the death of the artist, how we're killing creativity 

One element not raised to the discussion is how much physical attraction contributes to the success of the creative. It’s only natural for folk to pay more attention to pretty people, but in an arena where art/content is flooded, popularity comes sometimes not so much through the art or content itself as much as who is the creator. The art is no longer the art but the presentation/presenter of the art. And when success depends on attraction, that one needs to in some way pander to their audience in some way, then you see where some compromises come in maintaining a steady income through the content.

Being an artist is tough. I try to market myself on social media, but I’m a very private person. Sometimes it feels like you have to show so much of yourself to get a response. It sucks.

You are not being too idealistic. I once had an argument with someone where he said that "if enough people enjoy the work (music) then it is great art." but then I wanted to ask, where is the line between art and entertainment? or do they mean the same thing? And if someone makes good art but doesn't have the network to carry it, does that make it bad?

I think we killed creativity when we started to commodify art, when we made it a tangible thing with guidelines of what constitutes as valuable or worthless, we turned the experience into a product for consumption.

Here's to a world in which no one has to articulate their cool ideas in any way that has to factor in demonetization!

I remember Dr. Dre said something about social media sapping the mystique of the artist. It hits different when you can experience someone's art without knowing what they're doing every waking moment

It sounds cringey but I was watching an episode of Psycho-Pass the anime in which they were discussing the phenomenon of people becoming icons. One of the character’s argument was that icons rarely become revered because of their own creativity but rather because people buy into the character and raise them up on a pedestal. So basically the audience created the celebrity instead of the celebrity garnering an audience

There's a whole genre of RU-vid videos with titles like "How I Make Six Figures As an Artist" and they are incredibly depressing. Basically you need to make art, yes, but also manage several social media accounts, make prints and stickers, do shipping, make RU-vid videos, engage with your followers, all while replicating the most overdone, inoffensive, commercial illustration styles on every Millennial soccer mom's Pinterest feed.

"Our inability to live entirely in the present ( like most animals do ) combined with our inability to see far into the future, make us strange in-between creatures. Neither beast nor prophet." -Arundhati Roy Field notes on democracy

"An artist must never be a prisoner. Prisoner? A prisoner of himself, prisoner of style, prisoner of reputation, prisoner of success etc." ~ Henri Matisse

Yeah saddly the priviliged people mostly are the ones that found themselves more capable of doing art or hobbies related to it, the struggle people, the hardworking class, simply don't have time for it. The priviliged ones are the one that makes most of the content we consume daily; for example: movies. If you think about it doing art is one of the greatest way of rebel against the inequities of life, so if you find yourself, (no matter the situation you are), eager to express, do it. Even if just reach a few people, it's for the good of all of us.

As a writer who's just starting, and trying to figure out whether I should create a niche or a persona, or "learn the ropes" before making stuff for myself, this video was an eye-opener. It's important to remember why I started writing. To have fun.

This covers most of my feelings around making my art a ‘career’ that I hadn’t fully articulated. The whole idea of branding or marketing my work is really unappealing to me, and not just because of my poor social skills lol I care more about my art reaching people than making money off of it so I use social media, but there’s only so far you can reach without playing into marketing/trends and whatnot. It can really affect how you value your work & effort, but I am trying not to do that so much.

When I first entered college I had plans to become a level designer for video games but instead changed my mind to pursue art as I fell in love with the work I was creating. I felt like a Matisse looking at his painting in awe at his own talent. I recently was Commissioned by my aunt to create an artwork for her friend and I created an amazing (in my opinion) drawing that she rejected. To be honest, I felt defeated because the drawing they showed me that inspired them to commission me was a computer artwork designed to be simple and non-offensive. The fact that my aunt's friend liked that artwork over my own really hurt me. I put relative symbolism and heart into the drawing. My art style is inspired by the German expressionists of the early nineteenth century so I semi-understand why they might raise an eyebrow because it's not "whimsical" and "cute enough" but I truly do not want to do the art style that I see many people doing. I watch a lot of RU-vid artists and their works to me seem almost the same. The color pallette, the design, it's too conveyor belt for me. They're not bad, they're just not what I feel I need to do. Expressionism is an art style that is controversial and many times looked down upon but I love it because it allows me to express myself in various ways. I am a socialist artist who doesn't want to become another cog in the machine but the machine is way too powerful to fight against.

One other point I like to mention about the marketization and privatization of art is how it is very oriented towards the eurocentric ideal. In my country, at least, a lot of the art I've seen nowadays are following the western aesthetic which is considered "more pleasing" to the eye, more "modern", and more marketable. A lot of young artists follow this ideal and hence, the culture of art in my country could slowly lose its grip on their identity roots and heritage.

