Professions that have peaked

[Metalcat]

The arts have never been that great.  There have always been a few breakout rock stars, but traditionally, most artists relied on patronage from wealthy people.

A joke I heard: it is very easy to figure out if a painter was a genius or not. You only need to see if they died in poverty.

To be fair, that's because a lot of the greats as we know them were disruptors in their art. They're so famous specifically because they didn't pander to the popular demand of the time. It's only once art caught up to them that their work was valued, especially since art exposure was so tightly controlled, so it was hard to even get your work in front of buyers unless you conformed your style.

Also, a lot of artists sold plenty but were just raging addicts who were shit with money, so there's that aspect too.

I happen to come from a region with the highest concentration of professional artists in my country. So people making a good living off of their art was the norm where I grew up. None of the really good ones I know will die in poverty.

Some of them are absolute shit at business, that's for sure, but like any entrepreneurial industry, the ones who are savvy and learn how to sell and market properly tend to do quite well.

The ones who refuse to acknowledge the realities of commerical business and who are uppity that their talent should be enough? Yeah, they fail, just like anyone who acts like an entitled diva in any industry.

[StarBright]

The ones who refuse to acknowledge the realities of commerical business and who are uppity that their talent should be enough? Yeah, they fail, just like anyone who acts like an entitled diva in any industry.

But Diva also gets thrown around a lot for people who are asking to be paid for their time.

We've actually seeing a similar debate in the academic discourse right now, because younger scholars are starting to push back on travelling to give free presentations and the older folks aren't happy about it.

So I agree that "Divas" often fail if they are jerks. But that term gets such a bad rap - people who are lazy and are bad colleagues and don't do the work are jerks. People who have done the work, and know what they are worth and are willing to ask for it is a good thing!

But again, therein lies a problem with passion jobs.

[Metalcat]

The ones who refuse to acknowledge the realities of commerical business and who are uppity that their talent should be enough? Yeah, they fail, just like anyone who acts like an entitled diva in any industry.

But Diva also gets thrown around a lot for people who are asking to be paid for their time.

We've actually seeing a similar debate in the academic discourse right now, because younger scholars are starting to push back on travelling to give free presentations and the older folks aren't happy about it.

So I agree that "Divas" often fail if they are jerks. But that term gets such a bad rap - people who are lazy and are bad colleagues and don't do the work are jerks. People who have done the work, and know what they are worth and are willing to ask for it is a good thing!

But again, therein lies a problem with passion jobs.

I agree, but that's a totally separate point from the one I was trying to make. I'm not talking about how others perceive artists, I'm talking about artists who truly refuse to engage in the business side of their own business. Who firmly believe that their talent should be enough and that they shouldn't have to put any effort into self promotion or marketing, as if it's beneath them.

The many, many successful artists I know have a very realistic sense that what they are doing is a business and that business principles need to be respected.

I'm not at all talking about how artists are perceived, I'm specifically talking about those who lack key capacities to succeed and are unwilling to learn.

What you are talking about is a very valid point though, just not the point I was commenting on.

As to your point, I'm very familiar with the type of pushback that you are talking about as I am very much one of those people who pushed back against unreasonable expectations and have been given a ton of flack for it.

But I'm not someone who refused to be realistic about what my career required, I was willing to work and learn and do whatever it took to be successful, but I was very eager to push back against bullshit that shouldn't be expected and isn't actually necessary, but just holdovers of abusive hierarchichal systems.

There's a huge difference between someone who pushed back against an oppressive system and someone who feels like they shouldn't have to put in the bare minimum to succeed.

[Cool Friend]

The ones who refuse to acknowledge the realities of commerical business and who are uppity that their talent should be enough? Yeah, they fail, just like anyone who acts like an entitled diva in any industry.

But Diva also gets thrown around a lot for people who are asking to be paid for their time.

We've actually seeing a similar debate in the academic discourse right now, because younger scholars are starting to push back on travelling to give free presentations and the older folks aren't happy about it.

So I agree that "Divas" often fail if they are jerks. But that term gets such a bad rap - people who are lazy and are bad colleagues and don't do the work are jerks. People who have done the work, and know what they are worth and are willing to ask for it is a good thing!

But again, therein lies a problem with passion jobs.

