I joined you almost three years ago. I became part of a community, at first reluctantly. As I became more comfortable, I became more willing to reach out, and let others reach in.
Since then, I have noticed two types. Those who write to write, and those who write to read.
Those who write to write do not need an audience, although they know they have one. They do not write to gain any type of fame, nor do they write to be noticed. They do not write for attention. As they write they paint a landscape of life , using as a brush the written word. The imagery created is art, and the writer truly an artist. They ask questions, but find the answers within.
Those who write to read write to an audience, searching for validation from and unknown individual who somehow believes they have the answer to the question posed. They portray an aura of self-importance, yet have the ability to assume the posture of a victim. The profess confidence, yet portray insecurity. There is no imagery, and no great story. There is nothing profound.
I am not self-righteous enough to believe that I am either one or the other. During the best of times I am one, and during the worst of times I am the other, yet for the majority of the time I am a blend. I would like to think I am confident enough to be the former for the most part, but know that I have written purely for an audience in order to be noticed on more than one occasion, leading to an interesting, and yet sad, contrast.
And while this is what I have noticed, there is nothing wrong with either type. Some choose one. Some choose the other. Some choose both. But as long as the type is chosen for the right reason, then that is what is important.
For choosing one for the wrong reason just makes one look desperate.