed a year and I don't water or tend to it.

Bump it up to a sentence a day.