Thank you for your content! In my perspective, many people are somewhat losing the ability to see, understand or appreciate art. Art is something that has to be consumed slowly, it needs time to be digested. But the world we live in keeps moving at a faster and faster pace, leaving less and less space to dwell on the message that anything artistic is trying to convey. But also the massive increase of content leave many people with the sense of wanting more and faster, caring little about the authenticity of what they are to consume - caring more about being simply entertained. Creativity will always be every where making it nearly impossible to be killed but the way we choose to put it out into the world/react to it is definitely changing the dynamics between being an artist and creating meaningful art.

As someone that is currently having the opportunity and privilege to make a music album with some great musicians and facilities, I have to share/ point out how small of an artist I feel and how little of myself artistically I have discovered, in contrast of how much marketable I have to be. I am not blaming anyone for it involved in the current project, or even myself, I'm just doing what most of us bands are doing and trying to hold on to the profitable recognition of the hours of work we have spent in a network we are trying to join or sometimes build with great amounts of effort, neglecting effort that could go into an more in depth artistic discovery of ourselves and the art we are making Thank you so much for this video and for sharing and exploring such an important topic

Most artists were dependent on their patronage since antiquity. So much of our favorite classic art served as PR for the patrons.

This is so interesting... and depressing! As someone who writes songs and posts them online I've long had to realise that I'll never be able to make a career out of what I love bc I wouldn't be able to make the change between simply 'artist' and 'creative entrepreneur'. J'adore tes videos et tu t'exprimes tellement bien, c'est toujours intéressant de voir quelque chose bien recherchée et intelligente comme ça ❤️

Artists are still here, and art is most definitely not dead. Anyone who believes that is not trying very sincerely to find it. Additionally, making money or a career out of your art or creativity is not shameful and does not always lead to the “death” of the artist. (Also - Emily Dickinson never “made it” during her life, either. She never made a living through her poetry. Most of her work was hidden from the public.)

As someone who always wanted to make a living by making art this hit hard 😥 Trying to find a space in the ~*creative market*~ (those words should not be next to each other lol) while developing as an artist is so incredibly hard. Instead of growing by being exposed to art, you have to look at job opportunities and what pays, and tailor yourself to survive, while attempting to sacrifice as little as possible of your individuality. I'm very glad to see this discussed more, and I completely agree with the solution - I hope people realize that the market is killing the arts; it's been so discouraging watching people (especially established artists I've been following for many years) fall for the NFT scams, and I'm worried it will only get worse 😒

I wanted to copy nature but I couldn‘t. However, I was content with myself, as I discovered that the sun can not be imitaded, it has to be represented with something else... with colour. - Claude Monet

I write novels that I want to tell and read, but without any ability to market it, I'd die when my creativity thrives

It's just sad how certain groups of people believe that only they can trully undersrand real art and that they have the power to decide what true art is. True art will find its way to the audience, but it's much harder to be seen, heard or read when some people are just blocking you.

I think you make some really good points, as always. But I wonder if 1) art was ever free of commercialisation and marketisation, before the age of “creative entrepreneurs” 2) if it there were always gatekeepers in the form of editors, commissioners etc

You've made some great great points, excellent video! Just wanna shed light on the overestimation of how artists were valued in the past, and underestimation of the constraints upon them. For example: Joseph Conrad was frustrated of the Victorian public trapping him into writing only nautical-at-sea novels, because only those novels would sell due to his persona as an ex-sailor Polish immigrant. The Great Gatsby was a commercial flop at the time because it didn't cater to mainstream taste. Even Shakespeare wrote women in disguise as men due to Puritan pressure to not have too many men actors in dresses or women characters behaving out of line (among other censors.) Few artists have been free from mainstream trends + persona, and even fewer had their art recognized only because it was good. After the death of an artist, they are deified, and we have the habit of forgetting the unpleasant bits of their realities.

