Good life lesson, but it also reminded me of interviewing for faculty positions at the recruitment conference. One of the best things that the AALS does (I hope it still does this) is open the conference w/some dos and don'ts for interviewing. In essence, candidates who aren't familiar with what appointment committees are expecting to hear get a little mentoring beforehand. One message that was clear is that the modal answer to the question, "why do you want to change careers?" was supposed to be "I find myself hiding out in the library thinking about issues that I want to research, and I can't do that kind of scholarship in my current job." So I had an image of everyone who was looking for a job that year saying the exact same thing to each committee, with the difference between getting invited back or not being the level of enthusiasm (believability?) with which a candidate said the right thing.
There's nothing wrong with having the need to write be the reason for seeking an academic post, but I think that those who start their answer with talking about teaching run a risk that they won't be considered "serious" candidates at some schools. I've heard some people say that candidates who lead with wanting to teach won't be productive scholars (a hoary old saw if ever I heard one). Part of the problem is, again, the discomfort created by different types of candidates. My POV is that the very best professors do both research and teaching well and take both very, very seriously. Answering the question of why someone wants to become an academic by leading with a desire to teach shouldn't be the kiss of death for a candidate.