Would you prefer to read a great story or a well written story?
|Hello Mr Jefford|
That may seem like semantics but, as a self-publishing, occasionally careless writer, it’s a question I give a bit of thought, largely as I’m always torn between whether I should be spending more of my time editing or more time creating.
On the one hand, success as a blogger is often measured on output, and indeed my traffic numbers tend go increase proportionally the more I post. Yet, at the same time, I’m often appalled at my own writing after I read it back, and find myself editing my older posts nearly every time I view one of them.
When I think about some of the great wine writers in the world – and I’m particularly looking towards the likes of Andrew Jefford – I’m often in awe at the power of just one of their stories. I’m In awe at the sheer impact that a single, well written article can have, it’s resonance going beyond a single blog post to make it into a real talking piece.
At the same time, I also realise that by concentrating on just seminal writing (like what Jefford excels at), there is a chance we might be missing just as many stories that deserve to be told. Sure, said stories might not have as vivid imagery and a lyrical tone as Jefford’s article on Georgian wines, but by telling more stories, albeit not as prettily, is it possible to be as valuable a writer?
Obviously I’m naval gazing here, and blogger naval gazing at that (the worst kind!) but this question is an important one. Do you want well written, grammatically correct heart tuggers or are you willing to forgo a few apostrophes in exchange for more stories?