So They Started Young — So What? (A Rant About Authors)

What exactly is impressive about getting published at a young age, let alone winning awards at said age?  Writing isn’t like business, where making millions at a young age might be quite impressive indeed.  I’m sure a lot of people are envious of Mark Zuckerberg, who became a
billionaire before 30.  Why?  Because most people don’t make it in the business world when they are young.  To be fair, most people don’t become billionaires either, but the point still stands.

But writing can’t be held to the same standard.  Authors make it big when they are young, middle-aged, or damned old.  Kenneth Grahame didn’t publish The Wind in the Willows until his 50s.  Frank McCourt (Angela’s Ashes) at 66.  Anthony Burgess’s first novel at 39.  Mary Midgley at 56.  Joseph Conrad at 37.  Raymond Chandler at 43.  Richard Adams at about 52.  And on and on and on.  (There are bound to be plenty of SF/F examples too, but I didn’t want to spend an hour searching to find out.)

But their ages don’t matter.  We’re not talking about an 8-year-old writing a great science fiction novel, or a 115-year-old doing the same.  We’re talking about writers who came into prominence at various points in the typical span of a human life.  What matters isn’t that they wrote a great book at 17 or 52.  It’s that they wrote a great book.  What matters isn’t that they won an award at 17 or 52.  It’s that they won an award.  The age is irrelevant (or it should be).  We needn’t revere authors for being brilliant at a young age; let’s revere them for being brilliant.

What say you all?