Hey guys, it's Celestia, and I rewatched Velvet Buzzsaw and had an existential crisis over art and
social media, and decided to make a video about it. So, pretty much nothing new. But before we
get into that, I have a contest-and-prizes-related announcement. I know you guys hate it when I make
long intros, but this is important and exciting and cool, so I'll just give you guys a timestamp
on screen to skip to for the actual video topic if you're not interested. First of all,
I recently had the opportunity to review a couple of Parblo's products. If you're unfamiliar,
Parblo is a tablet company that's been creating digital drawing tools for seven years, and while
I hadn't heard of them before this, I wish I had. Their products are high-quality, affordable,
clearly designed with artists' needs in mind, and in terms of the tablet I personally tried out,
the Intangbo M, very beginner-friendly. The drivers were easy to set up, the size is
big enough to be easy to work on while also being small enough to take with you, it works perfectly,
and with a year-long warranty, you've got support if that changes. Bonus points for the eight
hotkeys that I immediately reprogrammed to let me undo and redo the same stroke 57 times with ease,
the large number of extra pen nibs it comes with that allow me to justify my habit of pressing
way too hard with the pen as my repressed anger attempts to free itself from the prison of my
mind, and the little place at the top of the tablet where you can put the pen when you're
not using it. That one might be my favourite, actually, because as is the case for many artists,
my tablet pens disappear into a pocket dimension as soon as I put them down unless they remain
in my direct line of vision like some harmless but infuriating SCP. This solves that problem.
I also got to try out their PR100 adjustable tablet stand, and it has quickly become one of my
favorite belongings. And not just art tools, mind you, but like-- one of my favorite things that
I own. Not only does it work perfectly with the Intangbo M, but it's also compatible with my iPad,
and even most of my thinner sketchbooks. It has saved my wrist, my back, and my vision since I
got it, and it has made drawing away from my desk so much easier. Whether I want to draw at a cafe,
a hotel, or even another room that isn't my office, it's made that feel like a
seamless transition from my office setup. And while all of that is very exciting for ME,
I'm fairly confident that you guys are waiting for me to get to the exciting part for YOU,
so let's do that. I've had a few requests for me to host monthly themed art contests, and Parblo
has sponsored my very first one. Basically, every month, I'll give you guys a one-word theme for you
to base one art piece around, which you'll be able to submit to my contest site. Then throughout the
month, the whole community will have a chance to vote for their favorite pieces, so that the
winner isn't decided by me, but by all of you. There will be anywhere from one to three possible
winners every month, depending on sponsors, and in this case, Parblo is offering a first place
prize of a lilac Intangbo M drawing tablet, and a second place prize of the PR-100 tablet stand,
so if that interests you, please consider entering. This month's theme is spring, which is
also the theme of my piece in today's video, and you can submit your pieces and vote for others at
duchesscelestiacontests.carrd.com, which is also linked in the description for convenience's sake.
Thank you again to Parblo for the opportunity to bring you guys such a fun set of prizes,
and I'm really looking forward to bringing more contests to the community in the future! Alright,
thank you for your patience, I'll finally get to the video now-- which I'm realizing I haven't even
explained the topic of yet. Okay. Velvet Buzzsaw. If you haven't seen or heard of it, it's a horror
movie based in the art world that follows art collectors, art dealers, art critics, and artists,
as they all basically let hubris consume their lives and suffer the consequences. I won't go
into too much detail to avoid spoilers for anyone who wants to watch it, but it's definitely not up
the alley of anyone who doesn't like horror or gore, so be aware of that. I personally love it,
but I know it received a lot of bad reviews, so take my opinion on it with a grain of salt.
Anyway, the point here is that in that movie, one of the main characters asks the question:
"what's the point of art if nobody sees it?", and, I mean, I've seen this movie a hundred times, but
that hit different this last time I watched it, because with every passing day, I am unironically
and entirely seriously more and more desperate to move into a cabin in the middle of nowhere and
never interact with another human being - other than my wife - again, and just make art, with the
company of some cats and maybe a friendly deer. But I also wonder if I'd really be happy that way,
because I don't know if making art that no one will ever see would completely fulfill me,
so hearing that question just really made me think: "how much of what I'm making as an artist
is motivated by the desire to have people see it online?", but more than that - to have people
LIKE it online? What art would I be making if my career or my finances weren't depending on it? So,
naturally, I spiraled. I spiraled even more when I rewatched the end of the movie, which - slight
spoilers - focused on one of the artist characters that had been shown to be burnt out, depressed,
uninspired, and exhausted by the industry's demand for him to keep creating brand new, groundbreaking
masterpieces that would take the art world by storm. And this dude, on some random beach in
the middle of nowhere, was finally happy, because he was away from the industry, away from his agent
and his audience, just drawing patterns in the sand with a stick. And it zoomed out to show all
of those patterns being washed away with the tide, destroying his art before anyone ever got to see
it. And he was just laughing, and smiling, and perfectly at peace, and gosh darn if that didn't
make me cry. But it also made me think, and when I think about anything art-related, I end up here,
frantically trying and failing to put those thoughts into the form of a cohesive script.
