3 ms·
Did Leonardo's art suffer for being done for patrons? Maybe, who knows? What would he have created if he'd had some kind of Renaissance-era version of Patreon,
by egypturnash 6y ago
Did Leonardo's art suffer for being done for patrons? Maybe, who knows? What would he have created if he'd had some kind of Renaissance-era version of Patreon, with a thousand people willing to give him one measly florin a month to keep doing whatever he wanted to instead of painting the heck out of portraits of rich merchants and their families?
As an artist, I feel that there is a sort of scale of priorities. Making money with my art skills is more fun than making money with any other way. But there are things I like to draw, and I'd rather make money drawing those instead of things I don't like to draw. And I'd generally rather make money by drawing whatever the heck my muse directs me to draw, instead of what I think is likely to sell, or what someone with a lot of money would like me to draw.
Different people have different priorities, someone who's willing to draw whatever the hell comes their way probably makes more money than I do, and that's their choice. I have an artist friend who mostly dropped off the net for a few years because he was doing lots of very specific fetish art for a rich client who didn't want it posted anywhere, and was willing to pay handsomely for that. He was willing to do that, I wouldn't. He also had a kid to support, I don't.
And... poor Vince certainly could have used a richer set of patrons, yeah. He could have used a lot of things. Possibly including some modern psychoactive chemicals. Dude was pretty fucked up.