Quote:
Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze
Catlady:
Your definition of artists as professionals would make more sense if you referred to them as professional artists. A person who makes money from art, whether occasionally or constantly, is to that extent a professional artist. A person who does not is an artist all the same, but deciding that money determines the level of the quality of the work itself is arbitrary.
|
To me, "professional artist" would be at a somewhat higher level; that is, I would expect someone defined as such to pretty much make a living at it, as opposed to simply earning some money from it.
Money isn't the determinant of quality, but earning money does mean you're offering something that some people are willing to pay for, which is a least a minimum standard to separate a real author from a wannabe. It doesn't automatically follow that more money earned indicates higher quality.
Quote:
|
The next level of discussion might be to try to determine whether excellence is a fixed attribute or simply a matter of collective preference to be decided from year to year by consensus. If the latter is true, then perhaps you're using money as your gauge for popularity.
|
Beyond basic competency in grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc., quality is largely subjective.