Working, working: but nothing to show for it

I guess the act of creation comes down to this:  10% inspiration and 90% perspiration.  Working hard on a project might feel gratifying, but while you're doing it, if it is writing, you don't have much to show for it.  I could show you my notes from the Chicago Manual of Style or my nifty edits (in red pen) on 55 pages of typescript, but I'm pretty sure no one wants to see that.  Writing is probably the least glamorous of the arts because you have so little to show for all of your labor.  Visual artists, dancers, even actors have so much more to show for their work.  You have pictures, you have illustrated reviews, you have YouTubes, or MP3s, DVDs or CDs.  Even when I'm done, this project isn't going to be a physical book that I can hold in my hand, but simply an on-line article.  The editors may put up some flashy movie clips from YouTube, but I never describe any movies in my lengthy article, even though its about a movie director.  Now I may have piqued your interest:  how, you ask, can someone write a 55 page manuscript about a movie director and not talk about movies?  You'll have to read the article (probably out in early 2011) to see how I can say so much about Johnnie To and never actually talk about his films, except in passing.  Original research:  the new frontier, where the game is to find something to talk about that no one has ever before thought to look at, analyze or describe.  I manage to do it without any post-modern or deconstructionist theory, so it isn't properly "research" in the academic sense of the word.  All the better:  people might actually read it, understand what they read, and, if I'm lucky, a few people might be inspired to look at this director, film criticism, the international film circuit and a few other interesting cogs in the modern business of filmmaking in a new light.