No Writing Is Without Flaw
How it’s marketed and received are completely different matters
--
A person is either overrated or underrated. An accurate assessment of individual qualities is not practically possible. This is true for every field. In the case of a writer, it is no different either.
An actual assessment of the written material is never done. How a written matter is received has little to do with the actual quality of the draft. Conversely, if a written piece of work has not been well-received, or has not come up to expectations, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is not well written, or lacks in-depth research.
A lot of the reaction owes to its marketing, curation, promotion and a concerted attempt made to increase the overall visibility of the final product. Besides, it has also got to do a lot with the timing of the release. If the timing is wrong, even the best of writing goes unnoticed, and vice versa.
As regards the response (and reviews) it garners from the colleagues, critics, peers and the readers in general…. suffice to say they are anything but objective. As such these reactions cannot be entirely trusted. Many go with the flow and become critical simply because they see others criticizing what is written.
A majority lack the patience to go through the entire draft and then come to a conclusion. Then there are those who have simply not read it at all. They are critical either because they do not like the writer or have an agenda of their own. Besides, those who very conveniently judge an end product are least concerned with the process per se.
Amid all these reactions and judgments the effort of a writer is completely undermined. The final draft, that eventually gets published may or may not be up to the expectations. That being said, there’s always a certain effort behind the same. Very few readers are capable of rather make an effort to appreciate that effort in a real sense of the term.
In a given scenario when everything falls into place and the written matter is appreciated to begin with, it leads to an excess of positivity, something that may not necessarily be deserving. Likewise, if the initial reception is negative then all the positive aspects of the work is conveniently consigned to the garbage bin.
It is a fact that a written work is either never accurately rated. The response more often than not is superficial to say the least. That being said, it is not always black and white as it is assumed to be. There is always a lot of grey in between, that gets lost amid all the excess.
It is no one else but the writers themselves who understand the effort they have made, and the time they have invested, in writing. Every writer has a few personal favorites which may not have probably not performed as well as expected but remain the source of pride. As such, when a writer revisits his/her published work chances of disappointment is high. A feeling deep within that things could have been done better is always there.
If it is not the case then either the writer is too arrogant (to accept it) or is lying. It is as simple as that. As such, if the writers are convinced with their effort, it is all that matters in the final analysis. In any case how the written work is received is not something that can be entirely controlled.
Perfection is a myth. In pursuit of perfection writers tend to lose track of their primary concern. Besides, it is neither practically possible to keep track of every minute detail when the focus is on writing per se nor is it sensible to expect everyone to appreciate when the written matter is put up for consumption.
Since no writing is minus its flaws in the final analysis it is all about self assessment and a writer’s conviction. As such, it is imperative for a writer to first ensure personal gratification before putting up the written matter for public reaction. Writers satisfied with their own effort stand a better chance at dealing with superficial reactions and inaccurate assessments.
