Quote:
Originally Posted by uncle duncan  The moral of the story? If you're only writing for yourself, don't be surprised if you're the only one who likes your songs. (Not addressed to the poster, or anyone else - just a general rule.) |
I disagree entirely.
I think we have to entertain ourselves first and foremost. I think that our own internal interest is the only compass that can guide us accurately. Trying to create for the sake of others will probably not lead to a masterpiece, because our thought process there will be mostly based on faulty fantasies and fears of what the other person's mind must be thinking. This will produce a limp or lame result. Whereas trusting ourselves...knowing what is true in our heart of hearts is true for all men...that is genius. (Thanks Emerson.)
The challenge is constantly making yourself harder to please, but being able to develop the skill to please yourself anyway. You make yourself harder to please by becoming bored. Boredom is a gift: it motivates development and novelty. Artists fail because they either haven't become bored enough (they are too easy to please) or aren't able to ease their own boredom (they haven't put in the work).
The OP question is moot. The OP, like the rest of us, should seek to entertain themselves with their art, and share it. Most people aren't going to like it even if it's a standard from a big name. At least the creator of it should like it. Regardless of how some academic (or worse, a critic, who likely never managed to entertain themselves with their own art and is out for revenge) might categorize it.