Arrogance and success when it comes to writing

Do you think Stephenie Meyer didn't get lambasted when a "good writer" read her Twilight for review? I doubt it. I'm not a good writer but I've read enough fantasy books and romance novels to know when something is dull. But she published it anyway and ended up with a movie :) So I guess confidences has a lot to do with it - she was sure that what she was publishing has a niche because she studied them before she wrote it and she ended up in/famous.

Confidence isn't the same thing as arrogance, but neither one will help if your writing isn't any good at all. But confidence will allow you to keep trying, and if someone does eventually think that they can make money from your writing, you'll get published. Reviews and critical comments may have very little effect, especially if an author is already popular. Get published and if you have a best seller, then anything you write after that will get published and will be popular. But poularity doesn't necessarily have anything to do with writing quality. I've started quite a few books that were either best sellers or were highly rated by critics, and I thought they were poorly written.

Not arrogance--Confidence. You need to believe your work is good if you are going to convince someone to publish it. You also need to be able to take constructive criticism for what it is- comments about what could be improved about your work, not something that is wrong with you as a person. Sometimes a publisher will ask you to make changes before they will publish. You have to decide if those are changes you are willing to make or if you want to try somewhere else. That takes confidence. Arrogance will be a turn-off to a lot of people. People who are arrogant usually do not take constructive criticism well and do not listen when people try to help them improve their work.

The first Harry Potter book was rejected by many publishers, but J K Rowling did not give up and kept submitting it, until it was accepted for publication. Many other top writers have similar experiences. It may just be that they sent their manuscript to the wrong publishers first. Determination and confidence in your own abilities are important for any writer. If a piece of writing is not accepted by a publisher, that does not mean it's no good, it was just not what that publisher is looking for. Criticism can be constructive too. I never think my work is perfect. I can always rework it and improve it.

Arrogance solves nothing while you're dealing with something annoying. The feeling of being underestimated or criticized should not force you to show your strength. By the way, writing is something unique: everybody has their own opinion about your work. But the one who knows the purpose or meaning of yours is only you.

I think a little arrogance might be a good thing, but beware who you are arrogant to. Obviously, acting as if you were the Queen of England to the publisher of your first novel, might ensure that it will be your last word published. Or maybe not. As far as criticism goes, I think you should look at where it's coming from, before you decide whether to use or discard it. A good critic should be able to specify exactly what is wrong with a story and how to go about fixing it to make it better. The problem with some forms of criticism is that the person doing the criticizing can sometimes try to impose their experiences on your work. For example, some writers can break the rules with such style that they automatically get away with it. Another writer, with less skill, might fail to achieve the same. If a critic tries to project their personal issues onto your work, then of course you should not take it seriously.