Decadence once againpublished: 2008-12-01
I believe about 99% of all writers anywhere in the world are unable to make a living out of the proceeds of their writing. Does this make them lesser writers? Does this mean these writers should stop writing? Clearly, there's not enough demand for whatever it is most of us put on paper, so why do we stubbornly keep supplying? The answer is: writing is not about what others think, it is about what the writer thinks. Granted, this may seem like a decadent activity. But almost every activity in the Western society I live in is exactly that: decadent. We Western writers are a generation of decadent writers, writing about our decadent selves. You could dismiss this, but you could equally argue that a writer's writing mirrors the era he/she lives in. In due time, this will prove its worth.
And why is it that apparently writing alone is not enough, it must also get published, just to satisfy the ego?
@ Strasse’s partner. I believe it’s a little more nuanced. Not to satisfy the ego, but for a sense of self-worth and accomplishment – actually seeing something right through to the end. Finishing off a job, any job (whether it’s typing up letters for a boss or writing a novel), is in itself fulfilling. Is it ultimately the ego that desires to be fulfilled? Maybe.
I agree, but still the same question, why not just write, why should it be published or put on the internet….the personal satisfaction is at the end of the writing already accomplished no?
Why must it be shared?
@Strasse’s partner, this discussion is hypothetical one, as almost every artist/creative who considers his/her work to be his/her profession exposes his/her work and sells it. Whether it’s a painting, photograph, or novel.
sharing is caring
As usual it comes down to the capitalist system : art = profession = selling = money…I find this disappointing.
that’s just the outside. look further. when art is made for money, that’s disappointing. not that artists make money. there’s a difference.
@jur, exacto mundo!