JAWBREAKER SEASON 2, EPISODE 2:
MONEY + FAME = GOOD ART?
DO YOU MAKE BETTER ART WHEN YOU’RE RICH?
Transcription:
Georgia Tooke: There we go! Okay! We’re liveeee! Um, took me a second to get that organised! Okay, as always I’m gonna wait for my gorgeous Shae to join me today!
Shae Myles: Hiiiii!
GT: Hi!!! Omg this update has totally been messing with me! It wasn’t working for a second, I was stressed!
SM: I know, my phone is being so weird but oh well we groove.
GT: Ya it looks so different! Like….. hi everyone!
SM: I am so excited for this episode!
GT: Me too!!! Me too, we’ve been like seriously talking about this for so long, like its so nice we’re finally gonna talk about it!
SM: Ikr!! I guess we probably could just start!
GT: Just start right into it?
SM: Why not!! =)
GT: Okay! Well, welcome everyone, this is JAWBREAKER Season 2, Episode 2: Money + Fame = Good Art? Um, do you make better art when you’re rich and famous?
~~~Terrible connection vibes commence ~~~
GT: So, Shae and I have been wondering, for quite some time, how artists become celebrities, and how they become famous. So we’ve been thinking about this for quite some time now, when I was in school, I did this project and it was like a CV dissection. Everyone got to choose an artist who was successful, and then go back through their CV and find out how they garnered that success. So we were supposed to look at like what was there first gallery show, who was there, what curators were there? How did that jump to the next show? And really find out the steps as to how they became who they [are now]. And so, I chose Matthew Barney, we’re not gonna go into his career, but just to give you an idea of what a CV dissection might look like, and a bit of background into his career, we put that with our resources on our website ~see further up this page.~ So you can have a look through that if you want to see how a CV dissection is done and how he launched his career. And there is of course our regular resources that will inform this episode.
SM: Yeah, so essentially there’s a lot to unpack in this episode, so we’re gonna try and keep it concise. We’ve done a lot of research for this one, so hopefully we can deliver the research effectively. But there’s a bunch of things, in terms of our conversations personally that we’ve set out to look at and explore. So we’re really curious to see whether art is good just because people love [the artist]. So if you are really passionate about an artist and they release something that is a little bit out of the box, are you automatically conditioned to be like “this is good art bc its by this person…” Yeah, that’s just one of the really interesting questions that we set out to ask, and also the whole dynamic between “good” and “bad” art, and also love vs hate in terms of artist figures ~ahem~ Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons… but we’re not gonna talk about that today, we might do another episode about those two, but we’re not gonna talk about them bc frankly they don’t deserve it.
A couple of the factors we’re gonna talk about are: do you make better art when you’re born into privilege? Your family, and how does that impact your career. Also do you get a free pass, automatically when you’re famous, to make bad art, or make whatever art you want? Also how much an impact your education plays in your success, so whether you went to a really prestigious art school or if you went to a really expensive art school, like how much does that actually give you in terms of whether you’re gonna e successful or not. So we’re obviously gonna be referring to notes here, but to start off, I want to read a lil statement out that we found was really interesting. Do you know who wrote this? It doesn’t say on here.
GT: It was from an article from the Huff Post, When Fame Replaces Art
SM: Okay we can link it, but I’m just gonna read it out just quickly, just as a lil starting point,
“Once my students begin to pay attention they realise that many of the artists at the top of the economic heap in today’s art world aren’t necessarily those who have made substantial aesthetic contributions.The artists they come across in the media are often those who have rigged the system by mastering the art of getting the public’s attention and then holding on to it. They are artists/celebrities, and fame is a crucial prop in their pricing structure. Fame is also a shield that deflects and distorts tough critical questions and obscures whatever art may or not be present.”
So, we were thinking about ways that we could say it by not using the quote, but I just feel like it just encapsulates the whole vibe of like the whole thing of capturing the public’s attention by one thing, and then their career being based off that one thing. So it’s just really interesting.