Here we are. I know the movie wasn't about social media and how it affects both art and artists,
but it's definitely applicable. The motivation to get into the best gallery or represent the biggest
artist is fundamentally the same as wanting to get the most likes and the biggest following - it's
the desire to have your work be recognized and appreciated, and subsequently, validated. I think
all of us have been at low points where the art that we pour our souls into gets absolutely no
engagement at all online, and I think most of us have probably also asked ourselves the question:
what's the point in making art if nobody sees it? And I mean, I'm sure most of us have also
been fully aware that obviously, art's value and meaning isn't REALLY dependent on it being seen or
appreciated, but it's worth discussing that not only does it feel that way sometimes, it's also
a mindset that social media has helped cultivate, and not in a good way. Which goes without saying,
I guess, because there ISN'T a good way. That in mind, this video will be discussing some
of the main talking points that I spiraled into obsessing over on my movie night: social media's
impact on that mentality, how that mentality has subsequently affected art and artists,
and whether or not social media is taking the joy, passion, and meaning out of art. Let's start
at the start: how has social media affected the belief that art's value is dependent on it being
seen. Well, it's obviously worth opening with the fact that the mindset existed long before
social media. I mean, Velvet Buzzsaw based a whole movie on it, to some extent, and social media was
barely a factor. The belief that a piece of art is only as good as the number of people who praise it
has existed for as long as art has, and it's been propagated by both the artists and the audiences,
and it's not really hard to understand why, either. Art can't be quantifiably measured
as good or bad, although it can obviously be held to standards and criteria, so it makes sense that
the easiest way to conclude whether or not it's good is based on whether or not people like it.
And for the artists, not only is having your work be seen one of the only real ways to have it feel
validated, it's often the only way that that artist will be able to appreciate it at all.
I know for me, I can almost never appreciate my own art, because it's mine. All I can see are the
flaws, the mistakes, the things I can do better - so while the process of creating art is valuable
to me whether anyone sees the finished product or not, I can personally never really appreciate the
finished product without anyone seeing it, because I've lost the ability to see it objectively,
as it is. And in my experience, that desire to have it be seen is less to do with vanity, and
more to do with wanting to hear what other people think of it, because their perceptions of it are,
in a very strange and unfortunate way, the only way I can appreciate it. It's like I'm perceiving
my art vicariously through others. I'm rambling, though. As always, the point here is that there
are a lot of factors that motivate people to put a lot of importance on having their art be seen, and
to an extent, that's not a bad thing. Sharing art is important for an artist's growth, self-esteem,
career, and so much more, and valuing that isn't bad. But like anything, it becomes detrimental in
extremes, and in my opinion, social media has had a very extreme influence on it. It's become less
of "I want my art to be seen" and more of "my art is only GOOD if enough people see and engage with
it". Maybe that was always the case in the fine arts world, too, in terms of gallery life and all
that, but let's be realistic: maybe a handful of professional artists actually have a chance
to succeed enough to experience that mentality in the fine arts world, because it just wasn't
and isn't as accessible as the social media art world. Social media's art communities are
accessible to anyone and, subsequently, anyone, can be influenced by the addictive desire to get
more engagement on their art within them, and the resulting perceived association between
engagement and quality. I mean, even artists who don't ever want to pursue a career in art
still want it to be seen and appreciated, and fair enough! Why wouldn't they? But when social media
makes everyone feel like getting it seen should be easy, it can feel like a failure when it doesn't.