I Don't belive that creativity develops when You're exposed to art. I am a very creative person in the way that I Am always thinking of stories, characters, fantasy creatures and seeing art what really improves is my motivation towards making that a reality but not my creativity as that is something I develop just by living My day to day life. Anyway I really liked the video. Thank you for making this essays as they really motivate me to write down my thoughts and to think 😁

Hey Alice, I found this a really interesting watch. I believe you've read and quite like 'In Praise of Idleness' by Bertrand Russell. There are many artists that see the sublime in idleness as the cradle of cultural contemplation and reflection that is the soul of art such as Oscar Wilde- "To do nothing at all is the most difficult thing in the world, the most difficult and the most intellectual." He also wrote in his essay The Soul of Man under Socialism this - "The fact is, that civilisation requires slaves. The Greeks were quite right there. Unless there are slaves to do the ugly, horrible, uninteresting work, culture and contemplation become almost impossible." Wilde isn't justifying slavery, he is simply stating the inconvenient truth that great artists require a level of idleness not accessible for an extremely high percentage of people on the planet, I'd say 99% at a random guess, with you and I being Western, White and middle class easily in the top 1%. With the way the world has been conquered and colonised to serve the Western World we are certainly the slave masters, however fancy we dress it up. My point is not many successful artists have to work three jobs just to eat, and art has always been a cultural truth telling (or truth constructing) of the privileged. So for me, if the artist has died in the modern paradigm how can you really argue they ever existed. Maybe privatisation and marketisation do kill an abstract idea of purity in art but the suggestion there is that this is a corrupting force that as swept into the arts and converted would be holy artists with pure souls into capitalists. Its not something I find convincing and is as I far as I can tell the logical extension of your thesis (please correct me where I'm wrong). It has always seemed to me that the majority of artists from over the ages have either been aristocracy like Wilde or have been entirely dependant on their support. Art has always been subservient to commerce and I don't see any paradigm shift there. While maybe the internet has democratised taste, I think the bigger influence on the creative peoples and communities of this world has been in empowering everyone to be a nerd, to pursue their own little niche where there is only little interest within your local geography but enough of an audience globally. That's surely what has motivated you to post video essays on RU-vid. "The birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author." I think Barthes' idea has a strange aspiration to forget the author, as the authors existence is inescapable. For me the only people who understand the dilemma properly steer into the skid manipulate their persona as they do their art. This is the Savannah's, but its also the Oscar Wilde's with his outrageous public persona, you can see it in the Billie Eilishs and the Madonnas of the world too. Maybe music is harder to discuss because the visual of the 'author' is part of the creative dimension for sure. The idea that an authors persona limits interpretation and therefore creativity but the opposite is just as arguable. Sorry for the essay, I found you're video very thought provoking and had to get all my thoughts out. Love your videos

I think the death of the artist might be encapsuled in a B. Russell piece called "In praise of idleness". Essentially, if you work 9 to 5, it's pretty difficult to have enough downtime to be truly creative, or to find "inspiration" although he doesn't talk about that. The points he makes are best read in the article as I cannot hope to transmit everything or do the genius justice in such few words but that's more or less it in a nutshell.

I'm not sure it has anything to do with creative entrepreneurs. Since when would artists blame others for not creating? If they did, did they ask themselves what kind of sacrifice they made for their art? I see one main reason Art is dying: human beings became shallow, impatient, lost and obsessed with social status ("I want everyone to see me as ____" -fill the blank with your favorite label). I myself am guilty of those flaws. Do we ever take the time to observe, explore, introspect and create real art from scratch? Even if we did, would we accept that nobody recognizes our art but ourselves? Even if it had value, would anybody really take the time to contemplate it? Btw, there is no art if there is no slowing down.

5:40 really love this thought: "By asking them to build their own network, to become entrepreneurs, you basically asking them to distort their true self". This is what I was thinking a lot in the past days. I feel like I'm killing my genius side sometimes, because of the need to focus more on networks and entrepreneurship... it's hard to be it all.

I just read the fig analogy in the book I'm reading, "The midnight library" by Matt Haig. The whole book is about a woman who, between life and death, has the oppertunity to undo any regret she might have had in her life. I picked that book up purely because the summary on the back of the book sounded so promising. If you spend time thinking about regrets in your life or the fact that your life could've been so different from your current one I highly recommend this book. As always with Matt Haig there are loads of references to mental health and social media as well.