GT: Yeah! Just the part about how art is a shield that deflects and distorts tough critical questions, and so I feel like this is where we’re getting to these muddy waters of is something good or bad, is it because people love it or hate it, what makes something ~good~ and um, that’s a whole other discussion, I feel like that’s what all of art criticism is, seeking out if something is good or bad, or is it just subjective.
SM: Yeah, totally! So the episode today is going to be split into two parts. The first part is going to be us delivering the research that we found, then the second part we’re going to do a case study, basically another CV dissection sort of thing, to put the research into practice and how we sort of put it into practice ~yes I just repeated myself for no reason.~ So, with that, we can just get started!
GT: Okay, so part one, the research. So the art world really plays by its own economic rules. If there’s like an economy crash, the art market really is just an enigma, its just on it’s own playing field. And the reason why some artists work sells for millions and millions of dollars is because there’s a consensus in the art world that those works are just worth that much money, and should sell for that much money. Like, you see these artists selling their work for, what was it? Jeff Koons sold a sculpture for $61 million, like, that’s astronomical, like these prices are so ridiculous because the people in the financial position to go and buy this art, are just buying from a small portion of artists that are represented by a small portion of galleries, like i’s just such a small little pool of money that gets circulated around. The demand isn’t divided between all living and working artists, as we know, and we came across this term of ‘brand-name artists,’ and I think this is so perfect because you think of… Andy Warhol, is just such a brand-name artist, or like Jeff Koons, I hate to keep bringing him up, but like!!!!! So buying an artwork by a brand-name artist is, for lack of a better term, a dick measuring contest for the uber-wealthy. Like, what was that thing you were telling me with Kris Jenner?
SM: Omg yeah, I think… I don’t watch the Kardashians, but I think it was a clip that I saw on my explore page. So Kris Jenner was holding this mini Jeff Koons balloon dog, and Khloe comes in and is like… “what is that?” And Kris is like “art!” And Khloe’s like.. “but what though?” And she’s like .. “idk he’s a famous guy and it was a lot of money, so its a good piece of work.” And like, as an artist, to hear that conversation it just basically sums up how the dynamic between the ultra-famous celebrities and celebrity artists, who are basically endorsed by these people who are like “OH! So this is expensive so it’s good and I must own one!” I don’t know how much that would have cost Kris Jenner to buy, but probably a lot of money to me, and not very much money to her. So this is just why the playing field is just like, not level. You know?
GT: Yeah 100%! Like buying a Louis Vuitton bag, its just a marker of wealth, even if you don’t care about fashion or art. Anyways, so, back to the research! Our first question was: does having rich parents help propel your career. So we have two studies that we’re drawing from here, the first one is: Origins of Creativity: The Case of the Arts in the US Since 1850 by Karol Jan Borowiecki (professor of economics). This one compares the socio-economic backgrounds and geographic locations of participants that would class themselves as artists or creative professionals. According to the study, for every $10,000 in additional family income, a person is around 2% more likely to go into a creative occupation. The reason for this, is if you can rely on family support it makes it easier to enter a less financially lucrative field.
SM: So essentially, if you are lined up with people, and were like “ok so I make $60K”, and someone else was like “okay I make $70K” and it just goes up in this metaphorical line of people. It goes up in increments of 2% based on the money. Increments of 2% in terms of your inevitable success in the art world. And like, this is a study, this has literally been proven. How! Like that is so depressing! That the foundations of the art world are based on figures like that.
GT: Mhmm, yeah! Off of that, there was a NY Times report in 2017, that showed 22, 23, and 24 year-olds aspiring to work art and design are the most likely to receive financial assistance from their parents, with 53% reporting help. They also received the most money, an average of $3,600 a year, compared with an average of $3,000 for their peers in other fields. This highlights the invisible role of class in the art world, and it points to some of the challenges in bringing economic diversity to an industry that values humanism and resourcefulness, but simultaneously relies on the ability to engage and feel comfortable with deep-pocketed collectors.
So I can’t remember where I heard this from, but largely, artists are definitely more left-leaning in a political ideological sense, and the people who are in the Uber-wealthy, they are more right-wing. Usually where all of this money is coming from, is from industries like oil and gas, or old trust money that was back in the coloniser days that has been funnelled down through these families. And so there’s this great divide of like the artist trying to make the work that’s valuable to them, but also cater to these more right-wing, deep pocketed collectors. So I think that’s an interesting divide as well.
