(Untitled)
I got into this whole argument with Nic tonight, but...
I don't believe that you can call yourself an artist, a writer, a musician, whatever, until you are making a living doing it. What you're doing may (or may not) be art. What you're doing may (or may not) be good. But until you're doing it for a living, you are not an artist. You may want to be ( Read more... )
I can give you info on the people who would say that, yes, art is in how it is received and appreciated. There are people who think the way I do, and there are people who think otherwise. This is an argument that's never going to be resolved one way or the other.
You can think your way, I can think mine. But a person still can't call themselves what they're not. A plumber is still a plumber, no matter how great their art is. I'm not arguing about quality there either. I'm arguing about calling someone what they are. Until someone has achieved something and been recognized one way or another (again, not talking about how good their work is), they are what they are. Your profession is your profession. And that is what I'm talking about.
Nic basically got pissed off that I said she wasn't a musician. Well... She's not. She isn't working as one. She isn't playing anything. She has absolutely no intention of writing music for people to hear, "because it's too personal to share." Well then... If you're doing nothing, you're not a musician. No amount of talk will make up for the complete lack of work.
Reply
Leave a comment