Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Is she really 'an artist', or is she just crap?

226 replies

Nandocushion · 17/12/2011 06:32

I met my friend a few years ago and she told me, early on, that she was an artist. She didn't talk much more about it, and she was always short of money (if not in fact 'starving'), so I didn't really question it.

More recently, she's told me the rather sad history of her art career, and it was as follows: went to art school, had approximately 15 shows, never sold anything. Not. A. Thing.

She is now 30 years out of art school and has never sold a piece of art. She feels that critics have been biased.

I haven't seen her art. I have no idea what it is like, but I do assume that over the course of THIRTY YEARS, if she was good, someone would have noticed. And I also think, that if you have never ever ever made any sort of money, not even pennies, off being an artist, then maybe it's time you stopped calling yourself "an artist". Am I BU?

OP posts:
MillontheFloss · 17/12/2011 16:38

Ditto 'I don't bother with work as my DH is loaded but I am an struggling artist too' as in the OP's case!

CheerfulYank · 17/12/2011 16:43

Ugh, I have a friend like this. He had a breakdown when he was sixteen and so is supported by disability payments.

His art is shit. It really is. ( He is a fairly good musician though.) He had one show and also displays some of his stuff at a gallery owned by our friend's mom. He never sells anything because it's shit.

He always refers to himself as a starving artist and I always want to slap him.

nativitywreck · 17/12/2011 16:55

Oh yes CY. I have experience of this.
My ds's dad has refused for 5 years to get a job, go to uni, re-train-anything, because he is "a writer".
Uh huh.
He does the odd article, which he could do at the weekends if he had a full time job.
I managed to do a degree as the single parent of a baby, looking after ds all day and working in the evenings on broken sleep (and breathe!) but he couldn't manage to have a job and pursue his journalistic career?

He used to have more of a real career in journalism, but suffered with depression, which put paid to it, and I am supportive about his attempts to re-build this career, BUT to classify himself as such winds me up.

Especially when I am applying for call centre jobs. Apparently doing a shit job to support ds is OK for the likes of me, but he is a writer FFS.

Sorry, rant over! Carry on!

PlumpDogPillionaire · 17/12/2011 17:09

Well, you know, I blame the 18th century, which, I think, is when this fetishization of 'art' as some marker of 'genius' - rather than the product of skill like any other work - sprang up.

AnotherMincepie · 17/12/2011 17:33

Plumpdog, art which is purely the product of skill without any inspiration or originality is not art, it is craftsmanship.

MillontheFloss, why the need to make pointed comments to people who may be genuinely working hard at their art, but just happen to not be making a great deal of money from it? Quite nasty if you ask me, deliberately designed as a put-down.

claig · 17/12/2011 17:46

When J.K. Rowling was on the dole writing her first novel, was she not a writer? When she was slogging her guts out writing that book, was she not creating a work of art? Is it only when it sold millions that she then became a writer.

All the years that Van Gogh created drawings and paintings with little success, was he not still an artist?

Throughout those years, they may not have been successful artists, but I think they were still artists creating works of art.

nativitywreck · 17/12/2011 17:58

True, but if I were JK (if only!) and someone had said to me at the time "what do you do?" I might have said "I am on the dole but I am writing a book", not "I am a writer" because that does imply that's what you do for a living.

claig · 17/12/2011 18:01

Yes, but being on the dole is not "doing, it is "being"", whereas writing or painting is "doing".

claig · 17/12/2011 18:10

An actor has all sorts of different temporary jobs whilst waiting for the real goal of landing an acting role. If you asked an actor "what are you?" or "what do you do?", they would say "an actor", not a "pizza deliverer" or whatever temporary role they are currently doing.

A temporary job or even a permanent job does not define a person if they do not see that as what they are, if they have other goals.

claig · 17/12/2011 18:16

If you asked them "how do you earn your money?", they may say "I deliver pizzas" or "I am unemployed", but I think they see that as different to what they are or what they do, since they are temporary states as opposed to the permanent state of being an artist, writer or actor.

carabos · 17/12/2011 18:23

For some people, they are what they do and that's nothing to do with money. For others, what they do to earn money is what they are.

CheerfulYank · 17/12/2011 18:54

If he were actually doing something and trying hard it would be one thing, but he is sleeping in his mother's basement, waking at 2 pm to eat macaroni and cheese, and every few days he will spend ten minutes with some pastels and make a few random circles and squiggles. Then call it something like "Duality", get his mom to shell out some money so he can have it professionally framed, and put a picture of it up on facebook. Oh, and of course it has to be signed "James M. Nobhead" . Not his real name, obviously, but for some reason his insistence on the "M" enrages me. :o

He. Is. Not. An. Artist.

Van Gogh and Rowling are different stories.

CheerfulYank · 17/12/2011 18:55

And then he got a job (my brother put in a word for him) but it was too much to expect him to be there at 9 pm every day and put in a shift. So he quit.

And is back to being a "starving artist."

nativitywreck · 17/12/2011 19:11

Cheerful, how did I miss this guy?? It just seems all wrong that I wouldn't have had a relationship with him at some point.. Grin

SolidGoldStockingFilla · 17/12/2011 19:19

Nativity: I'm afraid I was probably shagging him. Oh no, hang on, with me it's always been musicians...