Salut Alice! Je suis artiste (poétesse) et je me suis abonnée à ta chaîne il y a quelques mois. Merci pour cette vidéo. Tes analyses sociales sont, comme d'habitude, pertinentes et personnelles. Avec Shanspeare, tu es une de mes RU-viduses préférées. J'aimerais que tu fasses des vidéos en français de temps en temps (mais c'est comme tu veux, j'aime ton anglais aussi). Il y a deux choses, toutefois, avec lesquelles je ne suis pas 100% d'accord: 1. Il n'y a pas nécessairement plus d'introvertis que d'extravertis parmi les artistes. Certes, les introvertis ont tendance à mieux se connaître eux-mêmes car ils passent plus de temps avec leur propre personne. Ainsi, ils créent des oeuvres d'art centrées sur les sentiments et la réflexion. Mais les extravertis sont tournés vers le monde extérieur et ce sont souvent eux qui, par exemple, écrivent des histoires palpitantes. Même si j'en fais partie, il faut en finir avec le mythe de l'artiste mystérieux! 😅 2. Je pense que nous sommes tous nés artistes et que la créativité est ancrée dans la nature humaine. Si nous faisions disparaître tout l'art et les adultes de la Terre, les enfants finiraient tous, un jour ou l'autre, par être touchés par la beauté de la nature et dessiner, chanter, etc. Sur ce, je te souhaite beaucoup de bonheur et d'inspiration pour tes prochaines vidéos. 😀

I commend you for citing William Deresiewicz’s article as your inspiration for this video essay at the end. I just finished reading the article moments before I started watching your video and I was thinking to myself, ‘I hope she cites him’ and you did. I’ve seen too many video essayists outright steal content from articles and journals without giving credit to the author, and simply pass it off as their own ideas, which can be quite infuriating. So yeah, good job and great video!

Hmmm…I dont know how I feel about this video. I’m a writer and honestly I don’t think there has ever been a better time to be an artist just due to the fact that you *can* make money relatively easily. Also this idea about constraints surrounding pleasing other people/editors isnt new. Emily Dickinson wrote in her diary about this same concept calling it all “too much and not the mood” bc she was tired of having to write for other people. I dont know…I understand where people are coming from but the fact that being an artist is a real career that so many people can pursue is incredible to me. Think about all of the starving artists from the past hundred years who were geniuses in their own right and history will never know them simply bc they did not have the network or luck that others had. Everything is in our hands right now and its really like a new renaissance. No hate whatsoever. Well put together video and I always love how you convey messages/ideas but I had a few thoughts on this one.

I really like hearing your perspective. I agree that privatization often isn’t conducive to creativity, however, I generally disagree with much of your framing. Your framing of “we’re killing creativity” seams to imply to me that society’s creativity comes specifically from people who work creatively driven jobs. Although you touch on the “democratization” of art, I feel that your points ignore the expanded opportunities for creativity that technology society helps provide. Technology and a lot of modern perspectives really help open the door to more casual creativity. Even running with the idea that societal creativity starts with those who follow creative pursuits as a career, I feel that your video looked too kindly on the art of the past. Art has rarely been a lucrative field, the stereotype of the starving artist exists for a reason. People who manage a lucrative or even sustainable career as an artist do, and have almost always done, so because they’re creating something that people want. On top of that, class and access have regularly curbed the abilities of some people to be as creative as they potentially could be. Thanks for the video, I really enjoyed watching it.

Has art ever been devoid of that marketisation? Especially during the time of Virginia Woolf. Dubliners by James Joyce was rejected by all 14 publishers based in Dublin at the time. When he wrote Portrait of the Artist - which was absolutely groundbreaking - he also couldn't get that published because it was so forward thinking. The only way he got it published was by his networking. He knew W.B. Yeats who put him in contact with Ezra Pound, who subsequently got it serialised. Then once again, after having made a name for himself, he struggled to be published. In the end he only got Ulysses published through knowing Sylvia Beach of Shakespeare and Company bookshop in Paris. Nobody wanted a novel that is sometimes lauded as the greatest of all time. Is today really so different? Detective novels, murder mysteries, and "smutt" books were much more likely to be published at the time. To me that sounds a lot like writing 2nd rate genre fiction to appeal to the market today.

I'm so, so happy to have found your channel. You make me reconsider so many things about my life, that I always end up writing something in my journal after watching your videos!

I watch a lot of commentary RU-vid, and I have to say, few commentary creators are exploring as many unusual / unique commentary topics and angles as Alice. Thanks for always making us think!

This is not just a problem in the world of art, but also in the world of fundamental science and that of philosophy, albeit without the aspect whereby one needs to "look the part" to succeed. This might be too pessimistic of a take, but I feel as though anything that does not return short-term gain is just outright neglected nowadays. I can't tell you how many times I've had to explain to people that mathematicians are not web devs, cryptographers, or engineers (I'm a mathematician), anf that we can not *just* do applied mathematics, because pretty soon we will run out of things to apply. This is not to mention how without pure mathematics, we will sooner or later run into the problem of not even understanding our tools well enough to apply them.

