3 ms·
This looong post is arguing against a ridiculous strawman. Just because I want to write blogs or take pictures does not mean others care about it enough to tog
by kinkrtyavimoodh 9y ago
This looong post is arguing against a ridiculous strawman.
Just because I want to write blogs or take pictures does not mean others care about it enough to together pay me a minimum wage for it. This is a bizarre expectation.
This guy had 9000 followers on Instagram (big number but far from being exceptional). He then set up a Patreon which was largely funded by friends and family. He spent a lot of time creating content (writing stories along with photos) that did not get much traction. And somehow it's Patreon's fault that he does not get a living wage out of this.
I mean I get that it sucks that you can't do what you love (take photos and write stories) and make a living wage out of it. But you weren't able to do it even before Patreon.
BTW, this happens with Uber too. Everyone starts commenting on how you can't raise a family of 4 just driving Uber 8 hrs a day.
- Noos 9y agoHis point is that in general, the patronage model doesn't really help the majority of creatives, and doesn't really work to create a small business model of creative work. It's just a few people making a modest living, and a lot of people who are just really making patreon rich in aggregate. We're going to have to deal with the devaluing of creative work somehow, or eventually people will just stop.
- kinkrtyavimoodh 9y agoBut was creative work ever supremely valued in the average case? Even the 'original' patrons, the kings / aristocrats didn't patronize hundreds or thousands of artists. They patronized a few good ones. I feel that the presence of some rock star musicians / YouTubers / whatever sends the wrong message that life as an artist is all hunky dory in the average case.