This is a little all over the place, but it's where my mind took me today. I've written this from an artist's perspective. Creator would probably be a more apt word. We're all creators, but some choose to put a significant and deliberate effort in creating, and those are the people I would consider "artists." For those that have not seen, I do visual art, sing, and have begun to create educational videos on various topics of interest.
At one point does art/media become unhealthy? I think this question is composed of two questions. When does it become unhealthy for the artist; when does it become unhealthy for the viewer, and to what degree, if at all, is the artist responsible? I think the criteria would vary according to the particular individual, but when patterns emerge in populations I think it's worth discussing. Ultimately I think it's a question that we should all be asking ourselves, on a personal level.
When I think of potential artistic motivations, I think of three principle goals, each of which would have two polar manifestations.
| For fun || Procrastination |
| Education and influence || Manipulation |
| Catharsis and self expression || Approval-seeking |
Regarding: | Catharsis and self expression || Approval-seeking |
This is obviously highly pertinent in our current state of media. I think many of us have the desire to encapsulate our identities into a brand, as a way to escape the fear of being unintelligible. To advertise an ideal, consistent Self, to validate and quantify our identities. We fear the incoherent, undefined, and the unknown, especially as it pertains to our own lives and identities, but that is a fundamental aspect of our existence. It's the Yin factor that society has shunned for massive swaths of history, because it's scary. Within the last few months I have been forced to reconcile aspects of my personality that are diametrically opposed to the image I've both privately and publicly packaged myself in. I am still trying to figure out how to completely integrate myself, and to what degree I should express these qualities outwardly. In society we are all miniature celebrities in a sense. This is why actual celebrities; the way we treat them and why, reveals so much about a society. Most notably how people believe they want to see and express rawness, when they only want the illusion of it, a "measured" rawness. I think fundamentally this is fueled by loneliness. We wouldn't have the urge to seek or be raw if we had the actual rawness that can only be established through trust.
A discussion about the objectification of Self, especially as it pertains to artistry and social media, also necessitates a discussion about vanity. I’ve generally avoided falling into this one, but I still feel the pull a little. It’s one of the reasons I very stubbornly refuse to wear makeup beyond ocassional lipstick. Therein is the danger of the artist merging with the art. Perfecting oneself visually as one would do for a painting. Becoming acquainted with the surprisingly technical aspects of fashion and then becoming unable to be visually pleased with themselves, not to mention the risk of falling into hollow materialism and the environmental effects of buying anything not thrifted. Having an earnest desire to capture candidness and authenticity, and express oneself, through photography, but then becoming so lost in lighting and posing that one starts to merge the challenges of the medium with real life, becoming obsessed with the minor details of their appearance or the appearance of the objects around them in every day life. Or wanting to live and display as full and interesting of a life as humanly possible, inspired by FOMO. The ubiquity of this content seems to have had a negative effect on the population that views this content (almost everyone, to some degree). When a person is always posting pictures of themselves or their stuff, I can't say the word "confidence" comes to mind most of the time. It's probably best to think of how we look and present to others as little as possible, but appearance and presentation is also an art form and a real and tangible part of life. So where is the line drawn? This all also begs the question of how an artist can turn off the endless critique we are all privy to but still improve as an artist, and also the question if it's even worth it at all. Because the more media you are acquainted with, the more you notice imperfections. When an artist starts to become bogged down by this, they lose the forest in the trees. It's the artists' true kryptonite and irony.
The motivation of | Education and influence || Manipulation | also becomes vulnerable to this perfectionism. Not just in the visual sense but also in the ideological sense. You find yourself asking if the idea is worth expressing, if it provides a net good, or if it's just imposing yourself on the world. The anxiety of putting a bunch of work into something that is not influential enough, or influential in the wrong way, to warrant the work. And if intentions are "off," consciously or unconsciously, it can inspire a counterproductive or harmful reaction in the audience.
I would argue that the motivation for me that has been psychologically healthiest to me on an individual level has been: | For fun || Procrastination |. When my likeness, ideologies, nor identity is not involved in the art at all, when it is entirely immediate, minimally planned, and meditative. It is also probably the healthiest form of procrastination I've done. But I feel that this art has the least net positive effect on others.
Society would prefer I make this essay into a video, going through hours of filming and post, and ensuring that it is visually interesting by looking as interesting and well assembled as possible. But honestly I'd rather not. I like to write. I find it effective and I really hate doing post. And I don't care or want to care what my lighting looks like or if I'm close enough to the mic when I'm educating or pondering. But the written media is no longer effective. I want to be effective. Ultimately, my goal is to help, educate, and inspire people. A follow up question to that, is whatever message worth expressing, and is it conducive to the goal of being helpful to people? Further, if the answer is yes, how much exposure is enough? At what point should one stop quantifying influence based on the number of souls that are reached? Is it when we become spread too thin? And when does it start to effect one's mental well being? Because we can always be better. I think as we travel this vein of thought it's important to not forget the power of face to face interaction. Not just for the other person but for oneself. And to not have a goal to that interaction beyond connecting with that person and having a good time. I was not a fan of the strict social isolation that dragged on and on for months, and I knew from the beginning that I would not enjoy it. I think face to face interaction should supersede interaction by proxy, such as through media, but not replace it.
