Recent events have led me to reflect on one of my previous blog posts, "Defining Success as an Artist," which I now feel inclined to revisit and expand upon. In that post I pondered the different ways one can define success for themselves, particularly as a visual artist. I am realizing now that what I was reflecting upon then really comes down to commercial vs. critical success and the paradox that you can have one without the other, or in some cases, they may not happen at the same time.

It always helps me to think of parallels in more popular industries like music or film when it comes to trying to wrap my head around the fine art world. If you are a reader of my blog then you have no doubt had the experience of watching a small, independent film that you thought was amazing and that you might even consider to be one of your favorite movies of all time, but that not many people know about or have seen. This movie likely garnered critical success at the time of its release, and perhaps went on to become a fan favorite with a cult following, but it was not a film that was a hit at the box office that subsequently enjoyed commercial success. 

The flip side of this could be a popular dance song that captures the heart of the world. It might not be the type of song that achieves critical success by winning or even getting nominated for a Grammy, but one cannot deny that it still managed to achieve a massive level of appeal and commercial success. And let's face it, if you were the creator of that song, I'd imagine that you probably wouldn't be all that bothered about whether or not you won any award for that piece of music if you already knew that practically everyone in the world was dancing to your song.

So now that we have clearly established that there are different types of success, this then leads me to ask: is one form of success better than another? In the examples above, I've already implied that if you are able to make a piece of art that becomes a commercial success, then you likely will not be too worried about critical acclaim. The commercial success can help pay your bills, unlike a small, shiny statue. But what if you find yourself in the first scenario above, holding that statue, but have no commercial success to show for your work? What then?

I want to pause here and acknowledge that most awards and especially award shows, exist in part as a vehicle to promote creative works. Entertainment studios heavily fund advertising around awards season to bring attention to their creative projects because they know if a property they own wins in some category, it can help lead to more paying viewers for their product.  Therefore, they are betting that a critical success will lead to a film becoming a commercial success, if it isn’t already. And it is easy to assume that the two should go hand in hand. But the reality is that they don't always!

And this then can become the crux of the matter for a creator who has been handed an award, but has no audience to show for it. You know you have made something good, you literally have the trophy to prove it, but if the public is not buying what you are making, then where do you go from there? What real incentive do you have to keep doing what you are doing? Unless those awards come with cash prizes, then it is very difficult for an artist to afford to continue to make their work and hope that there is some future out there that they are still living in where the public has caught up to their artistic vision and are now willing to embrace it commercially. It takes a great deal of conviction and a continuous flow of personal resources to continue to charge forward as an artist when you find yourself in this position. And that's what I plan to do.

Working in my art studio in March of 2024, on one of my largest canvases to date.