This is so important! It’s like with other famous people-writers, actors, athletes—we don’t see all the WORK and all the ATTEMPTS and failures. Looking forward to the next installment :)
I LOVE this! It's such an interesting concept that talent is not something inherited, but something worked for. You could also even argue that talent is subjective. It's based on the observers, the time frame in which it's being observed, & so many other factors. So many famous creatives lived & died without being recognized for the talent that we now give them.
Yes, exactly! All the important painters and people thought Van Gogh’s paintings were total crap. What changed? Tastes? Aesthetics? Was Van Gogh ahead of his time? Or just unlucky? A hundred years from now, will everyone think Van Gogh sucks again? Who knows?
I did find this fascinating! Hopefully very encouraging for other artists of any sort. It reminded me that my mother painted in oils as a hobby all her life, and while they were competent, I never felt they were truly inspired or beautiful. Then, in the last years of her life (she died in her late sixties) she shifted to water colors, and I have two still lifes that I found delicate and lovely. While I never had the goal of becoming a great writer, I have been happy to have become a writer of light fiction that people enjoy, and that success didn't come to me until my sixties. Just glad I didn't die before 40, because....well, for lots of reasons...but also because it would be sad not to have experience the satisfaction of fulfilling a dream I'd had since I was 12.
Respectfully, there is absolutely no way you can draw like that (the Bedroom sketch). There is nobody alive who can control line and form that brilliantly, because you’d have to be not just a genius but also self taught, mildly insane (even then) and working in a world that’s on the cusp of photography and before offset printing developed to the degree that linearity in that specific idiomatic sense (both in Van Gogh’s drawings and paintings) was widely available to look at. Printing was crude even in the time of Daumier or Durer; the skills and styles associated with offset lithography (including all comic strips and commercial art) were just on the horizon. Even Da Vinci doesn’t draw that way because it would never occur to him to do so. There’s only one Van Gogh because it’s impossible to reproduce that combination of factors, in him and in the world, in any other era or set of circumstances.
I think maybe we're saying the same thing. No one can draw or paint exactly like Van Gogh because no one else is Van Gogh. But also, maybe, everyone could do amazing creative things if they found the exact right set of circumstances. Which maybe is still mostly out of our control, but not as much as we might think.
Thanks for responding. I realize it wasn't so much what you said as the nerve you struck — the time I've spent over the years dealing with art skeptics or just "my kid could do that" philistines in general who keep trying to "expose the myth" of modern art; to "prove" that it's all some kind of scam based on artificially inflated value (where Van Gogh is the ultimate ironic example since he never sold a painting but now they go for millions each).
The specific value and meaning of Van Gogh remains elusive. I don't know where you live, but I'm lucky enough to be able to see a great deal of his work basically whenever I feel like it (given my proximity to big museums) and it's a constant revelation. The idea that anyone could challenge him in this way got me upset enough to respond without giving adequate attention to what I was responding to; apologies for that.
No problem. We all have those things that set us off. I have no desire to "expose the myth" of modern art. I'm gobsmacked by Van Gogh, every single time I see one of his paintings, especially in person. It is exactly a revelation, as you said, every time. And maybe I didn't communicate it well, but part of what I was trying to get at was that elusiveness. Where did those amazing images and that way of seeing the world come from? It's a mystery and a miracle. If I had millions, I might pay that much to have one of his paintings to look at every day.
Very jealous of being able to go see Van Gogh in a museum frequently and easily. That is a lovely part of big-city living.
What a great article, Robyn! Years ago I read this book titled, “Talent is Overrated” by Geoff Colvin. It is a fascinating look at what we in the arts consider to be talent. He concludes, not to be a spoiler, that IF there is a thing called talent, it doesn’t have anything to do with one’s success. Hard work, and hours and hours of dedicated practice are better indicators of success.
I teach trombone students at the college level and often hear “wow, she/he is really talented, I can’t do that”, or “I am not naturally talented” as a reason (or excuse) why something isn’t working. This book helped me become a better teacher by being able to discuss the talent vs hard work scenario. Now, to find this real world example you presented of what hard work and dedicated practice can do to someone who draws shitty sketches, yet becomes a world famous artist is something I will incorporate into my teaching. (I’ll also check out the Van Gogh book!)
I have looked at many Van Goghs over the years and entered into his world. He had a vision. Executing his vision was not about draughtsmanship. You make an excellent point about the astonishingly short time in which he produced his great work—the paintings that expressed his unique and unforgettable vision. Without incredible tenacity, he couldn’t have done it. But hard work alone won’t make an artist in any medium. I have seen people work hard to become writers and never produce any memorable writing. So I’m a believer in talent, although vision will do as well.
It is amazing how much he produced in such a short period of time!
I think I agree with you that hard work isn’t enough. There has to be some added element. I’m just not sure what that added element is. Is it something you’re born with? Is it something that’s a result of your experiences? Is it some magic ability to turn yourself into a conduit for the music of the spheres? I don’t know. Maybe what we call it doesn’t matter. I definitely know that whatever it is, Van Gogh had it!
BRB, gotta text you a bunch of my shit drawings…
I mean, they're probably better than Van Gogh's...
