I always assumed it’s because in western society, the career of “artist” is smeared and sneered at for being “not a real job”. My creative friends often mention the risk of being “taken advantage of” when it comes to payment and remuneration—that since they love what they do, they should be expected to “do it for free” or be underpaid.
And at society at large there’s this idea that you get paid to suffer—and jobs aren’t expected to be appealing or fun. So you shouldn’t expect to be paid for making art. This does dovetail as a cause of financial precarity you’re alluding to—but I believe there’s more malice or disdain behind the reaction than just neutral risk assessment. Therefore when A.I. comes and gobbles up paid opportunities for artists, the view is “well that wasn’t a serious job anyway—it’s just a hobby, a passion. You don’t get paid to do what you love, you get paid to do what you hate.” rather than “it’s a valid job, but good luck making a living”
To be honest, I’ve never actually looked into this to back it up. I’m making a lot of assumptions here and putting a lot of thoughts/words into a nebulous group known as “society”. The closest is I’ve read some historical analysis about the shift in views of genius (including artistic) from the romantic era and into the industrial age that underscore a shifting sentiment from being driven by passion or inspiration (passive), into patience and discipline (active).
I always assumed it’s because in western society, the career of “artist” is smeared and sneered at for being “not a real job”. My creative friends often mention the risk of being “taken advantage of” when it comes to payment and remuneration—that since they love what they do, they should be expected to “do it for free” or be underpaid.
And at society at large there’s this idea that you get paid to suffer—and jobs aren’t expected to be appealing or fun. So you shouldn’t expect to be paid for making art. This does dovetail as a cause of financial precarity you’re alluding to—but I believe there’s more malice or disdain behind the reaction than just neutral risk assessment. Therefore when A.I. comes and gobbles up paid opportunities for artists, the view is “well that wasn’t a serious job anyway—it’s just a hobby, a passion. You don’t get paid to do what you love, you get paid to do what you hate.” rather than “it’s a valid job, but good luck making a living”
To be honest, I’ve never actually looked into this to back it up. I’m making a lot of assumptions here and putting a lot of thoughts/words into a nebulous group known as “society”. The closest is I’ve read some historical analysis about the shift in views of genius (including artistic) from the romantic era and into the industrial age that underscore a shifting sentiment from being driven by passion or inspiration (passive), into patience and discipline (active).