It turns out that when you make something truly for yourself you're doing the best thing you possibly can for the audience.
---
That's not how art works... that something else. That's not art, that's commerce... It's almost like a diary entry; so, could I be concerned that someone else doesn't like my diary entry? Doesn't make sense.
Okay, I've been mulling over why I don't really care for these statements (apart from the loudness wars issue, and mainly because I thought my previous argument was pretty weak). I think his point seems perfectly reasonable, but I just disagree with his idea of the scope of what art is.
I definitely understand and agree with this thrust of what he's saying: outsider art that I like is some of the most interesting art I can consume, period. My hometown's
Daniel Johnston is a real testament to that. Much of outsider art that appeals to me does feel like a diary entry. However, the simile to the diary entry also seems odd, because people generally don't write a diary for public consumption and I think most diary entries are, well, not appealing. When we see very bad, genuine art piece, we can either
celebrate its terribleness or more likely
consider it forgettable. I guess that's all fine and good if you're like Gillian Welch and
would make your art no matter what. Where I would push back on Rubin's position is, well, this is a needlessly narrow view of art (and it's one that I see fitting neatly with a lifetime of success in the counter-culture).
In contrast, I think of stand up comedians building a set, and preforming and performing in front of an audience to see which jokes and delivery work, and which don't. That's certainly catering to an audience, and I would say definitely it's still art. Killing your darlings is probably good advice. I would go farther than this though, and push back against the dichotomy between art and commerce. I see industrial design as an art form that goes so overlooked, that
we often don't even see it. I think it would be very difficult to parse the art from the commerce in industrial design in Rubin's way.
There is an artistic skill in creating something amazing for yourself, and as Tim thoughtfully points out, this works well when the audience and the artist are in the same cohort. However, there is also an skill (as in gift-giving) that is seeing what others like and creating/procuring that
specifically for others. I don't think we should count that out.
I've been mulling over some ideas recently about
Howard Moskowitz, and applying his ideas on horizontal segmentation juxtaposed with golf's rankings, and I think that's why Rubin's platitudes rubbed me the wrong way.