doing it just for already-successful artists is a bit random.
I think a lot of people have radical misconceptions about what it means to be a “successful artist” or even what the spectrum of the field looks like for an average creator.
Everyone in this post feeling salty about this whole story are picturing either struggling deviantart furry artists living in their parent’s house making terrible sonic OC’s for sheltered discord kiddies, or snooty dudes in black turtlenecks having showings of abstract nonsense at galleries in upscale neighborhoods, and nothing in between.
Most artists who survive by art are making minimum wage grinding out graphics and designs for like, edges of price-tag-holders on magazine racks at drug-store checkouts and the other millions of tiny details that go into making our world deliberate-looking and designed, and most of those kinds of artists are working contract/gig work and aren’t even full-time employees and have no benefits or safety nets. Employers hate paying artists, there’s a very real stigma and aversion to paying people for creativity and most companies choose either outsourcing small projects at a time, or more and more choosing to just use AI.
A graphic designer can make a logo that redefines a global company’s image and helps launch a multi-billion dollar venture, and make $200 for it. This is why there’s a very real need to fund art unless we want to hand it over to AI entirely and just let the world dissolve into mediocrity and soullessness.
Yeah, but this specific policy, last I checked, is invite-only. That means it’s the turtleneck guys, or more likely the Celtic fine art equivalent, not gig work graphic designers.
Unless said graphic designer has an in with someone in charge of sending the invites, anyway. Which is another issue with doing it that way.
(It’s a good thing to point out in general, though)
That means it’s the turtleneck guys, or more likely the Celtic fine art equivalent, not gig work graphic designers.
And? That’s fine. The country wants to boost their artistic culture, it has to start somewhere. And honestly, despite me holding it up as a picture of stereotypes, even those “cultural” artists rarely see any measure of actual success despite trying their whole lives to gain some kind of social connection to an art market. Again, this is a matter of deciding if we want art in our lives and where that goal is going to begin.
If celtic sculptors and “art lifestylers” get a UBI, that’s great. It just means the struggling graphic artist is a little closer to also finding some level of support, and the closer the struggling graphic artist gets to social respect and support, the closer YOU get to a broad-scale safety net.
I just will never shit on efforts to socialize our vast resources as a species, at least not until the last billionaire is made into mulch.
I think a lot of people have radical misconceptions about what it means to be a “successful artist” or even what the spectrum of the field looks like for an average creator.
Everyone in this post feeling salty about this whole story are picturing either struggling deviantart furry artists living in their parent’s house making terrible sonic OC’s for sheltered discord kiddies, or snooty dudes in black turtlenecks having showings of abstract nonsense at galleries in upscale neighborhoods, and nothing in between.
Most artists who survive by art are making minimum wage grinding out graphics and designs for like, edges of price-tag-holders on magazine racks at drug-store checkouts and the other millions of tiny details that go into making our world deliberate-looking and designed, and most of those kinds of artists are working contract/gig work and aren’t even full-time employees and have no benefits or safety nets. Employers hate paying artists, there’s a very real stigma and aversion to paying people for creativity and most companies choose either outsourcing small projects at a time, or more and more choosing to just use AI.
A graphic designer can make a logo that redefines a global company’s image and helps launch a multi-billion dollar venture, and make $200 for it. This is why there’s a very real need to fund art unless we want to hand it over to AI entirely and just let the world dissolve into mediocrity and soullessness.
Yeah, but this specific policy, last I checked, is invite-only. That means it’s the turtleneck guys, or more likely the Celtic fine art equivalent, not gig work graphic designers.
Unless said graphic designer has an in with someone in charge of sending the invites, anyway. Which is another issue with doing it that way.
(It’s a good thing to point out in general, though)
And? That’s fine. The country wants to boost their artistic culture, it has to start somewhere. And honestly, despite me holding it up as a picture of stereotypes, even those “cultural” artists rarely see any measure of actual success despite trying their whole lives to gain some kind of social connection to an art market. Again, this is a matter of deciding if we want art in our lives and where that goal is going to begin.
If celtic sculptors and “art lifestylers” get a UBI, that’s great. It just means the struggling graphic artist is a little closer to also finding some level of support, and the closer the struggling graphic artist gets to social respect and support, the closer YOU get to a broad-scale safety net.
I just will never shit on efforts to socialize our vast resources as a species, at least not until the last billionaire is made into mulch.