Being touched by your own work is a feature of a worthwhile music, because if you aim to touch the others, you first have to get something to share.
Possibly. I mean, it occurs most of the time. But not necessarily. It's the old "absolute or thematic" music debate. As Stravinsky wrote in
Chroniques de ma vie (An Autiobiography): you can do great things only by solving problems which are
musical by nature. His example : you're on the piano, you have limited options to get from point A to point B, it's a technical process. He adds: this is what the greatest composers do, they solve problems. Which is to say: even an abstract, tension/release work, can create an incredible response from the audience. If you want to say something in the first place, of course you can, but you can't bypass the "materiality of music", as Stravinsky would say. Conclusion: the absolute quality of music is essential, the thematic quality of music is accidental.
Another point: Bach didn't try to share "what he feels" to God, though he encrypted his music and struggled with great constraints to speak to God (to celebrate his glory in a worthy way), in the same manner cathedral builders encrypted forms only God's eyes would see from the skies. Listen to the Musical Offering's Ricercar a3: you can deeply touch your audience, even if it was not your main purpose, because your craft achieves perfection.
We can move the debate on the perspective problem. When you feel an emotion, listening to a work you spent hours and hours crafting, does an audience who discovers the work for the first time can be struck in the same manner as you?
Two ways out of this matter I guess:
- Mike Verta's "write on paper, spend as little time as possible on the piano" way
- reach excellence
In my opinion, both can link your emotion to your audience in an adequate way. I don't say it's easy. Both ways are out of my league! But if I wanted to share what I
feel with my music, I would consider these paths, take a breath, and recognize there is no shortcut.