There was a time when the commitment to work above all was accepted as appropriate for a wide range of occupations. Today it is to be found among members of a smaller percentage of occupations but the total number has grown so greatly that it is hard to judge whether the percentage of people involved is greater or lesser than in the past.

What has changed are the norms, that is the ethical expectations, applied to all members of society. Some of the older among us may remember the social reports and novels (made into film) which portrayed the clash between the traditional work ethic and the newer family ethic coming into ever greater influence. This was seen to have maximum impact on the role of worker and the role of husband (we are speaking of the late forties and, in particular, the fifties) vis-a-vis his wife, and, even more strikingly, between the husbands job and the needs of his children.

Of course, the tension of role conflict not only became greater along these lines, but the new expectations favoring a career for woman versus the wife, and, most particularly, the mother role, has added dimensions of conflict beyond what we imagined in the fifties (with the beginning of which I became a professional). The artists role is archetypal in all these respects. Artists are given greater leeway for deviance from the norms when they are "geniuses", GREAT ARTISTS, but I doubt (but do not know) whether the vast majority of serious, dedicated, often quite skilled, artists are given the same latitude. I would guess that not being a Van Gogh, Picasso, or.. (insert the names of your choice) the artist who puts his work above his family roles is defined as egocentric, lazy, irresponsible or whatever characterization has been developed in the particular subgroup. In fact, I would hypothesize that those with the greatest ambition for success, whether scientist or artist, is unable to function normally in the family, if normal is defined as consonant with the most generally accepted norms for the general society.

To turn to the question of eyesight and type of art produce, or any of the many statements one sees proliferating in the media, you must remember that the media now assigns people to read the key professional journals, almost every university, research organization now has publicity agents (whatever their label) and the public, increasingly committed to fact not fiction, has an omnivorous hunger for information about itself and its special members. That being the case, hypothesis is treated as fact, what are essentially pilot studies are treated as if they had demonstrated the TRUTH, and anyone, wise, foolish, informed, ignorant, can be cited as an intellectual Messiah.

The process of science has many safeguards against all these, and more, abuses, as artistic work-groups have when the are well organized (and when are they) against the charlatan, the fake, the fraud.The Truth or science is not the truth of art, though both have learned much from the other (at least, if we think of the social sciences, I would not say the same of the physical or natural sciences). Neither is the TRUTH of religion or the many forms of thought, such as Myth,which have enabled people to live in an ever perilous world.

I suppose what I am saying is that Leonardo, Raphael, Michelangelo, Durer, and company, had a much clearer path, no matter how difficult, because they knew themselves to be workman turning out a product, and that their commitment to the family, which was primary for them and everyone, allowed them to concentrate on the work role because it contributed to the family's welfare in the best way possible for them. The artist today is beset by conflicts of commitment far beyond what they faced. We face many more situations in which society has not yet created an accepted order of priority leaving the individual lonely and afraid, inevitably guilty through no self-fault because faced by irreconcilable (at this moment, in this place) social expectations.
Tennis Anyone?
(Trivia question, what film actor of cult status spoke that line (and many like
it) in his earlier Broadway career?)
By Irv

>> Being an Artist

¶ 7:47 PM