
Recently we were talking about what we would have done if we’d known what was ahead.
By and large we’re okay, and the kids turned out okay, but I have great remorse that I tried to write when they were small, and often prioritized writing over spending time with them. This rather ignores the fact that I’m more neurotic than a shaved cat and would probably have driven them insane(r) if they were my 24/7 job.
But anyway, I said something like “I would not have spent my time beating my head against trad pub, and writing a lot of things I felt no push to write, but were demanded by the houses/I knew they’d be accepted. I’d just wait till Indy came on, and write for the drawer till then.”
I realized almost immediately after I said it that yeah, it sounds lovely, but short of sending my mind back in time, with everything I’ve learned on the “wrong path” I probably wouldn’t be the same writer, and I wouldn’t be better either. I’d never have learned what was actually wrong with the things I first wrote, and why they didn’t sell (Yes, some of it was left weirdness turning them down, but not all. I had no clue how to foreshadow for instance, or how to assign different weights to plot elements.) I’d never have learned to write fiction that appealed to others, because I wouldn’t be forced to. If I were writing only for me, I’d have no idea how to make a negotiation between what I like and what’s likely to appeal to most readers (not content, but presentation, mostly.) I’d not know that sometimes the books you were forced to write (Dyce) can be the most fun to you and others, if you claim the theme pushed at you and make it fun.
I’d be a much less flexible and practiced writer. Not to mention that not having the practice of butt-in-chair and writing, I’d probably have 200 unfinished novels, and no clue how to finish anything, let alone anything anyone else wanted to read. (And I’d never have learned to write short stories.)
So, the wrong path might very well have been the right training. If I can get my aquatic birds in a row and write like I mean it now, that it.
What brought this on? Oh, this:

As someone in the group where this was posted pointed out, other than the title, these could be self-care affirmations. Because, sure, we all need to remember sometimes we need to step back, take a deep breath, and not chase the red dot all the time.
BTW these would be more likely be called “anti-communist affirmations” because in a communist regime, no one has time to create or produce what they want to, monetized or not, so this is irrelevant. In communism, you pretend to work and they pretend to pay you, and just chasing down the necessary food in stores takes all your time.
But leaving that alone, look, of course you’re allowed to create what you feel you need to, even if it’s not beautiful. Why wouldn’t you be? The corollary is that people are allowed to spit on it, and hate it, even if it IS beautiful. So what?
And what the heck does it even mean for a form of work to be “valid”? This sounds like the whining of a twelve year old whose father doesn’t think that playing games is as valid as school work. What is work, even? Why are we talking about work? Most of us don’t “work” in the sense our ancestors did. Most of us sit in chairs and wiggle our fingers, or carry things indoors, in temperature controlled environments. As for “valid”, I was unaware of a ministry for declaring the validity of work. Is this “Pay me for doing things that benefit no one?” I suspect it is. But you see, that’s bullshit. You can do whatever you want so long as you support yourself. (The reason most trust fund babies are useless.) No one cares. But you can’t force people to pay you for doing what you want to do which benefits no one else. Even if you call it “work.” You are free to call whatever you want to do “work” and people are free not to pay you for what amounts to strange forms of onanism.
Not needing to accomplish anything to be worthy is another fun one. Worthy of WHAT? Most Christians believe that all humans are worthy of basic respect and treatment as humans and co-equal children of G-d. That’s a religious belief. But what the heck is worthy, even, in the context above? Again, worthy comes with freight. Worthy of what? And no, you are not worthy of respect, adulation, or even frankly passing interest, unless you have done something that renders you so. You’re worthy of basic decent treatment, maybe, unless you’re a whiny pain in the *ss, in which case you’re worthy of shutting up and going to your room without dinner. Your worth is not measured by deeds, maybe, but it should be measured by behavior. You behave like a decent human being, you’re likely to get the same in return. Anything else? Well. Do the thing, and we’ll give you the respect. The thing can be simply working to feed yourself (and/or others you’re responsible for.) Or it can be some great artistic or scientific feat. Then you’ll be worthy. Of respect, admiration, whatever you’ve earned. So, yes, you need to accomplish something. What that is, depends on how much respect/adoration/whatever you want. My question here being: Why are you so focused on what others think of you?
Communists don’t believe in souls. No, seriously. Read Communist manifesto. Of course you’re not defined by what you produce. You’re fed by what you produce. Okay, sometimes not directly, but see here, a society that doesn’t rely on enslaving others to your needs works like this: You make something others value (or trade your time away to do something others value). In return they give you tokens of exchange. You use these to get what you need: food being a primary thing. But if you work hard and do something really valued, you might even get a lot of free time to do things you know no one will pay you for. This is easier in free and prosperous (the two go together) societies because there is so much extra food, wealth, time.
And we’re back to worth. What in actual h*ll is “worth” in this sense? No, man is not the sum of what he does or learned or the certificates achieved. To all this he must add something more in the awareness that others exist and that in a decent society he owes them respect and dignified treatment; to all this he must also add enough self-awareness to try to avoid injuring others or mistreating them, including taking advantage of them. What the heck this has to do with “worth” is a complete puzzle to me.
