if I happen to read a book that I think fails on the level of plot, language, dialogue, characterization, representation of various groups, etc., I will surely discuss that with friends who read the same book. I think understanding where a writer fails in mechanics ultimately makes me a better writer. I also have a habit of dissecting the good bits of books with my friends. That does not, emphatically, mean I am jealous. That just means I am interested in the mechanics of writing.

 

Although there are jealous writers out there, I still think that a critical approach does not by itself make a writer jealous. Trouble begins when a writer starts feeling that he/she is  unpublished because of other people's allegedly undeserved success. There is no correlation between one's form rejection and another's acceptance. Maybe there isn't room for all of us on the pages of, say, F&SF, but certainly there is enough room for many good people to be published some of the time.

When something I love gets picked up by publishers and agents, I am happy. My friend Bryn just went on sub with her weird, intense, freaky book and yes, it makes me  very happy indeed (and here's to a quick sale!). When something I think is mediocre gets picked up by agents and publishers, oh well. I am not mad, resentful or jealous, but I am not insanely happy either. And yes, if I read it and dislike it, I will dissect it with friends. 

Thing is, you learn from people who write well, but you also learn to write from people who do it badly (in your opinion). Many people start writing because they've read something and think they can do better. Of course when you actually put your butt in chair, you discover that doing it better is not as easy as it seemed - but that's all part of the learning process.

Everything I say is, of course, just my opinion. :)