What we see in the new paradigm—in both the artist’s external 
relationships and her internal creative capacity—is what we see 
throughout the culture: the displacement of depth by breadth. Is that a 
good thing or a bad thing? No doubt some of both, in a ratio that’s yet 
to be revealed. What seems more clear is that the new paradigm is going 
to reshape the way that artists are trained. One recently established 
M.F.A. program in Portland, Oregon, is conducted under the rubric of 
“applied craft and design.” Students, drawn from a range of disciplines, 
study entrepreneurship as well as creative practice. Making, the program 
recognizes, is now intertwined with selling, and artists need to train 
in both—a fact reflected in the proliferation of dual M.B.A./M.F.A. 
programs.

The new paradigm is also likely to alter the shape of the ensuing 
career. Just as everyone, we’re told, will have five or six jobs, in 
five or six fields, during the course of their working life, so will the 
career of the multiplatform, entrepreneurial artist be more vagrant and 
less cumulative than under the previous models. No climactic masterwork 
of deep maturity, no King Lear or Faust, but rather many shifting 
interests and directions as the winds of market forces blow you here or 
there.

Works of art, more centrally and nakedly than ever before, are becoming 
commodities, consumer goods. Jeff Bezos, as a patron, is a very 
different beast than James Laughlin. Now it’s every man for himself, 
every tub on its own bottom. Now it’s not an audience you think of 
addressing; it’s a customer base. Now you’re only as good as your last 
sales quarter.

It’s hard to believe that the new arrangement will not favor work that’s 
safer: more familiar, formulaic, user-friendly, eager to please—more 
like entertainment, less like art. Artists will inevitably spend a lot 
more time looking over their shoulder, trying to figure out what the 
customer wants rather than what they themselves are seeking to say. The 
nature of aesthetic judgment will itself be reconfigured. “No more 
gatekeepers,” goes the slogan of the Internet apostles. Everyone’s 
opinion, as expressed in Amazon reviews and suchlike, carries equal 
weight—the democratization of taste.

Judgment rested with the patron, in the age of the artisan. In the age 
of the professional, it rested with the critic, a professionalized 
aesthete or intellectual. In the age of the genius, which was also the 
age of avant-gardes, of tremendous experimental energy across the arts, 
it largely rested with artists themselves. “Every great and original 
writer,” Wordsworth said, “must himself create the taste by which he is 
to be relished.”

But now we have come to the age of the customer, who perforce is always 
right. Or as a certain legendary entertainer is supposed to have put it, 
“There’s a sucker born every minute.” Another word for gatekeepers is 
experts. Lord knows they have their problems, beginning with arrogance, 
but there is one thing you can say for them: they’re not quite so easily 
fooled. When the Modern Library asked its editorial board to select the 
100 best novels of the 20th century, the top choice was Ulysses. In a 
companion poll of readers, it was Atlas Shrugged. We recognize, when it 
comes to food (the new summit of cultural esteem), that taste must be 
developed by a long exposure, aided by the guidance of practitioners and 
critics. About the arts we own to no such modesties. Prizes belong to 
the age of professionals. All we’ll need to measure merit soon is the 
best-seller list.

full: 
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/the-death-of-the-artist-and-the-birth-of-the-creative-entrepreneur/383497/
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to