This is a topic that has been on my mind for quite a while, and thought it would be interesting to throw it out here and see what the wise folk of dissensus have to say about it. It stems from myself and other musically inclined friends being at a crossroads in life where we're trying to deal with a conflict between ideals and pragmatism etc. But I don't mean for this post to be about me and my life but more about the conflict between arts and professionalism.
To me, it seems that aspiring towards arts as a profession is rather contrived and damaging to the quality and enjoyment of actually partaking in arts, and by arts here I'm primarily talking about music - but it could just as soon apply to anything of a creative nature. Music, at it's best to me has something of a cathartic (or some kind of) necessity, it's not an obligation or means to an end. Needless to say, with so many musicians there is a vast difference in personality between material that is made before fame/after fame - scenes are born out of obscurity, where a lack of pressure and freedom that being a no-name brings, produces inspiring music. Though as they move from obscurity to fame, the music begins to become formulaic and predictable as we have seen so many times before. That is once you are recognised for a particular thing, your creative vision narrows as there is a crowd to satisfy - and the music becomes a means to pay for bills and as a career. The art of it goes and it becomes like a trade.
So how do people feel here about the idea of aspiring to live off arts? Is it a case of be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it? A self defeating endpoint. Of course the conclusion will probably go something along the lines of - it depends who you are, and what it means to you etc etc. But when music alone becomes the inspiration for music, rather than life for music - how greatly does it limit to joy and quality of making music? If one loves music should one take precaution that the pressures of professionalism may never sully it for them?
To me, it seems that aspiring towards arts as a profession is rather contrived and damaging to the quality and enjoyment of actually partaking in arts, and by arts here I'm primarily talking about music - but it could just as soon apply to anything of a creative nature. Music, at it's best to me has something of a cathartic (or some kind of) necessity, it's not an obligation or means to an end. Needless to say, with so many musicians there is a vast difference in personality between material that is made before fame/after fame - scenes are born out of obscurity, where a lack of pressure and freedom that being a no-name brings, produces inspiring music. Though as they move from obscurity to fame, the music begins to become formulaic and predictable as we have seen so many times before. That is once you are recognised for a particular thing, your creative vision narrows as there is a crowd to satisfy - and the music becomes a means to pay for bills and as a career. The art of it goes and it becomes like a trade.
So how do people feel here about the idea of aspiring to live off arts? Is it a case of be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it? A self defeating endpoint. Of course the conclusion will probably go something along the lines of - it depends who you are, and what it means to you etc etc. But when music alone becomes the inspiration for music, rather than life for music - how greatly does it limit to joy and quality of making music? If one loves music should one take precaution that the pressures of professionalism may never sully it for them?
Last edited: