Thanks for this article, you do highlight a point on those writers who gain more subs, faster, seem to have a knack for engaging their audience. Whether the writing is or is not written with them in mind is unclear but the writer certainly makes it seem that it is for the audience and not themselves. At some point I don't think the artist or audience know anymore. They like what you're doing, you like what you're doing, so it seems like you're creating for the audience but really the audience is still you but now plus those with similar tastes.
The dichotomy of 'creator' or 'artist' isn't accurate. When JMW Turner smudged red paint on his sea scape, Helvoetsluys, later turning it into a buoy, as it hung for the Summer Exhibition of 1832 next to Constable's The Opening of Waterloo Bridge, he did it so he wouldn't be upstaged by his principle rival. Turner did it in the gallery with the audience in mind. Turner was an artist through and through and part of being an artist is being aware of the audience, whether it's an audience of one (yourself) or millions and everything in between. Now the question of whether 'content creators' make art, that's spicy.
"...you can interpret it however you like." I take umbrage with this part of the quote. It's untrue, you cannot interpret art however you like. That's not how art works. With writing the meaning is quite clear, it's in the words and the interplay between them, style may be dense or stories be contradictory but that allows for discussion not endless interpretation. If a reader thinks they can re-interpret endlessly then I guess words have no meaning. With painting it's much the same, the placement of objects, people, landscape, the choice of colours, shading, etc all play a part in the message being conveyed. Even a pleasant landscape is telling you something while it's being pretty.
I think you should do what matters to you and not worry about a label. There’s a fear of failure that hits us all and we want to be acknowledged in some way for the efforts we put forth, regardless if we classify ourselves as an artist or a creator.
Whether you’re an artist or a creator you want to make an impact with what you create, but we shouldn’t have an expectation of feedback in one way or another, although it’s very hard not to.
I think you are right in that creators, in the sense we’re talking about, are trying to create content that they hope can improve someone’s life in some way, and hope they receive some form of exchange, whether that’s financial or something else.
Artists on the other hand are creating something that they hope can change the way people think or change the world in some way through their art.
As MBTS notes, it may be a bit harsh to make a thick line of demarcation between artist and creator. There is an overlap. I named my platform Temple of Artists because I write what I myself am interested in, and I offer the ideas to other artists because they relate to the artistic process.
Erica's point is valid though. Either you're writing mainly for yourself, or you're writing mainly for others.
I do feel, however, that in striving to clarify my ideas to myself, my audience benefits. And I would imagine that even when one writes content designed for others, one still wishes to derive some personal satisfaction from it.
Thank you for this. I think you're spot on. I'm an artist, trust me. The stuff I put together is not about you. LOL. I use the quote "it's not about you" all the time in my writing and it's the approach I take in music as well. Enjoyed this post very much. Objectively, as in regarding the totality of my experience thus far, I'm at level three, but in terms of figuring out Substack, It's level one.
This is an interesting article for me. While I enjoyed reading your personal insights and found them engaging and thought provoking, I can't help but heavily disagree with the dichotomy Ali presents. The idea that a creator is empathetic to the audience while an artist isn't sounds absurd to me, thanks in no small part to the perspective I've developed as someone who's involved in comics as well as narrative fiction. When I look at my friends and acquaintances who are illustrators, painters, and yes writers as well, and they offer their services for commission - thereby showing said "empathy" by creating works that members of their audiences are specifically asking and paying for them to create - does that mean they're no longer artists? Of course not. They still create works for themselves, just as those of us who write for our audiences often also write for ourselves. The choice to play to an audience, no matter how frequently, doesn't change this fact.
I think the immediate disconnect I have with what Ali proposes is the inherent idea that a dichotomy needs to exist here at all. Not every content creator is an artist, but every artist is a content creator, even if what they're creating is ultimately made for and only ever viewed by themselves. Artists are still creating things, still putting them out for the world to see, whether or not said world is as large as a broad segment of the general audience or as small as me, myself, and I. To claim otherwise, and especially to shape said claim over the idea of empathy to one's audience, really just feels like a semantic game of hair splitting to me and I can't help but question the value of that.
Thank you for writing this article, Erica. It made for a great read that was just the boost I needed this morning.
What an interesting distinction you point out here! I, too, am an artist rather than a creator. If I worry about what people want from me, I'm plunged back into people pleasing, poor boundaries, and perfectionism, all of which I've spent a lifetime escaping from. My problem is not lack of empathy, but too much of it. Writing is the place where I please myself and let the rest go. It's not so much about accolade and reward as it is the challenge of being the best writer I can be, according to my definition of "best writer," not someone else's. I think I'm at the get smart level. Thanks for this -- it really made me think & refined some of my goals.
How about a category of craftsman. I like writing. I love the process of it and I find joy in solving the small and catastrophic problems that come up during the process. When I'm done, I like to push it out in the world, so I can start on the next one and apply my learnings. The work and the process drive me, but sharing it is part of the process of closure to me.
I think I’m in Level Two - Get Good! I’ve found a consistent publishing rhythm here and am tweaking to see what works. I also like how artist and creator are defined here.
