Are You a Writer or an Artist?

I am a newly published online writer. So far, I have been enjoying myself, and feel fortunate that my writing has been accepted and published. I may be a new writer, but I am not new to writing. I have been songwriting since about ten years old, finally self-producing a CD of my songs a few years back. In my current profession, I have edited, co-written and written scripts and screenplays for government and educational television programming. In New York or Hollywood? No, this was in Salinas, California, and currently in Albuquerque, New Mexico. I am also a former vocational instructor to high school and adult students in the field of television. I am a graphic artist, novelist, web master and entrepreneur. Why am I telling you this, and why should you care? The point I am trying to make is that I am an artist, and have always been in my personal and professional life. There is an old saying, "A famous artist, is a dead artist." There are exceptions to this of course, but most artists attain immortality long after they pass. Who is your favorite artist, the one who inspired you the most, in any field? Are they alive? Were they alive when they inspired you? Most may argue with what I am about to say, maybe even send me hate mail, because artists are emotional creatures. Artists have to be emotional. These are the tools of our craft. Nevertheless, artists must also look inside and separate themselves from ego and aspirations. It is the difference between being an artist and a writer.

The artist in me wants everyone to accept my writing at face value. My research, my composition, my opinions, my art, they all need to be accepted in order for my ego to be fully satisfied. Let us say that my creation receives alteration, or even rejection. The artist inside, my ego, is really what gets offended. As an artist, I do not want anything imposing on what I consider a personal artistic statement. I want it free of censorship, and it should be accepted, and more importantly adored, as it is. I do not want to hear any criticism, or anyone picking it apart to point out its minor flaws. If the admirer does not get it, then they do not understand, and should take the time to understand my work, from my viewpoint. How does this sound to you, a little self-centered? Yet, strip away all the personal reasoning or justifications, and this is what the artist, or ego truly wants.

To be an artist, a true artist, one must stick to their beliefs and proceed with their art, ignoring any criticism along the way. Van Gogh did it this way, so did Woody Guthrie. Every artist that died, or was near death, and later 'discovered', all lived their lives devoted to their art, in spite of the consequences or poverty. So what drives and artist's ego? If it is worldwide fame and fortune, then they are not truly artists. These people may find fame and fortune, but usually crash quickly, a forgotten subject of a question in a trivia game. What drives an artist's ego is immortality. We want fond remembrance and acceptance, by generations to come. Immortality is what drives an artist. This is where the artist usually becomes confused with the difference between aspirations and expectations. The reality is that very few people become 'famous', even on a national scale, compared to the thousands that aspire to it. If you can convince your ego that this is indeed a fact, you will save yourself a lot of heartache and restless nights.

I musically performed in nightclubs professionally for about two years. I have directed live television programs, written scripts, edited and produced many televised productions. What am I, in love with myself? No, what I am pointing out is that I did these things on a local level. Millions did not see the programs, nor did I perform for thousands of people. Even so, my ego was satisfied. I was still able to create and receive adulation for my work. Did I have full control over my creativity? No. There were times I worked over, under, or with others to get these things accomplished. There were many negotiations and compromising. Sometimes my creative ideas were rejected, or not possible under the circumstances. If I had held to my personal artistic principals in defiance, I would not have been able to do such things. Even though a writer is a lone wolf of sorts, we must remember that we are trying to reach other people. This agreement is on the reader's terms, not ours. The idea is to find creativity within that realm. Think of it this way. What is your favorite abstract art film? Do you even have one? Do you go out and spend money to see or rent abstract films? An abstract filmmaker is an artist, and because they choose to break the rules of filmmaking, the art then becomes a specialized niche. A niche does not have mass appeal. Only a small section of society is interested in this niche market. The artist is obviously not getting rich or famous from their films, the key word being artist.

What is the one thing you want most out of your writing? My guess is, as many people possible reading your writings and thoughts. The hardest thing for an artist to do is publicly display their artwork, and let it stand on its own, open to opinion. We are not there to 'doctor' it. When I would show the other band members recordings of my songs, I would try to explain the ideas while we were listening. My partner would then tell me, "Quiet, don't doctor it." When someone reads your writing, you are not there to doctor and defend your artistic reasoning behind the work. The art must face scrutiny on its own, like a parent letting their children experience life. People will take from it what they want, not what we want. If we really want our artistic visions to be accessible, then we must also take into consideration whoever will be experiencing it. If I have to explain it to them, and the work cannot stand on its own without other interpretation, then that would indicate to me that I need to modify the work to get my point across in a more accessible way. It does not damage my ego. Instead, it presents a challenge to it. How can I artistically modify my work so that more people can understand my vision? In the case of writing, it may be modifying the verbiage, grammar, or title, maybe even the concept of the whole work. Some ideas just do not work. When our band was playing in a country nightclub, and we threw out an occasional rock song, some patrons of the audience were not amused. The lesson is that the idea did not work, and you cannot please everyone. This is not about whether you write, play music or paint. If we want to only stand on our artistic principals, we will be standing alone for the most part. As an artist, there must be some compromise. Some may even call it selling out, the key word being selling, and isn't that why you write in the first place?

We must be able to occasionally send our artistic egos to the corner of the room for some time out, while we concentrate on becoming immortal. Then we must lower our expectations, because sometimes we hope for too much. Everything I have recorded, everything I have written and created, will still be here when I am gone. I have insured of this. Realistically, only a few will experience my works, maybe even only my family and friends. Nevertheless, it still makes me immortal, because several generations from now I know someone will listen to my songs, see my art, or read my words, my feelings, my thoughts, and my emotions. I will live once again for those few moments. That, my fellow artistic friends, is the meaning of immortality, and it does not have to be on a large, global scale neither. It is the reason why I do what I do.

Looking at it from the perspective of the publisher, they are not there to help us write, they need writing to sell, and for the most part they are selling to a mass audience. We cannot fight what a mass audience will accept. We must compromise, maybe even rewrite or accept modification of our work. Is this imposing on my artistic principals? Is it selling out? Call it what you want, but we cannot force the public to see it as we do. If that means I will have more success with how-to video articles than writing commentary on ancient astronauts, then I cannot change that. The video articles are what appeals to a mass audience, and I have no control over that, but I can use it to my benefit, so I may remain in a creative world and still make a buck doing it. I used to tell my students, if you want to create your masterpiece, then buy your own equipment, get all your friends together and create it. If you want to work and make a living at this, then lower your creative aspirations. Accept that you will compromise your personal artistic ideals along the way, so that you may still maintain a source of income.

If you do not agree with any of this, then yes you are truly an artist and have my deepest admiration in standing for your creative principals. Me on the other hand, I just want to write, and write for people willing to read my words, and more importantly, who are willing to pay for what I write. I truly wish the best to everyone, whatever your aspirations may be.