I agree, but that's a totally separate point from the one I was trying to make. I'm not talking about how others perceive artists, I'm talking about artists who truly refuse to engage in the business side of their own business. Who firmly believe that their talent should be enough and that they shouldn't have to put any effort into self promotion or marketing, as if it's beneath them.

I come from a family of artists and went to art school, and I have never once met a single artist who believes this. Met plenty who were bad at the business end, and plenty who disliked it, but never one that believed they would be commercially successful without it.

[StarBright]

I agree, but that's a totally separate point from the one I was trying to make. I'm not talking about how others perceive artists, I'm talking about artists who truly refuse to engage in the business side of their own business.

Yep, I hear you and I am picking up what you are putting down.

I sometimes feel like the engineer hive-mind that can be the MMM boards hits the wall of perception (not important to me = not worth money = diva arts person expecting to make a living doing their stupid thing) and I wanted to make sure to comment on it.

I work at a company that is about 70/30 degreed engineers/art and design school grads and the miscommunications and misunderstanding are constant.

[GodlessCommie]

A joke I heard: it is very easy to figure out if a painter was a genius or not. You only need to see if they died in poverty.

To be fair, that's because a lot of the greats as we know them were disruptors in their art. They're so famous specifically because they didn't pander to the popular demand of the time. It's only once art caught up to them that their work was valued, especially since art exposure was so tightly controlled, so it was hard to even get your work in front of buyers unless you conformed your style.

Well, it really was a joke, not statistical analysis! Plenty of greats were doing great (no pun intended), either by always having wealthy patrons lined up, or by selling in the open market. Some were even lucky enough to be disruptors in their youth, and thus staked a place in history - but by the time they were old, they were wealthy establishment, avoiding the unpleasantries of poverty.

[BlueHouse]

Certain types of doctors.  I'm going to qualify this by saying IN THE US.  I'd go to Thailand for a Physical in a minute and may actually plan a medical vacation around that in the future. 

Podiatrists?  Nope.  I'll trust a Physical Therapist much more.
Back Pain?  I'd go to PT or  a Therapy long before an MD. 
Skin issues?  Just give me a good camera and the internet. 
Probably most other things too.

MDs seem to only have a limited tool box and most don't seem to want to expand beyond that tool box.  If they can't find a solution in that toolbox, then it's automatically the patient's fault. 

[Metalcat]

The ones who refuse to acknowledge the realities of commerical business and who are uppity that their talent should be enough? Yeah, they fail, just like anyone who acts like an entitled diva in any industry.

But Diva also gets thrown around a lot for people who are asking to be paid for their time.

We've actually seeing a similar debate in the academic discourse right now, because younger scholars are starting to push back on travelling to give free presentations and the older folks aren't happy about it.

So I agree that "Divas" often fail if they are jerks. But that term gets such a bad rap - people who are lazy and are bad colleagues and don't do the work are jerks. People who have done the work, and know what they are worth and are willing to ask for it is a good thing!

But again, therein lies a problem with passion jobs.

I agree, but that's a totally separate point from the one I was trying to make. I'm not talking about how others perceive artists, I'm talking about artists who truly refuse to engage in the business side of their own business. Who firmly believe that their talent should be enough and that they shouldn't have to put any effort into self promotion or marketing, as if it's beneath them.

I come from a family of artists and went to art school, and I have never once met a single artist who believes this. Met plenty who were bad at the business end, and plenty who disliked it, but never one that believed they would be commercially successful without it.

Yeah, my hometown is an artist community, but also a hardcore hippy community, so raging idealism is unfortunately quite common there, not just among the artists. It's also why a lot of the businesses and restaurants there also fail.

[Spiffy]

Certain types of doctors.  I'm going to qualify this by saying IN THE US.  I'd go to Thailand for a Physical in a minute and may actually plan a medical vacation around that in the future. 

Podiatrists?  Nope.  I'll trust a Physical Therapist much more.
Back Pain?  I'd go to PT or  a Therapy long before an MD. 
Skin issues?  Just give me a good camera and the internet. 
Probably most other things too.

MDs seem to only have a limited tool box and most don't seem to want to expand beyond that tool box.  If they can't find a solution in that toolbox, then it's automatically the patient's fault.

Would you want a Physical Therapist to remove a toe nail? That is a very common thing for a podiatrist to do.