So ways to combat this inequality, is obviously paid internships, affordable housing for students, funding/grants to help with fees, and I just wanna add in a lil bit more radically, that school should just be free! I think further education should just be free for all people, no more student debt! But I don’t think we’re ready for that conversation yet!
SM: I mean, a girl can dream!
GT: Yeah! Exactly! Um, and then just to finish that one off, there was a 2014 study done by the Census Bureau data from The Hamilton Project, that found that fine arts majors are among the lowest-earning graduates, but their earning trajectory is also among the steepest. And so their initial earnings barely surpass $15,000, but more than double within the first five years of their career, which highlights how critical financial support during those early twenty-something years are. So if you’re not getting that additional support from your parents or your family, you’re not gonna be able to survive on what small income you’re making, which usually results in artists giving up their dreams of being an artist, and chose something that’s more practical to earn the money. Whereas people who do have financial support can push through those lower earning years to become more successful, more rich and famous.
SM: I feel like with that, what really is so interesting about the trajectory is, like for any ‘normal’ job, like if you work in STEM for example, your earnings will increase through things like promotions, and working your way up gradually. So that’s just the way that it works, but with artists and the art world, you could literally go from making no money, then you have a breakthrough show, and then everyone wants you in their gallery, and then your earnings could just fuckin skyrocket. This is just so daunting, and is why it is so difficult to navigate, because it’s not like you can be like “ah I’ll just follow this little path and I’ll work really hard bc I know it’ll pay off in the end, there’s no way of knowing that, and there’s no ~right~ way to do it. Which is just like, sad.
GT: Um, so, that was do rich parents help. Yes. What about your social circle though? So from this study Fame as an Illusion of Creativity: Evidence from the Pioneers of Abstract Art, this article is by Paul Ingram. So this one just researched the social ties and level of fame achieved by 90 pioneering abstract artists. And it found that there was no statistical support for the relationship between the artist’s creativity and the fame they ultimately achieved. NO statistical support. Between creativity and fame. ~AHH!~ He found that the artists who had a diverse set of friends and professional contacts from different industries were statistically [more likely] to become famous. Great.
SM: So basically, you’ve gotta have a good circle of mates and know all the right people from art school, and have influential families in order to make it. According to this study, a study on ninety artists!!! Like, I feel like there was a demographic that I saw in this article, and it wasn’t just in America, I think it was all around the world. So it’s not just something in the states, this is genuinely the state of the art world everywhere! Wild!!
GT: Yeah! So if creativity has, like there’s no statistical data to link it to becoming famous, this leads us to: how does ~bad art~ become so famous? So we found this experiment that was done that we found so fascinating, so it was conducted by Matthew Salganik, Professor of Sociology at Princeton University. He started thinking about success, and specifically about how much of success should be attributed to the inherent qualities of the successful thing itself, and how much is just chance. And so his hypothesis says that for some essentially random reason, a group of people decided that the thing in question was really good and their attention attracted more attention until there was a herd of people who believed that it was special mostly because all the other people believed that it was, but the successful thing wasn't in fact very special. So he wanted to test how much success should be attributed to chance vs quality. So how he did this was he created a website that funnelled 30,000 teenagers that he recruited online into nine identical worlds. In each one of these worlds, they exposed the teens to 48 songs from emerging artists, bands that hadn't yet been signed so were completely unknown. So after listening to the songs, the teens could download the songs they liked best for free. So in the “control world” the teenagers couldn't see what their friends were downloading or what other people were downloading, so they just purely downloaded the ones they liked. Whereas in the eight other worlds, you could see who was downloading things more frequently than others, so this drastically changed the results. In one world, they had this song 'Lock Down' by the band 52 Metro," and Salganik says in this world, the song came first, ranked first out of all of them, and in another world, it came 40th out of 48. It was exactly the same song, just in different worlds it succeeded differently. So the conclusion that he came to was that its very hard for a poor quality thing to succeed, but if you meet a basic standard of quality, then what becomes a huge hit and what doesn't is essentially a matter of chance.
