Blog

How do you speak about your “activity” as a visual artist? What is the correct vocabulary to use? It struck me again recently how words influence the perception of the individual in society and his/her “valuation’ (value) in the big scheme.

When you say you are an accountant, reactions are straightforward. It is first, a “real” job and a job that is perceived as safe and serious. You are respected for your expertise. When you say you are a visual artist, there can be different reactions.

There is the blank stare, the polite “how interesting” and the clever segue in the conversation. There is the assumption that your art is a nice relaxing hobby, and you see the person fighting the urge to ask, “but what is your real job?”, ie how do you really contribute to society you lazy daydreamer. Some of us have real responsibilities etc….

The question I am asking myself is: how to speak naturally and simply about what drives you and happily fills your days (and sometimes nights) in a way that most people understand and value? I am not speaking about people from the art world, just people you meet in your daily life: friends, relatives, neighbors, strangers on the bus and at non-arty parties etc….

Should you say it is a passion? Could sound like a glorified (and cheesy) way to say it is a hobby. Like I have a passion for house plants. At the moment. Next month/year, I might have a passion for weaving.

Is it a calling? A pompous word for most occasions and audiences. More blank stares are bound to follow. I discussed the matter with a fellow artist, and she told me art is her “raison d’être”, her purpose in life. The literal translation is her “reason for being”, which it is incredibly strong and to which I can totally relate as another artist. But would you say that in a random social gathering?

Is it a job? In many ways, it is. There is production (with tools, techniques and substrates), there is communication, there is money exchanged, there are colleagues and business partners, there is competition. And the word career is used. But by calling it a job, is it not demystifying an activity that is divine for some, starting with the artists themselves? Interestingly, there seems to be an increasing number of artists who are very comfortable with the artistic entrepreneur approach and who are also incredibly savvy in the process.

Is it a way of life? Certainly. But somehow it becomes even less comprehensible/understandable by most.

I believe two elements play a vital role in how artists are perceived and valued by society, time and money.

In regular jobs, the daily workday is timed, there is a starting time, regular breaks including a lunch break and an end time, unless you are one of the corporate gladiators enjoying the rat race. Time can be more fluid for artists. True, some artists might not work in their studio for months, but they need that time to recharge, to gather information and inspiration. They also need time to promote their work (let’s not forget this time-consuming and exhausting part of the “job”). And for some, going to the studio every morning like clockwork is simply counter-productive.

Money comes in an erratic way for most artists. Let’s face facts, most artists don’t live from their art and need to have a side hustle or the proverbial “day job”. Hence if you don’t live from your main activity ie art, it cannot be a job?

So how to be taken seriously in your requests as an artist? An accountant asks you something, you generally comply as you know (or just assume?) it is a valid request, and it might be in your best interest. An artist asks you something, say about the way his/her artworks are lit for the show you are organizing, he/she might be considered picky or difficult, while the artist is just being professional. I had that experience recently for a show organized by non-art people, complaining about how demanding artists are. Yet, an artist can be professional. S/he can be reliable. S/he understands the notion of deadlines and can respect them. S/he is allowed to develop a strategy of communication and a strategy for diversifying his/her sources of revenue. None of these notions are bad words that will make him/her less of an artist.

Is commercial success the price to pay (pun intended) to be taken seriously as an artist? In a still capitalist society, an artist that sells, that is commercially successful is respected indeed. It becomes socially accepted and even highly desirable to befriend a successful artist. As if all the weirdness and all the disquieting freedom were tamed by money. This can be a slippery slope. In seeking commercial success, some artists might look for the sure thing, abandon their uncertain exploration and give up their freedom. All that for financial comfort (nothing wrong with that) and for social acceptance. Not every job is a passion. Which raises the question of why so many people accept spending valuable hours, days, months, and years of their lives for an activity that is just ok. Money, security and/or power/influence might play a role there. Every passion does not need to lead to a job or to a lucrative activity. They can be enjoyed just for their own sake.

Is being an artist a special job that cannot be done without a calling? It is work for sure. And that’s work that never stops. You are always thinking about art, your artworks, what you currently work on, what you would like to work on, looking for inspiration, capturing inspiration. No 9-to-5 for the wicked.

Ultimately money is freedom. So, finding ways of making money is increasing one’s freedom. And freedom is one key element for making art. Universal revenue would be great news for artists. So is claiming the right to live from one’s art and to be an art(ist) entrepreneur. Maybe that’s a label that most people will understand and respect. I will try it from now on to monitor reactions.