[BlueHouse]

Would you want a Physical Therapist to remove a toe nail? That is a very common thing for a podiatrist to do.

ewwww!  Okay, gross.  Sorry, but that's one of the bodily things that I cannot even discuss without dry-heaving.  I'm pretty sure I would need to be sedated if I even had a situation where that might be necessary.  sorry I cannot answer the question because even thinking about it makes me close to passing out.

[Metalcat]

I agree, but that's a totally separate point from the one I was trying to make. I'm not talking about how others perceive artists, I'm talking about artists who truly refuse to engage in the business side of their own business.

Yep, I hear you and I am picking up what you are putting down.

I sometimes feel like the engineer hive-mind that can be the MMM boards hits the wall of perception (not important to me = not worth money = diva arts person expecting to make a living doing their stupid thing) and I wanted to make sure to comment on it.

I work at a company that is about 70/30 degreed engineers/art and design school grads and the miscommunications and misunderstanding are constant.

I hear you 100%. I'm a trained artist myself, so I completely understand the dynamic you are talking about.

[Metalcat]

Would you want a Physical Therapist to remove a toe nail? That is a very common thing for a podiatrist to do.

ewwww!  Okay, gross.  Sorry, but that's one of the bodily things that I cannot even discuss without dry-heaving.  I'm pretty sure I would need to be sedated if I even had a situation where that might be necessary.  sorry I cannot answer the question because even thinking about it makes me close to passing out.

Then I'm going to hazard that you don't have a ton of experience with understanding why certain medical professionals can't do the jobs of other medical professionals.

As someone who is treated by no fewer than 11 medical specialists, as much as I love my physiotherapist, she can't do what a lot of the others are licensed to do.

It's incredibly fortunate for you that you haven't needed more "gross" medical care and aren't forced to appreciate the unique skills of these various professionals.

[GodlessCommie]

I sometimes feel like the engineer hive-mind that can be the MMM boards hits the wall of perception (not important to me = not worth money = diva arts person expecting to make a living doing their stupid thing) and I wanted to make sure to comment on it.

I hear you! I am an engineer who tries to develop appreciation for arts. And the conundrum I face is this: when I detect efforts by an artist to be commercially successful, I instinctively reject it for not being pure art. But when I see what I think is pure (modern) art, I also instinctively reject it, for it doesn't look to me like art worthy of appreciation at all. Thus, I don't support either with my $$$, and contribute to the very problem I detest - artists who are ahead of their time dying in poverty.

[Cool Friend]

I sometimes feel like the engineer hive-mind that can be the MMM boards hits the wall of perception (not important to me = not worth money = diva arts person expecting to make a living doing their stupid thing) and I wanted to make sure to comment on it.

I hear you! I am an engineer who tries to develop appreciation for arts. And the conundrum I face is this: when I detect efforts by an artist to be commercially successful, I instinctively reject it for not being pure art. But when I see what I think is pure (modern) art, I also instinctively reject it, for it doesn't look to me like art worthy of appreciation at all. Thus, I don't support either with my $$$, and contribute to the very problem I detest - artists who are ahead of their time dying in poverty.

Totally, I never pay engineers that are trying to be commercially successful--I just can't support impure engineering.

[thesis]

Custom art can be pretty expensive, but not as expensive as it probably should be, considering the skill and time involved. I have an artist friend who has talked about having to charge less because the only alternative is starving. That being said, I can only buy so many $500 custom pieces before my mustachian cheapness kicks in. But I do think that most art is, technically, underpriced.

That being said, there will always be artists among us, and that makes me happy. I wish more could earn a living doing it, though. Perhaps if people spent less on clutter, they could spend that money on something really nice from a local artist. Who knows.

[GodlessCommie]

Totally, I never pay engineers that are trying to be commercially successful--I just can't support impure engineering.

I get what you are driving at, and it would be just deserts if you or other people did just that! But for better or for worse, you don't, and neither does anyone else... We, engineers, are too practical to embrace and promote "engineering for engineering's sake" as our friends in the arts did for their field.

On the flip side, most everyone can name more famous artists than famous engineers. If the latter is a thing at all (outside of Civilization videogame).

[Morning Glory]

Would you want a Physical Therapist to remove a toe nail? That is a very common thing for a podiatrist to do.

ewwww!  Okay, gross.  Sorry, but that's one of the bodily things that I cannot even discuss without dry-heaving.  I'm pretty sure I would need to be sedated if I even had a situation where that might be necessary.  sorry I cannot answer the question because even thinking about it makes me close to passing out.

