Can an Artist Be Too Productive?

[Pong Messiah]

Interesting piece on novelists: Stephen King: Can a Novelist Be Too Productive?

 

I think this question should be asked of all art.

 

And while I acknowledge that there are prolific writers who have produced great work, I disagree with King in the general sense, mostly 'cause every artist I can think of who puts out loads and load of work starts recycling themselves, taking some of the impact of their "great" art away, as you've already gone over those themes, images, sounds, etc. so many times before, even in lesser works.

 

One example I always go back to when people ask this question is Robert Pollard. Love the dude, but he puts out something like seven albums a year, and as good as his work is, it kinda just runs together after awhile.

 

That being said, nobody is forcing the audience to look or listen to every piece of work in an artist's catalog, so maybe there is some responsibility on their part that should be acknowledged. There are definitely authors, musicians, etc. who I've simply burned myself out on.

 

[monkeygirl]

NO.

[Darth Krawlie]

mostly 'cause every artist I can think of who puts out loads and load of work starts recycling themselves

Hello James Horner and Hans Zimmer!

[Odine]

An artist regardless of their craft should be continually crafting, honing their skills, creating, I.E being productive. So in that sense, no I don't think there is a limit to productivity. That said, not everything an artist/writer/whatever creates should necessarily see the light of day. Quantity very rarely equates with quality. Often the benchmark "product", or creation, of an artist/writer/filmmaker/whatever which gets them a level of success, or fame, or notoriety, is often a once-off, and has several factors as to why it's so good. All subsequent work is then compared back to the initial "success" by us as consumers, and critics alike. The artist then is often put under pressure to recreate the one-off success again, because it was so magic. And so they try figure out what mix of criteria was it that made the work so good. Some prolific artists who continually make exceptional works are probably more self aware, or conscious enough to view their works dispassionately so they know what it is that makes them successful.

 

However, banging out books because you're a writer is not necessarily the best way to be productive if you want to write the next "Great Gatsby" or "Gone with the wind". Productivity in such a task might be doing a fuck tonne of reading, research, seeing plays, having romance, living life or whatever. There is no point trying to put out information or "production" as an artist if you're not consuming or feeding anything in. It's like running a car on empty.

[Driver]

I think most artists ARE constantly producing. It's just a question if they are critical enough of their own work. Some artists just finish and release.

 

Stephen King can hand off a first draft and not sweat it like used too.

[Pong Messiah]

 

mostly 'cause every artist I can think of who puts out loads and load of work starts recycling themselves

Hello James Horner and Hans Zimmer!

I hate making fun of Horner cause of the plane crash and he did usually put really effective music with his films (say what you will about the guy, but he was great at what he did), but man, that guy was shameless...

 

I heard Alexander Nevsky maybe a decade after seeing The Wrath of Khan, was kinda like "Huh, 'Battle on the Ice' sure has moments that sound like the battle in the Mutara Nebula!" but at least it wasn't a note-for-note transcription, and he was taking riffs from people other than Prokofiev (Mussorgsky, Vaughan Williams)...

 

https://youtu.be/vKZPgGbUuX0?t=2m15s

 

Then a saw The Search for Spock again, and was like "Holy crap, he actually *IS* doing note-for-note transcriptions!" (e.g. "The Fight" and "Juliet's Funeral/Death" are directly pulled from Prokofiev's Romeo & Juliet ballet)

 

Later in his career, of course, he started ripping off his own stuff that he had originally taken from others and I'm not even sure how to categorize that kind of recycling.

 

I won't make fun of Zimmer (even though it may be deserved) because you can't discuss film scores atm without 100 people saying how canned everything he does is...

 

Ah crap, kind of derailing my own thread. Sorry.

 

[Ms. Spam]

Ever read the books Amazon offers? Some them read like the dry text of an anthropology class in college.

 

Opinion or fact: Steven King is a formulaic writer and most of his books feel like they were ghost written. Like Ann Rice.

[Driver]

Ripley about to shunt the Queen Alien out the Sulaco airlock and Kirk about to hack down the Reliant shields are note for note the same!

[Ms. Spam]

Also. Riffing and re-riffing off material is called homage in the comics business. Why not movies?

