upvote
> There are some people that believe that writing is an act of creative expression.

I think "some people" might be underselling it, as evidenced by the borderline innumerable fiction books in existence?

> and as such, it's a quite selfish activity

"quite" seems a bit harsh, surely "writing because you enjoy it" is pretty far down the list of all "selfish" activities? I'd imagine many authors also write because they think others will enjoy their works.

reply
I 'm sure you consider your opinion to be correct, but there is something to writing being an act of creative expression. It's fine for it to be a selfish activity. Diaries are this way, for example, and the negativity you point at other people's hobbies is unfortunate.

There's something to the idea that if the writer is writing with the intention of publishing it, that should be edited. But if you're writing for yourself, and happen to simply keep your writings somewhere public, some other person's desire for you to edit more is a measurement of that other person's feeling of entitlement.

I have about as much desire to read some publisher's edited version of Anne Frank's diary as you appear to have to read the original.

reply
Franks diary was edited, both by herself and later publishers.
reply
Some argue that her father’s editing was detrimental, that it removed some of her voice and her experience. I think there’s something to editing out the more… problematic parts of a pubescent child’s diary. I would have been mortified if my thoughts of that nature were published, and the censorship allowed the diary to reach a more broad audience in e.g. grade schools. But at the same time, I do understand the wish to see the full, authentic story.
reply
Sure, it was edited. The point is, there exist those of us who have desire to read the unedited version.
reply
By her father, not herself. She sort of died before she had an opportunity to edit her writings for publication.
reply
https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/anne-frank-...

> But the manuscript that Otto Frank pitched to Dutch editors didn’t contain his daughter’s entire diary. Anne herself had begun editing large swathes of her diary with publication in mind after hearing a radio broadcast that called on Dutch people to preserve diaries and other war documents. Otto respected some of those editorial decisions, but overlooked others ­– for example, he included material about Anne’s crush on annexe dweller Peter van Pels.

https://www.history.com/articles/anne-frank-diary-hidden-pag...

> Frank’s candid words on sex didn’t make it into the first published diary, which appeared in English in 1952. Though Anne herself edited her diary with an eye to publication, the book—released eight years after her death from typhus in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp at age 15—contained additional cuts. These were only partially restored in 1986, when a critical edition of her diary was published. Then, in 1995, an even less censored version, including a passage on Frank’s own body previously withheld by her father, was published.

https://research.annefrank.org/en/gebeurtenissen/b0725097-67...

> In response to Minister Bolkestein's appeal on 28 March 1944 on Radio Oranje to keep wartime diaries and letters, Anne Frank decided to rewrite her diary into a novel: "Imagine how interesting it would be if I published a novel of the Secret Annex, from the title alone people would think it was a detective novel."

> Anne rewrote and edited her diary on loose sheets of duplicator paper. On Saturday 20 May 1944, she wrote: "Dear Kitty, At last after much contemplation I have begun my 'the Secret Annex', in my head it is already as finished as it can be, but in reality it will be a lot slower, if it ever gets finished at all." Anne's rewritten version, known as Version B, ends with the diary entry of 29 March 1944.

reply
You may find that there is a continuum between textbooks and poetry; and that some folks want things that are further over towards the prose and poety side, some of us enjoyed reading Kerouac, we don't care about perfection so much as feeling a piece channel the spirit of the person who wrote it. What is being communicated is not always just the raw parsing of the text but something more, a gestalt of what it meant for the author to be writing that particular kind of thing at that time, in their lives and in history.

"Good writers" are... a matter of taste

reply
deleted
reply