Should everyone publish?

[Jon Loomis]

Maybe everyone should write--it can be therapeutic, I suppose, although that's never been the case for me--but should everyone publish?  Was there some value for the larger culture in the old-school gatekeeper role of traditional publishing?  Sure--they missed a lot of good stuff that deserved to be published, and published a lot of stuff that they ought to be ashamed of.  But did they also serve a valuable role by weeding out huge quantities of execrable schlock?  Surely there's some writing that should never see the light of day--but now the rusty handbrake of traditional publishing has been released, and what's left of literary culture is careening toward the cliffs.  I'm playing devil's advocate here, to a degree--but for the sake of argument, who are the gatekeepers now?  Or was there ever a need for gatekeepers in the first place?

[D. L. R.]

It would be nice if people would learn to write a good story before publishing. 

[Jon Loomis]

Yes.  That would be nice, indeed.

[Cammy May Hunnicutt]

But, again... who's to judge?   

[D. L. R.]

When I read, I judge. 

As if anyone who has ever read anything, has ever done anything other than that. 

[Cammy May Hunnicutt]

Well bully for you.  We all do.

But we don't all run around saying people shouldn't do things if we don't like them.

[D. L. R.]

Okay then, looks like we all know who is the judge of what is a good story…the readers.

 

Makes one wonder why anyone would put forth a question like that when anyone that can write would say, “I am.”  

[Cammy May Hunnicutt]

LOL   Good point, DLR.  My hackles went up at the question right off the bat.  "Shouldn'ts" give me an itch.