I write.
My wife and I took a writing class, but, I can't say that it was of any benefit whatsoever.
You see, I think writing is the same as thinking; either you think clearly and artistically or you don't. Your writing follows your thinking.
A non-artistic thinking person who tries to write artistically will resort to artifice instead of the natural expression. On the other hand, an
artistic person who applies themselves to writing straight-ahead prose may find an imbalance toward emotionalism.
There is no concrete axiom here.
How you think is really the issue.
What is your epistemology? What do you know and how do you know it? Your personal philosophy is the frame for everything you write.
Art is about the effect on the audience, the viewer, the listener on the one side, and, about the expression of the point of view of the artist on the other.
The two will hardly ever coincide! Why? We are what we are. We are who we are. Our nature is to be. It is our discovery process that informs US what that nature is. Should our nature turn out to be artistic, and yet, we are inarticulate in our thinking---the strenuous blockage will dominate the process of self-expression because we lack clarity.
History is littered with damaged artists whose "self" was inarticulate. The pain of the creative process came from self-medicating that block and that pain. Alcohol, drugs, sex, destructive behavior in artists is a result of the imbalance between knowing what you are and expressing it accurately.
I think so many men are into sports because they substitute the physical for the intellectual expression. Writing, like sports, can be either a spectator event or one of participation. But, each of us must be realistic about our actual physical (mental) attributes we bring to the game itself. A midget is not going to be a linebacker for the NFL.
So too with art of any kind. It all begins with who we are and how we think. The rest is mere ornament.
T.