As an artist, having to choose between self-actualizing and idk, STABILITY IN ALL ASPECTS was a hard choice for me but no regrets 🤧 thank u for these vids like always!

"the more you see art, the more creative you become" I have to respectively disagree, however admit that at one point I was also as idealistic about art. It's a cliche that "travel broadens the mind" but I've come to realise (after years of trying to convince myself otherwise) that not all minds have the potential to be broadened. The same also applies to creativity and by extension curiosity - there are a lot of people who would like to be creative, consider themselves artists and aspire to be creative individuals, but not everyone can be - and that's ok.

as a brazilian, I''m honored for you to metion Cecilia Meireles

knew that i was sticking around as soon as the bell jar quote hit ✨ i used to detest the idea of being a professional artist because i didn't want an employer or audience or anyone but me + my desire to make decisions about my life...but then i realized that i would be doing art regardless of whether i had a side job or other responsibilities....so would i rather wake up at 4 am everyday to make time for everything or try the creative entrepreneurship ting?.....it's still for me. it's always going to be for me. but i guess other people can witness it as well

This makes me think of Daft Punk somehow, they're amazing artists and have a deep love for the philosophical aspects of music making, but they also have a business mindset in that they own their own record label and all, for the sake of controlling their art without much influence from the music industry.

I actually like art that is individualized. Some should be especially if its the artists intent, or they dont mind it. Sometimes i think of the artist that wrote it as a character in the story, or their own experiences that i cannot directly relate to but feel more meaningful when i separate it from myself and see it as their story they are telling me. I used to avoid some of Taylor Swifts songs because they lack relatability for me. A lot of them are about very specific romance stories which i dont really relate to. But when i saw it as her story, and listened to it that way i found that i enjoy it so much more. I admired her vunerability and the way she described her own experience, which inspired me to write my own stories, worring less about relateability and how it could still be enjoyable to those who dont relate so i dont have to worry about being "relatable" to succeed n gathering a substantial audience.

You always say the things I need to hear. Another great video, Alice. Merci!

You know it’s going to be a great video when it starts with a Sylvia Plah quote

I'm watching the video instead of working on my thesis proposal, no regrets. Great video! I think the ideas of sir Ken Robinson about creative schools will gel well with your solution.

im so happy your channel is growing!! this is an amazing video, well done

your videos are so stunning ... so incredibly thoughtful and thought-inducing. thank you for this!! I think about this a lot when creating videos and uploading them to youtube, which is definitely ran by 'creative entrepreneurs' > 'creatives' themselves

been binge-watching so many of your video essays. thank you for inspiring me to learn again.

The widespread backlash to the ‘I don’t dream of labor’ videos was pretty irritating. It seemed as if no one was truly, genuinely attempting to articulate a criticism that felt sincere to them; rather, because it was a popular thing to do that guaranteed views (and money), most responses felt like hollow “gotcha!” moments in which the person invalidated the entire idea and refused to engage with any part of it in good faith, all so that they could smugly wag their finger and say “uh uh uh - you forgot to mention privilege 😏” The art of rhetoric is, too, becoming more visibly profit-motivated and guided by what they audience wants to hear about, and specifically, what opinion they want to hear. Tee Noir’s channel is one of my favorites for a number of reasons, but I love how she purposefully creates videos that are meant to start a discussion (back when that phrase still meant something lol) and aren’t merely, in her words, “a conclusion factory.” Anyways, I went to school for orchestral performance so good fucking luck to me ig 😅

Creative entrepreneurship have always existed with artists being photographer medium. Cave paintings served as a form storytelling lessons to younger generations to improve hunting All art now is used just to launder money especially with E art

In my case, seeing art, paintings or listening to more music kills my inspiration. It kinda puts limits to my creativity or ideation process. The less I see, the more I'm able to create or ideate.

I'm officially the second patron! Look forward to your book club and exclusive patreon content.

I was actually hypothesizing recently for some time as to why people are all crazy after music esp. kpop artists (not kpop itself really and also it’s a wonderful sub division of pop music, no debates on that) and I realized that these music companies take a billion cares to prettify the idol and make them appealing to the audience in every possible way from hair to clothes to accessories so when people consume their music (or any work of art or writing) it is very easy to consider art equivalent to the artist (when both are intended to be marketed ). Fans would argue that they are obsessed with their top tier work but this idea of persona really comes into play because no matter how good a person him/herself be, it’s still a carefully orchestrated Persona made to be visually appealing. In Stephen Colbert’s interview of BTS, he asks the fans would they still be a fan if BTS were fifty year old fat guys producing the same music and although it was followed by laughter, it is very relevant to this discussion … I once heard the incident of an Indian Actor recounting how a fan was bitterly disappointed after meeting him in person because of his not-so-handsome looks. Has this ever happened to you that you were quite disappointed on seeing the author’s picture after reading their book? Idk but it has happened to me. So privatization actually does much harm in these respects but how can we separate the two, it is perhaps too difficult!!