Anyway, I want to applaud Claig for some terrific posts. A person is more than whatever s/he does to pay the bills, and there is nothing at all wrong with wanting to define yourself by what you care about doing rather than being defined as a shelf-stacker/burger-flipper/cab driver when that's just what provides you with an income.

claig · 17/12/2011 19:33

Thanks, SolidGold. Smile
Society does try to typecast people, but life is far more complex than neat little pigeonholes. Remember the cab driver who was Mastermind champion.

And artists are different to most of the rest of us. They are rebels and iconoclastic and creative and often don't conform to society's norms about timekeeping or whatever. They have a vision and a dream and they create a new reality, they aren't bound by protocol. They put themselves on display, open to the critics to often be torn apart iin public, they face failure regularly at auditions etc. But they do it because they have a real love for their art.

It takes all sorts in life, and thank God for artists and their persistence in the face of so much rejection and lack of recognition.

rockinhippy · 17/12/2011 19:35

When J.K. Rowling was on the dole writing her first novel, was she not a writer? When she was slogging her guts out writing that book, was she not creating a work of art? Is it only when it sold millions that she then became a writer.

All the years that Van Gogh created drawings and paintings with little success, was he not still an artist?

Throughout those years, they may not have been successful artists, but I think they were still artists creating works of art.

graig I think the difference here is TALENT - I've no idea as to whether the OPs friend has any actual real talent or not, I suspect neither does she - I know from my own friends, exhibitions, even when theres lots, are not necessarily a mark of real talent - just contacts, money or as I've seen - been able to blag it?

some Artists really do genuinely have talent & it takes a while to get noticed, but if they are good, they WILL be noticed, especially after 15 exhibitions - along with the wannabes I know - I also have several professional Artist friends who DO make a good living from it, not all because they are good at marketing, but because they were spotted by people who are

I've had a good career in Arts & Design & worked very hard for it, so it does get up my nose when compared as equal to people who "play" at it for fun, yet announce it as their chosen career

Interesting though that some on this thread think being an Artist means you are looking down your nose at others, I hadn't thought of it as pompous before Confused

& cheerful, your friend sounds oh so familiar - but not to any of my talented Artist friends - they paint incessantly - but definitely to the wasters who like to use the title Grin

claig · 17/12/2011 19:40

rockinhippy, but on the other hand, we know that there are thousands of musicians and artists all over teh country who are better than many of teh famous ones, but they have never been spotted. A lot of it is about who you know and what contacts agents and managers have. There is lots of talent out there that has been unspotted, and there are lots of manufactured acts with less talent.

claig · 17/12/2011 19:43

Just look at the amount of popstars from public schools with rich parents and good contacts. They aren't the best in the land, but they knew how to go about it.

SantasStrapon · 17/12/2011 19:49

My mum paints and exhibits, she sells approximately 10 paintings a year. She loves painting, it is her passion, and she is very good.

But she would never call herself 'An Artist'.

JuliaScurr · 17/12/2011 19:50

Nick Drake
Van Gogh
Rowling
Me
Granted, the novel might meet with more commercial acclaim if I actually wrote it but that is a minor technical issue and not really the point.

newsandviews · 17/12/2011 19:50

Selling art is more about networking and self-marketing these days than making good art. I am an artist and I know loads of very talented artists who don't get much professional recognition, because they don't have the social skills or confidence to market themselves the wealthy gallerists, or they just hate the art market. And conversely, I know many others who produce very mediocre art but are excellent at schmoozing at gallery openings, so are very popular with collectors.

Plus, many types of art aren't very sellable - installation art (which is what I do) and video art are never popular with collectors but they often attract the most creative people.

I am supported by DH in my art, I am doing an MA with him paying full fees, and we've never needed an income from me so I haven't made a huge effort to sell my art or to produce it in a form which is easily marketable (I do a lot of conceptual art which doesn't result in a physical object to sell). I have won awards and recognition for my art so I know I'm very good at it, it just doesn't translate into cold hard cash. I probably would have made more of an effort to produce paintings or prints to sell if I was supporting myself, but in many ways I'm glad because it means I can spend more time doing the bits that are most important to me.

EssentialFattyAcid · 17/12/2011 19:51

Why does it matter so much to you whether she thinks of herself as an artist?

Are you keen to pigeon hole her as a "failed artist" or something to make yorself feel better?

rockinhippy · 17/12/2011 19:51

yes I do agree with that graig & I do agree with your post above too as regards it taking all sorts in life & Artists being dreamers & thank god for them etc etc - BUT there are a LOT out there that are clearly delusional - yet still spout on & on about their work & being the starving Artist -

these characters are also often the ones that think doing the leg work to get a foot in the door of a chosen field is beneath them IE one of my less talented artist friends - years back I had contacts to get her into a well known animation studio - this at the time was her dream job - but like everyone else you start at the bottom & work your way up - she stuck it 3 days & walked out & when I asked why I got - "I'm not wasting my talent making tea" - her talent is minimal - she's okay, but nothing special - shes now 50 & still sat on her backside living at home with her parents & tells everyone she meets she's an artist/designer

Sadly its people like her & several others I know who get the far rarer genuine talent a bad name

claig · 17/12/2011 20:00

I think that art is a tough game and the competition is fierce and talent, contacts, personality and chance can all help determine whether a person is successful or not. But for some to be successful, there will necessarily be many more that aren't. But I don't think they are wasters, they were tryers, but maybe didn't have the talent, luck, personality or contacts that others had.

The thousands waiting tables in Hollywood are not wasters, they are all tryers but most will not be successful for all sorts of reasons. But hats off to them for still trying.