At one point does art/media become unhealthy? I think this question is composed of two questions. When does it become unhealthy for the artist; when does it become unhealthy for the viewer, and to what degree, if at all, is the artist responsible? I think the criteria would vary according to the particular individual, but when patterns emerge in populations I think it's worth discussing. Ultimately I think it's a question that we should all be asking ourselves, on a personal level.
When I think of potential artistic motivations, I think of three principle goals, each of which would have two polar manifestations.
| For fun || Procrastination |
| Education and influence || Manipulation |
| Catharsis and self expression || Approval-seeking |
Regarding: | Catharsis and self expression || Approval-seeking |
This is obviously highly pertinent in our current state of media. I think many of us have the desire to encapsulate our identities into a brand, as a way to escape the fear of being unintelligible. To advertise an ideal, consistent Self, to validate and quantify our identities. We fear the incoherent, undefined, and the unknown, especially as it pertains to our own lives and identities, but that is a fundamental aspect of our existence. It's the Yin factor that society has shunned for massive swaths of history, because it's scary. Within the last few months I have been forced to reconcile aspects of my personality that are diametrically opposed to the image I've both privately and publicly packaged myself in. I am still trying to figure out how to completely integrate myself, and to what degree I should express these qualities outwardly. In society we are all miniature celebrities in a sense. This is why actual celebrities; the way we treat them and why, reveals so much about a society. Most notably how people believe they want to see and express rawness, when they only want the illusion of it, a "measured" rawness. I think fundamentally this is fueled by loneliness. We wouldn't have the urge to seek or be raw if we had the actual rawness that can only be established through trust.
A discussion about the objectification of Self, especially as it pertains to artistry and social media, also necessitates a discussion about vanity. I’ve generally avoided falling into this one, but I still feel the pull a little. It’s one of the reasons I very stubbornly refuse to wear makeup beyond ocassional lipstick. Therein is the danger of the artist merging with the art. Perfecting oneself visually as one would do for a painting. Becoming acquainted with the surprisingly technical aspects of fashion and then becoming unable to be visually pleased with themselves, not to mention the risk of falling into hollow materialism and the environmental effects of buying anything not thrifted. Having an earnest desire to capture candidness and authenticity, and express oneself, through photography, but then becoming so lost in lighting and posing that one starts to merge the challenges of the medium with real life, becoming obsessed with the minor details of their appearance or the appearance of the objects around them in every day life. Or wanting to live and display as full and interesting of a life as humanly possible, inspired by FOMO. The ubiquity of this content seems to have had a negative effect on the population that views this content (almost everyone, to some degree). When a person is always posting pictures of themselves or their stuff, I can't say the word "confidence" comes to mind most of the time. It's probably best to think of how we look and present to others as little as possible, but appearance and presentation is also an art form and a real and tangible part of life. So where is the line drawn? This all also begs the question of how an artist can turn off the endless critique we are all privy to but still improve as an artist, and also the question if it's even worth it at all. Because the more media you are acquainted with, the more you notice imperfections. When an artist starts to become bogged down by this, they lose the forest in the trees. It's the artists' true kryptonite and irony.
The motivation of | Education and influence || Manipulation | also becomes vulnerable to this perfectionism. Not just in the visual sense but also in the ideological sense. You find yourself asking if the idea is worth expressing, if it provides a net good, or if it's just imposing yourself on the world. The anxiety of putting a bunch of work into something that is not influential enough, or influential in the wrong way, to warrant the work. And if intentions are "off," consciously or unconsciously, it can inspire a counterproductive or harmful reaction in the audience.
I would argue that the motivation for me that has been psychologically healthiest to me on an individual level has been: | For fun || Procrastination |. When my likeness, ideologies, nor identity is not involved in the art at all, when it is entirely immediate, minimally planned, and meditative. It is also probably the healthiest form of procrastination I've done. But I feel that this art has the least net positive effect on others.
Society would prefer I make this essay into a video, going through hours of filming and post, and ensuring that it is visually interesting by looking as interesting and well assembled as possible. But honestly I'd rather not. I like to write. I find it effective and I really hate doing post. And I don't care or want to care what my lighting looks like or if I'm close enough to the mic when I'm educating or pondering. But the written media is no longer effective. I want to be effective. Ultimately, my goal is to help, educate, and inspire people. A follow up question to that, is whatever message worth expressing, and is it conducive to the goal of being helpful to people? Further, if the answer is yes, how much exposure is enough? At what point should one stop quantifying influence based on the number of souls that are reached? Is it when we become spread too thin? And when does it start to effect one's mental well being? Because we can always be better. I think as we travel this vein of thought it's important to not forget the power of face to face interaction. Not just for the other person but for oneself. And to not have a goal to that interaction beyond connecting with that person and having a good time. I was not a fan of the strict social isolation that dragged on and on for months, and I knew from the beginning that I would not enjoy it. I think face to face interaction should supersede interaction by proxy, such as through media, but not replace it.
Last edited:
) that it becomes unhealthy. Environment impact also should be considered. How responsible is the artist? Well, that would depend. Will try to address more later.
