I think you're treating artistic success and commercial success as two mutually exclusive concepts. More often than not, commercial success only occurs for new artists because of some unique aspect visible in their work.
I suppose that depends on what you define artistic success as. To me, it is whenever I successfully achieve the vision I had in my head and get it down in a medium. Pride and fulfilment in my work is number one for me. Compromising my work in order to advertise for something I think is a backwards step.
I've given much thought to whether the two can co-exist. For example, whether you can design graphic advertising for Nike based on their protocol and target market (while having no interest in Nike or their products and no respect for the way they increase profit margins by producing their sneakers in Chinese sweatshops.) And then whether in your own time you can continue with your own individual work. Finding time for both would be hard and you may find yourself thinking completely differently about art when you start producing it as a form of advertising or as a sellable product.
I think the financially successful artists find a way to work independently and not compromise their own unique vision or style. Let their work sell itself or create their own company/product around it. I don't doubt there would be artists out there though which would be happy to use their skills for whatever financial gain they can achieve.
I kind of agree and disagree with your statement "More often than not, commercial success only occurs for new artists because of some unique aspect visible in their work."
I think some artists can adapt their work to what they know is in vogue in order to make it a success, taking elements from other influences to make it recognizable and marketable.
Truly unique art has often come misunderstood at it's time of production and hasn't been successful at all, because it challenges people and goes against norm. Citizen Kane by Orson Welles comes to mind. It's regarded as one of the greatest films of all time now, and it is an artistic triumph, years ahead of its time of production. It flopped at the box office. Same could be said for Van Gogh who never sold a painting in his lifetime.
I'm an artist, I'm chasing my dream to work as an artist
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I think you're treating artistic success and commercial success as two mutually exclusive concepts. More often than not, commercial success only occurs for new artists because of some unique aspect visible in their work.
--
linchpin
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I suppose that depends on what you define artistic success as. To me, it is whenever I successfully achieve the vision I had in my head and get it down in a medium. Pride and fulfilment in my work is number one for me. Compromising my work in order to advertise for something I think is a backwards step.
I've given much thought to whether the two can co-exist. For example, whether you can design graphic advertising for Nike based on their protocol and target market (while having no interest in Nike or their products and no respect for the way they increase profit margins by producing their sneakers in Chinese sweatshops.) And then whether in your own time you can continue with your own individual work. Finding time for both would be hard and you may find yourself thinking completely differently about art when you start producing it as a form of advertising or as a sellable product.
I think the financially successful artists find a way to work independently and not compromise their own unique vision or style. Let their work sell itself or create their own company/product around it. I don't doubt there would be artists out there though which would be happy to use their skills for whatever financial gain they can achieve.
I kind of agree and disagree with your statement "More often than not, commercial success only occurs for new artists because of some unique aspect visible in their work."
I think some artists can adapt their work to what they know is in vogue in order to make it a success, taking elements from other influences to make it recognizable and marketable.
Truly unique art has often come misunderstood at it's time of production and hasn't been successful at all, because it challenges people and goes against norm. Citizen Kane by Orson Welles comes to mind. It's regarded as one of the greatest films of all time now, and it is an artistic triumph, years ahead of its time of production. It flopped at the box office. Same could be said for Van Gogh who never sold a painting in his lifetime.