I want to say something here but I'm not sure what I want to say. I know I'm a little ruffled but not sure why...
Ok - there are a million shades of "artist" just like there's a million shades of gay. I feel like we're looking at one shade of artist and broad stroking the entire community with that image - or worse yet, implying that is the only shade available.
And I'm guessing that image is (very loosely) the person who stops working to create art, barely survives on their income, may or may not become nomadic... is devoted more to art than people... etc
And I know artists like that.
But I know a lot MORE artists who have their "9 to 5" jobs, have families, and schedule the time they devote to their art (unless over taken by amazing inspiration), and most of us wouldn't know them from anyone else in our maze of cubicles at work.
I guess I just feel like it's being implied that those of us who partition off our lives, continue to work 9 to 5s, and schedule our art time aren't "artists"...
I dunno.
Something rubs me wrong here and I'm not exactly sure what it is.
Or maybe - ironically enough - the message with this thread is that if you aren't unstable - you're not an artist...
oh wouldn't that be a twist!
|