SM: Which is like, I’m sorry, that is mental!!! Like, obviously it makes so much sense bc music and art and all that, it is subjective. But for it to be proven that something is more successful because other people think it is, that’s essentially the whole vibe of this study, and that what he set out to prove. So, obviously everyone has their own opinions and preferences, but then the fact that without even knowing it, social influence can play such a massive part in things you decide, and things you deem as ~good~ is just crazy! Like that’s just mad! And this whole thing can be applied directly to the art world as well, which is again is just crazy.
GT: Crazy !
SM: So, I’m gonna talk a lil bit about our case study. So this is the second part of the episode, and so yeah you can download the CV dissection that we did, well I say we, it was you! That Georgia did of Matthew Barney, that’s available [above] if you want to see it written, it might be a lil bit easier to follow. I’m gonna make this as easy to follow as possible bc there is a lot. So, we’ve chosen to look at Chloe Wise, who is one of our favourite artists… but the catch is…. We fucking hate her!!
GT: We love her, we hate her, we love to hate her, we hate to love her… it’s a complicated and messy relationship.
SM: Honestly… yes. So first of all, before going in to all of this, I just want to say, we really aren’t setting out to bash her, or hate on her. We love her work and are just jealous essentially, I don’t have any problem admitting that!!! We just wanted to use her as an example for this bc she has a ridiculously impressive career, CV, she’s only young and we wanted to find out what the pinnacle career breakthrough moment was. Bc obviously its easier to find out this kind of info who are like, dead? Kinda morbid, but this kind of information does like present itself, like ~here u go~ until like after their career is over essentially. So we just wanted to do the research for ourselves, and find out how Chloe Wise became Chloe Wise. So if you’re not familiar with her work, she’s from Montreal, but she’s now based in New York and has been for some time. She’s known primarily for her paintings and sculptures, which explore notions of food, identity, the body… all that lovely stuff! She is no stranger to the lavish “insta-influencer” life, she presents that, if you go to her insta you’ll see. Maybe not so much bc of lockdown, but prior to lockdown, she goes to fashion shows, she’ll be reclining on a plush leather couch in her satin nightie, all of the stuff that makes me want to be her + hate her at the same time. So what we’re interested in, is how she established this life for herself, so there’s a couple of things im gonna talk about, first of all, the people in her life that might be of some significance.
So after some digging, she doesn’t speak explicitly about her parents and what they do, I found separately … I feel like I was totally obsessive the amount of searching I did for this, but in one article she mentioned her dad was an accountant, and in another article she mentioned his name. So I was like ooo ok I have enough info, so I think I found who he is, and his cv online…. This is all sounding so weird I hate myself, but it’s for a good cause!! So, if it is the guy that I think it is, he has served on several boards and committees of professional societies and charitable organisations. He’s a very professional, successful, and probably very influential man with a lot of power and status in his profession and career and world, I guess. And the second person to note is her “husband.” Still unsure of the vibe here, but basically on her insta she was talking about how she’s married to Eric Wareheim, who you might know from Master of None. He’s an actor, comedian and director.. all that, so he’s a very famous man, but this is completely unconfirmed, like probably a joke… I’m not really sure if it’s just a rich person joke that I just don’t understand. But yeah, apparently she’s married to this guy, but if she’s not married to him, they’re very close friends, they hang out all the time, and it just so happens that she uses his office as a gallery. So like, you know, just where all his other rich friends will be hanging out, and just like walking around, and her art is just there for all the other famous actors and directors n shit. So, that’s interesting, and the core of it, the base of it, the people who she’s surrounded by and influenced by and she has to support her are clearly very influential people in NY and in Canada I guess. So I put together a timeline, I feel like its easier to see, so this is basically my research into her breaking point.. breakthrough point, not breaking point she’s not got there yet! Her break-through point!!! Of like how she became so famous and everyone became obsessed with her. So:
March 2014 - she had her first every group exhibition, Deinviting Don Lothario in Montreal. She maybe got picked up at her grad show and this was following that.
