I wanted to reiterate this line of thinking because through my work I am hearing a lot of things that disturbe me.
I give advice to people. I hear the tone of others and it seems people are disheartened because no one is takiing them seriously or because they don't take themselves seriously.
We are told it is not the product that sells or generates money. It is the loudest person in the room.
That is true.
If you are presenting work and no one is taking interest it is because you are not presenting enough and do not precieve yourself to be "SELF-MADE" enough to produce.
I do not work for a corporate and I think that is great. Only when we do work for a corporate then our checks are garuenteed. That is what people like, gaurentees of pay.
We present our art work, thinking someone will like it because we like it. We know deep down that is no one pays for it, then they don't like it! We have this idea that green backs mean we are worth somethning and everything we produce has to have a political angle and it if does not then we are not relevent.
That thought has to stop. Art has it's our relevancy becuase the stories that are generated by the artists are relevant.
Those that do the work thought it was enough simply to do it, Thus they are relevant and should be heard. Should be seen and this is why we are thankful for NG. They give us that space to become relevant.
The moment you begin to feel your line of work is not reaching the right ear or an idea is just not surfacing around the right people. Then you are missing the point. Those that you are trying to impress with your work, your words, your prose, your ART, are in the same boat as you. Seeking relevance, none of them are any more richer or poorer than yourself because there money is depandant upon your feeling of relevance.
Case in point Michel Jordans Shoes. Can you imagine what used to be worth 100.00 a pop and kids used to shoot eachother over is not in Walmart for 20.00 or less. Why? cause Jordan is broke, he lost his sponsers that have seen he is no longer relevant, Everything he did has become the past and unless someone comes around and has something new to share, then what. Well his shoes will remain worthless as they were when they first came out.
Now that logo, "Jump Man!" will live forever in my heart, I want to know the man that created that image and how much he got paid. Did he use NG? probably not, but he was relevant. Maybe it was not a man, maybe it was a woman. Who cares, the point it is, that image was what helped to sell Jordan. It was the Art and the commercials, it was people that viewed themselves as a buisness not buisness men that changed the world.
ThiefOfVoid
It's great that you think that. But sadly these days, you have to be "popular" to be heard :(
AdventVoice
It does look that way most of time. Again I argue though, what is popularity? Rehashing the same ideas? Looking for work from industries like WALT DISNEY that are not paying people and if they are paying people, how many of them are original thinkers? Are we to settle for selling our ideas to universities with the injunction that what is presented is the property of the university and not the individuals?
Did you know anything you write or present on Facebook is the property of Facebook? I thought that was crazy when I read that. Not only is it property, but words and ideas expressed can be used at there discretion, so if you have something or an idea of value and decide to use them as a engine to promote your work, they have rights to it.
Again this is why I say, I am not a business man, I am a business.
If others think it is ok to use my diction as a means to generate sales or if what I am talking about generates a movement and a grouping of people and I could have gotten paid for it, would I have given the money to anyone except those that helped with the movement or the ideas that surfaced, I would have given the money to a charity, I would have learned a long time ago to only say what was needed and told all of my friends that how they view themselves matters to someone, cause it if did not, they would not have wanted to rights to them.