chunks of flommus
SUBSCRIBE! FEEDLY RSS EMAIL

maybe choke on your caviar while reading

“I attended a packed reading (I’m talking 300+ people) about a year and a half ago. The author was very well-known, a magnificent nonfictionist who has, deservedly, won several big awards. He also happens to be the heir to a mammoth fortune. Mega-millions. In other words he’s a man who has never had to work one job, much less two. He has several children; I know, because they were at the reading with him, all lined up. I heard someone say they were all traveling with him, plus two nannies, on his worldwide tour … None of this takes away from his brilliance. Yet, when an audience member – young, wide-eyed, clearly not clued in – rose to ask him how he’d managed to spend 10 years writing his current masterpiece – What had he done to sustain himself and his family during that time? – he told her in a serious tone that it had been tough but he’d written a number of magazine articles to get by.”
—Ann Bauer, ‘Sponsored’ By My Husband, Salon

Now you might say that he refused to touch that money but there’s no way that touring caravan is being financed by book sales unless the dude is JK Rowling so in the end the point is still the same.

This piece I’m referencing above was written to inspire writers so they don’t become dissuaded when they see others getting further with less struggle and in a shorter time. Especially when they assume it’s due to their own shortcomings.

And it’s nice to know that uneven results are often directly tied to playing field advantage.

This is true of the visual arts as well.

I had read recently that if you could peek behind the curtain of many ‘instantly’ successful artists, you’d find a network of connections pushing them or that they had the luxury of financial backing in the form of inheritance, trust fund, family money, etc. in the first place.

And often both.

None of that (as the piece mentions) detract from the brilliance of the work, but it is something to keep in mind if you’re one of those that spends the better part of a decade working for a living without the luxury of following your muse.

This is actually sorta related to a side issue that’s been a bee in my fanciful bonnet for some time: When slumming twentysomethings that think they know what it’s like to be ‘poor’ when really they were merely broke for a few years starting out.

Poor is when you have no resources to call on. Broke is when you can’t afford to do whatever you want whenever you want. And there is an ocean of difference.

Now mind you, I agree that it’s not incumbent on wealthy artists to have to disclose their funding. And using a well-heeled background as a springboard to contribute to the arts is far better than giving the world another finance professional. But I *do* think it’s absolutely incumbent upon them to be self-aware enough to not pull that ‘bootstraps’ shit in front of people.

The point is that for some very visibly successful people, it’s much less of a hustle.

And for people like myself that didn’t get bankrolled to follow their passion and who had to work every shit job known to man before barely eeking their way into an industry (remember I’ve got like 20 years years in publishing) full of people that get comfortably hoisted into positions people that have to work jobs for money simply can’t afford to take … well.

Also, not a lot of working class kids in the countless unpaid internships I’ve been around. Curious, that.

Also, here’s another old post but worth revisiting: 7 Scary Things Pulling An All-Nighter Does To Your Body.

Don’t I know it. Especially number 6. Sorry, pops.

—jason malmberg