but i guess there is a point at which you have to accept that some people just wont 'get it.' the content is not translatable across that boundary, for whatever reason. that is not a failure of communication or a question of bad faith but too great a difference in metabolism, or cultural/intellectual reference points, or you know, whatever it might be that comes between people.
it is confounding and perplexing that people don't hear things the same way - don't hear what you hear in something
and also lonely as well
so you might be trying to persuade them (possibly as foolhardy and futile as someone who likes anchovies trying to persuade someone who hates anchovies that they are delicious)
but it's also reaching out to see if anyone hears it or feels it in the same way
maturity is getting beyond the stage of "must obliterate your viewpoint / hearing-point" (using invalidation, mockery, abuse, tortured philosophical and political arguments etc etc) and getting to the "how interesting that you hear it so differently! how did that come about then? what forces us make us differ?" stage
trouble is, on the prose level, the immaturity phase lends itself to more exciting - cos excited, worked up - writing
the mature, each-to-their-own approach tends to be a bit tepid and easy-going
i am libidinally attached as a reader (and a writer) to that kind of writing where people lose all sense of perspective and proportion - and rage about aesthetic disagreements and other people's taste-heresy as if it really really mattered and was some kind of atrocity
the minute you start to have a more balanced, accepting type of outlook, the temperature of the prose starts to dip
but it's certainly healthier to be like that