Doing It for the Art: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted
VisualWikitext
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:
This [[Trope]] often applies to niche media, since oftentimes with more popular works the creators must work with the general expectation that they need to create something better than sliced bread. Yet it also crops up more obviously in media where we generally have a set of diminished expectations - want to know why the Western Animation section is so huge? Because the [[Animation Age Ghetto]] makes the really good ones stand out more.
This [[Trope]] often applies to niche media, since oftentimes with more popular works the creators must work with the general expectation that they need to create something better than sliced bread. Yet it also crops up more obviously in media where we generally have a set of diminished expectations - want to know why the Western Animation section is so huge? Because the [[Animation Age Ghetto]] makes the really good ones stand out more.


But now comes the obligatory warning: [[Tropes Are Not Good|this trope is not necessarily a good thing]]. '''Doing It for the Art''' does ''not'' equal quality work. (If it did, then this article would have been put in the [[Sugar Wiki]] a ''long'' time ago.) Some examples here are of people who genuinely tried, but were just not talented enough. (In which case this [[Trope]] would be some kind of consolation, as in, "That movie sucked, but at least they cared") Conversely, doing it for money does ''not'' equal lack of quality. ''[[A Christmas Carol]]'' was just something Dickens threw together for a quick buck. One of the greatest stories in literature was just for some easy cash. It's not the only one. Indeed, [[Magnum Opus Dissonance|some writers' hackwork is preferred to what they regarded as important stuff]], sometimes because doing it for money was the only way they let down their pretensions. Also, if somebody lets their success get to their head to the point where their "vision" hurts the quality of their work, it can quickly slide into a [[Protection From Editors]] situation. However, the romantic ideal represented by this [[Trope]] can lead to a backlash against creators who are perceived to be doing something solely (or even partially) for reward, possibly by people who assume that doing something for money means you don't put your effort into it for artistic reasons as well.
But be aware, [[Tropes Are Not Good|having this trope in play is not necessarily a good thing]]. '''Doing It for the Art''' does ''not'' equal quality work; if it did, then this article would have been put in the [[Sugar Wiki]] a ''long'' time ago. Some examples here are of people who genuinely tried, but were just not talented enough; knowing how much effort they put into their works does nothing to [[Vindicated by History|vindicate the final product]]. Conversely, doing it for money does ''not'' equal lack of quality; ''[[A Christmas Carol]]'', one of the greatest stories in literature, was just something Dickens threw together for some easy cash. It's not the only one. Indeed, [[Magnum Opus Dissonance|some writers' hackwork is preferred to what they regarded as important stuff]], sometimes because doing it for money was the only way they let down their pretensions. Also, if somebody lets their success get to their head to the point where their "vision" hurts the quality of their work, it can quickly slide into a [[Protection From Editors]] situation. However, the romantic ideal represented by this [[Trope]] can lead to a backlash against creators who are perceived to be doing something solely (or even partially) for reward, possibly by people who assume that doing something for money means you don't put your effort into it for artistic reasons as well.


In [[Film]] analysis, someone who does a lot of this is called an ''auteur'', as opposed to the ''metteur en scene'', who is the journeyman director who makes someone else's movie. Within the artists' circle, this practice is called "Art for art's sake". Of course if it does actually make money, well that's just a perk.
In [[Film]] analysis, someone who does a lot of this is called an ''auteur'', as opposed to the ''metteur en scene'', who is the journeyman director who makes someone else's movie. Within the artists' circle, this practice is called "Art for art's sake". Of course if it does actually make money, well that's just a perk.
Retrieved from "https://allthetropes.org/wiki/Doing_It_for_the_Art"