Hmm, now that I think about it, that may have been on the other blog. Let's see: I certainly disclosed here that I'd tried in my past to write a romance or three. But no, I guess I haven't mentioned it here.
NaNoWriMo but as NaNoWriMo didn't want me to work on an existing novel (that would have been cheating), I started a new one. I didn't get a full 50,000 words done, mostly because the fact that other bloggers were also doing NaNoWriMo meant I got to guest blog. It was as a result of that guest blogging that this blog was created.
Since I started this blog, I haven't worked on either novel. Which could support an argument that I'm not currently an aspiring writer (because a writer is someone who writes) but that's a cop-out.
And, anyway, I just joined RWA, so I'm guilty as charged: I am a writer of romance novels, and I aspire to be published.
Now, according to Maili and Keishon, if I reviewed romances, it would be bad that I hadn't disclosed that I was also trying to write them. Luckily for me, I don't review romances. But I want to be fair here: I can see that some (all?) of what I've posted on this blog could mean subtly different things when read with the knowledge that I'm trying to write romance novels.
So here it is. I'm outting myself as an aspiring romance author.
Now here's why I am not sure it matters much. I have no special knowledge of writing. I was a biology/philosophy major in college, have a master's in philosophy, and a law degree -- not a single writing course (other than legal research & writing) in nine years of higher education. I'm actually a very poorly read individual, particularly compared to various family members. In fact, one of my reasons for not reviewing is that I'm not a very good reader (too lazy, too critical, etc.). So, quite the contrary to the presumption that because I'm an aspiring writer I'd have a skewed perspective on the books I was reviewing, I actually think the fact that I'm not-well-read and know nothing about the techniques of writing is what would diminish the validity and quality of my reviews. If I reviewed books. Which I don't. (Do I say what I think about certain books? Sure. But those are my opinions, and there are no express or implied recommendations to read or avoid any books as a result.)
Also, the odds of my getting published are slim. First, I have to finish a book (not everyone does). Next, I have to pitch it to an agent or submit a synopsis or send an excerpt to someone in the publishing industry. And I'd have to keep doing that (lather rinse & repeat) until I give up or someone says, send more. And even that doesn't result in a contract, as we all know.
Plus, what if my writing is crap? Someone will tell me sooner or later, but I'm not going to slap an excerpt up on my blog until I think it's passed through some process that winnows out the chaff from the wheat. In the meantime, I have to do what a lot of people have to do: stick with it, write everyday, get critique partners, revise revise revise, and then polish polish polish. At any point I might lose interest, get discouraged, have someone lovingly explain to me that my writing is crap, or otherwise quit. And then, magically, I'm the same person but no longer an aspiring writer.
Instinctively, I've not wanted to say anything at this stage of the process, partly because of all the reasons why I might not be an aspiring writer in six months, but also because it gets people invested far sooner than I would like. It's a bit like any huge undertaking: getting a dream job, buying a house, starting a relationship, getting pregnant: we engage in these endeavors with no absolute guarantee that we'll succeed. Having people ask over and over, "How's it going?" can be painful. If I want to share, I will. Silence about the endeavor may mean nothing more than, "I'm working on it. I'll keep you posted."
But if it matters to Romlandia that I'm honest about being one of thousands of writers who want to be published someday, I hear and obey.