has money ruined art?

But doesn't that motivation cause u to target some audience... Instead of making art for arts sake... Doesn't it motivate you to make art for money's sake at some point?

Hmm...I see your point. Depends on the artist I suppose. There have always been art commissions where the artist had to cater to the customer (The Sistine Chapel ceiling, for example), but some opt to, rather than cater entirely to what sells, stick to their style. It's always going to be a mix.

I don't know if I can draw a comparison between the Sistine chapel and anything post modern.

We can find a small handful of example in history were people were paid to make great art that lasted.

Most artists were never fully compensate in their lifetimes. I mean, Shakespeare's identity is still in question.

Idk if I can compare great works to modern art... Was Mozart's desires the same as Kayne West's?

Is Stephen king driven by the same objectives as Homer?

How much passion and desire have we lost from art simply because of money?

I think really with such careers, you can't go in with money in mind. They're known to be options in which few make "real" money off of it, and many barely make anything. So, perhaps the focus on money comes later, as it's not very smart to go in thinking "I'm going to get rich off of this".

Sure... Many people go into medicine with the best ambitions. And many of them eveuntally have to worry about money even though it wasn't their original motive. But eventually it changes the way they treat people and what they prescribe and how they act.

Moreover, the people who don't make money at their craft these days, are almost forced into full-time labor elsewhere. Then they are only a part time artists. I'm not trying to put down people who enjoy a hobby. But, if they could pursue their passion full-time, it would change the art their create.

I think art part time artists are probably much closer to creating a pure-er art. The downfall comes with promotion, exposer, and survivability of the art.

The art that does make it out into the world, is so heavily funded. The good art is left hidden beneath a current mass produced, consumiable, repeating, easily marketed art. And history will have a hard time unearthing the gems created by geniuses that weren't business savy.

Since you seem rather knowledgeable about the subject, would you mind taking a look at mine and sort of...judging it I guess? Telling me if it's any good or shows potential?

I'm not an art major nor even too much a painting fan.

Really , where this topic hits home to me is literature.

I can't help but feel books are written down to a very low level these days in order to sell more copies. I feel stories even from 50+ years ago had a different feel... A more genuine feel.

I feel like if books were people... 90% of the books printed this year would all have bleach blonde hair and blue eyes. There would be difference like height, gender, freckles and such, but it all just seems like the same thing over and over

I definitely get what you mean. I've noticed this especially in the teen genre, it seems very much like the same cookie cutter plot over and over.

Good talk. Best of luck on your art.

Thank you, for the luck and the conversation.