Thanks for this article, you do highlight a point on those writers who gain more subs, faster, seem to have a knack for engaging their audience. Whether the writing is or is not written with them in mind is unclear but the writer certainly makes it seem that it is for the audience and not themselves. At some point I don't think the artist or audience know anymore. They like what you're doing, you like what you're doing, so it seems like you're creating for the audience but really the audience is still you but now plus those with similar tastes.
The dichotomy of 'creator' or 'artist' isn't accurate. When JMW Turner smudged red paint on his sea scape, Helvoetsluys, later turning it into a buoy, as it hung for the Summer Exhibition of 1832 next to Constable's The Opening of Waterloo Bridge, he did it so he wouldn't be upstaged by his principle rival. Turner did it in the gallery with the audience in mind. Turner was an artist through and through and part of being an artist is being aware of the audience, whether it's an audience of one (yourself) or millions and everything in between. Now the question of whether 'content creators' make art, that's spicy.
You can read about, and see, the Turner and Constable paintings here: https://www.royalacademy.org.uk/exhibition/turner-constable-and-the-royal-academy
"...you can interpret it however you like." I take umbrage with this part of the quote. It's untrue, you cannot interpret art however you like. That's not how art works. With writing the meaning is quite clear, it's in the words and the interplay between them, style may be dense or stories be contradictory but that allows for discussion not endless interpretation. If a reader thinks they can re-interpret endlessly then I guess words have no meaning. With painting it's much the same, the placement of objects, people, landscape, the choice of colours, shading, etc all play a part in the message being conveyed. Even a pleasant landscape is telling you something while it's being pretty.
I think you should do what matters to you and not worry about a label. There’s a fear of failure that hits us all and we want to be acknowledged in some way for the efforts we put forth, regardless if we classify ourselves as an artist or a creator.
Whether you’re an artist or a creator you want to make an impact with what you create, but we shouldn’t have an expectation of feedback in one way or another, although it’s very hard not to.
I think you are right in that creators, in the sense we’re talking about, are trying to create content that they hope can improve someone’s life in some way, and hope they receive some form of exchange, whether that’s financial or something else.
Artists on the other hand are creating something that they hope can change the way people think or change the world in some way through their art.
As MBTS notes, it may be a bit harsh to make a thick line of demarcation between artist and creator. There is an overlap. I named my platform Temple of Artists because I write what I myself am interested in, and I offer the ideas to other artists because they relate to the artistic process.
Erica's point is valid though. Either you're writing mainly for yourself, or you're writing mainly for others.
I do feel, however, that in striving to clarify my ideas to myself, my audience benefits. And I would imagine that even when one writes content designed for others, one still wishes to derive some personal satisfaction from it.
Thank you for this. I think you're spot on. I'm an artist, trust me. The stuff I put together is not about you. LOL. I use the quote "it's not about you" all the time in my writing and it's the approach I take in music as well. Enjoyed this post very much. Objectively, as in regarding the totality of my experience thus far, I'm at level three, but in terms of figuring out Substack, It's level one.
This is an interesting article for me. While I enjoyed reading your personal insights and found them engaging and thought provoking, I can't help but heavily disagree with the dichotomy Ali presents. The idea that a creator is empathetic to the audience while an artist isn't sounds absurd to me, thanks in no small part to the perspective I've developed as someone who's involved in comics as well as narrative fiction. When I look at my friends and acquaintances who are illustrators, painters, and yes writers as well, and they offer their services for commission - thereby showing said "empathy" by creating works that members of their audiences are specifically asking and paying for them to create - does that mean they're no longer artists? Of course not. They still create works for themselves, just as those of us who write for our audiences often also write for ourselves. The choice to play to an audience, no matter how frequently, doesn't change this fact.
I think the immediate disconnect I have with what Ali proposes is the inherent idea that a dichotomy needs to exist here at all. Not every content creator is an artist, but every artist is a content creator, even if what they're creating is ultimately made for and only ever viewed by themselves. Artists are still creating things, still putting them out for the world to see, whether or not said world is as large as a broad segment of the general audience or as small as me, myself, and I. To claim otherwise, and especially to shape said claim over the idea of empathy to one's audience, really just feels like a semantic game of hair splitting to me and I can't help but question the value of that.
Thank you for writing this article, Erica. It made for a great read that was just the boost I needed this morning.
What an interesting distinction you point out here! I, too, am an artist rather than a creator. If I worry about what people want from me, I'm plunged back into people pleasing, poor boundaries, and perfectionism, all of which I've spent a lifetime escaping from. My problem is not lack of empathy, but too much of it. Writing is the place where I please myself and let the rest go. It's not so much about accolade and reward as it is the challenge of being the best writer I can be, according to my definition of "best writer," not someone else's. I think I'm at the get smart level. Thanks for this -- it really made me think & refined some of my goals.
How about a category of craftsman. I like writing. I love the process of it and I find joy in solving the small and catastrophic problems that come up during the process. When I'm done, I like to push it out in the world, so I can start on the next one and apply my learnings. The work and the process drive me, but sharing it is part of the process of closure to me.
I think I’m in Level Two - Get Good! I’ve found a consistent publishing rhythm here and am tweaking to see what works. I also like how artist and creator are defined here.