Philosophical Musing

[Peegoo]

“Never look to others for validation. If you believe in what you have done, that’s all that matters.” On the surface, you think yes, of course that’s right. You shouldn’t care what anybody else thinks.

But on second thought, wait a minute, that is completely wrong. Isn’t the whole point of the creative process to make things that other people will enjoy or connect with? If what you have made does not resonate with other people, what is the point? Is it enough for you to think it’s good, if nobody else does?

Some people create just to experience the joy of the process.

I'm in the middle of building an amp from scratch, and I'm not expecting it to sound any better than any of the very primo tube amps I currently own--several of which I built and several are vintage gems. Do I care what others think?

Nope. Not in the slightest. I'm having me some fun!

I'm no genius, but I agree with this guy.

Now, if you're engaged in an enterprise where others' opinions count, e.g., you rely on a market to support whatever you're creating, that is way different.

 

[Peegoo]

Another aspect of this discussion, related to the "loving what you've done is all that matters," is what you get out of the effort.

We've all heard about how the pathway to happiness is to have a job one truly loves and is passionate about. That statement often neglects to consider success, because there have been millions of failed businesses owned and run by people that are passionate about what they're doing.

Being the architect of one's own fortune--or misfortune--depends on factors that far exceed passion, drive, and expectations.

 

[Lou Tencodpees]

If what you have made does not resonate with other people, what is the point?

In my estimation art doesn't necessarily require outside approval. As long as it provides some satisfaction to the artist then maybe that's all it was intended to be. Maybe that changes the definition of art/artist. Making myself a sandwich doesn't make me a chef, but a fella's gotta eat. Shouldn't preclude me from fulfilling that desire.

 

[Mjark]

It just feels like trained monkey stuff.

I hope you dress appropriately.

 

[KeithDavies 100]

many very well-regarded artists- some even considered genius- were not so highly thought of in their own time

so there's that

Exactly!!

I've decided I'm one of those.

 

[blowtorch]

Exactly!!

I've decided I'm one of those.

yep me too
"underappreciated and misunderstood in his own time"

and I keep in mind: "your jeering means nothing to me, I've seen what makes you cheer"
effective every time

I plan on dying unknown and alone
and happy

 

[KeithDavies 100]

Creativity for commercialism is one thing, you have to create to engage the masses and do what they like or what you hope they like for success.

Creativity for arts sake is for the artist's wishes. It's good when the artist says it is good, no one else's opinion matters.

Here are my examples.

View attachment 1099972

I had a friend who was a dancer and they had this print in their room. I just loved the colors and the expression of joy plus concentration found on the dancer's face.

This one is another representation of a woman in concentration.

View attachment 1099973

The first portrait you can pick up at Amazon for like $20. The second is hanging in Louvre and is priceless. When De Vinci painted the Mona Lisa he did not know how it would become what it became. He just painted and the result were left to the future.
Same can be said for the Dancing lady in Red, in five hundred years it might be hanging in the Louvre or in some gals bedroom as she envisions her life as a prima ballerina.

Hadn't seen that Dancing Lady In Red before. That's just stunning. I would have that on my wall in an instant. (Or, perhaps, in 48 hours, given your explanation that it's on Amazon!!)

 

[THX1123]

I'm reminded of two Camus quotes:

"Every authentic work of art is a gift offered to the future." Authentic.

"If it adapts itself to what the majority of our society wants, art will be a meaningless recreation." A Meaningless Reaction.

 

[Bob Womack]

And now a little slice of reality: The vast majority of music throughout history was either commissioned and written to please a client or written to please a market. The concept of "To thine own self be true" didn't enter the composition picture until the Romantic period in music, starting around 1820-1830. I guess it is only normal for modern musicians to be a little confused by this but do think of your favorite popular music: it was mostly written with the audience in mind in order to sell on the radio or some other media.

