Thursday, April 19, 2012
Enlightenment Era Discussion Question 2
Many artists in the Enlightenment Era were of the noble class or came from family wealth. How did having a background of financial stability help artists in your era to create great works of art? Is it necessary to come from economic resources in order to be an artist? Explain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe it is not necessary to come from a noble family in order to be a successful artist. I was born poor, lived in poverty, and died a pauper. In fact, my music sheets were lost and I was completely forgotten for 2 centuries until my music was rediscovered in a sewer somewhere in Italy, and I am one of the most famous composers of my time.
ReplyDeleteI was very poor when I began to get published. My husband had died and left me with many children to take care of. Though being poor helped create great works of art, I never could have gotten my works published without my wealthy friends who helped get my works both published and known. It doesn't matter where you come from, it matters who you know.
ReplyDeleteThat's soo true! I got tons of help from the family I was working for during the time. They put me and school and gave me lessons but I had they talent, the just helped me show it off.
DeleteSomeone had to have taught us something or gave us something that gave us our arts. Whether or not it was connections, poverty, or wealth I cannot say. But I did very much need the aid of my wealthy and political friends.
DeleteI couldn't agree more, i was lucky enough to have the Antoinette family on my side through everything. They would help me get customers and buyers and i owe so much of my success to them. Sometimes we need that push to follow our passions.
DeleteHmm..I wouldn't say coming from a background of financial stabability helped any artists create "great" works of art, but more of a way of helping their art be discovered. There are many great artists that just don't have the money to pursue their talent. Then again there are some not-so-talented artists that have all the money in the world and are famous because they can put their work out there. It all comes down to your actual talent to produce great works of art, not money.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you Mr. Beauchamp. It does take actual talent to become a great artist; money will help you get your art noticed, but if you do it that way, more people across the world may have negative opinions on your art because you got it noticed the fast way(which may not be the best way). If you take your time on your art and truly make it your best, more people will think positively about it and know that you are a great artist. Although it takes more time and effort, your achievement will be much greater.
DeleteAbsolutely not! I grew up as a serf girl in Russia and I worked for wealthy families but I got to where I am today by myself...of coarse with a little help from teachers. I do believe coming from a wealthy family would be a great help but it isn't always necessary. By the way, being finically stable helps with buying lessons and making the path to fame easier but it isn't required.
ReplyDeleteAlthough lessons help you improve faster, you don't HAVE to pay for them as my father was a professional violinist who gave me lessons as a child and I grew up to be a world famous artist. A lot of artists are inspired by elder family members who are willing to give them free lessons when they are young so that they can grow up with talent. Some artists prefer to experiment with different instruments and teach themselves how to become an artist. Others decide they want to be an artist right on the dot and have to pay for lessons from a pro who will teach them. I think it all depends on the type of person you are, but that's just me.
ReplyDeleteI see where you are coming from, Vivaldi. Although, it makes sense to me, for my family is an extremely talented, performing family, what about the visual artists? You can't pay someone to teach you that kind of art, that all comes from your creativity. Do you think being financially stable enough for lessons would help them?
DeleteI agree with everyone who said that it is not necessary to come from economic resources in order to be an artist. Now that being said, I think that it is not possible to be a successful, well known artist without economic stability, or some kind of connections to people that can get you recognized as a good artist. If both of your parents were peasants and struggled to support a family, people would not take much notice of a poor peasant child selling their artwork. If the child grows up and some how gets connections to people who can get their work recognized then that is a scenario in which they are able to become a successful, well known artist. If you have niether connections nor economic stability, there is a very small chance that you will be famous for your craft, at least during your own lifetime.
ReplyDeleteAnzi no! I had a large famiglia and, while we weren't poor, it certainly took effort for i miei genitori to cover finances for all their children, along with music expenses. However, despite money-troubles, my famiglia was determined I receive the resources I needed so that my abilities and love for the violoncello could flourish. If it hadn't been for their amore incrollabile e la determinazione, I would not be the man I am today, of that I am certain.
ReplyDeleteNow, I of all people no that lacking in financial troubles is bliss and makes life much easier, ( I have lived under those circumstances in the past, and I gladly took full advantage of it) but what makes a successful artista is the support of a loving famiglia, and his own talent, and determination to become what he truly wants to be.
The definition of "successful" is an arguable subject. In Mr.Boccherini's opinion, a supporting and loving family, talent, and determination is all that it takes to make a successful artist. While I do agree that these are the makings of a successful artist, success could mean being pleased with one's own work, or success could also mean that everyone is pleased with your work. I think we all could go back and forth on this topic, however, the question was not weather one could or could not be a successful artist, without a stable economic background, it was more along the lines of weather one could be an artist in general with or without economic stability. You could be dirt poor, and homeless and still be an artist (in my opinion).
ReplyDeletesignorina Behn, I agree completely with you when you say that successo as an artista is relative, it depends on whether a man (or woman) feel they have succeeded by being pleased with their own work, or whether they can only depend on the opinions of others to make themselves feel worthy gli artisti.
DeleteIf a man believes he has the ability and he passiona to be an artista, he shouldn't be outcast the world he wants to belong in by his "superiori", simply because he may lack social status, a wealthy famiglia, and an impressive ancestry. These aspects of life shouldn't be relevant in what a man becomes. If he has the drive, and the belief in his work, he shouldn't need other;s approval. He has the right to be his own man.
I believe that economic stability may help you be a successful artist, but is definitely not required. Many artists do not have a lot of economic stability and are born talented. Their dream is to have their job for their talent and do what they love all their life. I was born into a poor family and became famous the "hard way" by not buying my way into fame.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Vivaldi's statement, "Many artists do not have a lot of economic stability and are born talented." Some people are born with talent and destined to be famous artists. It is obviously in their fate to have some kind of fortunate encounters that lead to their popularity and rise to fame as an artist. It is still possible for those who are not destined to be critically acclaimed artists, to become artists, nonetheless.