October 2014 - her friend Bobbi Salvor Menuez, (who you might know from White Girl, that film, it’s really good, it’s on Netflix) so Bobbi basically asked to borrow one of Chloe Wise’s Bagel Bags. She does these sculptural bags that look like food, and it was called Bagel Bag No. 5, which was basically a parody of Chanel, and Bobbi was going to a Chanel event, and was like “HEY it would be so funny if I wore this at this event and I wonder if the press will go mad bc it will look like a bagel Chanel bag!” And so that happened, and the internet did in fact go crazy, everyone was like “omg Chanel have a new line of bags” and everyone was so excited. You can see on the resources some of the headlines from that time when everyone was obsessed with it and it became a massive story, everyone was just crying about this bag. Then it came out that no, it wasn’t a real Chanel bag, it was this artist Chloe Wise, and everyone was like “OMG she’s amazing!!!”
March 2015 - first solo show in Montreal
May 2015 - same show in Toronto, so she’s already done three major exhibitions within a year
June 2015 - first solo international show, in Switzerland, and I found out as well on t he website for the gallery that she undertook a residency in the gallery and made the work that was gonna be exhibited in the gallery, which is obviously a really amazing opportunity to have that time dedicated to making a new body of work
November 2015 - first solo show in NY, obviously a massive deal. To go from, in 18 months, just being exhibited where you went to school, to being shown in NY!! Wild!
So basically after that her career exploded. If you go onto her website, you can see her CV and stuff which is obviously where I got most of this information. So since then, since 2015, she’s been exhibited in 33 group shows. I counted that from the list of “selected” exhibitions! So that’s not even all of them!!! I don’t even know how many she actually has been in, but there were 33 on her website, and then 8 solo shows in London, NY, Denmark, Paris, LA, Brussels, Greece, Sweden - literally this girl is EVERYWHERE!!! Over the next, what, six years? And even through the pandemic she was getting shows, and like, wtf man!! So everyone loves her bc u know… her work is amazing, but it’s just kinda.. what that timeline shows, is that the Bagel Bag being shown, Bobbi wearing that bag at the Chanel show and the press catching onto it, that was her ~moment~ where she was like: “this is me.. i’ve done it!” And like… it’s genius, it fuckin worked, and her career is insane, she’s only… i actually think she’s only 30. Like maybe even younger than that and her career has just skyrocketed bc of this one really perfectly timed moment.
Another thing that I wanted to look at is her gallery representation currently. I couldn’t find a backlog of who’s represented her in the past, but currently she’s represented by three galleries. And like, idk if i just don’t know much about this bc I’ve never been represented by a gallery and like, I don’t really know much about it anyway just in general. But like I wasn't really sure of what the benefits to being represented by more than one? I kinda just thought it was just one, and that other people would not want to represent you if you were already being represented. BUT no. So she’s represented by a gallery in London, who, on their website they say they “present minimal and conceptual art by emerging, mid-career and established artists.” so you’ve got a whole wide range of people being [represented] by this gallery, and one of them is Jeff Koons. So like imagine just casually having your name on the same list as him ~yikes.~ She’s also represented by a gallery in Canada, which basically encapsulates all Canada’s most important contemporary artists, she’s represented by them. And also one in Switzerland, which is basically, they work with private collections as well as international institutions, so their connections are wild. This is a really important gallery to be represented by, and also the majority of young people and emerging artists who are represented by this gallery have their first European solo show through the gallery, which in this case is correct for Chloe Wise, this is who she was exhibited by for her first international show. So like, i think their standpoint to be like “come to us, you’ll get international recognition!” which, she did.
