Within or Without?

I've always found that the best kind of product, whether scientific, artistic or anything else that is cognitive, comes about when there is no audience in the creator's head. The minute one starts thinking about the recievers of the product, it will severely compromise the quality of what one creates. A probable reason for that, is that originality gets relegated to a background, in favor of populist appeal. Pandering, however altruistic, is in direct conflict with the self-satisfaction or "spirituality", or "inspiration" or whatever it is that allows you to make a connection with ether! That is why, it is quite common to see the best kind of creativity, when it is unsullied by the desire for acceptance. So, the best way to learn Bharata's natyashastras is not from the "Noopur" and "Nartaki" dance schools that are strewn from Mumbai to Milipitas. That art form 's spirit lives in Thiruvaiyyar in Tanjavur, in Rajamanikam Pillai's hutment. For he dances for himself, not for the Padma awards and the UN shows that get him a house in Delhi's VIP localities. In a strange paradox, the best outputs are those where you are most selfish. That said, i am not convinced of that thought when taken to the extreme. Like i once saw a show of a famous modern dancer, which had silence for 40 minutes on the stage, with the lights out. Needless to say, when the lights came on, there was silence again, since everyone had left! (I stayed on, curious to see what the dancer had imagined. That is a different story!)
At such times, one can argue that the point of all art is some sort of expression, so it is probably good to know how to express it, by knowing your audience. So, when Alarmel Valli started the remarkable trend of communicating in English what her mimes mean, before every piece she performed, it was communicating with her audience, not pandering to it. But there is a thin line. And transgressing it, is the difference between a truly great work and a could-have-been.
In writing, which uses the crutch of language, it is far easier to not transgress that line than in dance, music, painting or for that matter, science. So poets and writers can write purely for themselves, and then bask in the universality of the medium, that makes a reader recognize some part of his life or thoughts in the writings, and hail it as a great piece. That's what it is, isnt it? When you are able to relate some thought, feeling or experience to what you are reading/seeing/ listening, another man's indulgence becomes a work of art.