Why are artists poor? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why are artists poor?

#21

Post by cwan » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 6:45 PM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #19

cwan wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not what I said, but many rich people are entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship is one of the fastest ways to income mobility. It's also one of the more difficult ones. That being said, other high income earners tend to also need to be highly creative - from senior managers to consultants, to yes, sometimes even bankers (sometimes unfortunately so). To suggest however that "rich people are so uncreative" is however not onl…

I didn't suggest that, I was merely pointing out that your reply didn't make much sense. > Many rich people are entrepreneurs. Yes, and many rich people aren't, so what. > Entrepreneurship is one of the fastest ways to income mobility. Agree, but no one was talking about entrepreneurs, you just injected it when he said "rich". > That being said, other high income earners tend to also need to be highly creative No one…

Er no, you're veering this discussion to the silly. I was responding to his original claim and why my response wasn't "moving the goal post" as you state. If you can't see that there is a relationship between high income earners and rich people (and my distinction in my original comment or even that entrepreneurs can be a significant subset of rich people/high income earners), I'm afraid there's nothing further useful to say.

Re: Why are artists poor?

#22

Post by gatormax » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 6:47 PM UTC

tjic wrote: post #18

abefortas wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on the meaning of value. I value lots of works of art very highly, but I've hardly ever considered buying art. I think art can have value without being particularly saleable. And with certain kinds of art, the fact that it's popular and lucrative may even be a sign that it's crass and inauthentic. Think Damien Hirst and Andy Warhol.

> I value lots of works of art very highly, but I've hardly ever considered buying art. Then either the art you admire is way out of your price range (I admire Alphonse Mucha, but I don't own any originals!), or the artists you admire are doing a poor job of letting you know that their work is affordable, and would add to your quality of life.

"The principle of revealed preference." If he's not buying it, he's not really valuing it. Like the old joke about two economists who walk past a porsche. One remarks that he'd give anything to own that car --- the other responds, "Clearly not."

Re: Why are artists poor?

#23

Post by zeynel1 » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 6:49 PM UTC

branden wrote: post #4

Ugh: The job of all artists is now self-promotion. In an age in which the old cultural gatekeepers are being swept away, the most pressing challenge of creative artists is to build their own brands. And it’s the Internet which provides creative talent with easy-to-use and cheap tools for their self-promotion. In a sense this is true, but you could replace every instance of "self-promotion" with "creation" and you'd h…

"The job of all artists is now self-promotion."

The job of an artist has always been self-promotion. An artist sells a brand.

Re: Why are artists poor?

#24

Post by cwan » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 6:59 PM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #20

cwan wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This argument I'd concede partially to - that there are social advantages some of us have. This needn't however be an argument about income mobility - which I think is a separate issue (and I do believe exists), but even those who get there because of social advantage does not mean that to stay there one does not need to be creative and at least have a valuable work product. This isn't to say that all rich people (pa…

> but even those who get there because of social advantage does not mean that to stay there one does not need to be creative and at least have a valuable work product. Nor does it mean that because they're there they're somehow more creative than people who didn't have those opportunities and couldn't get there. > but I would argue on average, most high income earners must be because of the value that others are will…

> Nor does it mean that because they're there they're somehow more creative than people who didn't have those opportunities and couldn't get there.

The original question was why "rich people are so uncreative?". With reference to the subset of high income earners, I'm not saying that they would be more or less creative than others in those positions who had better opportunities. I am however saying that the nature of their jobs - as high income earners - suggests that they need to provide something relatively unique as a function of their job that reflects value on average at least equal to their income (unless you're saying that most have somehow lucked into "high income" and on average the people who pay them are irrational/stupid). Again this isn't to say that someone else in that position couldn't be more or less creative - it is however to say that the nature of their job based on the attribute of high income requires more creativity.

I never said that being creative was the only path to wealth - however, innovation does require creativity and innovation is how wealth is created where rule of law exists. Wealth is a reflection that society appreciates a given idea/innovation. I'd even argue that seeing arbitrage also requires a certain level of creativity though as noted, I would concede that inheritance does not. Nor would I restrict it to the self made rich people as the reality is even those born into wealth would need to exercise a certain level of creativity to maintain/grow it (even if others might be more effective at doing so).

Re: Why are artists poor?

#25

Post by anamax » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 7:02 PM UTC

Are artists poor, or is it that "artists" are poor?

Re: Why are artists poor?

#26

Post by gnaritas » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 7:12 PM UTC

cwan wrote: post #24

gnaritas wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but even those who get there because of social advantage does not mean that to stay there one does not need to be creative and at least have a valuable work product. Nor does it mean that because they're there they're somehow more creative than people who didn't have those opportunities and couldn't get there. > but I would argue on average, most high income earners must be because of the value that others are will…

> Nor does it mean that because they're there they're somehow more creative than people who didn't have those opportunities and couldn't get there. The original question was why "rich people are so uncreative?". With reference to the subset of high income earners, I'm not saying that they would be more or less creative than others in those positions who had better opportunities. I am however saying that the nature of…

What I'm saying is the correlation between wealth and talent (creativity) is much weaker than the correlation between wealth and who you know or who your family is and what opportunities those connections got you. I don't believe rich people are more creative, they're just much better connected and able to apply what creativity they have than unconnected people.

Re: Why are artists poor?

#27

Post by cwan » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 7:31 PM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #26

cwan wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nor does it mean that because they're there they're somehow more creative than people who didn't have those opportunities and couldn't get there. The original question was why "rich people are so uncreative?". With reference to the subset of high income earners, I'm not saying that they would be more or less creative than others in those positions who had better opportunities. I am however saying that the nature of…

What I'm saying is the correlation between wealth and talent (creativity) is much weaker than the correlation between wealth and who you know or who your family is and what opportunities those connections got you. I don't believe rich people are more creative, they're just much better connected and able to apply what creativity they have than unconnected people.

