April 15, 2024
Selfish Artists: Dynamics of A Peculiar Concept
All people are selfish, artists or not. This might sound like a hot take, but it’s actually trite: When all are something, nobody is. In other words, all people are selfish because that’s human nature – we are the center of the universe because that’s how we perceive everything – but the fact that there are degrees is what allows us to call someone selfish and someone else not.
Linguistic and metaphysical trickery aside, selfish artists are a peculiar concept because the nature of art itself (especially in connection with authorship) is as peculiar. By its nature, art isn’t quantifiable, whereas artists are humans with intense desire to quantify everything.
Do artists have social responsibilities? That’s a question we’ve wondered about. Selfish artists, as a concept, is somewhat relevant to that question, but not entirely. The topic boils down to the degree an artist respects the art, their work, and ultimately themselves.
Selfish Artists and Music
Ross Daly, an Irish musician who has spent most his life playing in Greece, once said something that made a profound impression on me. I paraphrase: There are musicians who play so that the audience listens to the music, and there are musicians who play so that the audience listens to the musicians.
The worst offenders are of course soloists, especially in uncontrolled environments. To be direct: Picture your average rock band’s lead guitarist. Still, you can expect such behavior (selfish artists with skewed priorities) from other players, too. Bass players who slap and pop and tap all the time or drummers playing double bass drum like it’s a machine gun.
You might also recall a recent post on confidence and creativity, where I referred to various drummers playing something they hadn’t heard before. In particular, how Chad Smith – drummer of Red Hot Chili Peppers – freestyled and played casually, having fun, whereas Dirk Verbereun – drummer of Megadeth – took detailed notes and put together a much more “audience-ready” artistic interpretation.
To be clear, I don’t consider Smith selfish; the occasion was just meant to be a funny exercise. However, I do consider Verbereun unselfish for coming up with something that respected the song he played, the art, as well as the audience.
Is Art Meant to Be Shared?
In my post on pornography, erotica, and the nature of art, I presented the following argument:
[Art] attempts to communicate an experience and even connect experiences to others, people to one another – not to mention the function of the audience. And yet at the same time (and again we have to recognize a paradox) the best art is the kind of art which ignores this function, at least on a conscious level.
In other words, art both is and isn’t meant to be shared. As I said, it’s paradoxical; yet true, on an idealistic level. In some sense, only selfish artists can produce a work that is worthy of being shared.
Think of writers who adapt to their audiences, usually in order to please everyone and sell (“share”) as many books as possible. They might sell a lot of books, true, but the more palatable something is, the less worthy as art. Art is meant to be deviant, divergent, disturbing.
I’d say art is meant to be evil in some metaphorical sense of the word.
Selfish Artists and Confidence
This will inevitably (but necessarily) complicate the argument, but we must face it: Are selfish artists confident? Based on the discussion on confidence and creativity, is there a connection between selfish artists and (lack of) confidence?
I would say, tentatively, that though there is no direct connection – a confident artist can be selfish or unselfish – it is much more likely for arrogance to express itself as selfishness. And because humans are complex and sometimes (or in some areas of their lives) might be arrogant whereas sometimes (in other areas of their lives) might be not, being confident isn’t quite a binary condition.
We all have our darker days.
In such cases, I’d say an artist eager to show (to themselves, first and foremost) that “they’ve got it”, might exhibit more selfish behavior. A musician might play in a way supporting their own skills rather than the song. A painter might go against what the theme of their work requires only to indicate their skills in a particular area (picture them, if you will, recalling a critic’s negative comment on the artist’s ability to draw eyes; they’re seething with anger and decide to draw hyperrealistic eyes for what should’ve been an impressionist painting).
How about writing, however?
Selfish Writers
The dynamics involved in writing are interesting in the context of the topic. First of all, like painters and unlike musicians in a band, writers work alone. Also as in painting, a novel can take a long time to finish – though consider that a painter might spend years depicting a single moment, whereas a novel can describe events in an entire lifetime.
In this context, I would say writers can be given a little more slack regarding selfishness. However, self-indulgence and disrespect for the art as a result of selfishness can also affect writers, too. There is a reason we have expression about people enamored with the sound of their own voice. Words are mesmerizing, and writers can fall victims to their own enchanting.
It’s About Respect
As I mentioned in the introduction, the topic boils down to respect – for one’s self, for the art, for the audience. Yet as we saw, this can also be problematic. When you adapt to your audience, you essentially disrespect them! Similarly, when you allow yourself to get carried away, you disrespect the art as well as yourself.
The entire edifice is vague and without clear dividing lines – welcome to “fictional reality” – which makes it profoundly difficult to assign borders to. As I said, humans have a desire to quantify everything but art – true art – is unruly and evades such attempts.
Ultimately, does it even make sense to talk about selfish artists? Perhaps; perhaps not. But I would still argue it’s not only valid but indeed imperative to talk about respect toward art. It’s absolutely crucial to be aware of the criteria art formulates for itself.
I admit to selfishness. Oh, I crave lots of sales, and am sure that even if ‘my people’ are a very tiny fraction of readers, by dint of there being 8 billion people on Earth, they’re still a healthy potential bunch.
But I don’t want any outside input, except my beta reader’s (and she reads for clarity), and hew only to my own standards.
Because nobody else does.
My writing is the only place in my life I have full control, and my way is the only way… but I hope you will like it, whoever you are, too. Some of you. A FEW of you. Because, of course, I don’t write for the masses.
What you say about control is both intriguing and something I deeply relate to. We control so few things; let writing be one of them.
It’s interesting also because – at least the way I write, which likely differs significantly from yours – writing is also about letting go, consciously giving way to the subconscious (yes, it’s as confusing as it sounds), which is some subtle way of actually reaffirming control.
No wonder writing feels so therapeutic to many!