I apologize in advance to all the male artists who don't fit the description of the species that I am about to give.
What is it with male artists as compared to the female ones? I'm specifically referring to the drawing kind of artists.
I run an art-based website. I write and publish comics. I hang out in that "artsy" crowd. And statistically, I've got to point out that male artists are some of the most difficult human beings to deal with in the world.
I don't make this generalization lightly. When I'm working with or commissioning female artists, it's straightforward-- what/when/where.
But the men. Oh GOD, the men. "Your Angst For Today is..."
Seriously. 9 out of 10 male artists that I've ever interacted with on an artistic project are procrastinators, excuse-makers, or life-drama-angst creators. And this is all directly in proportion to how sought after their art is. There's a name for the other 1 out of 10: Successful.
So much talent, so little focus. Or so many excuses NOT to produce the very thing they say they want to do with their lives.
A clarification: This is not about those men with artistic talent who are putting there energies elsewhere, or who have said plainly that they're not creating art for others at the moment. This is for those art-teases who say quite plainly that they are wanting to do a comic or a project or some other thing, who engage you, the art buyer, and string you along with promises broken one after the other.
I have yet to meet a girl artist who does that. If they can't do the project, they say so. If they're going to be late with it, they tell you WHY and when you can expect it. I never have to worry that a female artist will get back to me with "I'm just unmotivated this week."
I don't mind if people have reasons for not being able to do art. But don't string me along! Guys-- string-alongers. Almost all the time! But not girls. Guys-- angsters over why they "just can't create" today. Girls--if they are, they never TELL me, they just stick to their schedule. Guys-- puffed-up egomaniacs about how cool all the OTHER PROJECTS they're working on are, while ignoring the fact that they're supposed to also be working on something they previously agreed to do for me. Girls-- if they accept your commission, they keep you up-to-date on all the other work they're doing on TOP of yours, which just makes them look that much more fabulous.
Yes, I HAVE worked with brilliant male artists who always deliver. They're rare, but not unheard of. Once again, they're successful. But the rest of them--! Arrrgh.
I just want to know if there's any particular REASON, or if we just have to chalk this up to "artistic temperament" tempered with the male genome.
M
Posted by Agent M at April 16, 2004 11:03 AMDude, I've chalked up your strange behavior to "artistic temperment" for years now!
Posted by: Sean on April 16, 2004 01:21 PMI don't think there is a particular reason you can just nail to the wall with any satisfying 'ta-dah!'. It involves how the artist looks at their work, and how they decide to market their creativity and accomplishments.
It could just be one is an 'Artist' (with or without the 'e') and one is an Illustrator, and you are seeing a male/female trend which isn't really there.
(I'm not saying an Illustrator isn't an artist, it's just their goal in a project is to satisfy a client; they are looking for a buyer to do work for. An artist is more one who completes a work and then looks for a buyer.)
Or it could just be bragging rights for 'projects in progress' versus bragging rights for 'completed projects'. At that basic level it might just be a guys versus girl thing. How many times do you have guys saying "I've got all this left to do today" and girls saying "I've gotten all this done so far today".
Guys do have a tendency to look at the final product when considering their goals, and girls do consider the smaller steps required to get to those goals. Maybe that is what you are noticing, the benefits of taking smaller steps to get things done.
Posted by: gerry straathof on April 18, 2004 04:51 AMAt the risk of sounding unkind (because I like your writing and I think you've done some really witty stuff), this sounds more like a whine than a rant. It's true, though, that some of the artists I know (or to clarify, people with artistic talent--this may or may not mean that they actually produce art, for profit or not) are self-absorbed, neurotic, depressive, or downright lazy. Most of those that I know are male.
What gives? Men are typically (as psychological profiles would have us believe) logical, straightforward thinkers concerned more with action than contemplation. But you get a male who thinks with the right part of his brain and the result is something a little less than... typical, shall we say.
Maybe it's the illustrator in me--I like to see things get done, and I like to communicate with my art. Sure, I've got my fair share of unfinished projects, but I like to think that I'm going somewhere. I know two guys who make a living doing art of some kind, others that produce art on the side of their day jobs (which is not a bad thing), and a lot more that play around with art now and then (some of whom are quite talented, or who could be if they applied themselves--sorry, that's the teacher in me).
Now statistically I think there are more male artists than female. Historically especially. Look at Michelangelo, though--pretty successful guy most would think, made quite a bit of money doing commissions. He left quite a few projects unfinished, sometimes because he couldn't stand the client and sometimes because he just lost motivation. Sheesh!
Now the subject of angsty male artists probably isn't that relevant to too many people. I'm going to say something really inflammatory here, though--I think guys are generally lazy slobs. Sure, you've got your metrosexuals and workaholics, but *generally*. Look at nature's role model--the lion. Lazy slob. The girls do all the work--fetch dinner, raise the kids, make sure there isn't zebra blood all over the den--multitasking. That must be it--male artists can't multitask. Either they're artists, absorbed in the "creation of art", or they're businessmen, fantastic at marketing their work, but seldom both.
I could be wrong--that's just my opinion! (Lazy slobs.)
Posted by: Mrs. M on April 19, 2004 07:17 PMMrs. M is pretty much bang on.
Having worked with, hired and fired my fair share of artists, here is how it has played out in my corner of the world:
Male or female, there are people who will work and people who won't. More importantly, there are people who pretend to work and people who actually work. At the end of the day, I have met more males who can sustain the illusion of productivity than females who can do the same. (I am not saying that's a good thing.)
So while the numbers may start out equal with each generation, the number of females claiming to be artists will eventually dwindle compared to males claiming the same.
This is not to say all males pretend and no females pretend, but that those males that pretend seem to be able to keep it up longer.
So I don't think that *all* men are lazy slobs, just the ones pretending to work. And that the "male artists" in the above rant are most likely of the "pretend" variety.
Perhaps you've been exposing yourself (*cough*) to predominantly that kind of male.
That's all I have to say about that.
CH