Philosophy Now Forum

The composer of music, the painter, the performer of music, the sculptor, even the quilter -- these people create objects or experiences of "art".

A dilemma faced by such creators is the following: Should the creator please himself or the audience (consumer)?

It would be nice to do both. If one's livelihood depends on it, or if one is mainly concerned with making a fortune from art, pleasing the consumer may be paramount. Otherwise, creating art that meets her (the artist's) own plan or expectation or standard may be the important thing.

For example, the hobbyist composer, having an independent source of income, may have the simple aim of composing music that sounds good to him, or that reminds him of music that he likes which has been composed by others. If other people perform it or like it too, that is merely icing on the cake. This avoids the potentially self-destructive obsession of trying to be popular, or to be "great" in the annals of music history. If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, the creator can take steps to create only "beautiful" things, and others will have to make their own judgement.

Interesting....

Perhaps this is relevant. I once heard the author Salman Rushdie make this comment in an interview.

He said when a writer is young, the tendency is to measure one's work against that of other writers, to compete, to compare.

He said that as a writer matures, these comparisons fade away, and one writes simply because that's what writers do. I thought that was a wise insight.

To me, the essence of art is that experience where one stops doing the art, and the art begins doing you. You become just the instrument through which the art expresses itself. Perhaps it takes a lot of "doing the art" and perhaps some natural ability too, to reach that point.

You have to keep a simple game plan otherwise you end up with some form of entertainment rather than an artwork. Live to create, don't create to live. When there is no difference between yourself and an audience there is no dilemna.

Thank you both, Typist and Bernard, for expanding upon my comments -- new insights!

Artists who despise popular tastes usually live in poverty and become famous posthumously. Nietzsche for example.

Thanks, duszec! More possible insights.

This makes me wonder, did Nietzsche like what he thought and wrote? Were his writings up to his personal standard of art or authenticity? Did they reflect his "true self"? If so, isn't that enough?

Can we hold him responsible for the use others made of his writings? What was his behavior toward others?

The Bible, considered a work of art by many, has been used to justify slavery, the burning of "witches", and the persecution of Jews.

I think that Nietzsche did not want to please. He probably was aware of the shocking effect of his writings and probably enjoyed it.

One Belgian suggested once that Nietzsche was subtle or soft (doux), which surprised me. I tried to find some confirmation of this in his writings and some chapters in Zarathustra sound not harsh at all to me, for example the chapter about friendship.

Nietzsche is not responsible of course of what other people used his works for, Nazis or others.
His sister (who was a Nazi, together with her husband) burnt the compromising material and kept only what she considered good stuff. So what we get from Nietzsche will always be an incomplete picture of his ideas, and always open to speculation.

I do not agree with him, but the more I read his works the more I like him, which surprises me a bit, but I cannot help it.

duszek, you've made me curious about Nietzsche, and now I want to learn more about him.

I really don't think this is a dilemma at all.
You can only make the type of art you can make. You might be lucky enough or cynical enough to be able to follow a path of commercial success. If you want to make a living at it then you can actively pursue that pathway, if not then you have the leisure to follow the path that you most desire.
Either way the value of the art is not necessarily diminished by taking one or the other pathway, except in purely monetary terms. The value of art is more than cash, I think. If you need to find the validation in another's appreciation then obviously you need to at least exhibit, and hopefully sell a few items. But I still can't see where the dilemma is.

My own art, at the moment is a series of busts of famous philosophers. I like making them, but whilst they might have some commercial value, I imagine that the pursuit of that small specialist market is likely to take up time better spent on enjoying the act of making the art in the first place. It would also involve me in making copies of items for sale rather than creating new objects - which is where the artistry comes in.
What am I going to do with all these lumps of plaster? Who knows!
Whilst I enjoy looking at them they will survive. When I get fed up with them, I might find them a new home, or destroy them.

Chaz, your comments ring true for me. If you enjoy the act of making art (composing, painting, sculpting), that would seem to settle the issue. Maybe the dilemma only exists in my mind, as an excuse to start a topic!

I, for one, would like to see some of your busts. Might it be possible to photograph one or two of your favorites and post the photos in this thread?

Mike Strand wrote:Chaz, your comments ring true for me. If you enjoy the act of making art (composing, painting, sculpting), that would seem to settle the issue. Maybe the dilemma only exists in my mind, as an excuse to start a topic!

I, for one, would like to see some of your busts. Might it be possible to photograph one or two of your favorites and post the photos in this thread?

It would not be that easy. I can link a URL but can't upload images that are not on the Internet.
But if you give me a day or two I can think of something.

I'd like to see them too Chaz, Flickr or picassa are easy to upload photos into. I really enjoyed copying a bust of Voltaire when at art school. It was different to working from life models; unkind of me perhaps, but not many of those models were good at emanating someone's living thoughts the way that bust of Voltaire by Houdin did!)

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?q=bust+ ... ,r:17,s:39

Bernard wrote:I'd like to see them too Chaz, Flickr or picassa are easy to upload photos into. I really enjoyed copying a bust of Voltaire when at art school. It was different to working from life models; unkind of me perhaps, but not many of those models were good at emanating someone's living thoughts the way that bust of Voltaire by Houdin did!)

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?q=bust+ ... ,r:17,s:39

My method is to use photos of the philosopher where available or pictures of a range of other busts.
My aim is not to copy but to find something myself.

I have begun a Facebook page called "Chazpics Sculpture." Send a friend request, and I will add a few more images as they are made.

This is the link they give. But I think you need to be friends first.


http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set= ... 483c624c01

Not bad chaz. Quite liked the fecundity sculptures as well, yours or images of the real thing?