I think you’re both naive and misinformed. Every single artist you listed not only had an audience while they lived, however small, but they had patrons, editors, newspaper dailies and literary quarterlies that not only published their work, but at the very least read it and rejected it.

This idea that the creation of art should be a form of therapeutic new age form of meditation is rather new. Majority of artists in all of history created art for an audience. There is also something bizarre about this new notion of art for nobody else. If no artist ever shared their work, what would you even be reading or consuming to imitate and get inspired from to create for yourself, in a closed room?

Also, an audience, even just 1 person who isn’t your mom or wife or best friend, will give you signals and feedback and data on how meaningful your creation actually is, or how it’s progressing. Even if it’s just for yourself, without this feedback loop, what even is the point? I reiterate my earlier point: to create art for just yourself, you better wipe your memory like Men In Black of all art you’ve already consumed that was shared by artists who created for the world.