The paragraphs are certainly relevant, and there are some poignant descriptions, such as that public opinion "will turn everything into a reproach and a sneer against the unrecognized writer; without fellow feeling, without response, without sympathy, he is left standing alone in the middle of the road like a homeless wayfarer. Hard is his calling in life, and bitterly he feels his solitude."
The standard, romantic point to make about this is that such suffering is necessary for the production of great art. I've defended that view in my writings. The "hungriest," most incisive artists are often the youngest ones precisely because they haven't yet succeeded in financial terms. The more an artist succeeds, and the greater the artist's following, the greater her temptation to sell out, to exchange artistic standards for business ones. So the "hard life" may be a prerequisite for great art. I'm sure there are exceptions, but there's at least a grain of truth in that generalization.
