What's that age-old question again - "Does a tree falling in a forest make a sound if there is no-one to hear it?"
We could ask that in different ways and applied to different things.
Is an athlete the best in the world if there is no-one to compete against him?
Is someone a writer if no-one reads his work?
Would I be a house builder if no-one lives in the houses I build?
Would I be a dog lover even if I don't own a dog?
Would I be a cat lover even if I don't own a cat?
Is someone still a leader if no-one follows him, or all his followers desert him?
And we could go on and on in that vein, I suppose.
So, what's my point?
Well, it's a bit self-centred. I have this blog and I write here. I also write several other things outside of this blog. Much of what I write may never be seen by anyone. I write because I want to and I'm able to articulate things better when I think about things and put them down on paper. (Yes, I know this is a keyboard, but you know what I mean). So, am I still a writer if no-one ever reads what I write?
In my opinion, yes. Being a writer is not predicated on having an audience in the purest sense, anymore than being a farmer requires people to buy your crops. Being a farmer means that you should be someone who 'farms', i.e. grows crops, raises livestock, etc. That is a given. But if no-one ever bought your produce, it could be either that you produce only for yourself, you like to give away your surplus, or you're a bad farmer. Likewise, being a writer means that you have to be someone who 'writes'. Whether someone ever reads what you write or no, does not determine whether you are a writer or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment