I had occasion to meet a very well-known artist recently, and I was able to get contact information through them by which I submitted two songs for their review/opinion.

Looking back, they may not have been my two ABSOLUTE BEST, in terms of most originality lyrically and/or marketability as pop/folk (or alt-country, or what the hell ever you call it these days).

This person indicated that I was not of the caliber of writer to be a professional.

Needless to say, the news hurt, but it got me thinking:

What's the difference between a "songwriter", say, someone like Steve Earle or whoever, and a song-maker-upper (my term)?

Think of Woody... I seriously doubt he would have considered himself a "songwriter" - he made up tunes, borrowed lyrical and musical ideas, all for the sake of telling stories and getting his ideas across.

John Prine, while considered a lion among songwriters, also comes across to me as someone who is much more "maker-upper" than someone who is as craft- or market-oriented as others.

I'm not trying to force a distinction here, because, of course, every person I've cited had both personal AND commerical ends in mind when they composed.

I'm just wondering what would make someone better, or not as good, when there are literally thousands of signed artists in the world, and thousands of albums released on labels large and small.

I don't think I belong in the upper echelons of writers, and certainly not of players, but there's no way that somewhere between an open-mic hacker and a John Prine, there's room for lots and lots of us.

Don't worry (LOL), I've consoled myself with getting lots of very enthusiastic feedback on my songs from the people that matter - the audiences I've played for.

Really looking forward to a constructive discussion of how all the different styles of writing fit under the umbrella of "songwriting".