This section of the book resonates with my personal experiences and work habits. As a master procrastinator who often worries about public perception, I sometimes doubt my talent and whether I deserve the opportunities I’ve received. Following the book’s advice, I am actively trying to overcome this mindset.
However, I find certain aspects of the reading confusing. First, in the section about “pretending”, by focusing on the process of making art, the book indirectly implies that one must not focus too much on public feedback. Yet, in the “Talent” section, talented individuals who don’t gain recognition are shunned by the world, implying that public opinion does matter.
Additionally, the book’s advice in the “annihilation” section to simply produce art seems to contradict the principles of lateral thinking, which warns that such behavior can create mental patterns that limit creativity.
Moreover, I disagree with the book’s argument that “Art is human, error is human; ergo, art is error.” This analogy can be manipulated to support any viewpoint. For example, saying “Progress is human, error is human; ergo, progress is error” would suggest we halt all human advancements, which is clearly not advisable. Therefore, I find this argument unconvincing.
Impressions of FIELD
I was thoroughly impressed by their projects, though I was disappointed that there weren’t any demonstrations. The studio visit stood out from previous artist visits in that it clearly showed teamwork. While the other artists certainly have teams they collaborate with, they only mention them in passing. However, the FIELD team in the background certainly boosted their presence. Also, gaining insights into the business aspects of ‘making’, like planning projects, work division and meeting deadlines, reminded me of what to expect in the future.