Subtly Shaming Artists for Their Wish to Be Seen Needs to Stop
Why "Don't Create for the Likes, Just Create for Yourself" Often Entirely Misses the Point...
If you would like to listen to a read-aloud version of this post, you can do this here:
Artists (particularly writers) find themselves trapped in a peculiar paradox: When they express the natural (!) desire to be seen and heard, they're often met with a dismissive platitude: “You should create art for yourself, not for likes or validation.” In my opinion, this outwardly well-intentioned advice has become a subtle form of guilt-tripping that invalidates artists’ feelings and contributes to the broader devaluation of creative work.
Art, at its core, is an act of communication. From the earliest cave paintings, creative expression has always served as a bridge between the artist's inner world and the community around them. And that renders the “create just for yourself” mantra not just simplistic, but actively harmful.
When we tell artists (especially emerging ones) that they should be content with creating in isolation, we dismiss the inherently social nature of artistic expression. A story unread, a painting unseen, a song unheard exists in a vacuum that denies the artist the very thing that makes art meaningful: human connection.
Audre Lorde wasn't just speaking metaphorically when she said, “Poetry is not a luxury. It is a vital necessity of our existence.” The necessity she referred to isn't just in the creation, but in the sharing—the moment when one human experience resonates with another.
False Dichotomies Everywhere…
…and one of them is: Either you create purely for personal satisfaction, or you're shallow and seek external validation. That’s binary thinking, and it ignores the complexity of artistic motivation.
Most artists create for a multitude of reasons that are constantly in flux:
to process personal experiences
to connect with others who share similar feelings
to spark dialogue about important issues
to leave something meaningful behind
to earn a living through their craft
and yes: to be recognised for their unique voice and perspective
None of these motivations invalidate the others, and the desire for recognition, even a financial one, doesn't diminish the authenticity of the work.
Should We Check Our Privilege?
Because yes, I do believe a certain privilege is embedded in the advice to “create just for yourself”: It assumes that the artist has no material needs, no desire for their work to create change in the world, and no hope that their perspective might shift someone else's understanding.
Especially for marginalised voices, this advice is particularly damaging. When artists from underrepresented groups express the desire to be heard, they're not just seeking personal validation—they're often fighting for the visibility of experiences and perspectives that have been historically silenced.
Telling these artists to be content with creating in obscurity is the equivalent of saying their stories don't need to be part of our collective narrative. It reinforces the status quo and perpetuates the dominance of already privileged voices in the artistic landscape.
The “create just for yourself” mantra also conveniently ignores the economic realities of artistic production: Writers, illustrators, musicians, and other creatives increasingly face the expectation that they should create for free or for exposure, while somehow magically sustaining themselves in a capitalist society. I wrote this as a reply to a note by
a few days ago (I have also responded directly on her note but chose to expand on it a bit later):When we separate the desire for recognition (in whatever form) from artistic practice, we implicitly support a system that exploits creative labour. We tell artists their work isn't meant to be valued, especially not financially—it's just a hobby, a passion, something they should do in their spare time after their “real work” is done.
This attitude directly contributes to the undervaluing of the arts in our society (I bet my colleague
would have to say something about this). It's a very short step from “You should create just for yourself” to “Why should we fund arts education?” or “Why should we pay artists fairly for their work?” And those short steps are already taken every day…Humans Thrive on Community and Relationships
Perhaps most paradoxically, the “create just for yourself” advice often comes from people who actively consume (yes, I’m using that word) and enjoy art: They read books, listen to music, watch films, and follow artists on social media (often even with a slight parasocial slant)—all the while telling creators they shouldn't care about finding an audience or monetising their art?
That’s cognitive dissonance in action, and it reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the artist-audience relationship.
Art is not a one-way street but a conversation, expression and reception. It becomes meaningless if we ignore that very simple truth.
When we tell artists they shouldn't care about being heard (often in the form of a probably even well-intentioned, “Aw, don’t take it to heart if no one interacts. There are so many who love your art but never tell you, and you should only do it for yourself anyway”), we're essentially saying their half of this conversation doesn't matter. We're claiming the right to be moved by art while denying artists the satisfaction of knowing they've created that feeling in us in the first place.