This is so important! It’s like with other famous people-writers, actors, athletes—we don’t see all the WORK and all the ATTEMPTS and failures. Looking forward to the next installment :)
I LOVE this! It's such an interesting concept that talent is not something inherited, but something worked for. You could also even argue that talent is subjective. It's based on the observers, the time frame in which it's being observed, & so many other factors. So many famous creatives lived & died without being recognized for the talent that we now give them.
Yes, exactly! All the important painters and people thought Van Gogh’s paintings were total crap. What changed? Tastes? Aesthetics? Was Van Gogh ahead of his time? Or just unlucky? A hundred years from now, will everyone think Van Gogh sucks again? Who knows?
Just had to share where I was last week…
Did you love it? I assume this is the one in the Van Gogh Museum, though he painted so many versions of all his paintings, it’s hard to know for sure.
I did find this fascinating! Hopefully very encouraging for other artists of any sort. It reminded me that my mother painted in oils as a hobby all her life, and while they were competent, I never felt they were truly inspired or beautiful. Then, in the last years of her life (she died in her late sixties) she shifted to water colors, and I have two still lifes that I found delicate and lovely. While I never had the goal of becoming a great writer, I have been happy to have become a writer of light fiction that people enjoy, and that success didn't come to me until my sixties. Just glad I didn't die before 40, because....well, for lots of reasons...but also because it would be sad not to have experience the satisfaction of fulfilling a dream I'd had since I was 12.
Sometimes it’s all about the medium, Louisa. And it’s definitely never too late!
Respectfully, there is absolutely no way you can draw like that (the Bedroom sketch). There is nobody alive who can control line and form that brilliantly, because you’d have to be not just a genius but also self taught, mildly insane (even then) and working in a world that’s on the cusp of photography and before offset printing developed to the degree that linearity in that specific idiomatic sense (both in Van Gogh’s drawings and paintings) was widely available to look at. Printing was crude even in the time of Daumier or Durer; the skills and styles associated with offset lithography (including all comic strips and commercial art) were just on the horizon. Even Da Vinci doesn’t draw that way because it would never occur to him to do so. There’s only one Van Gogh because it’s impossible to reproduce that combination of factors, in him and in the world, in any other era or set of circumstances.
I think maybe we're saying the same thing. No one can draw or paint exactly like Van Gogh because no one else is Van Gogh. But also, maybe, everyone could do amazing creative things if they found the exact right set of circumstances. Which maybe is still mostly out of our control, but not as much as we might think.
Thanks for responding. I realize it wasn't so much what you said as the nerve you struck — the time I've spent over the years dealing with art skeptics or just "my kid could do that" philistines in general who keep trying to "expose the myth" of modern art; to "prove" that it's all some kind of scam based on artificially inflated value (where Van Gogh is the ultimate ironic example since he never sold a painting but now they go for millions each).
The specific value and meaning of Van Gogh remains elusive. I don't know where you live, but I'm lucky enough to be able to see a great deal of his work basically whenever I feel like it (given my proximity to big museums) and it's a constant revelation. The idea that anyone could challenge him in this way got me upset enough to respond without giving adequate attention to what I was responding to; apologies for that.
No problem. We all have those things that set us off. I have no desire to "expose the myth" of modern art. I'm gobsmacked by Van Gogh, every single time I see one of his paintings, especially in person. It is exactly a revelation, as you said, every time. And maybe I didn't communicate it well, but part of what I was trying to get at was that elusiveness. Where did those amazing images and that way of seeing the world come from? It's a mystery and a miracle. If I had millions, I might pay that much to have one of his paintings to look at every day.
Very jealous of being able to go see Van Gogh in a museum frequently and easily. That is a lovely part of big-city living.
What a great article, Robyn! Years ago I read this book titled, “Talent is Overrated” by Geoff Colvin. It is a fascinating look at what we in the arts consider to be talent. He concludes, not to be a spoiler, that IF there is a thing called talent, it doesn’t have anything to do with one’s success. Hard work, and hours and hours of dedicated practice are better indicators of success.
I teach trombone students at the college level and often hear “wow, she/he is really talented, I can’t do that”, or “I am not naturally talented” as a reason (or excuse) why something isn’t working. This book helped me become a better teacher by being able to discuss the talent vs hard work scenario. Now, to find this real world example you presented of what hard work and dedicated practice can do to someone who draws shitty sketches, yet becomes a world famous artist is something I will incorporate into my teaching. (I’ll also check out the Van Gogh book!)
I have looked at many Van Goghs over the years and entered into his world. He had a vision. Executing his vision was not about draughtsmanship. You make an excellent point about the astonishingly short time in which he produced his great work—the paintings that expressed his unique and unforgettable vision. Without incredible tenacity, he couldn’t have done it. But hard work alone won’t make an artist in any medium. I have seen people work hard to become writers and never produce any memorable writing. So I’m a believer in talent, although vision will do as well.
It is amazing how much he produced in such a short period of time!
I think I agree with you that hard work isn’t enough. There has to be some added element. I’m just not sure what that added element is. Is it something you’re born with? Is it something that’s a result of your experiences? Is it some magic ability to turn yourself into a conduit for the music of the spheres? I don’t know. Maybe what we call it doesn’t matter. I definitely know that whatever it is, Van Gogh had it!