Post

If we can only have art from people who "aren't in it for the money" that means we can only have art from privileged middle-class dilettantes. Making art being a viable career is responsible for nearly all worthwhile art, and if it's not a viable career any more we will get drastically less of it.

891 reposts3.2K likes

Weird how this game works - your labor is more "valuable" if it's unpaid! Until money ceases to be the way in which we pay for our basic needs, unpaid labor is just exploitation.

People are welcome to make art not for the money, but for the love of art. That is called a HOBBY. And I think everyone should have a hobby. But that doesn't mean people can't also make art for Money. What do they think movies, books, music, and everything else creative is?

The "bedroom coders" everyone loves to romanticize were selling shareware. They were selling mail-order software. Victor Hugo wrote Les Mis as a serial for a newspaper and he got paid by the word, which is why it's so fucking long. Labor can only exist if society values its existence.

As a privileged middle-class dilettante who creates / plays music just for a hobby I totally agree that art in all forms needs to be viable as a career. JS Bach wouldn’t have produced the volume of genius work he did if he wasn’t paid to compose new cantatas every week.

On the one hand you have Black Ops 7, and on the other you've got God of War: Ragnarok. Both are huge projects, employing hundreds, costing millions, and made for profit. But one is still a goddamn masterpiece of artistry.

Are there people claiming that artists shouldn't be paid? The argument is that to be 100% authentic in your art, you must be doing it for the expression and you also shouldn't alter the expression for the purpose of profitability. If it's authentic and profitable then great.

Yes. "Well, we can't pay you, but it'll be great exposure for your work! And for a good cause. Think of it as marketing!" Meanwhile the person offering gets paid, as do the venue owners, ... everyone gets paid but the artist the public is there to see/hear.

Art is essential to life. People so often don't value the time and effort put into a piece. My sister is an art teacher and a painter. She charges for her paintings by square inch. I've been told this is how it's done in the art world and the price per square inch goes up depending on the painter.

I agree, but the fact this is not self-evident indicates that art and creative work is a marginalized class of labor. No other profession, from doctors, to contractors, to programmers, have to justify being paid for their work.

Skilled artists do not fall from the sky. Like any other craft, it takes an incredible amount of time and resources—and often formal education and institutional knowledge—to reach a professional level.

Creative work creates billions of dollars of value. It is the backbone of massive and popular franchises, among many other industries. Starving artist should not even be a thing based purely on the revenue creative work generates.

My favorite piece of art ever is worth a microscopic fraction of any other artworks I have. It's a statue hand-carved by a poor, unknown artist in Borneo out of a single log. It's geometrically and aesthetically beautiful. He was likely paid pennies, if that, for his brilliant art.

the best artists--in any genre--dont necessarily become known or receive compensation for our work; to get there requires a different skill & a different sort of "ambition" altogether. we do what we do bx we must, not bx we want money for it, although it would be great if we could support ourselves.

Making "art by people in i6 for the mony ONLY the AI rip off artists There is nothing wrong with being paid to do what they love. Hell I am a Quality Assurance manager and love my job, should I not get paid either? Weird logic

i hate to say it but i kinda feel like there's actually more diversity among the amateurs. the career artists seem to be massively biased towards an upper-middle class upbringing or higher.

The vast majority of really good art comes from those that can convincingly convey their views and struggles in life through their desired mediums. Those that share those struggles can connect with their art on such a granular level that it’s difficult to define why they love it so much.

Are being "not about the money" is weirdly new notion - for centuries, wealth and rich patrons knew to pay their artists. Hell, they sometimes paid education in full to have an artist on active retinue. "Poor artist" being romanticized is certainly weird.

We need a living wage equivalent UBI in this country. Far too many struggle far too much for far too little. Our founding documents say the gov't's job is to provide "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" to its constituents. It's time for those who don't support that to get out of the way

NSFW creator here... The take that art should be produced not for money comes from a place of obvious privilege. Like I'll make a good pinup for fun, but if I get paid for it too, that's nice. But I pay for food with my art income, nothing wrong with eating.