Quantity VS Quality
Something I’m constantly thinking about when considering my future as a writer is whether to prioritize quantity or quality. More specifically, should I be using my time to write a large body of work which is of sub-par quality, or should I be using my time to write fewer works of ostensibly much higher quality?
The general sentiment that I had understood growing up was that it was important to spend time on something and make it a complete product. This makes sense on its surface, especially when one considers that there is already a plethora of disposable narratives out there nowadays. If I want to distinguish myself as a writer, then evidently I would need to invest a lot of time into a project in order for it to stand out.
Recently I’ve been second-guessing the legitimacy of this strategy, however. If what I’m really trying to do is become the best storyteller I can, then it may in fact be better to write a large amount of things which are of lesser quality rather than a few things of higher quality. Especially from a financial perspective, I believe I would have a higher likelihood of writing a bestselling work by simply putting more works out into the market.
Another advantage to focusing on output rather than content could be that I have more opportunities to learn from my mistakes. I see this almost from a Darwinian perspective: if I produce a large body of work, the weaker ones will die off while the ones that are more fit to the current environment will remain, and I can learn something from those works that do survive.
Reaching across the proverbial aisle of creativity, one example that I turn to for this is classical composers. Of course when one looks at someone like Beethoven, who only wrote nine symphonies in his lifetime, one might assume that the optimal strategy is to take quality over quantity. The problem here is that Beethoven was undoubtedly a musical genius, capable of writing incredible music even while going deaf.
Consequently, one could look at a composer like Haydn, who wrote 105 symphonies, as a case for quantity over quality. He evidently didn’t possess the musical talent of Beethoven, but I believe he accounted for this by simply producing a large enough body of work that, through sheer probability, one of his works would be of significant quality. For those of us who aren’t blessed with profound, innate talent, this may be the answer.
That being said, I don’t know if I can actually write with quantity in mind over quality. When I get really into a story, I find it challenging to simply toss it out or leave it in an unfinished state. Perhaps the optimal strategy really is to be the cold, indifference Darwinist that sends forth a dearth of material to be torn apart by the world, but I can feel an almost paternal connection to the characters and worlds I build that makes me want to nurture my work and only put it out into the world when it is capable of standing on its own two feet.
Curse this squishy mammalian brain.
