i have a question which i hope u will find interesting-it has long fascinated me. the question is this: Do artists enjoy their own art? that is, can poets, composers, painters, philosophers, directors, actors, writers and the rest stand back form their creations and enjoy as if they had no part in producing them? can they derive a full sense of pride? is it possible for an artist to say “yes, i really enjoy my own work-i am amazed at how brilliant i am!” for example, i know Wagner and Nietzsche absolutely adored their work and thought they were superior to most of the other people working in their field.
I can really only speak for myself, but in that case, yes. I enjoy my work very much. As Garfield once said, ‘it’s not the having, it’s the getting’, I tend to enjoy the creation more than just sitting and staring at the finished piece.
I frequently go back and reread my comic, for example, and I tend to rummage through my boxes of photos I’ve taken of stuff I built out in the machine shop, just to look at them.
My works are largely utilitarian, however, and not what you’d call “classical” artworks- paintings, statuary, etc. Mine run closer to something like a nice paintjob on a car, or a worked hardwood stand. (Just Google my name- the first page and a half is my stuff.)
For the most part, and more generally speaking, most artists would not do what they do if they didn’t enjoy it. It’s often hard work, usually time-consuming (I once spent most of a day machining a bracket for one of my cars- once installed it’s all but hidden, and works no better than the factory piece, but I’m still somewhat proud of it) and can be very frustrating. But yes, it’s generally worth it.
Welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board, jesseboy!
You raise a couple of good questions, which I think you’ve partly answered yourself: if Wagner enjoyed his own work, why wouldn’t artists in other media be able to do the same?
I’m a photography buff myself, and even though I wouldn’t call myself an artist, I do get a real charge when I make a photograph that is particularly good. I can look at it and think “damn, that’s a great photo!” Mind you, that’s rare, but that’s probably because I’m usually a crappy photographer.
Can artists enjoy their own creations as if they had no part in producing them? I’m guessing not. The viewer seeing a Monet painting for the first time gets to experience the completed work fresh, all at once. Monet lived with that canvas for weeks, experiencing every new spot and splash of paint. By the time it’s done, he’s intimately familiar with every square inch. He can’t see it fresh, but that doesn’t mean he can’t step back and say, “damn, I’m good!”
Changing the subject, I’d like to make a few comments on your first post. They’re meant as 100% constructive criticizm. I’m not trying to pick on you or slam you in any way. Just a few notes to help you settle into the particular groove of this message board, 'kay?
Your OP, being more of a “what do you guys think” kind of question, belongs in the IMHO forum. The General Questions forum is for questions that have factual answers, such as “why is the sky blue?” But please do not re-post it there. A moderator will likely come along shortly and move it for you.
Some folks around here are real sticklers for capitalisation. It really makes your posts easier to read. And post that’s easy to read is more likely to be responded to. I know that the shift button on your keyboard works, because you capitalised “Wagner” and “Nietzsche”.
It depends. I’d say the majority of artists do enjoy their art, but a substantial minority don’t, and a few (often movie actors) refuse to look at it. And the attitude can change over time. Sometimes you’ll look at something and decide it’s crap; later on, you’ll realize it wasn’t that bad.
I find that whenever I make art (or anything, really), I look at it and reflect more on the process of creation and what was going on when I did it… so looking through an old photography album will leave me re-evaluating myself and how I did the photography (or failed to do it, all too often). But then again, I have a tendancy to do that with all art. When I look at someone else’s webpage, I usually dissect it in the back of my mind in both how they coded it, their look, and how they achieved the look (believe me, some webpage designs are works of art and engineering). So I think the answer to your question is yes. Look at actors - they are usually able to look at their movies like anyone else.
But writing and music are different stories, usually. Someone writing a 600 page book is more likely to have an emotional attatchment and understanding that is completely different from everyone else’s, and many musicians look at a new album like it is a tremendously large and potent statement. They also tend to listen to other musicians more than themselves.
I almost enjoy my work but have never prodced anything I was 100% satisfied with. Like many, I am my own worst critic.
Still, I’m pretty happy using it.
One thing that I believe many artists will agree with is that, often when I’m working I can start feeling like my photos aren’t very good, simply because I keep seeing them over and over. If I put them away for a while, even just a few days, I can look at them with a fresh perspective and really decide if I like them or not. Also, seeing them toned, matted and framed is different from seeing them hanging up in the darkroom. The finishing touches make them more complete and…professional, I guess.
Famous quote, paraphrased: A work of art is never completed, only abandoned. (I’ve also heard it “released into the wild.”)
I’m very critical of my own work. For example, when I listen to the soundtrack album for a show whose score I composed, I hear all the flaws, musical and technical. I can acknowledge that I did some really good work with it, but I have no real objectivity as far as an overarching judgement. The more time passes, the more objective I can be, because I forget about the creative process (i.e., I have trouble remembering which song required days of head-pounding-on-wall work, and which just came out in an easy hour), and I can evaluate the work as a finished product.
But Salvador Dali (to name one example) was famous for holding himself up as a genius; he once said the very best thing in his life was “waking up and being Dali,” or something like that. In his case, the attitude is partially self-parody, but it’s obvious he thought very highly of himself and his impact on the field, which implies he had great appreciation for his paintings and sculptures.
I don’t think there’s a solid answer, for all artists. Some hate themselves and their work and destroy large portions of it during or after production. On the other hand, I can’t imagine someone like Thomas Kinkade having any emotional feeling of any kind (beyond the mercenary instinct, of course) for his inoffensively empty landscapes.
I do enjoy my projects “as if they (sic) (I) had no part in producing them?.”
