<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: To Biz or Not To Biz?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/</link>
	<description>Infinite Possibilities</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:10:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/comment-page-1/#comment-9162</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 17:27:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/#comment-9162</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the clarification, SMD.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the clarification, SMD.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SMD</title>
		<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/comment-page-1/#comment-9136</link>
		<dc:creator>SMD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 18:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/#comment-9136</guid>
		<description>Oh, now I see what you mean.  I meant that mainly to say that the first person I&#039;m thinking of when I write is myself.  If I don&#039;t like what I&#039;m writing, I stop.  I have to like what I write first.  But I can see what you&#039;re saying.  That&#039;s basically what I was saying.  I write to please myself.
I think we&#039;re thinking of different concepts of &#039;the market&#039; though.  Writing for the market, to me, means setting out intentionally to write a story that fits into a single idea.  So if a publisher asks for only stories about ninjas with laser guns, I won&#039;t set out to intentionally write a story about ninjas with laser guns.  If I happen to write a story about ninjas and laser guns and discover the publisher, great.  That&#039;s just what I mean.  I realize that technically if you are trying to get published you&#039;re writing the market, meaning the market is the audience, but I meant it a little differently.
But I see where my words were a little misconstrued.  For that I apologize.  I should have chosen them more carefully.  I do write to please myself.  Hence why I get a lot of enjoyment when people visit my blog, or comment on my writing (wherever it may be), etc.  Hopefully that&#039;s a little more clear now :S</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, now I see what you mean.  I meant that mainly to say that the first person I&#8217;m thinking of when I write is myself.  If I don&#8217;t like what I&#8217;m writing, I stop.  I have to like what I write first.  But I can see what you&#8217;re saying.  That&#8217;s basically what I was saying.  I write to please myself.<br />
I think we&#8217;re thinking of different concepts of &#8216;the market&#8217; though.  Writing for the market, to me, means setting out intentionally to write a story that fits into a single idea.  So if a publisher asks for only stories about ninjas with laser guns, I won&#8217;t set out to intentionally write a story about ninjas with laser guns.  If I happen to write a story about ninjas and laser guns and discover the publisher, great.  That&#8217;s just what I mean.  I realize that technically if you are trying to get published you&#8217;re writing the market, meaning the market is the audience, but I meant it a little differently.<br />
But I see where my words were a little misconstrued.  For that I apologize.  I should have chosen them more carefully.  I do write to please myself.  Hence why I get a lot of enjoyment when people visit my blog, or comment on my writing (wherever it may be), etc.  Hopefully that&#8217;s a little more clear now :S</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: E.v.R.</title>
		<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/comment-page-1/#comment-9134</link>
		<dc:creator>E.v.R.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:50:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/#comment-9134</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s nothing wrong with writing for yourself. There&#039;s nothing wrong with writing for other reasons either. There&#039;s nothing wrong with writing for both yourself and other reasons.

There is not a right answer here. But I think what answer you choose says a lot about your outlook.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s nothing wrong with writing for yourself. There&#8217;s nothing wrong with writing for other reasons either. There&#8217;s nothing wrong with writing for both yourself and other reasons.</p>
<p>There is not a right answer here. But I think what answer you choose says a lot about your outlook.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/comment-page-1/#comment-9133</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:41:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/#comment-9133</guid>
		<description>Well, now I agree with you, SMD. Because now you&#039;re making sense. You should be happy to have accomplished a traffic milestone for your blog. And you should also be happy when you write...

My cynicism was a response to: &quot;I don&#039;t write for anyone but myself...&quot;

The second I read that, I called &#039;bullshit.&#039; If you only write for yourself, then why have a blog? Why submit stories for publication at all?

Now, I&#039;m not trying to tear you down. On the contrary, I want you (and all other artists and writers) to *embrace* the meaning and purpose and (dare I say?) BLISS that comes from creating for *both* ourselves AND for others.

Don&#039;t trivialize or denigrate shared human connection by labeling it &quot;market&quot; and then inferring that you despise it.

Now, if you meant to say something like: &#039;First and foremost, I write to please myself, because in so doing, I know that others will enjoy my work, too--because we are after all, all human beings,&#039; then I would agree with you. 

Is that what you really meant? Please say it is. 

And don&#039;t equivocate &quot;making a living&quot; from your writing and &quot;being read my many.&quot; You can indeed have the latter without the former. But what you *cannot* have is MEANINGFUL writing if you&#039;re the only one who reads it. So share it, and be proud of sharing it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, now I agree with you, SMD. Because now you&#8217;re making sense. You should be happy to have accomplished a traffic milestone for your blog. And you should also be happy when you write&#8230;</p>
<p>My cynicism was a response to: &#8220;I don&#8217;t write for anyone but myself&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>The second I read that, I called &#8216;bullshit.&#8217; If you only write for yourself, then why have a blog? Why submit stories for publication at all?</p>
<p>Now, I&#8217;m not trying to tear you down. On the contrary, I want you (and all other artists and writers) to *embrace* the meaning and purpose and (dare I say?) BLISS that comes from creating for *both* ourselves AND for others.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t trivialize or denigrate shared human connection by labeling it &#8220;market&#8221; and then inferring that you despise it.</p>
<p>Now, if you meant to say something like: &#8216;First and foremost, I write to please myself, because in so doing, I know that others will enjoy my work, too&#8211;because we are after all, all human beings,&#8217; then I would agree with you. </p>
<p>Is that what you really meant? Please say it is. </p>
<p>And don&#8217;t equivocate &#8220;making a living&#8221; from your writing and &#8220;being read my many.&#8221; You can indeed have the latter without the former. But what you *cannot* have is MEANINGFUL writing if you&#8217;re the only one who reads it. So share it, and be proud of sharing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SMD</title>
		<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/comment-page-1/#comment-9132</link>
		<dc:creator>SMD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:13:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2007/11/16/to-biz-or-not-to-biz/#comment-9132</guid>
		<description>Yes, I do write for myself.  I don&#039;t see what celebrating achieving something has to do with refuting that idea.  Am I not allowed to be happy that doing something I like has given me something in return?  I mean, if I write a story and it gets published, am I not allowed to be happy about it simply because I write for myself?  There&#039;s absolutely nothing wrong with being happy that you&#039;ve achieved something.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I do write for myself.  I don&#8217;t see what celebrating achieving something has to do with refuting that idea.  Am I not allowed to be happy that doing something I like has given me something in return?  I mean, if I write a story and it gets published, am I not allowed to be happy about it simply because I write for myself?  There&#8217;s absolutely nothing wrong with being happy that you&#8217;ve achieved something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

