Wrizzit

No. I think the first book could be the best, and putting care into the process is more important than publishing quickly. Also, 'bad' is subjective; different people will have different opinions.

Noorie9h

Agreed! I think the first book should be me learning how to write a book, so I should know how to write it well enough to feel fulfilling for me. If it doesn’t do well in terms of audience then that’s okay.

2

Noorie9h

In other words - first book for me, maybe first five books for me, and I want them to have that cozy atmosphere of a well told story After that? Then I’ll write books that appeal to an audience.

1

I basically wrote my first book as a challenge to myself. I had just hit my 50s and was in a now or never type scenario. I thought little of it once it was done, but it was my wife who pushed me into looking for a publisher. In terms of success, it was easily the best, but, 15 more books later, I don't think it was my best work.

I think someone getting their first bit of work out in the open is important, if it's bad it's bad, but that doesn't mean no one will like it. The act of being seen in a new space can end up hurting a lot of individuals, but an author's first work gives them feedback on where they can find ways to express themselves for future works. There will always be room for improvement in any creative field, but to never try is often the greatest opportunity missed.

Yeah, my first book was so baaaad even weeds declined to grow in it. On the other hand, it's helped underline that short form writing works better for me.