Haven't even watched the whole video but I am really glad you are repping the Death of the Artist book, I read it a year ago and it was really transformative for me

Thank you Alice for this video! It's so nice to hear an unarticulated thought come alive and explained in a video essay. One thing that I thought I'd add is neurodivergent thinking is highly linked to creativity. So, folks with ADHD tend to be more creative naturally on average (speaking from experience). But to your point, since art is so privatized, it crushes the "space" for neuro-divergent ideas because it's often not marketable yet.

this video made me think of the film "Work Without Author" I've watched for my philosophy class in college, it also talks about the creativity and artistic process in terms of different perspectives and societal structures, would recommend it

awesome take, I haven’t really thought about it in this way and I thank you for looking deeply into this and informing me :3! Also long time no see (sorry i was sleeping 😴) :)!

I think it's the first time I comment on this channel but I would like to tell you that I really like your videos It always makes me think about things I normally wouldn't and I love it!

Thank you for your RU-vid content- j’adore tes vidéos. I aspire to be so intellectually aware and creative like you!

I came because I saw Camila Cabello's story on Ig and I don't regret it. I'm loving this video. And even more cause I'm learning French. ❤️

The first quote hit me hard, in a good way! Very interesting subject but I'm a bit conflicted about it, since I feel that artists that were free to use their times to create and be idle, have always been a minority. Musicians, dramatists and painters flourished at the Medici court as well as during Louis the 14th's reign because they had wealthy, influential patrons that could protect and fund them, but also control their works (Louis the 14th, for one, was not shy on censoring what he did not like). Years later, Balzac wrote most of his novels to pay off his debts, in a hurriedly and unvarnished way. Maybe he would have written better books, had he been funded by somebody, and maybe not. Maybe living solely for one's art can also in the end kill one's creativity, by making us distance from 'normal people's lives and struggles? (I believe Sally Rooney mentions this in her new book but haven't read it yet!) I would say it has probably never been as easy to be an artist as it is today but there are definitely way more people trying it and thus, much more competition. Also, I do agree that the pressure artists feel today can be of a different sort, with social networks especially, and that things could still be done to improve their situations.

Such a phenomenal and beautifully made video! Thanks so very much for sharing! À bientôt 💞

One name that always comes to mind as the archetypal artist is Prince. He encapsulated the whole publicity image that artists have today, but beyond that, in the background, he was also the ultimate artist in terms of prodigiousness, diversity and work ethic. In my opinion Prince is an impossibility that is going to be very difficult to see another artist reach.

But, if someone is making art for the love of making art, then why should they worry about their success in the market? Emily Dickinson hardly made any money from her poems. She apparently even refused compensation. That didn't stop her from writing poetry because she was doing it for the love of the craft. Social trends and marketing tactics only become a burden when your goal is to make money and gain recognition from it. And I feel like many artists who make the critiques you made in this video are being dishonest by not admitting that they want to make a bunch of money and garner a bunch of attention because admitting that would contradict the "struggling artist making art for the love of it not for the fame and fortune" persona. Many of the most cherished artists in history had no reason to expect that more than 100 people would read their work. But they did it anyway. If you genuinely love making art, then make it. But I don't know if getting disappointed when the market doesn't reward you for your art is useful. The market is made up of human beings who choose what they want to choose. You can't force people to pay attention to your work.

spot on, as an artist, I'm drained away trough marketing/creative thinking. I'm not ready to compromise art, and my work, just to have more income, or better reputation, or whatever ... or I wouldn't be an artist, and my work wouldn't be art. But it's a very rough ride, to keep my work as pure as possible though. It demands so much sacrifices that almost no one, understandably, does it any more ... (every field is being marketed away nowadays, away from it's beautiful core element)

I really enjoy your videos, please keep it up!

Ok so you are BY FAR my favourite youtuber EVER. (hi from lima, perú).

I really needed this video. Thank you.