Let me ask you this - who would you consider to be more creative?

(a) a person who could be more creative doing piece work at a factory (b) a person who may be less creative performing some form of art

Both these individuals may have arrived at their respective current jobs in life but I'm not saying that opportunities had nothing to do with it. With respect to rich people, I am saying that high income earners have to maintain a higher output of creativity on average to maintain that income as a function of their job. I'm not saying that luck doesn't have a lot to do with it, or that geography or ancestry doesn't have to do with it.

Re: Why are artists poor?

#28

Post by tjic » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 7:32 PM UTC

gatormax wrote: post #22

tjic wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I value lots of works of art very highly, but I've hardly ever considered buying art. Then either the art you admire is way out of your price range (I admire Alphonse Mucha, but I don't own any originals!), or the artists you admire are doing a poor job of letting you know that their work is affordable, and would add to your quality of life.

"The principle of revealed preference." If he's not buying it, he's not really valuing it. Like the old joke about two economists who walk past a porsche. One remarks that he'd give anything to own that car --- the other responds, "Clearly not."

"The principle of revealed preference." If he's not buying it, he's not really valuing it

Exactly!

Re: Why are artists poor?

#29

Post by lux » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 7:53 PM UTC

indigoshift wrote: post #16

Speaking as a Starving Artist, I've noticed that part of the problem lies in artists trying to achieve success by aping corporate methods, which rarely work for an individual artist. I did that for awhile, and it got me absolutely nowhere. There's also this attitude (in the US, at least) that you're a failure if you're not instantly successful. Rare is the artist who takes the time to build a solid foundation of fans…

> Rare is the artist who takes the time to build a solid foundation of fans/patrons.

Amen. I'm just getting back into music as my next "career" move (touring musician/technomad starting 2010 :). This year has been spent getting the small stuff in place and slowly building a listener-base online and around town. Blogging, twittering, posting songs for feedback, playing open mic nights, joining song circles, networking. Mostly the type of stuff any real business person has to do to make their business succeed, and for artists it's no different.

I've been self-employed for 8 years now (time flies!), and I know over-night successes are fiction. It's a constant struggle to maintain or improve where you're at. Things are made to appear over-night when they took years getting to the point where the forward motion reached that level. I'm hoping to take the same approach to slowly building a music career, and I don't expect it to take just a few years. It will take as long as it takes, doing what it takes, but it's the only approach that works. It's great to hear of others doing the same thing too, right on! That's the main reason why I love HN as a community.

One story that stuck with me, cheesy as it was, was from a speaker I saw back in high school. He was talking about how you see a basketball star, or the math wiz in class, or your favourite band, and how it's easy to say "wow, that's magic!" as if they were just born with the natural aptitude and were instantly where they are today. He said that what's magic is what you don't see, Michael Jordan practicing every day for hours, the band rehearsing and playing small gigs for 10 years, the math wiz actually doing his homework. I always took that to mean we make our own magic happen when people aren't looking :)

Re: Why are artists poor?

#30

Post by indigoshift » Tue, Aug 25, 2009, 8:06 PM UTC

lux wrote: post #29

indigoshift wrote: post #16

Speaking as a Starving Artist, I've noticed that part of the problem lies in artists trying to achieve success by aping corporate methods, which rarely work for an individual artist. I did that for awhile, and it got me absolutely nowhere. There's also this attitude (in the US, at least) that you're a failure if you're not instantly successful. Rare is the artist who takes the time to build a solid foundation of fans…

> Rare is the artist who takes the time to build a solid foundation of fans/patrons. Amen. I'm just getting back into music as my next "career" move (touring musician/technomad starting 2010 :). This year has been spent getting the small stuff in place and slowly building a listener-base online and around town. Blogging, twittering, posting songs for feedback, playing open mic nights, joining song circles, networking…

> It will take as long as it takes, doing what it takes, but it's the only approach that works.

And that right there was my first big mistake. I'd jump into an art career half-assed, and if it didn't take off like a rocket in six months, I'd put it aside and collect a Day Job paycheck. As a result, I'm pushing 40 and my art is at a stage right now where it should've been fifteen years ago.

But I didn't stick with it, and all that time is wasted time now. I listened to people who didn't understand a thing about art, and measured my success by the "get rich quick and get a Hollywood deal!" crap that everyone thinks is the true measure of success. I fucked it up and missed out on all those years of working every day to get better. Right now, I'm scrambling as fast as I can to catch up.

Those of you in your 20s, let me say this: If there's something you can't stop thinking about--whether it's art, music, coding, or whatever--then just do it. Even if you suck at it right now, it's better to get all the suckitude out of your system now, while you're young, so that by the time you're my age, you've put all that behind you and your craft is nice and polished.

Hook me up with a link to your music, man! I wanna hear it. If it's something that jives with my artwork, I'd be willing to give you a free plug. If you'd like to reciprocate, let me know.

Currently, I'm creating a comic and related artwork for that niche of people who are tired of all-ages, family-friendly nonsense. The comic's NSFW, but it's nothing racier than you'd find in an old copy of Heavy Metal.

Link to the comic is: http://locus.keenspot.com

You'll wanna read it from the beginning, or it'll make no sense. TOC link is towards the top, under the banner and above the nav buttons.

And good luck with your music career! I've always wanted to make music, but have no talent for it. I live vicariously through all my musician friends. :)