Quote Originally Posted by moptop View Post
I don't think any one thing is enough. Who was it said writing was 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration?

Each one of us has different innate skills, and no doubt we envy the skills that others have, which we lack. Personally, I find it easy to use words and, from the feedback I have had over time, my writing is emotional and evocative. I find it quite easy to come up with an interesting initial idea, but I find it very, very difficult to turn that initial inspiration into a full story.

Others, I know, come up with full detailed, complex plots, and find it intensely difficult to create realistic characters, or to use words to describe atmosphere effectively and so engage the audience.

So - you need the lot, and the bits that don't come naturally, you just have to work at.
I like this one -- especially since as a voracious reader, I have noticed that even among my favorite professional authors, some of these skills are weak in each of them! In each case, they use their proficiency at the others to engage me anyway.

For example, in SF, Asimov cannot write character or interesting dialogue. Niven's characters are less than two-dimensional. But their ideas make it all worthwhile.

Meanwhile Sturgeon has few memorable ideas but can write engaging character and his empathy is very high, making him great to read and re-read.

So along with Moptop's wisdom I'd add -- if you're really good at some of these things, write to your strengths and you'll build enough of a fan base to give you time to work on your weaknesses -- or make them irrelevant!