Reminds me of my mom. When I was a kid I got a splinter lodged way under my fingernail and she was too freaked out to be of any help. I ended up breaking it off trying to remove it and it just stayed there until my nail grew and it finally worked it's way out.

Physical therapists can debride wounds and do all kinds of procedures. I'm sure toenail removal is within their scope, at least at big places with PT's who specialize in wound care. I had a podiatry NP remove mine once, but they wouldn't cauterize it to keep it from growing back (I get subungual hematomas from running and it would be easier if my second toe on either foot just didn't have a nail).

[Metalcat]

Custom art can be pretty expensive, but not as expensive as it probably should be, considering the skill and time involved. I have an artist friend who has talked about having to charge less because the only alternative is starving. That being said, I can only buy so many $500 custom pieces before my mustachian cheapness kicks in. But I do think that most art is, technically, underpriced.

That being said, there will always be artists among us, and that makes me happy. I wish more could earn a living doing it, though. Perhaps if people spent less on clutter, they could spend that money on something really nice from a local artist. Who knows.

Unfortunately for artists trying to sell paintings, things like HGTV pushed everyone to covet a more hotel-like esthetic, which means people actually started actively seeking out the kind of generic nothing "art" that you would see in a hotel or home decor magazine.

Those prints are designed to be generally benign, which is kind of the opposite of art. But it's now the dominant esthetic.

That sounds like a judgemental statement, but it isn't. I don't hold the consumer responsible to sustain any particular type of taste.

I used to be an avid art collector, but now have almost no pieces in my home because I chose an overall esthetic over showcasing fine art.

But certainly it's been entertaining for me to see prints that were used specifically to not be noticed, suddenly taking over as a private household style trend when the whole point of them is to be generic and not represent individual style and taste.

I'm now always a bit surprised when I see proper paintings in people's homes.

[GodlessCommie]

In fairness, it is difficult to fit (what I perceive to be) proper art in an average home's interior. Either your home does disservice to the painting, or the painting does disservice to your home. Few can afford both serious art, and to design their living space around it.

[BlueHouse]

It's incredibly fortunate for you that you haven't needed more "gross" medical care and aren't forced to appreciate the unique skills of these various professionals.

It's actually called Vasovagal syncope, and while it might seem funny or very mild compared to other maladies, it's pretty inconvenient and it does really suck knowing that in times of distress, I'll probably be pretty useless or even add to the problem. 

[Cool Friend]

Totally, I never pay engineers that are trying to be commercially successful--I just can't support impure engineering.

I get what you are driving at, and it would be just deserts if you or other people did just that! But for better or for worse, you don't, and neither does anyone else... We, engineers, are too practical to embrace and promote "engineering for engineering's sake" as our friends in the arts did for their field.

On the flip side, most everyone can name more famous artists than famous engineers. If the latter is a thing at all (outside of Civilization videogame).

I was trying to prod you to reconsider the binary moralism of "pure" vs. "impure" art. It also may be worth considering that "art" means much more fine painting. Artists make the movies and TV you watch, write books you read, design clothes you wear and the cool gadgets you like, write, record, and perform your favorite music, and much, much more.

[Metalcat]

It's incredibly fortunate for you that you haven't needed more "gross" medical care and aren't forced to appreciate the unique skills of these various professionals.

It's actually called Vasovagal syncope, and while it might seem funny or very mild compared to other maladies, it's pretty inconvenient and it does really suck knowing that in times of distress, I'll probably be pretty useless or even add to the problem.

I was more replying to your statement "ewwww! Okay gross" about a toenail removal. People who have had a lot of invasive treatments don't tend to be grossed out or freaked out by then anymore. That's why I assume you haven't had a lot of medical procedures, which would explain why you don't see a lot of value in the doctors who do them.

I'm very familiar with vasovagal syncope. I've triggered it maaaaaany times in maaaaaaany patients. I specialized in phobic patients, so I've had fainting, vomiting, panic attacks, and even violence. It's pretty common to have horrible reactions to medical stuff.

But as I said, not usually among people who have had a lot of gory treatments. They're usually tanks.

