3 ms·
As an art teacher, I have certainly seen the best artists evolve naturally from those who also work the hardest. As Weisberg mentions in 'Creativity: Beyond the
by Daub 7y ago
As an art teacher, I have certainly seen the best artists evolve naturally from those who also work the hardest. As Weisberg mentions in 'Creativity: Beyond the Myth of Genius', when the Beatles moved to Hamburg, they were a run of the mill band. When they returned, they were the Beatles as we know them. The reason: gigging four hours a day, seven days a week over one year.
However, I have also seen other factors play a part. Certainly, the very intelligent artists are prone to self-destruictive criticism, and frequently fade from view. But in my experience, the most important thing an artists can posses is a coherent sense of self.
- majos 7y agoWhen you think of the "best artists" you've seen, are you making any distinction between technical and creative skill? For example, there are many great studio musicians who are nonetheless nowhere near as good as composers of original music. I would expect that technical skill is a more natural outgrowth of hard work than creative skill, even as the Beatles-in-Hamburg story claims a growth in creative skill.
- Daub 7y agoWell... generally I would say that a good artist is a mix of the technically adept, some kind of sense of self, and ‘being there where it’s at’. That last value refers to how in tune they are with the cultural zeitgeist. There are ways around the first value, but not the second and third.