The most valuable function of art is to ask questions. Not to answer questions. And the better the artist, the more incisive and valuable are his/her questions. Today art is being sold as an answer, which corrupts it.

depuis découverte, je suis une fan incontestée

Our french lefty queen has posted 😍

I believe the first thing, the surface of this theme if I would talk about it, "the death of the artist", would be the death of connection. And with "connection" I mean analysis, analysis of self, and analysis of whatever the mind finds and is attracted to. Things becoming virtual/automated (interaction, consumption, discussion, etc) make creativity less enriched because a like on my work doesn't have a face, it doesn't give me a hug, it doesn't shake my hand, it doesn't make a silent face I can treasure in the future, etc. Another thing that helped kill connection would be the fragmentation of the creative community, makers and consumers, into their genders, races, political identities, sexual existences, ethnic backgrounds and so on. When I am here and I like your video and I give you a compliment on the video, all of that falls into scrutiny, my genuine appreciation becomes something else, and connection becomes lost. In the same way, a woman who might understand little to nothing about the content of your video gives you a like and a compliment, but now the disconnection is intellectual while the connection is now empathic. A final thing we could consider as a loss of connection could be the social class differences where sometimes someone has a lot to say, a lot of knowledge, but the knowledge is trapped within a social class type of language or within a social class political concept ("they would never understand" and things of the sort) and connection, again, is lost. The second thing, to me, would be anti-intellectualism and how it corrupted the understanding of the possible formats of art and its discourse. Social media brought a format that would be the "no format" format, where the content is irrelevant because people are buying and consuming the person delivering the content. Kinda similar to the idea of the "aura" of the artist, where the criteria for what this said artist creates is irrelevant, and it only matters that that person made it. Most people who consume Savannah's content are not consuming the content, are consuming her, looking at her and just drooling over the way the light hits her face and blah blah blah, and that is ok. The problem with that is not that she is doing it, but that there is not an understanding that what she does is one of many formats, because no one talks or thinks about the formats that are possible, not even explore possible new formats. Whatever is working, is producing views and subscribers, and followers, that becomes the format, without being an actual format. Sadly, the same way this "no format" format dictates social media it began to dictate art, and a bunch of scribblings are now being sold as illustrations, fingers tapping on simple midi mixers become music, and it mostly stops there because sculptures are expensive af to make, theatrical plays and movies as well. People suggested tiktoks were running for awards, and that is totally fine, but you know some people say they should win Oscars. People who suggest that are usually the people who might watch Savannah, with their k-pop idol profile pictures and etc. The rejection of formats would be what kills art because things have meaning, there is proportion, composition, symbolism, aesthetic choices, among other aspects. People don't want to rise to the level of the product, they want the product to be them. It's like the ultimate form of aggressive marketing where the product is not sold as "for you", but as "you". Lastly, the problem would have a final nail on its coffin called "lack of definitions". What is art? What is an artist? What are the levels of artistic expression on a financial marketing scale? The hardest art to sell is high art or self-referential art because it has a very low connection value, so it is hard to sell as "for someone" because it feels too specific. High art would be art that is too profound, too rooted in classical references of historical art pieces, so it requires a deep level of understanding of art. Self-referential art is too profound in the other direction, it explores a side of the artist, a memory, a personal belief that doesn't justify itself, etc. Then there is concept art, which is high art but less nerdy, we could say, so people get it. Then there is commercial art, which is just cute, colorful, creative, innovative, or made by someone who has a parent that is very respected in the art world so automatically they become artists as well. Or maybe it is someone who established themselves in one art form then they decide to explore another art form, and then they just get a vernissage just like that, they just get a record deal just like that. After that, we have craftsmanship, which is the technique without the complexity of using the technique as language. A painting that is just an image, a portrait that is just a portrait, without the objective of expressing anything with the strokes of the pencil. After that, we have social media art, commissions, that is different than "commercial art" because the person who pays for it is not a company, but an individual. But likely with commercial art, commissions also end up with a lot of pornographic content. Lastly we have these people who claim to be artists, but are not, and sell themselves as the art, like Savannah who maybe sells herself as a muse, as someone who inspires others in different ways, be it for trying to be someone who also gets the same interaction from posts, the same numbers; be it for inspiring others to be her, even though the desire of being her is just insecurity speaking. So there is no artist, there is no art, there is nothing, only the immaturity of whoever consumes them. People should self-help themselves into better content. Thanks for reading. Cool video. Very good editing using different moments in time and different angles, it helps keep the video more dynamic.

Your channel is very relevant, keep up 🙏🏻

As a writer and unpublished author I’m worried because of this. I already constantly compare my book with much more established authors and feel like I need to constantly be entertaining/relatable if I want to even make a pinch of that success and honestly it can feel quite draining having to entertain all the time :/

Actually i really liked this video, im happy to discover your channel!

