Or as the wonderful RVCBard puts it: The Grow The Hell Up Post
There are artists and arts orgs all over the world deluding themselves.
Because they have convinced themselves that if they do what they love (their art) they will make a living at it.
But you don't make money doing what you love.
You make money doing what you are good at.
You can love something and not be good enough at it to make a consistent living from it.
That's lesson #1.
------------------------------
I had a client who was an actor. He wanted to make a living as an actor. He was struggling. He put together the money he need to hire me and asked me for my help.
So I broke out a piece of paper and started brainstorming ideas on how we could leverage his skills as an actor into viable ideas that could bring in some cash over the long haul. Some of those ideas included:
1. Creating a unique actor training class, where he could teach other actors some of the skills he has learned over the years.
2. Developing a small, niche, corporate training class where he could teach presentation skills to a particular group i.e. doctors, lawyers, etc.
As I got to the third or fourth idea, I could see my clients eyes begin to glaze over.
When I asked him what was wrong he said:
"You don't understand, I don't want to do anything of that . . . I want to make a living acting."
So I told him that he had a decision to make:
He could decide to try and make a living as an artist
Or he could decide he wants to make a living with his art
If he decides that they only way he can make a living is as an artist, then he just set himself on a vary narrow path to victory. The laws of supply and demand basically ensure his life will be a constant struggle.
If he decides he wants to make a living with his art, that means he is going to take the artistic skill he was blessed with and ruthlessly use it in any way he can to create a self sustaining life.
This is a much broader path with a increased chance of success.
Look at it this way, last election John Kerry really only had one way to win the election. He had to win Ohio and/or Florida.
This election, Obama had three or four viable paths to 270 electoral votes.
He expanded the playing field.
If you choose to make a living with your art, that's what you are doing, you are expanding the playing field.
That's lesson #2
---------------------------
You know, part of me wants to be snarky and simply call what you post here Growing The Hell Up.
I don't know about you, but that whole "I must use my skill in only one way or it means I'm selling my soul" mentality has a whiff of more than a bit of privileged adolescent angst that reveals itself through its lack of knowledge and/or experience with the myriad ways a single talent or skill can be used to earn a living.
I always wanted to write, ever since I discovered I enjoyed the process as much as the result. Did that mean I only wanted my work published in Important Magazines or by Giant Publishing Companies? Hell, no. It only meant that using my passion for writing is an important component of personal and professional satisfaction. Fame and fortune, if I ever come into them, are just the icing on the cake.
BTW -
Tag!
http://writerjoshuajames.com/dailydojo/?p=1035
Thought I forgot about you, didn't you?
Posted by: RVCBard | November 06, 2008 at 09:27 AM
I agree. Time to rename the post.
And I see you tagged me, but the ones you put on your site were so damn heavy that I don't even so why I should bother. :)
But alas, I will do it to avoid being labeled a chicken.
Posted by: Adam | November 06, 2008 at 10:17 AM
I don't know why, but my first reaction was: if all he wanted to do was act, why hire a consultant for help?
Hell, I would have tried to give close to the same advice.
Posted by: Tony | November 06, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Tony,
The funny part is that often in my coaching/consulting life I also end up being the vehicle that reveals the real problem . . . and that's when things get fun. :)
For that particular client I was just able to drive home the contradiction between his desire to "just act" and the reality of his situation.
The irony is that after he worked together he did in fact decide to start expanding the way he uses his skills . . . and then that gave us to chance to focus on how marketing could help promote his new ideas.
So it ended well.
Posted by: Adam | November 06, 2008 at 01:46 PM
That's good.
I've known a lot of people who've simply left the arts for not making a living as an artist--as opposed to (as you talk about)trying to make a living with their art.
Posted by: Tony | November 07, 2008 at 09:36 AM