Bob

 

[beyer160]

And now a little slice of reality: The vast majority of music throughout history was either commissioned and written to please a client or written to please a market. The concept of "To thine own self be true" didn't enter the composition picture until the Romantic period in music, starting around 1820-1830. I guess it is only normal for modern musicians to be a little confused by this but do think of your favorite popular music: it was mostly written with the audience in mind in order to sell on the radio or some other media.

Bob

The Who's first single "I Can't Explain" was, according to Pete Townshend, "written to introduce us to the charts." A purely commercial move by a band that was already experimenting with feedback and loud, aggressive playing (by 1964 London standards). Nine years later they released Quadrophenia, a sprawling, near-incomprehensible concept album that made no efforts towards the singles charts. Having established themselves as a popular, successful band, the Who were free to delve into less commercial material. Like I said, the intersection of Art and commerce has a LOT of grey area.

 

[naveed211]

It is right. Don’t seek validation. That should never be the point.

It’s not bad to want validation. It’s bad when you start making art with validation as the goal. Then it’s a product. Which is fine, but call it what it is.

If you get validation or you don’t, that’s fine either way. But just make what you want to make, however it comes out.

 

[Edgar Allan Presley]

Art is about connection, but real, deep connection is a different thing than creating something that most people find pleasant and agreeable. Good art risks missing the connection because it is so specific and real. It won't connect with everyone.

When we connect with art, we don't feel alone; we sense someone else's genuine humanity. To create that kind of experience in the viewer, an artist has to plumb their own humanity and create from there.

The vast majority of music throughout history was either commissioned and written to please a client or written to please a market.

Sure, but because something was commissioned or created for a specific audience doesn't mean it doesn't come from the deep self of the artist. J.S. Bach composed for patrons and churches, but he was still composing from his own inspiration. Same for Rilke and the Duino Elegies. These weren't just to please someone else and get some money.

I don't want to be too restrictive, though. Sometimes art is made to make people dance and have fun together, or to sell toothpaste. Sometimes art is made as just an experiment in form, or to quickly sell and pay rent. These can be real art, too, and sometimes they can even connect with people deeply.

My best work started with my own delight, not someone else's. And that holds true in commercial art, folk art, and fine art. Work that starts with the artist's own delight has the best chance of moving other people.

 

[ChicknPickn]

This is similar to my youth... I thought it was great when a girl was crazy about me and, to be truthful, I did not mind when a girl was openly hostile to me either, I always thought, where there is fire.... there is the possibly it could turn toward fondness... passion was the key! It was the girl who was completely uninterested that I was pretty sure was not going to change her mind.

A wise old owl-friend of mine has often said that, too - - that there is no hate without love, no suffering without ecstasy. I can remember those odd dynamics with a few women. Publicly, we scorned one another, and then we tried to steal glances without being detected.

 

[BluesMann]

Very interesting thoughts here. I have a very difficult time writing songs I think are any good. I think I may have written a half dozen I thought were keepers. Having a reaction from a listener or listeners is not a requirement but it does inform one about what one has written. I guess the same would be true about any artistic endeavor. I get a kick out of what passes for some form of art as far as painting goes for example. Give me a 10 by 16 foot canvas and let me splash random colors randomly and viola, it’s in a gallery. Some of the music I hear these days sounds like it’s been crafted with the same degree of care.
Is the creative process the end in itself? As in validation neither desired nor required? I recall that as an example, Van Gogh was not really appreciated in his time. Many poets, authors, artists were not either. Or are not appreciated in their own time. Music interestingly enough seems to go both ways. Some not appreciated until they are long gone. Others reap the rewards presently in the current music industry environment. I play and write for my own enjoyment. If when I play, it gives pleasure to others that’s just a happy bonus for all of us. As far as I can discern, there is no right or wrong answer.

 

[1955]

What if there’s no real point to any art, whether it resonates or not? That’s a scary question for a lot of activities that pass the time away.

