I like this article, but on some level I vehemently disagree with it? The summary is this: > A writer needs readers ... Any worthy pursuit needs a mat. > ... Better to be pinned in public with courage than to train > endlessly in private like a coward. And then I think of various shut-in artists that I admire. Take, for example, Henry Darger[1]. He clearly did not seek public recognition; he never showed his work to…
Yeah, I think the distinction is just the underlying purpose. If you are doing art for arts sake then just do your thing. (and there is nothing wrong with that) It may even be where you spend the majority of your time if you are lucky enough to do that. But if you are labouring under the belief that your art has human value to others, you must put it out in the world, and often the sooner the better!
Many of the most famous artists were unknown or unappreciated in their time, and if they'd asked the people around them whether their art had value we'd likely not have half of the Louvre.