So I wanted to look at, I wasn’t really gonna mention this, i just kinda found it interesting, whether there were benefits to being represented by more than one gallery. I found a really great article by Justin Kamp, which basically says, yes there are benefits, and lots of them. So I’ll just go through them just quickly, but the main one is the fact that you have an expanded access to collectors. Obviously it makes sense, the more people you are represented by, you have a wider audience. And also as a result of that, you have greater financial capabilities, so galleries can work together somehow (idk, it’s just what this guy says!!) and you have essentially better resources, better exhibitions, a more widespread knowledge of art fairs, collectors, collections and stuff. And then, you also have the chance to build better institutional recognition in different parts of the world, which obviously makes sense. if you’re represented in Europe, and also in Canada, your reach is gonna be wider. And then, this one is the one I mainly wanted to highlight, this is just wild to me. So, theres the ability to increase your pricing if you are represented by more than one gallery. So working with an additional gallery or in her case, three galleries in total, the market expands, naturally, bc your audience is bigger in all these different places you’re being shown in. So your prices automatically can go up and change bc of the wide range of audience. Which is like, no wonder she wants to be represented by all these people at once: your prices go up, you make more money, you’re more successful!! So, wild!
GT: And I feel like, something I was thinking about when we were talking about gallery representation and her being represented by 3 galleries, is like, this is kinda obvious, but it kind just clicked for me today: she’s a full on professional artist. That is all she does. She makes sculptures and paintings. All day. Thats how she makes money. She doesn’t have to waste time working some damn customer service job to make ends meet, you know?! All her time can go to making work. That’s how she has so much work to show and sell, is bc that’s all she’s doing. So, a reminder for everyone who’s still working - that it’s okay not to have a new painting to post every week, like! We’re tryin, tryna make it work!! Things to think about, things to keep in mind!!!
SM: That is honestly a really good point, bc I like, wish I had that life. That I could just be like “hey I fancy making some really large-scale work…”
GT: “Can someone pls fund me!”
SM: Yeah!!! Me and u literally spending 24 hours writing funding applications ~eeeeek~ Anyway, so, something else that is really interesting is the way that people write about her success. And the way she writes about her success. So, there’s an article from VICE, who have called her: a born networker. Let’s take a moment…. like… !!!
GT: We were shook by this!!!
SM: Yeah, so if someone were to describe me as that, which it not true, I am not a sociable person and I don’t do v well in social situations. Like, if someone was to brand u as a born networker… like that says a lot about you as a person. Like not gonna throw any shade.. but, maybe negitively! Like idk if I would want to be… it kinda sounds a bit weaselly… like ur gonna get your fuckin foot in the door every opportunity. Obviously it’s a good thing bc look it’s paid off for her, and like, I’m just some 2020 grad being like “i want this girl’s life!!!!” so like, ultimately it doesn’t really matter but a quote after that said: “her social fluidity led to the confluence that first placed her faux Chanel.” so like, basically what they’re saying is, the fact that she is so good at networking and it courses through her blood, and that she had the initiative to do the Chanel Bag with Bobbi. It wasn’t a mistake that she did that, and she knew that it would probably most likely blow her up, and it would be… like she knew what she was doing which is iconic, can’t lie. And like, something that you said Georgia, when we were talking about this, is that she must have a motivation for every event or event or person she knows in her life… like her motivation must always be: how can this impact my career. Like, “how can this propel my career”… to be called a born-networker. That’s what that equates to, for me.
GT: Well yeah, that’s how we interpreted it, was having a motivation. Looking at her husband, faux-husband, the fact that she is exhibiting her work in his office space, the amount of people that would reach, to become friends with more actors, more models, more celebrity personalities, influencers, like that’s really expanding your network so it’s not just networking with other art ppl, it’s like, you’re networking with some way bigger players in terms of wealth and status.
SM: Yeah! And so, the way that she writes about her success is also really interesting, so she, in an interview she admitted that her her “social media inherently possesses a volatile disjuncture in that there exists simultaneously a persona, and an extreme honesty. This persona is almost comically honest to the point that they are inseparable from the performed or exaggerated images of the persona.” So basically, there’s no fuckin way to tell what’s authentic or what is performed, which obviously is the beauty of social media, everyone is subject to it, like it’s the same for everyone, this isn’t exclusively her. But the fact she acknowledges that is so interesting. The fact she’s like “yeah bitch I’m playing a game, obviously! Everyone is!” And i just think that’s really interesting. She also says: “I understand that as a 25 year old white cis-gendered Jewish girl of privilege, I am perceived a certain way, whether that is positive or negative, and I like to play with my own image and watch the reactions change.” So like, she literally is like, “I know I am rich and I know I was always gonna be rich!!!” And it’s like… ueeuugh… idk I just find it so odd, like yeah well done for acknowledging that you’re an issue. But the art world is flawed, inherently. But I just think it is so interested that she’s like “i like to watch ppl be annoyed, and ppl be jealous!” And I guess… dk what that’s like!!!!