And on that note: The idea that there are “so many who love your art but never tell you,“ is a bit misguided anyway, because honestly: These metrics are very easy to check, on Substack at least. And it’s probably fair to say that the idea of “so many readers, they just don’t like or comment” is not true in most cases. Some people simply don’t break through the algorithm at all. So are we trying to make people feel better by selling them the illusion of, “So many people read your stuff, they just don’t find the time or are too shy to voice it, chin up”? Is it really serving anyone? Of course Substack is geared towards people who already have a platform…
Another little anecdote: My Substack subscriber- and follower count hovered well below one hundred for a long time. I’m an inconsistent writer who refuses to do things by the magic “get more Substack followers”-book, so that’s to be expected. Here, have a handy graphic:
What you see there is the difference between something like 65 and over 1,000 (of which just under 800 are subscribers). The sharp uptick happened after one (1!) note that somehow managed to trigger the algo (it scared me a little 🤣). I’ve lost a few again since then—the trend is clearly more downward than upward, which gives the first hint that a lot of people are either just looking for reciprocity to boost their own stats (“I follow you if you follow me”—yes, there were even people who were narking at me via DM because I didn’t follow back, or those that immediately unsubscribed after I subscribed—the good old social media spiel hasn't changed much for some people). There was also a type of engagement with my posts that made me uncomfortable, because it smelled of a personal or political agenda. I’m not saying people shouldn’t have one, I just don’t like it when my posts and inbox are used for furthering it in very obvious ways without as much as trying to build a connection first. But that’s a different topic I might get into another time... Or, last but not least and probably the most likely: My writing is simply not fulfilling their expectations, which is totally fair.
Anyhoo—what’s much more interesting is this before the uptick:
And here it is after:
Both of these show the averages pretty well—my opening rate always hovered around 70% before the subscriber uptick. These were people who really engaged, mostly via email actually. They replied to my latest posts, sent me DMs and talked to me. Yay, human connection!
I get these people still, and a few of my new subscribers also fall into that category (you know who you are 💚). But it just goes to show that more subscribers really don’t mean more connection…
No One Said Artists Should Create for Engagement ONLY
So really, none of this is to say that creating purely for external validation is where it’s at. Artists who measure their worth solely by metrics like likes, sales, or followers will eventually find themselves on an emotional rollercoaster. The real challenge (and the more nuanced advice, I guess) is how to balance intrinsic and extrinsic motivation:
How can artists honour their vision while also engaging meaningfully with an audience? How can they remain true to their voice while also making space for growth through feedback and recognition?
These questions don't have simple answers, but they acknowledge the complexity of artistic motivation in a way that “just create for yourself” fails to.
When we guilt-trip artists for wanting to be seen and heard, we don't just harm individual creators—we diminish our collective cultural landscape. Perhaps we should check in on our desire to make people feel their wish for an audience is somehow impure or shallow, and why we think that seeking any kind of recognition is somehow “self-indulgent”? What does it say about us, rather than the artist?
If you ask me (which you probably don’t 🤣): It’s high time to reject the shaming (even if that’s not the intention, but there comes a time when impact is simply more important than intention) and reclaim the inherent value of artistic visibility:
Being seen and heard is not a vanity project—it's a fundamental human need and a crucial part of what makes art meaningful.
Artists, especially writers, should feel empowered to say, “I create because I have something to say, and I want that something to be heard. My desire for an audience doesn't make my art less authentic—it makes it complete.”
And for those who consume art, perhaps a more supportive stance would be, "I value your voice and your desire to be heard. I understand that your art exists not just for you but as an invitation to connect. That desire for connection doesn't diminish your work—it honours the very purpose of art itself."
I’ll be brutally honest here: If I read the Tumblrism of, “But but but, I am too shy to comment or even click the like button”, I’m inwardly (no, outwardly) rolling my eyes fairly hard. Have we really arrived at the stage where we are basically saying, out loud, that we do have the time to read someone’s posts, but we don’t have one second (!) to click the like button? Yeah, I call BS. The real problem is that people simply feel entitled to consume and don’t care that much about the creator…
Everyone Talks About “Supporting the Arts”
But supporting artists means more than just consuming their work—it means actively valuing it, both emotionally and financially. It means understanding that art is not just a personal indulgence but a vital part of shared humanity.
So the next time you hear an artist express the wish to be heard, maybe resist the urge to respond with platitudes about creating just for themselves. Instead, consider asking what they hope their work will communicate, who they hope will hear it, and how you might help amplify their voice?
In doing so, you'll not only support that individual artist but contribute to a culture that truly values creative expression—not just as a hobby but as an essential form of human connection and cultural enrichment that deserves both recognition and yes: reward.
Art may begin in solitude, but its journey is incomplete until it finds its way to others. Let's please stop pretending otherwise…
The very idea of The Creative Cure is that mental well-being information should be available to everyone, and that creativity is not a magical unicorn for a select few but a birthright. That’s why my newsletters and read-outs are free.
It takes time (and sometimes even expertise ;)) to craft this content, and your support is appreciated—that’s what keeps The Creative Cure free for everyone. If you would like to support my work, here’s what you can do:
Support The Creative Cure by making a one-off or regular donation.
Have a look around my webpage. I have a range of services available that might be helpful to you, or someone you know.
Share The Creative Cure with your creative friends. Spreading the word is hugely appreciated.
As someone who has (in previous churches, not my current one, thank God!) experienced being literally scolded and having my character questioned, accused of "seeking praise from men (people) instead of God" and essentially told that it was a sin to expect artistic success, I really resonate with this article.
Very good post. Can we translate part of this article into Spanish with links to you and a description of your newsletter?