[Darth Krawlie]

Ripley about to shunt the Queen Alien out the Sulaco airlock and Kirk about to hack down the Reliant shields are note for note the same!

Yup, Horner gonna horn.

 

His four note danger motif is in just about every film he scores. Started a little more complex on Khan, shortened for Willow, then everything else!

[Pong Messiah]

His four note danger motif is in just about every film he scores. Started a little more complex on Khan, shortened for Willow, then everything else!

Haha... have just wasted nearly an hour looking for it in the Braveheart soundtrack, cause I couldn't remember hearing it there (dammit!), then found out it's on the official list of "dangerless Horner scores." GAH!

[Pong Messiah]

And before I forget:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUjsonjLGmg

 

[monkeygirl]

An artist can only be too productive if it conflicts with some other goal such as a publisher wanting to keep the releases at a steady pace so as to keep the public consumption at a level healthy for continued sales. An artist of any kind can never produce too much, with no other criteria, in my opinion.

[pavonis]

"Can an artist be too productive?" sounds like "can a person earn too much money?" Authors and musicians get paid for their work. More is better for them, isn't it? Why should they care if the consumers find the material repetitive?

[monkeygirl]

EXCLUDING THOMAS KINKAIDE

[pavonis]

Why? Kinkade had to eat, too, and no one has to buy his kitschy crap paintings.

[Ms. Spam]

Kinkade sucks ass with a straw. I realize this is about art and being productive but really it is all subjective.

[Darth Krawlie]

 

 

His four note danger motif is in just about every film he scores. Started a little more complex on Khan, shortened for Willow, then everything else!

Haha... have just wasted nearly an hour looking for it in the Braveheart soundtrack, cause I couldn't remember hearing it there (dammit!), then found out it's on the official list of "dangerless Horner scores." GAH!

When it played 30 seconds into Avatar I almost walked out of the movie. Then an hour later suddenly I heard Glory.

[Driver]

To be fair Avatar was full of walk-out offenses

[pavonis]

I didn't like Avatar the first time I saw it as Dances with Wolves.

[Guest El Chalupacabra]

 

I heard Alexander Nevsky maybe a decade after seeing The Wrath of Khan, was kinda like "Huh, 'Battle on the Ice' sure has moments that sound like the battle in the Mutara Nebula!" but at least it wasn't a note-for-note transcription, and he was taking riffs from people other than Prokofiev (Mussorgsky, Vaughan Williams)...

 

 

I can see how some parts of that sound like TWOK, but when I hear Battle of the Ice, I hear....

 

 

[Darth Krawlie]

Oh lord in heaven basil poledouris' score for Conan is top ten, if not too five of all time.

 

This is now a film score thread.

 

Forget how bad the movie is, if you were unfortunate enough to see it, but this is one of the best tracks I've ever heard.

 

http://youtu.be/-mTANle_IcQ

[Driver]

A film score thread in Pong's domain? Walter isn't going to stand for this!

[Guest]

An artist can only be too productive if it conflicts with some other goal such as a publisher wanting to keep the releases at a steady pace so as to keep the public consumption at a level healthy for continued sales. An artist of any kind can never produce too much, with no other criteria, in my opinion.

 

 

"Can an artist be too productive?" sounds like "can a person earn too much money?" Authors and musicians get paid for their work. More is better for them, isn't it? Why should they care if the consumers find the material repetitive?

What if the focus on production keeps them from producing higher quality work, which would help them earn more money? For example, an author who sells 5,000 copies of each book, and manages to write 5 books a year. That's 25,000 books, which is pretty good. But maybe if they really buckled down and worked on 1 higher quality book where they sell 4 times their normal amount and 2 normal quality books which also get a 10% boost because of people liking the other book. Now they've sold 20,000 + 11,000, or 31,000 books, their publisher is much happier, their paycheck is bigger and they've increased the likelihood of selling more books in the future.

 

In that case, the focus on production has hurt their bottom line.

[Odine]

^thats kinda why an artists main concern should only be quality. Doing it for the passion, love etc. Productivity will kind of sort itself out. The production company/publishers etc of the world will always try and find a way to boost production, motivate faster work which will always result in a lower quality. And really, if an artist is really committed to their craft they will strike a balance between quality/productivity naturally.