 

[teletimetx]

Not that my opinions have any particular value, but:

From a scale where distances are measured in light years, or time passing on a geologic scale, I think it's pretty safe to say that all the chicken scratching of humans, artful or not, are pointless and unimportant. From Big Bang to Black Hole in ten easy steps. Not particularly important, these humans - except in the hubris of their vanity.

But within our lifetimes, things and experiences acquire the meanings humans attach to them. I don't think it matters much whether you chase commercial success or satisfy yourself as to the value of your efforts.

I think a lot of people would prefer to be real lucky rather than real talented or real smart. If you're looking for it, or at least open to the concept, you can discover really talented and really smart people every day. And certainly people that you really wonder: "why aren't they famous or recognized for the amazing things they do?" Timing and luck? IDK.

Have a cousin in the Seattle area who (among other things) does really large sculpture installations. Looks to me like good work if you can find it. Will the sculptures still be around in 400, 500 years? Who knows? I think they're kinda cool.

Music on the other hand has a sort of evanescent quality. Even though we can reduce most of it to sheet music or in more recent times to recordings, sometimes, live music has an additional quality that doesn't always translate well to either recordings or sheet music. Trying to explain some live performances is like "dancing about architecture" as one wiser person said once.

I have a friend who is a really good songwriter, and recognized by many as such. Because I once was taken with the notion that live music had this elusive quality, I told my friend that I would include in some of my performances a song that would be performed only once - but I would be the only one to know that. Kind of the opposite of trying to write a song that would be heard many, many times.

He laughed. Well, at least you'd be doing something that no one else was trying to do. I said, well, that's what happens sometimes anyway, so why not at least be honest about it. And to be further honest, I had a song (maybe 12 years ago?) that was called "Tapeworm Jesus" and I performed it once at Anderson Fair in Houston. It got some laughs, but in retrospect, further performances may not have been warranted.

So in my vanity, I thought of this "one time only" concept, after the fact.

Yeah, art with a capital "A"! Art!

 

[getbent]

What if there’s no real point to any art, whether it resonates or not? That’s a scary question for a lot of activities that pass the time away.

I've had the opportunity to see cave drawings, petroglyphs etc that are ancient and while we DO measure time in light years etc... I found some degree of humanity and connection in that... thinking of watching my grandfather do scrimshaw making knife handles that reflected his work and experiences and thinking of these folks back in those times, taking time to share their work and experiences...

I was walking in the country the other night with my dog (not yet 2 years old) he is energetic and interested and still full of the dangerous curiosity of not being afraid of much.... It was dark (we were away from any city type lights) and we heard a sound that was, well, strange, part wind making something shudder and maybe part animal that sounded menacing. He rushed back to me at a full run and circled behind me, looking up with deep concern.

Smiling in the dark and a little concerned myself, I said, 'just about time to get back in the truck eh, boy?'

When we got back in the truck, he sat on the seat next to me looking out at the window, I'm sure wondering what the hell that was and not being too interested to find out. He looked over at me, caught my eye for a moment to make sure we were okay and he laid down.

Maybe there is no point. But those wordless connections matter to me. I recognize I create the meaning, but they create the context.

 

[Peegoo]

I think all true art has a frame around it...it helps me to determine what's art and what isn't. It works for me.

The frame doesn't have to be made of wood and surrounding a painting; it can be something else that's tangible, such as the city surrounding a large mural on the side of a building, or a sculpture surrounded by a park. It could be commentary or satire surrounded by a social or political issue. There's always some form of frame.

 

[oldunc]

There's a large difference between "shouldn't care" and "shouldn't depend on". There are also differences in people's reasons for playing music; just to do it, to prove to yourself you can do it, to connect with an audience, to please parents, to impress girls (or I suppose boys), to make money, and doubtless other (even more futile?) reasons. Success is going to be defined in terms of what you're trying to do.

 

[memorex]

I play what I like, because nobody pays me enough to play what they like.