Artist Dilemma #3
You've been painting nonobjective work in this year's trendy colors, and you have the unsettling feeling that there may be more to art than pleasing the masses and sales. You reach way back and try to remember why it was that you became an artist anyway. Was it a passionate desire to follow the market, or was it wanting to communicate something deeper and more authentic? What would you say through your work if you were in touch with the authentic part of yourself and had the opportunity to express it? Do people's responses to your authenticity matter?
Labels: dilemmas
posted by Cassandra at 8:23 AM
4 Comments:
You ask "there may be more to art than pleasing the masses and sales." Certainly, but is it wrong to consider the desires of your audience? Some of the greatest art of all time was done as a commission where the patron specified what they wanted.
You suggest reaching "way back and try to remember why it was that you became an artist." Your bio has a statement that probably rings true with most artists "I started painting when it became something I was compelled to do." That is certainly the case with me. I simply couldn't avoid being an artist.
Is it not "authentic" if you consider the market?
Very clever, Henry -- quoting me back to myself! For me there is a difference between the work I do to please the market and the work I do solely for myself. Maybe it's all art -- I don't know. Some would dismiss the saleable work as decorative art.
Hi Cassandra,
I have really been enjoying your blog lately-lots of great topics and things to ponder about.
I think it's really interesting to examine this dilemma #3. Why not believe that the work you do solely for yourself will be your most amazing marketplace success as well?
Hi Katherine,
From your mouth to God's ears!
Post a Comment
<< Home