GT: I feel like I’m just like, so like “I just want everyone to like me, I really want people to perceive me positively!!!” And she’s like “idc how people perceive me, and that’s what’s gonna bring me more fame and attention” and I’m like “omg.. idk!!”
SM: Yeah, so basically what that suggests to me, is that networking for her, in this case anyway, is just such an important part of your career’s success. And basically her innate ability to network and to network to the perfect few people is basically why she is who she is, and her career looks the way it does, and she’s got such an impressive CV, and ultimately it’s down to that.
So, I feel like that was a lot, and thank you for holding in there, like, the main point of this was to, reassure myself!!! So hopefully to reassure everyone watching that this kind of success, there’s a lot of things that contributes to it that maybe isn’t accessible to you. I think that just bc Chloe Wise acknowledges the fact that she’s from this privileged background, it doesn’t make her any less part of the problem, like I know she’s not the core of the problem, but like… I said what I said. She worked super hard to get to where she’s at, and everything she’s achieved is so incredible and obviously her skillset as an artist is ridiculous, and she’s so unbelievably special and talented, that’s there, I’m not denying that. But I just think that if success isn’t measured by your output, and the art that you create, and it’s to do with money, who you know and chance, you know… I can’t relate to that, bc I can’t see those opportunities ever presenting themselves to me in that way. Bc I… I literally live in Aberdeen, and like, u know… I don’t have any connections with like actors and NY ppl. I just think it’s so scarily unattainable, and I just wonder if Bobbi didn’t ask Chloe for the bag… like imagine the bag was in an exhibition and Chloe was like “oh no u can’t have it, it’s not available!!” or imagine if Bobbi… Chloe didn’t think to ask, it was Bobbi that was like “oh!! can i wear that to the event it’ll be funny!” Like imagine if that didn’t happen, for whatever reason! Would her career have fast-tracked as quickly as it did? Where would she be now without that one moment of ~chance~. And yeah, it’s just interesting to me.
GT: Yeah definitely. In closing, for this episode, I feel like there’s just a common misconception that artists become successful and famous bc they make good art. But it’s really about who you know, how good you are at networking, being at the right place at the right time, and a big part of it is just dumb luck. But, my final thoughts on this whole thing is: can you become a famous artist without hobnobbing and schmoozing… maybe not. Can you make good art without coming from privilege and wealth? Abso-fuckin-lutely you can! We’ve seen so many artists come up with such good art that were not from privilege and wealth. Can you become a successful artist without all the stuff we’ve talked about in this episode: rich parents, prestigious art degree, networking… and i think that just depends on how YOU define success, and what is ultimately important to you. So if just making art is a joy for you, and a tool for you to understand yourself and the world that you live in, and you’re doing that and making work and that’s the most important thing… like, that’s perfect, that’s success. If you want to be rich n famous, I think it’s definitely more of a challenging road that you have to work a lot harder to get there, but ultimately find out what success means to you, and align with your values.
SM: Awww!!! Your closing statement was much more wholesome than mine, I sound like a fucking bitch!!!
GT: lol i had to bring it around!!!! Well!! We set out with the intention of it being 25 long, and here we are 50 mins later!!! Um, but thank you so much to everyone who popped in, who joined us, stuck it out with us the whole time! This will be posted on our IGTV and also on our website, our YouTube, so there’s many ways you can watch it back if you weren’t here on a Sunday afternoon/evening. Yeah! Thank you so much everyone!! We’ll see you next month for episode three!!
SM: Thank you for staying that whole time bc it was a lot!!!
GT: Yeah thank you!!!!! Okay byeeeee!!!
SM: Byeeee!!!!