Point to ponder

[avevale_intelligencer]

It is a truth universally acknowledged that no-one will ever be in need of a writer.

Discuss, taking care to distinguish between "need" as we might externally perceive it from our civilised standpoint, and need as it would appear to people whose primary concern is survival.

Comments

[jahura.livejournal.com]

Okay...complex life forms. As opposed to amobae, bacteria, and anything that has no brain or central nervous system. Please forgive my snobbery as I will work on considering E-coli to be on the same evolutionary scale as whales and dolphins. ;)

If the point is pure survival, you can survive without any artistic stimulation. It may make for a short and uncomfortable existence if previously exposed, but it is possible.

[keristor.livejournal.com]

In general, people can survive without external artistic stimulation because they can make it themselves and get it from others without needing writing. That's my point, all through history most of the people have survived without forms of written entertainment. No bookstores, no Amazon.*, no libraries, for most of the people most of the time. They sing, they tell each other stories, they may get the occasional wandering bard or a preacher who tells them stories about some religion. Or for the lucky few they had captive entertainment employed by the local aristocracy. And if they are all alone they can still think and dream (and find 'art' in nature).

Access by the general population to written fiction, or to written materials at all, is a very recent thing. For most of the time it has been the province of the rich and those they favour. And for much of the world this is still true.