I’m not usually slow in decoding language, but it seems to me this pathetic little poster uses “worth” to mean “love.” And to claim he/she should be loved regardless of what he/she does…. or not. Which is cute, but is the scream of a toddler. Whether you’re loved without doing anything to deserve being loved is a matter of luck. Your parents might be stupid enough to love you no matter how many times you spit on them. I doubt anyone else will be.
For other people, normally, to be loved you have to be capable of love first. This means you have to be aware that other people exist as separate entities from your pathetic little self. nothing in the semantic confusion of this stupid “anti-capitalist” screed leads me to believe the writer is aware other people exist or what society would be like if we all followed his deranged prescriptions. So, the scream of a toddler, with a full diaper, who has just taken all the other kids toys and broken them, and now stands there insisting you must love him.
As for not monetizing hobbies: everyone has to make that decision. I’m broken the other, and am going to have to monetize my hobbies, because otherwise I feel like I should write all the time. Greed? No, not really. But what I’m paid for produces the most, which is good for me, and my family. It allows us take the kids and spouse/future spouse out now and then, and get the good vet care for the elderly cats.
However, because changing pace helps me rest, I should be doing things other than writing, at least one day a week. If I monetize “war with snails” medieval ornaments, or making dragons or something, I’ll do more of that. Which will be good for me. (Even if they’ll never make as much as writing.) HOWEVER I know people have other different internal demands and make different choices. Larry Correia, famously doesn’t monetize his very good miniature painting, because otherwise he’ll nag himself over getting it done and it will stop being fun. And that’s fine.
Note to person who wrote this: Hobbies are an invention of what you (and Marx) call capitalism, also known as the free market. You see, people wanted things, and other people wanted to sell these things to them. The sellers wanted to optimize their making of saleable things, from which drive eventually the industrial revolution was born. Also fertilizers and better agricultural techniques. This, in turn, made people have enough they didn’t need to work from when they woke up in the morning till they slept at night, which even most of the rich did till about 200 years ago. Which in turn allowed them to have hobbies: things they do not for money.
So, yeah, you can do extra things you do and don’t sell. You might think this is some kind of natural right, but it’s not. It’s the result of centuries of free trading, which the idiot who wrote this wants to wreck because he’s an idiot who thinks the world owes him a living and food just falls from trees. (Jean Jacques Rousseau. If we invent a time machine, we need to make sure he’s whipped every day and twice on Sunday until he either stops being stupid or quits writing.)
As for defining what success looks like for you, this sound like the toddler again. “It’s good if I say it’s good.” Because he cares passionately what society says.
Most of us have long ago defined our own success and don’t give a hang what “society” thinks. Society might think that jet setting lifestyles are success, but I hate traveling and like my routine, for instance. Society might think that certain fashions are needed, or certain designers. I slouch around in jeans and t-shirts.
Success for me is feeding and taking care of myself and mine, having raised kids who (so far, knock on head) didn’t turn out mass murderers, and writing books people pay me for. That’s it.
Who the heck is “society” anyway? The person writing this would be well served by remembering there is no such thing. There are loud voices, which is what he calls “society” but most people living their own lives, don’t care.
They also don’t care about him, his “worth” or what he chooses to do with his life and time. As long as he’s not a burden on others, or forcing others to give him his “needs” at gunpoint, the rest of us couldn’t care less. It’s not so much that the world doesn’t owe you a living. It doesn’t, of course. It’s more that the world doesn’t owe you NOTICING YOU EXIST. That is the reality for every single one of us. Sane people don’t crave the attention or love of “the world” or “society.” We have people who matter to us, and from those we crave attention and/or love. Which is fine, so long as we’re capable of giving THEM attention and love.
Look, it’s not just that if you don’t work you don’t eat. This might or might not be true in our society. Free trade (that despised “capitalism”) has made us so prosperous, at least in countries that remain somewhat free that most people won’t starve. Other people, out of charity or pity will give you money or food or a place to sleep.
It’s more that man — and woman, for the twits who need that spelled out — is made to strive. We are the product of a long evolution in which our ancestors worked desperately and were always on the verge of disaster. Without something to struggle against/attempt to get better/more/ work for/endure/etc we stagnate. We lose track of what’s important. We start thinking that the creations of our mind are of primary importance, even if they not only don’t serve any purpose, but aren’t wanted by anyone else. We end up believing in nebulous constructs like “society” and “worth” and demand that one give us the other.
The truth is that more self-worth and self-respect is found in doing a menial job that pays for your own basic needs than in all the self-involved art no one would pay for.
The other truth is that if you want to do something passionately enough, you also want it to be seen by the most people possible That means not only getting technically better at it, but getting better at it in a way other people will pay you for it. Because words of love are one thing, but when people give you their beer or coffee money for what you created you know they mean it.
The truth is that if you can find something you’re good at — art, craft or service — and get good enough people pay you for it, you can spend your entire life struggling against your own limitations, be happy and fulfilled and not care what the “world” at large thinks, and whether you have “worth” in an abstract sense.
Go and find something large enough it’s worth striving against and this nonsense will fix itself. And pay your own way while you do it. And you’ll be someone worth knowing.














