ItsAChiaotzu said:
In my opinion, no art in any form should be made with making money in mind, this is what leads to constant samey music artists and games dominating charts, if all art was made out of the desire to make art then we would have (mostly) consistently high products and piracy wouldn't be an issue.
To anyone who thinks that artists would be screwed over by the lack of money, artists are being screwed over by the lack of money already, because all the money in these industries are not going to artists, but to mindless crap.
What are your thoughts?
Sorry, but this isn't a solution at all. Do you have any idea how many people there already are making art for art's sake? There are so many people out there making games, movies, music, paintings and who knows what else that throw their products out for free just for exposure, and odds are that they will never be successful with those ventures. Part of that reason is just because we are naturally biased creatures that understand crap when we see it, but the rest of that reason is in the fact that successful pieces of art that will go to mass audience DEMANDS business sense.
One of the most important things that an artist needs to learn about is refinement. Most artists fail miserably because they never rewrite their scripts or songs or never try to re-conceive their failed artistic excursions. And to be fair, art for the sake of art loses a lot of its touch if you continue to recreate it in order to appeal to a mass audience. However, in an attempt to make sure as many people as possible see your piece, refinement is almost always necessary. I personally strive to make movies, so let me use that as an example and break this down.
While the motivation is to make a funny/dramatic/compelling or whatever kind of film, the motivation to moving forwards is money. Let me explain why. In my process of refinement to create the strongest piece of art with the greatest potential for mass market appeal, I would have rewritten my script for this movie at least once, but if I wanted something of quality, probably between 3-4 times. Now following the massive rewrites of the script, I'll also need to do a considerable level of polish to those scripts. Now I have to cast actors, build sets, shoot, possibly reshoot, do a rough cut, add in the digital effects, stamp out a final cut, and finally distribute my piece of art. After all that time, effort, and money I invested in the project, can you conceivably tell me how I could survive off of this movie NOT making any money? If I put in all of that just to have people admire it and then leave, I guarantee you that I will never be capable of making another movie again.
This is already a text wall, and it's not really that in depth of an explanation. I'll just jump to the end of the argument and say that your method does not make art better, it actually makes it a whole lot worse. The incentive isn't just to create your piece of art, but to make a living creating your art. If you can't do that, then there is no reason to not just get a side job and only make small budget projects on the side for fun.
