I know it's no light bulb moment thing, but something within a piece of writing I re-read recently made me think about this. (Any aspiring young writer, any writer, any reader and any person for that matter, really must read 'Letters to a young poet' by Rainer Maria Rilke. At least once in a lifetime. You can buy this small book through Amazon and such or there are several 'free' copies floating out there.)

Anyhow, what I read coincided with a comment made from my 'posse' an affectionate term I use for those few who have stayed this wordy journey with me. "Keep writing," was the message conveyed in the comment. I guess I am one of those lucky ones who can just spit out words? The result of too much crap in my head? A lifetime of observation? Can't pinpoint the reason exactly.

But here's the thing: I only discovered this 'ability' when I found myself on Wattpad. I mean I wrote - some musings, some poetry, and some random stuff before my appearing here - but nothing like this flood of words you are seeing now.

So I question, whether the audience  in fact creates the writer? In this digital age, everything is immediate. I push the publish button and you are there, somewhere in the world and you read it 'fresh off the press' so to speak. So we are together in this. A 'relationship' forms between the writer and the reader(s) and this relationship needs nurturing, just like any other relationship. I write, you read, we are connected through words and we sustain each other.

So this compels me to write more. Which brings me to my earlier question: Would I write so prolifically if there was no one reading? I didn't in the past, because I was writing to myself see? Now I write to strangers, and some read and reach out and comment, and I am then writing to 'friends'?

I love words and oftentimes this love translates into a lot of 'waffling', as I rush to clack the keys and produce yet another piece, something that will in turn be read and returned to me with various views and often profuse and other times convoluted and hilarious commentary.

And I am noticing changes, both within myself and within my writing. You have probably not realised it but there is more 'emotion' emerging in my work. There is humour too, and an openness which I once would have thought impossible to achieve. I have let you into my home and into my family; I have made my real life a part of your lives. And you in turn speak to me of your families and your lives.

So maybe the definition of 'writer' is evolving? It seems so in my case, because you are the reason I write now see? You are not 'invisible' I can hear you and speak with you and oftentimes YOU provide the ideas and themes for the next write? So you are in effect producing the words through me?

I thought once, writing was someone creating a story and then getting it passed around till it got published and then sales would kick in and royalties would follow. I thought one wrote to strangers. Maybe they might get the odd 'fan mail' or sitting in a bookstore, sign a long line of open books and share a few quick words with readers, but it was mostly writing to strangers? The only way they could determine the 'quality of their work' was through the number of sales...

But their lives were private and they certainly didn't allow anyone into this privacy - let alone enter strangers' homes. So when I say the definition is evolving, I mean that 'the writer' is no longer a picture and some blurb on the last page. I mean the writer is just another person, and one who depends on the symbiosis I mentioned earlier. Sorry about the big word - it kinda means the 'partnership' resulting from this close and at times very personal relationship with the readers?

So yes, I am depending on you. Without you, most of what you read would not exist; there would be no reason for its existence? And it fascinates me really, because I have no desire to be 'published' in the traditional sense, I have no focus on this leading me to anywhere beyond here. So without you, would I still be 'a writer'? I may perhaps if I was fortunate become 'an author' but that would not satisfy me, I understand this now.

Writing to strangers is what we all do when we begin. Then we either go one of two ways: become an 'author' or become a writer. Very different things in this digital age... If for example my Memoir was 'published' and it was bought by the almost four and a half thousand people who have read it so far, I would have no idea who any of these people were and whether it had any impact or inspired, or gave hope... I would receive some money for my effort, sign some copies and then be overtaken by the next book and the next book... I would still be 'selling' but I would live in isolation see?

Sure, getting some financial compensation or 'official' recognition would be rewarding in terms of the effort expanded, the long and lonely hours spent tapping keys, the life missed because it is consumed by the act of writing itself... But really, there is (at least for me) more satisfaction gained from this interaction than from any potentially financial rewards or 'public recognition'?

I have seen the lives I have touched, I have observed the changes my words have made to these lives firsthand. And I have seen the changes brought about in me, through the impact of those lives on mine. I hear it a lot, this "I want to be published" and I often wonder if these would-be 'authors' fully understand that one need not be 'published' in order to be heard?

Can one make 'a living' as an author these days? Much harder task, because of the advent of 'self-publishing' and sites such as these, where no monetary rewards are forthcoming... Perhaps we all as writers need to adjust our expectations and flow into this evolving role, where we write for friends and we receive their commentary as compensation and as inspiration?