Caution: a rant
There's something I don't understand. Why is one type of writing deemed more valuable than others?
Example: people are willing to pay for books but are unwilling to pay for writing on a blog.
Granted, books and blogs are worlds apart in terms of theme, style, time commitment, and approach. A book goes through rigorous editing stages and fact-checking, whereas blogs are written willy-nilly and often in the spur of the moment.
But blogs are equally valuable. Blogs are ever-unfolding personal books—unedited life documents.
Writing/sharing takes heart, time, and precious energy, regardless of the container it falls in.
People want to consume art/writing, yet they don't want to pay for it.
Is blogging art? Sure, why not? You're creating and sharing pieces of yourself, no?
For some reason, wanting my personal internet home to be a means for capitalistic gain still fills me with shame.
But why? Where is this coming from?
There seems to be this moral high ground among people (bloggers) who think that personal blogs should remain profit-free. As if wanting to be paid for blogging somehow lessens the authenticity of my thoughts, life, and art compared to someone who does it for fun. Why is the mere thought of someone wanting a fair energy exchange between writer and reader frowned upon?
What is the fucking difference between being paid for being a blogger and being an assistant paper-pusher in a stale, concrete office? Why is the latter more palatable? Deemed less fucking icky?
Sigh.