← Back to context

Comment by jancsika

3 months ago

> Those will never get popular, but at least the local community will gain a better sense of connection through the artistic expressions of their community members.

I assume you're just spitballing here. Still: what you've proposed often produces an artistic process that is possibly worse than the oligopoly you're attempting to oppose.

Prioritizing "a better sense of connection" through artistic expression is a recipe for manipulating artists into giving away their time (and, perhaps, art) for free or close to it. Moreover, de-emphasizing popularity means the local production has less money coming in. Too few dollars chasing "a better sense of connection" essentially means you'll optimized for the most manipulative ego-maniacs to hound local artists to mentor and make art for less than what they are worth.

Worst of all, the artists who get manipulated and burned out by this process aren't the ones who would have produced "garbage coming from the pseudo-anonymous void." They're the ones who would have done local community productions that have enough money to pay a minimally decent amount of money to artists. Ironically, you end up with less enthusiasm for the kind of art you're wanting to produce.

Whoa, what a weird take. I'm talking about stuff like starting a local photo club/drawing club/etc and sharing your work with like-minded people and starting exhibitions in your local town. Voluntary.

You make it sound like some weird manipulation scheme. Sounds like you've never actually done anything like this in real life.