Sometimes it helps to write things out even when you don’t share those writings. It helps to clarify, to understand, to process, and I post shit like that from time to time too because, well, why the fuck not, but the sharing doesn’t always matter. I think for writing to be an enduring thing for you… an enduring practice… there has to be more driving you to write than just an audience.
There has to be more than the desire for attention.
People realize that and they think part of their realization means “well, if it has to be more about the love or value of writing itself, as a practice, as a means of satisfaction, pleasure, even as a means of functioning and working through things, then the desire for attention, for recognition, is bad and needs to be cut out.” That’s not exactly how people would phrase it maybe, but…
A lot of the time when people realize this quirky little fact that you’ve got to love the thing you’re actually doing in a deeper way too – about writing if that’s their thing, or about whatever else – they think that the want for being seen, heard, for having your expressions, thoughts, feelings, etc. matter, for having that thing you do appreciated by someone somewhere in the world needs to be excluded, that it’s a distraction. It’s not. It’s an additional driving force, not a distracting one.
It’s not a contradiction to write for your own enjoyment while also enjoying the attention you get, if any. It’s just that one’s more of a driving force than the other and if (or when) you start thinking it’s the other way around you’re not going to be driven enough to bother. The love of attention, recognition, whatever… that’s a secondary pleasure of doing something you can share around.
Maybe it’s not the point but you also don’t need to demonize it.
The dangerous faggot (Milo) is an attention whore par excellence. That invalidates none of the points he’s made in speeches at college campuses, in interviews on youtube and television, and in debates with fairly hostile opponents. None. His love of the attention doesn’t negate his advocacy (both through rhetoric and action) for free speech, for genuine equality in the eyes of the law and the government, for economically conservative values, for discerning and basing opinion on facts.
None of that gets cancelled out by it and, in fact, wouldn’t have been possible without his antics.
All the things that conventional wisdom says would obfuscate and confuse his message, are actually the exact things that make his message and his communication of it to Americans possible. Same goes for Trump and any number of others who’ve learned to effectively shrug off, work through, and even play off of controversies. Hell, the President has learned not just to play off them but to thrive on them; and really, even compared with the likes of a Milo (or a Marilyn Manson) he’s a phenomenon in this respect. No one else has taken it to that level of success.
All that to say, you don’t need to guilt yourself for a lack in “purity of motive”.
They’re not competing motivations, they’re complimentary.