You Could Have Zero Idea You’re a Good Writer
Most writers don’t know their article is fire.
“To catch fire, make your readers the main characters of your work.”
No dispute with this one.
The key to getting readers addicted to your stories is indeed to make them special.
But if you write as being you: as a broke college student, as a widow, as a retired WWII veteran, as a mother of five, as a struggling entrepreneur, as a former CIA agent, as a musician who failed to find a music label, it doesn’t make you a weak, self-centered writer.
Personal experiences are an essential ingredient in crafting a genuine piece.
Out of all the ideas you can write, it’s impossible to always put the readers before you. One way or another, some topics are best written in a first-person POV. And in some rare cases, it’s the reason some articles become highly infectious.
The idea of “readers as main characters” has never been so popular.
However, I’d like to believe it isn’t how most people see it. It’s not as direct as writing articles through the eyes of the readers. No two eyes are the same. They can look at something similar but see a completely different picture. One can see change as an ending, while the other as a new beginning.
Why do most writers think they are not good enough?
The reason is closely related to the above paragraph.
When they publish an article, and it doesn’t get much traction, they think their writing isn’t effective enough. For them, the holy grail is on the number. If they garnered low views, they assume their article flopped. And if their views rocketed, they believe they are on top of the writing game.
To some degree, this is true. If we look at the mechanics of online writing, analytics is indeed crucial. Data never lies. It’s logical to conclude that high traction means wider resonance and low traction implies the opposite.
However, in the context of being a “good writer”, I’d like you to detach from the number for a split second.
This may give you a fresh perspective:
Quality versus quantity is the most common nuance in mathematics. In engineering, this ideology has been part of our language (Yeah, I’m an electrical engineering graduate). A lot of engineers are investing all their lives in a single study because of this paradigm. They believe that one solid paper with groundbreaking results is worth more than a thousand studies with surface-level findings.
This principle is nothing different in digital writing.
Number of traction (quantity) can be a reliable metric. However, resonance, by context, means how deeply something affects someone. Numbers have much less to do with it; depth and level of response do. Resonance doesn’t lean towards the quantity (number of views), but rather on the quality (how deep the moral is embedded in the readers).
A story can accumulate millions of views but is worth forgetting the very next day. Oppositely, a story could only get 50 views, and yet gets tattooed in the minds of the readers.
In summary, traction isn’t the only indicator of an article’s level of resonance.
Yes, maybe your story has only acquired 50 readers. But what are the odds that one of those is deeply affected by your writing?
What are the odds that a single line in your story restored their faith in life, love, friendship, career, or business?
What are the odds that you just saved 50 lives?
And by essence, isn’t that makes you a good writer?
Isn’t giving a fresh perspective in life through your writing, even to only one person, can indicate that you are an effective writer?
Truth is, no algorithm can precisely tell whether a story resonated or not. Available metrics can only provide a fraction of it. Unless a reader came up to you face to face and told you how you touched their lives, no one can tell.
Most writers are underestimating themselves simply due to the number. When their article draws a few eyeballs, they think they are not good enough. Viewership is their only standard. Low views equate to poor writing skills. As a result, their self-confidence as a writer gets stained easily.
Only a few writers dare to see the bigger picture.
Likes and comments don’t give precise information. They shouldn’t be treated as an ultimate parameter. Big amounts of reactions don’t always mean success. Oftentimes, they only show that your article is safely written. That you’re too afraid to stand your ground. You want your story to be a sweet melody for everyone.
But if you are a polarizing writer, your article can live forever in the mind of your reader. Once you write what you believe, someone out there will thank you for expressing your philosophy. They might not leave a like or comment, but you know resonance happened.
Appreciate your work with little views. Sometimes, they are your best-written work. Maybe not the crowd’s favorite, but the most magnificent one.
If you can get my point, chances are, you’re a good writer without you knowing.
If you want to know one thing or two about storytelling, hit me a follow and I’d like to share some of my insights.