As others have mentioned, I enjoy the process of creating. That’s the big thrill of working in the trade. I don’t feel that I have to possess the cabinets and furniture I make. The real joy is in building them. Other people take possession of them, but I will always feel a connection to the work that others can never have.
Grammarians are encouraged to tell me if I used that (sic) thingy properly.
Advice welcomed.
Thank you.
We now return you to your regularly sheduled thread…
If you happen to count musical performances, I’ve never been completely satisfied with anything I played. I liked it, mostly, just not satisfied, per se.
I am frequently dismayed with the final product. In the case of a photograph, it is what it is. In the case of a stone sculpture, I suppose I could go back and chip away some more, but… when my inner workings say it’s done, it’s done.
There are times when shooting a photo when I know without doubt that I ‘got it’ and it always is pleasing and almost disarming. I used to think that talk of a Muse was largely bullshit but to be honest, what comes out isn’t always what I thought would come out and…well… it’s gratifying.
I enjoy elements of most of what I make. Does that help a bit?
For me, enjoyment goes along with satisfaction that the artistic goal has been fully achieved. (In this way an artist is different than the audience – lucky for audience.)
Note the difference between the general dissatisfaction of performing artists with any of their performances, as opposed to the occasional satisfaction of of non-performance artists.
I’ve never been satisfied with any music I’ve played, theater performance I’ve given, or video I created.
I’ve taken photos, drawn a couple things that I was more-or-less completely satisfied with. Written a couple short stories and a few articles that really wouldn’t benefit from further change.
My longer written works, however, always seem to have room for improvement. I assume there’s no way to make them completely satisfactory. I’ll like individual paragraphs, or certain plot elements, but won’t enjoy/be satisfied with the rest.
Like when I buy a woman clothes & accessories & tell the lady what to do with her hair & everything so the whole thing brings out her personality & then I take her out to an art opening & show her off? Yes, I enjoy that.
I am a guitarist and write a bunch of music. I write for guitar, piano, bass and strings usually.
Generally there are two ways I write music. The first is when I have an idea in my head and work out the parts. When I work that way I usually create something and record it. When I listen to the music later I almost always find something I could have done better. I like listening to what I wrote but those little mistakes-problems drive me crazy. The other way I write is to improvise. When I improvise something cool and get it on tape my general reaction is “Holy Crap, that is COOL!”.
I enjoy all the stuff I write otherwise I wouldn’t do it.
I like what I write but there is always a little voice in my head saying “You could have done this better…”. It interfers with my enjoyment of my own music unless I put the song away for a long time.
I’m a bassist, and there are some things that I’ve played and recorded, that after some time has passed, I have said, damn that was pretty good. There’s also things that I’ve played that I just flat out can’t even listen to.
Sleestak, that’s pretty interesting. I suppose each of us is driven by a different KIND of voice. When I’m sculpting a piece of stone, I simply ‘go’. I have only once made a clay model first, they’re always abstract works. As the stone comes away, I am moved to go at it in different ways but I am never aware of some conscious discussion or process inside that says, ’ If you cut this right here the entire thing will be reduced to a large useless shard of disgustingness’ . I made a piece last year for my best friend, it was a small candle’s flame out of alabaster. I knew the angles I wished to see, the sense of a flicker I was going for. I suppose to that end, I was directed first, but still and all- the exact shape was a mystery until I finished the piece. Make sense?
Photos are different, by design. In a fraction of a second I know if I got it or not. With faces and digital photography, that part of the creative process has become mercilessly streamlined. I shoot, I check, I throw out- all on location. A few photos have taken me a while to shoot. I shot one last summer that actually took a prize in a juried show ( yay ! I don’t suck uniformly with my art !! ), where I kept driving by the location, seeing the shot happen. Eventually I left the house one day, drove back there and stood and walked around, and shot perhaps 4 frames. I knew that only the one was…true? Real? what word do we use? Honest?
One frame was creative, the rest were snapshots. All within 10 feet of each other, all of basically the same subject. It’s like the musicians in here who are posting- you work a piece for hours and there may be elements that ring in your mind but a lot of it is still chaff. Suddenly it clicks and you play through a variation that is stellar. Hope you had the DAT running…
I make music, film, act and I write. I also dabble in design and photography. All of it is for fun, and hence I’m not getting a large distribution (yet, i hope).
I always go back and look over/ listen to/ watch my work, because not many people ever get to experience what I’ve created. I have to go back to it myself to ensure that it stays real; by being observed it’s like my effort wasn’t in vain. I can occasionally appreciate it seperate to the creative process, but it is hard to stop myself mentally editing as I go (that shot should have been different, I should have structured that sentence differently).
But that’s why I do it: to remind myself that I created something real.
There was a thread around here a while back discussing dreams; in it I mentioned that I have dreams in colour, sound, smell, touch, even (rarely) taste. My daydreams and conscious efforts at imagining things can be as complete.
Much of my art comes from trying to render in the real world these images and scenes in my head. Only once recently have I succeeded in capturing the feel of such an internal image. (I go back to that little drawing a lot.) Most of the time, if I’m lucky, I’ll get 1% or 5%. I suspect that, in my head, I can create/perceive/apprehend (now there’s a Great Debate) far more than I could ever render in the real world, even if I did nothing else for my entire life.
I can’t look at a piece of my art asd appreciate it as a complete stranger might. It’s impossible; my art is too closely connected to me. Every piece of art reminds me of the struggles I went through making it. None is a complete representation. Some do a pretty good job, and I feel good about them. Most… remind me of how much more there was to capture.
