Name: The Death of the Artist
ISBN: 9781250125514

The Death of the Artist

"Over the last twenty years, art has become more accessible than ever before. A painter can post their latest creation on Instagram and wait as the likes pile up; a budding filmmaker can shoot a clip on their iPhone, then upload it to YouTube for thousands to view. The digital landscape has fundamentally altered what it means to be creative, as well as how consumers interact with artistic production both economically and curatorially. William Deresiewicz, a leading critic of contemporary culture in America, argues that we are in the midst of an epochal transformation within art. Whereas the nineteenth century considered artists to be craftsmen and the twentieth century treated them as professionals, artists today are uniquely dependent upon themselves. The internet, along with decreases in art funding and the growing prevalence of gig economies, has forced artists to become responsible for every aspect of their work, from conception to promotion, from sales to legacy. In The Death of the Artist, Deresiewicz profiles those struggling to make a living through the arts, from the twenty-something college novelist with a multi-hyphenated job title to the midlife painter who must utilize social media to stay relevant. Deresiewicz shows what the birth of the "creative entrepreneur" signifies about our evolving society at large and what might be done to keep artists thriving, because we need them"

What Hacker News says

iamacyborgSep 2025

> It reminds me of what GarageBand or iMovie and YouTube and such did for making music and videos so accessible to people who didn’t go to school for any of that, let alone owned complex equipment or expensive licenses to Adobe Thisandthat.

It’s worth reading William Deresiewicz‘ The Death of the Artist. I’m not entirely convinced that marketing that everyone can create art/games/whatever is actually a net positive result for those disciplines.

thread

drewdaNov 2020

This blog post and the associated startup/investment are, I think, identifying a real issue but not acknowledging the underlying structural issues: most independent creators probably do need to sell a range of complementary products and services to make ends meet. At the same time, this is still no guarantee that all their offerings will add up to a sufficient living. Just because some independent newsletter writers are able to do so does not necessarily mean that this model will work for the majority.

I think it's fascinating to read about how this model has worked and has not worked for artists, starting with musicians and now extending across many different artist mediums.

William Deresciewicz's "Death of the Artist" book interviews 100+ "successful" artists on their experiences selling through digital platforms. It's particularly interesting to read about how the digital sales channels affect the type of art and the topics they chose to pursue. It isn't necessarily "dumbing down" art, but it does change the art itself.

The book started with this article: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/the-dea...

thread

plumthreadsOct 2024

I recently read Cory Doctorow's "Chokepoint Capitalism" and William Deresiewicz's "The Death of the Artist" which both decry the sentiment that somehow Big Tech has been a boon for artists.

The reality is that anti-competitive practices in these companies has made them more of an extractive monopoly rather than a market to connect artists and art "consumers." To your point on revenue sharing, both Youtube and Spotify have laughable revenue shares to the point that even well known musicians have to tour nonstop to make ends meet. At what point does "exposure" benefit the artist more than it benefits the platform for having free art?

thread