Just found this channel. Fantastic. This video is such a breath of fresh air. I was an adjunct for two years, in philosophy. Quit and left academia because of all you say here. In the U.S., the situation is awful. Succeeding as a non STEM academic is impossible without being an entrepreneur.

This video explains everything I have been thinking and feeling as an artist in this social media obsessed world

Love the video!

This may seem strange but in a way, I see Lana Del Rey as a "true" artist. She writes her own songs and her albums and music have changed over the years despite many people disliking her changes. She also has a slightly confusing and problematic social media presence. In ways, she seems to live in her own world which is something I really appreciate.

I love your narration style. It's so well written and gives me a calm feeling. Maybe it's the French too (;

this is so inspiring! I really do not know though about the story of the free artist... Artists like bach and mozart did have to produce for rich people. Beethoven famously hated producing requested pieces, but did have to do it for money anyway. Artists always had to bend to the will of oligarchy and even who became famous was connected to who you and more importantly your family knew. the only way out of poverty used to be through religious studies (vivaldi). Sooooo I guess you did have a smaller space to network in, but is that really a positive if this space is STILL only accessible to the rich? I wanna add that I DO love your point about arts in educatiion!

I love your soothing calm voice 💜

Yay! I’m your first patron :3

Oh god, we're killing Artists. . . . Like slowly . . . .

Entrepreneurship is the only thing standing in between us and the wide consumption of our art.

Such an interesting discussion! I'll need to think everything you said over :) and hope I don't get trapped by my own creations too

A.I art has changed the game. You should revisit this subject.

I do believe that creativity is a birth right- it's actually the core thing that makes us humans different from other species of animals- we make things! It's just our perception of what we deem "creative," limiting it to artwork and self expression, that can stop us from identifying as an inherently creative person, and also goes along with the intense pressure we put on ourselves to "be creative." We're actually creative all the time! We create our selves, our lives and our experiences, every single moment of the day with the communication we have with ourselves and others. We do have influence of our reality through our creativity and we gain more influence just by identifying as a creative person. It changes how we move through life, it connects us to our power, purpose and pleasure, but often stems from our pain and our problems, our feelings and presence. This is how we grow and evolve individually as people, but also how to find our unique position and perspective that we can share with others, which does have the opportunity to become profit for us if there's the interest and intent to be persistent, patient, present creating a product that transforms, informs or influences people's perception of themselves somehow. Follow your interests but don't put so much pressure on yourself to do anything with it. Value and validate yourself, your experiences, especially the hard ones, and all the things you're fascinated with. Find the nuances in life that draw you in. The work of the artist is to connect the dots between it all and create the meaning and change you'd like from it. Or to choose to create no meaning or change at all. It's up to you; you're the creator! This was a wonderfully thought provoking video, Alice! Beautifully done!

The fig passage that began the video was deep and beautiful♡

Great video.Very interesting!

I like the new themes with this Vedic .. keep up the good work

Very insightful & observant!!

Hello Alice this is such a beautiful video! Yes everything has become about churning nowadays, there is competition on performing a certain way in areas which aren't meant be taken that way. Another thing that confuses me a lot is how people have started setting standards for the number of books one reads in a given year, as an avid reader since a child (I'm still young) books are meant to be enjoyed (even non fiction), not counted as achievements

Interesting post, Ms Cappelle, but a whole video about art and creativity, meritocracy and class and nothing about Inspiration? Maybe, that is why the artist is dying? I think Art is about passion and feeling and my response to what I see, feel, hear and how they inspire me. Shared interests inspire a collective. It strikes me Art has become a popular brand that is defined by how much one makes. Van Gogh died a pauper, always celebrated and financially carried by his brother, Vincent. Maybe the reality is we all need an income, Universal or Guaranteed, rather than this idea all work can be an immediate investment, or income. Van Gogh's genius wasn't revealed till after he died.

i love ur channel so much girl

I'm a painter and have thought about this topic A LOT (marketability, death of the author and such). "Making it" in the art world does take a level of quality (as in making genuinely interesting, thoughtful art), but that once your reach that point of quality, it's kinda down to luck: meeting the right curators or gallerists, or making the right kind of art at the right time (being marketable). With my chances of "success" being so slim, I've had to remind myself again and again why I got into painting in the first place, which is: painting itself, nothing more, nothing less. Don't get me wrong though, I'd love to make a living painting full time, but if that means painting things to suit the market, I'll pass. I'd rather work another job, paint less but paint what's honest to me :)