ReplyDeleteI think you've brought up some good points but consider this: In your pre-industrial world, labor is a high commodity. Acquiring skill comes with a cost (you can't be working to feed your family if you are training to increase your skills as an artist). Someone invested in all of you so that you may be trained as artists. This might have been in the form of money or time, both of which have economic value. What about the vast number of people in your world who did not have someone nurturing their talents? Did we miss out on something from perhaps very talented individuals who had no access t resources that could further their art?
ReplyDeleteAnother question I would ask you to consider is who decides what is good art or bad art? Is the individual who is trained going to create better works of art than one who is not? With greatest respect to all of your brilliant artistry, why is your work something that has carried over to us in the 21st century as opposed to Jacques the iron smith who banged out rhythms as he worked in his metal forge or Bitsy the washerwoman who sang lullabies while she scrubbed grime from people's collars?
I had mentors but really, I learned my art through experience. We most definitely missed out on artist who did not have resources, but i'm sure that someone got to experience there art even if it was only their family.
DeleteThe audience gets to decided if its good or bad art. The fact that it raised any questions at all means that it is somewhat doing its job right. The point of art is to raise questions, capture moments, convey beliefs. Training often helps with art but many artists are born with their talent fully crafted. Those artists did not have the proper connections of financial wealth to become well known. That does not mean that they failed as an artist, it simply means they are not known.
You're exactly right Anne! Our mentors have supported us. And of course the artist who did not have resources were not as lucky as those of us who did have the resources and of course we would miss out on their talent that I'm sure they had a lot of. What decides the difference between good art and bad art in the form of dance are the audience because it's up to them whether or not they enjoyed the performances we perform. And our choreographers decide based off of how well we perform in their eyes. But personally I'm my own critic and what I think looks amazing is amazing.
DeleteTo answer your question Ms. Andreadis, the audience considers what is bad art or good aart. The more people listening to your music the better your art is and if no one knows who you are, what you do, and why they need to know you, then your obviously are not a good artist.
DeleteExcellent point Ms. Andreadis. I very much agree with you that it is difficult to balance your life necessities with your artistic necessities, but that is part of the life style. You have to be willing to go as far as it takes for you art. I bet we certainly have missed out on some very brilliant artists which is a shame. Unfortunatly, knowing the right people and having people to nurture your talent is almost always mandatory in being a famous, successful artist. But if you don't have those, it does not mean you are not an artist. No one decides if art is good or bad. The only thing people decide is if they like it or not. What decides if art is good or bad is the amount of effort and emotion put into their work and how the artist feels about it. Like i said before, real, true artists will have no limit for how far they will go to make a master piece. PEOPLE have different oppinions on if they like it, not if it is actually a good piece or not. I repeat myself again, great art comes from effort, emotion, and creativity; bringing something new to the table. I'm sure many people were capable of doing it, but just didn't have the resources.
ReplyDeleteAhh i couldnt help but to stumble upon your table! Ive noticed a fellow dancer like myself, Bonjour Pierre. Coming from a weathly family during my time of the greatest stuggle i would like to say that being wealthy can for sure help you further your arts journey more, it could get you known faster and if you have the skills that would definetly e a boast for you! Well anyways back to my table.
ReplyDeleteYes! That is the point I am trying to make! Being wealthy could help you on your journey, but your not going to get anywhere or be a true artist if your just going through your career with out growing as a person.
DeleteI must say that coming from a good financial family it does help with our arts. It provides money to pay for the expencive things we need to use such as pointe shoes. But for me, I was always close with the wealthy considering the fact I married wealth. And no, wealth is not needed to become great artist because there are many fantastico artists that come from poor families.
ReplyDeletePlease excuse the removed comment above, i'm very sorry. I didnt come from a rich family, we were quite poor actually. My mother was my mentor, She taught me how to sew. i owe alot of my sucess to my mother and customers who kept coming back to my work and was telling others to buy my designs. you do not need to be wealthy to be a magnificant artist, you need passion and the wealth will come to you.
ReplyDeleteYou are extrememly right Ms. Rose! But do you agree that being wealthy does come in handy?
ReplyDeleteI believe that it can come in handy but only if you use it sparingly and for your passion. Some people take advantage of their wealth and just don't have the same passion as the people who are less fortunite enough to have that money to kick start.
DeleteSignorina Bertin,I agree with you completely. Coming from a positive environment, and being praised for one's work has a very important role in how successful an artista feels with his or her creations. However, whether or not a person's work is widely loved or well known, I believe is irrelevant; as long as an artist feels content with his work and is unafraid to continue.
ReplyDeleteGli artisti are individuals, and I believe it depends on the strength of character within an individual that will allow him to become what he truly wants to be. If a man personally believes that he is inferior to those gli artisti of higher social standing, or of a superior arts education; versus being self-taught, or learning from elders, he will never succeed. However, if he believes in his work and doesn't allow anyone to tell him "no", he will, at least in my eyes, be a true artista.
Having economic stability is a thing that comes in handy, especially if your art does not work out, at least you know that all is not lost and you have something to fall back on. That being said, I agree that some people had to chose between making a living and pursuing their arts because in this era, art is not a stable career that can ensure a steady flow of income. But some other people, like myself, have the passion to keep pushing myself to make a name and a living for myself, out of writing plays, no matter how difficult.
ReplyDeleteAphra, i agree that it isn't a stable career but we keep pushing through and made it. Some people are just lucky to be able to pursue and make money out of something they love. i care about having wealth but if i didn't have love and support, i would be nowhere.
ReplyDelete