Social media gives everyone a potential platform to reach other people with our art,
and it's easier than ever before to share our work with the world, but because it's so much easier,
everyone is doing it, resulting in so much oversaturation and competition that in the end,
it's really not all that much easier. Before, it was incredibly difficult to get into the art
world, but easier to be seen once you did. Now, it's easier to get into the art world,
but almost impossible to be seen once you do. So while social media makes us feel like we have a
huge advantage, we really don't. An advantage, sure, but a huge advantage? Not-- not really,
no. But our feeds are still flooded with other artists that we're seeing get that engagement,
and the more time we spend surrounded by that, the more we inherently begin to associate art's
quality with the number of likes it gets. It becomes less of "I think this piece I made
is good, so I'll post it" and more of "I'll post this piece and SEE if it's good based on how well
it does". Associating art's quality with how much engagement it gets will inevitably skew anyone's
perception of their work, and I feel like social media, while an effective and valuable tool in
many ways, is only serving to worsen those skewed perceptions. By reinforcing that association,
it's reinforcing the belief that not only does art only have value to the artist when it's seen,
it's only GOOD if it's seen, and that's just on the artist's end of social media. What about the
audience's side? People are seeing hundreds of amazing pieces of art every single day, all over
social media. Oversaturation doesn't just lead to artists having to deal with way more competition
than they can ever hope to actually compete with, it also leads to audience desensitization:
if all of the art that people are seeing is incredible, incredible art stops being enough
to impress people. I talked about this before in a previous video, linked in the card above,
but because high quality art is everywhere, now your art being high quality is no longer enough
to have people be motivated to engage with it it. It either has to establish a personal connection,
have shock value or a controversial nature, or has to be... attractive, let's put it that way.
People have been so desensitized to quality in art that quality isn't ENOUGH anymore, so they don't
engage with it. But on the other end, artists are told that the quality of their work is dependent
on the number of people that engage with it. See the problem? It's led to artists everywhere being
disillusioned, frustrated, insecure, angry, and desperate to be seen and appreciated in any way.
And it's hard to blame them. I know I mentioned in a pet peeves video that it pisses me off when
artists whine on social media about their posts getting no likes, and it's true -- that does
irritate the hell out of me. But I do get it. I've seen artists give up on art because they didn't
get any engagement, I've seen artists lash out at others for not engaging with art posts enough,
I've seen so many forms of pain from artists all across social media, feeling like their worth
depends on the likes they're not getting. I've FELT it. And the most motivational, constructive
thing I can possibly say is that it sucks, and you're not alone. But moving on to the next point:
how has this mentality influenced artists? You may be wondering: "hey Celestia, doesn't half
of what you just said fall into that category?" and the answer is yes, there's a lot of overlap
between those two points, but there's still more to discuss. So far, we've gone over how social
media has worsened the impact of that mentality for artists, but we still have yet to go over
how that worsened impact has changed how artists approach art. And there are a multitude of ways,
unfortunately, and that's exactly why I had such a breakdown watching Velvet Buzzsaw. It's exactly
why I, two glasses of wine and not enough sleep into an evening, was utterly demolished by the
question of: "would I be drawing what I'm drawing if no one was watching?" I did eventually come to
a very demoralizing conclusion, but we'll get to that. If we, as artists, are convinced that
now more than ever, the value and quality of our art is defined by how many people engage with it,
how does that change the way that we interact with it? Too much is the answer. For one, many artists
are more inclined to draw certain content that they might not have otherwise, because they think
it'll get more likes. I'm not saying artists are drawing sh*t they have no interest in for likes,
although I'm sure some do, but I AM saying that if they have two ideas that they want to draw,
and one is more popular on social media, most artists are more inclined to draw the more
popular one - I certainly have. And it's not because they're actively trying to sell out,
it's because they're trying to keep up with the impossible pressure imposed upon them by social
media, and the desire to feel like their work has value. But that's not the end of it. Artists
often also feel pressured to draw more often and post more art than they otherwise would have,
because quite frankly, the algorithm will forget you like a distant father figure if you don't.
And if you're constantly drawing more than you want to and feel pressured to churn out content
faster than you actually can, you're either gonna end up with work that you aren't happy
with because you rushed it, burn out because you overworked yourself, or absolutely no time for
the art that you're actually passionate about or the things that bring you joy, which also leads
to burnout. It's pretty much all that. And those impacts, which aren't even the only ways that this
mentality influences artists, are already enough to result in artists everywhere getting addicted
to social media, overworking themselves, losing their passion for art, or giving up altogether,
and once again, we're back to "that f**king sucks, and you're not alone". I don't know,
I mean - what would you be drawing if you felt no pressure to build a following on social media?
