Is it better to be a bad writer or to not be a writer at all
No writer starts out brilliant. Bad writing is simply the inevitable, necessary practice required to eventually write well.
>>25556443But what if OP never makes it into writing well? Think of all of these books that are technically publishable quality, but still kinda eeh. Is it better to be an author of the book like that than none at all?
>>25556433>[WHICH IS] better[:] to be a bad writer[,] or [NOT TO] be a writer at all[?]
>>25556474More importantly we should consider why to write firstDo you write for yourself Do you write for othersCan you write for yourself only The bad writer is also the hated writerThe non writer is not seen but not hated
>>25556483oh god its cum genius having opinionsUGH
All considered, I believe it is always better to be a bad writer than being a non-writer. Meaning writing is always better than not writing, and a writer is just someone who write. If you need a writer to be something more than that, i'm just not interested in that line of thought.
