What if You're a Prodigy?

A young person wrote to me today to ask if it was possible to be 14, to publish a novel, and to be taken seriously about it.

The short answer: Maybe, but you wouldn't want to do it. The long answer:

I started writing SF when I was 11, and immediately got enormous support from parents, friends and teachers. The support continued through high school and intermittently through college (where I discovered too late that majoring in English was for literary critics, not for writers).

But I didn't publish my first book (a children's story) until I was 27, and I was 37 before my first novel appeared. This was probably a good thing.

Since starting this blog in 2003, I've received queries from kids who are eager to become writers while still in their teens. Many are just in love with one author or another, and want to write the same kind of thing. (Robert Jordan fans: this means you.) But some are just plain astounding.

A couple of years ago, a 14-year-old wrote to me asking for advice on formatting a novel she'd just finished. OK, OK, I said, send me a chapter and let me see how you've done it. She sent me the whole thing, close to 100,000 words...and it was good. The characters were individual, the dialogue was speakable, and she wasn't in a hurry to explain everything in the first ten pages.

She wasn't the first teenager I've met who might be publishable, but she was the most promising. I pestered agents and editors, asking if they'd be interested, and the answer was very clear: Yes, she's good, but kids shouldn't be publishing novels.

First, think about the author: So you wrote a novel at 14 or 15. By the time it was published, you'd be 17 or 18, and that novel would embarrass the daylights out of you. It would be so...so fourteen.

Then think about the publisher: Even if the novel was good, the publisher would likely promote it as a curiosity. Look, she's still got braces on her teeth but she writes like a grownup—isn't that cute? Isn't she weird?

If the content was even remotely "adult," meaning sex, people would mention Françoise Sagan, who wrote a best-seller when she was a teen (Bonjour Tristesse), and never really recovered. I've known one or two other teen prodigies who made a splash with their first book, and then faded out.

So the result might be disaster: You'd never write again because of the response to that first novel.

My prodigy of a couple of years ago is still writing, and she still astounds me with her speed and maturity. Give her a few days with no homework, and another novel or novella lands in my email—and it's good. I've met other prodigies face to face right here in Vancouver, including a few Korean kids who haven't even been speaking English more than four or five years. Obviously, literary talent is not rare.

But getting published is not the sole purpose of writing. It's a nice side effect, and sometimes it makes you a little money. But the real reason to write is to educate yourself, to rewire your brain so you can see the world the way a writer sees it.

When you started walking, you fell on your face every three steps. No one cared—everyone was delighted that you were up and running, but they didn't register you for the Boston Marathon. The very experience of walking and running might prepare you for marathons later, but don't be in a hurry.

For now, just enjoy the fun of storytelling, of getting to know your characters (and yourself), and gaining confidence with the technical challenges. Writing should be just part of your youth, along with the horrors of high school, the opposite sex, the need to earn a living, music lessons, taking stupid risks, and everything else in your life.

If you keep at it, you'll eventually get published...at 19, or 29, or 39. But the important part of getting published is that your story is a good story, not that it's written by a kid.

If you're a prodigy, I wish you every success. But don't be in a rush to get published.

Comments

[Joel A]

That advice can be applied to life in general. It always saddens me when I see youngsters do well in music or movies or business when they rise, then fall real, real bad. (With some never rising again.) I've met many a bitter writer who pursued the "dream" but to get wealthy, not just published.

"But you have a novel getting published?"

"So what?" they reply. "I can't live on that advance."

"What are you going to do now?"

"I don't know. Hmmm. Do you know any REAL jobs?"

Sigh.

[Sylvano]

Now that I am 41, and my brain has recently sprouted the notion that I ought to write books, I look back to my early years of pursuing writing and poetry, and I wonder whether I could have had a few novels under my belt now. Who knows?

But it doesn't matter because, as you note, it is "rewiring the brain" and "educating yourself" that are my motivation - not making money from writing. This is particularly so, since my regular job is more than capable at addressing that part of life's equation...

[Erik Buchanan]

I'm 37. I started writing books in grade 3 (however old I was then). My first published novel is coming out next year.

I like to think that the years have added a wisdom and depth to my writing that wasn't there before.

Of course, I might just have finally improved my grammer to the point where a publisher could actually read what I've written, but my ego and I are going to go with the first explanation ;).

[Christopher Willard]

Arts and sciences differ. The mathematical in art and science has seen many child prodigies -- and music would be included in that, sequences and memorization play a big role. (see Twyla Tharp's new book regarding her views on Mozart being to a large degree a product of his environment.) On the other hand, the less "solveable" arts (for lack of a better word) and by this I mean novel writing, poetry, painting, have never seen a real child prodigy. Yes there are those who published young, or painted a somewhat realistic picture at a young age, but their works lacked depth and meaning, in other words, they were not very good pieces of art. I've never yet been able to find an exception. The person most mentioned is Picasso, who painted a realistic picture many artists would die for at age 17, however these promoters of the artist forget his father was a painter and that picasso worked daily from an every earlier age learning to paint. And when the dust clears, that early painting still looks like a student work. Same with publishing. So take this as a hopeful sign, keep working and realize that mastery of an art takes years.

[cj]

It takes time to learn and grow....

[Scaccia]

I've been writing for almost ten years.. I was in a rush to get published a few years back, feeling like I just HAD to be earning money already, and that was the quickest way to do it, especially while I was about 13-14 years old and there was nowhere at that age to get a real job. My stories weren't that great, but I think I've gotten better and I think the story I'm working on right now will someday be (finished, ha ha) publishable.

But I cooled down, now I'm 19 and getting ready to self-publish a book of poetry I've written in the past six years. So it may not earn me a lot of money, there'll be no major recognition, but it'll be out there, and at least five people will have bought a copy to make me feel better.

I also worked at a library, so I'm going to convince my old boss to buy a copy or two when the fiscal year rolls around. Then my high school English teachers can be proud, even if no one really read through and OK'd my work for publishing except myself.