[ 3 min read ]
I guess my yesterday’s post was highly philosophical.
Was I right, or was I wrong? It really doesn’t matter.
Was Leo Tolstoy always right? To me he wasn’t. Some of it (his thoughts) is crap. And some of his writing is bad — boring as hell and hard to follow.
What matters is that I created something. What matters is that I hit “publish” even if I might be wrong.
It’s so important. Writing it down (whatever is on my mind — my thoughts) and sharing it with people. Not because my thoughts are always precious, even brilliant, orderly, easy to follow, but because my today’s thoughts can (and will) inspire my tomorrow’s writing, and perhaps it will inspire someone else too.
A thought doesn’t have to be perfect (flawless) to be able to inspire and trigger some other thought in you or in your reader. It’s enough that it exists, that you can read it several times and ponder over it. Something which doesn’t exist will never do anything. Never inspire anybody, never be a spark.
I don’t blame or hate Leo Tolstoy for having and writing down so much bullshit (especially in What is art? and What shall we do?). I might have had the impression that I wasted some of my time reading his stuff, but I’m not the only person who reads his books, so even if I didn’t like it someone else might have a different impression. And maybe it was a wrong impression (maybe I didn’t waste my time — at least I realized that he was capable of bad writing and that I find some of his thoughts absurd). Why shouldn’t he be allowed to do that (write all of it down)?
Of course, Tolstoy is just one example. I bet I could find crap in everyone’s writing. And I bet there is much crap in what I write too. It just doesn’t matter.
If I love to write my thoughts down I will continue to do so. That should be obvious (but isn’t — so many people ask if they should follow their passion, a dumb question).
If someone enjoys to write his / her thoughts down why shouldn’t they?
Where is it written that writers owe it to other people to put out only perfect texts? Where is it written that they can’t make mistakes? Where is it written that they can never produce crap? Where is it written that they should stop if their writing is bad?
Whom will a terrible writer offend so much by typing words on his / her typer? Whose life will be ruined? What law will they break? Seriously. Why are we so eager to accept (and justify by any means necessary) crap produced by icons and when someone who isn’t well established as an author or artist (who is developing his craft) should stop if the work is not good? Heck, sometimes, if it’s an icon, we’re incapable of realizing that it’s a crap (a joke).
Who decides what is and what isn’t crap in the first place? And when something is a masterpiece? I wrote about this dilemma before.
A reader / viewer? Are you kidding me?! Why? Why would he / she be entitled to do that? Of course, he / she can share his / her point of view (opinion) but it’s just an opinion. An opinion (a belief) of a single person doesn’t turn any work into a crap or a masterpiece. They wish!
Actually I don’t know what does (turn any work into a crap or a masterpiece). I’m not at all convinced that the opinion of the majority, or of some establishment, or some class of people, or some authority (critics for example) can do such thing. They wish!