An Audience of One?

“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.” ~ Cyril Connolly.

Dr. Tanya continues her Blogging Insights series by offering the above quote for our consideration.

Does Stephen King have no self because he wants to sell books? I take issue with this “all or nothing” approach to writing. You can write the fiction you enjoy while still keeping an eye on what might attract an audience. And what about nonfiction writers? They’re writing for the public because it’s their job. If a journalist reports a story of a fireman rescuing a kitty from a tree, does his self disappear? Does a biographer have no self because she’s been paid to profile a famous person? Do textbook authors have no self? That’s ridiculous.

Again, there’s this notion of one type of writing being “better” than another simply by virtue of its authenticity as opposed to the quality of writing. Pour out your heart in a diary full of ungrammatical gibberish that no one will read and receive a gold star from Cyril for “writing for yourself.” I disagree that this output is superior to keeping an audience in mind when we write. Most of us proofread and edit our work because we would like our potential readers to be able to easily understand our ideas. This is a good thing!

All my public writing is for myself because no one is paying me to write; however, I want to be read, so I am simultaneously writing for the public. I try to express myself clearly because I have an audience in mind, and I include images to generate interest. If I were writing solely for myself, I wouldn’t bother with images, nor would I care about other people’s privacy and feelings. What we don’t say is often more important that what we do say. Self-censorship is part of being an adult, whether we’re writing or doing any other thing.

~*~
©️2023 Paula Light and Light Motifs II. No unauthorized use permitted.