What would you be drawing if you didn't care how many likes it would get? Personally, I actually
felt really sad to answer that question, because if it weren't for the realistic need to keep up
a social media following, I would be working on my art journal, my game, and my comic full-time,
and saving the art that I'm making right now for my spare time. Which is basically the opposite of
how I'm working now. And that just makes me sad. I know it's just the nature of the world we live in,
but it's sad, and I'm sorry if you guys are coming to similar conclusions, because it can
feel really heartbreaking to imagine an art life you realistically can't have. Thanks,
Twitter. Alright, so, the final question Velvet Buzzsaw unwittingly forced me to consider: does
social media, all of that in mind, take the joy, meaning, and creativity out of art? Starting with
creativity - I mean, if we acknowledge that social media is pressuring artists to prioritize what's
popular over what they want to draw, we also have to acknowledge that it's having a negative impact
on those artists' creativity, because they're not prioritizing their own visions and ideas and
things that are new from them individually, but are instead prioritizing what they think people
will like. That doesn't mean artists don't ever prioritize their own creativity, but it does mean
that social media doesn't necessarily value it, and if we value social media, WE have to value it
less, too. And joy? I gotta say, social media has definitely diminished the joy I felt in my art,
specifically because I have to rush it so much that I don't have time to enjoy it the process,
the finished product, any of it. Moreover, I feel like enjoying making art has become less important
than getting engagement on that art, and yeah, I think that that means that social media is taking
some of the joy and passion out of it. But the meaning, that's harder for me. It's always felt
pretentious to me to act like art has meaning only if the artist doesn't care if it's seen, because
that's both unrealistic and unreasonable. I think that whole misconception came from people acting
like an artist making art they love and wanting it to be seen is the same as an artist only making
art BECAUSE they want to be seen, and they're very different things. There's a middle ground,
like with most things, but it's still a spectrum and not just all bad. I don't think anyone can
really define what gives art meaning, and as such, I don't think that social media can take it away
if it can't be defined in the first place. If an artist only makes something so they can post it,
yes, I suppose one could say that that diminishes its meaning. But if they make it because they
want to and then they choose to post it, that shouldn't diminish that meaning. Ultimately,
I think it comes down to the relationship that every artist has with social media. At its best,
social media can offer artists validation, critique, support, appreciation, community,
inspiration, growth, and opportunities. At its worst, it can cause addiction, self-hatred,
frustration, depression, aggressive competitiveness towards other artists,
and burnout. I think it can be either a tool, a hindrance, or both, depending on how we use it,
and it really just comes down to a need for self-awareness and pragmatism. So in conclusion,
what is the point of art if nobody sees it? Well, we don't have to be drawing in the sand where no
one can ever see it for art to have meaning, or make us happy, or be valuable, but that scenario
does beautifully visualize my conclusion: that the point of art is that it makes us happy. If you
can make art that you never post and feel joy in that, that's the point. If you feel the most joy
in having people see your art and engage with it, that's the point. What matters more than any other
factor is what the artist feels about what they create, and that's not something that anyone can
define objectively or quantifiably. I think that what I've learned the most from this contemplation
is that social media isn't the enemy, it's how we engage with it that can make it one,
and I think that we all fluctuate between using it as a tool and having it negatively influence us.
I know it's something I personally wrestle with every day. Right now, I think I would be happier
than ever to live in that cabin in the woods far away from social media, drawing only what I want
for no one to see, but I also know that there's a whole game I've been working on for months,
a comic I've been working on for years, and I've always wanted to make those for the purpose of
sharing them with others, so I don't know. I don't think there's any right answer. I think we
all need to find a good balance between valuing our creativity and passion, and progressing our
careers via social media, and I guess what I've come to accept is that moderation and boundaries
are key. We just can't let the pressure to conform to the art that's expected of us
consume us. What do you guys think? I feel like this is something that's different for everyone:
everyone has had a different experience with social media, and with the belief that art's value
is dependent on it being seen, so subsequently, I think it's more valuable and important than ever
to hear what everyone has experienced with it. Anyway, all of that rambling existential crisis
aside, I hope you guys enjoyed today's video! Thank you for watching, and thank you as always
to channel members Cafe Soleil, Lotus Dreams Art, Joseph Solomon, and Oco Nova for their support,
as well as patrons Kyle Low and Lillybug, and I'll see you all in my next video!