[Morning Glory]

It's incredibly fortunate for you that you haven't needed more "gross" medical care and aren't forced to appreciate the unique skills of these various professionals.

It's actually called Vasovagal syncope, and while it might seem funny or very mild compared to other maladies, it's pretty inconvenient and it does really suck knowing that in times of distress, I'll probably be pretty useless or even add to the problem.

Make sure you eat something before the procedure,  and shift your weight around to avoid locking your knees.  Stay hydrated at all times. Drinking extremely cold water can help increase blood pressure and alleviate dizziness. Don't hold your breath or bear down. Sit down when you need to. (I'm not giving medical advice,  this is what I tell students).

@Malcat we were typing at the same time. I've had fainters too, although not truly phobic people,  just inexperienced college kids who skipped breakfast.

That's a good observation about the art. I wondered why paintings all seem to look the same these days.

@BlueHouse I didn't mean to pick on you either.  When I saw the eww gross I briefly launched into a story about fingers falling off but then thought better of it. I can't eat cheetos without that coming to mind, but if I liked cheetos I would get over it. Sorry. I'm doing it again. There are always going to be jobs for people with strong stomachs.

[marion10]

My father in law was a Protestant minister, my BIL is a retired minister and we’re pretty active in the church. For a good sized congregation that is in or near a big city and financially stable, we can easily get 75-100 applicants. The salary is decent, good benefits, pension. Being in a metro area means your trailing spouse can find a job. 50 years ago, your mainline Protestant pastor was a white male with a wife who helped out at church. Now, you don’t have to be male or straight or white, so the applicant pool is much larger- it’s very hard to get into seminary and expensive to boot. 40 years ago, our church staff was a full time minister, and full time or 3/4 time assistant that was paid or partially paid by the National church, church secretary, organist/director of music and a janitor. Now we have one full time minister, church secretary and director of music ( part time) and janitorial is contracted out. Our minister makes about $70,000 plus housing. I can see in 5 years, we will not be able to afford a full time clergy as church attendance dwindles. We have 3 churches of our denomination in a 3 mile radius and one is supported by a wealthy older woman who pays most of the minister’s salary.

In a rural area, many places are two or three point parishes where one minister drives from church to church. It’s hard to get someone to come because there are no job opportunities for a spouse ( although with more people working at home- maybe this is changing).

[GodlessCommie]

I was trying to prod you to reconsider the binary moralism of "pure" vs. "impure" art. It also may be worth considering that "art" means much more fine painting. Artists make the movies and TV you watch, write books you read, design clothes you wear and the cool gadgets you like, write, record, and perform your favorite music, and much, much more.

No, I get it, and if you read the post you replied to again, you should see a dose of self-irony.

But I hope you also see where the conundrum comes from. There is a near-universally held belief that art has value beyond technical mastery of an artist. That art is not craft. It later developed into a near-total disconnect of value of art from technical mastery of an artist. If anything can be art, and a signed urinal is a pivotal moment in the history of art, then how can a laymen understand if he is paying for art, or is being taken to the cleaners by a charlatan? Alternatively, if I'm buying from someone technically skilled seeking commercial success, how do I know if the promise of value beyond simple craft is fulfilled?

So the heart of the issue isn't moral. It's more a question of value - value of an art piece itself, and value of me as consumer of art.

Ironically, some of it applies to engineering, but in very niche areas. Luxury watches are one of them. The sales pitch is that it is the uncommonly high quality of engineering that makes them that valuable, even if that quality can't really be directly appreciated by a consumer. This is, on the surface, engineering for engineering's sake. Of course, almost nothing filters down to actual engineers, but that's the closest I can think of to art for art's sake. Very high-end audio equipment and exotic cars are also like that.

[Metalcat]

My father in law was a Protestant minister, my BIL is a retired minister and we’re pretty active in the church. For a good sized congregation that is in or near a big city and financially stable, we can easily get 75-100 applicants. The salary is decent, good benefits, pension. Being in a metro area means your trailing spouse can find a job. 50 years ago, your mainline Protestant pastor was a white male with a wife who helped out at church. Now, you don’t have to be male or straight or white, so the applicant pool is much larger- it’s very hard to get into seminary and expensive to boot. 40 years ago, our church staff was a full time minister, and full time or 3/4 time assistant that was paid or partially paid by the National church, church secretary, organist/director of music and a janitor. Now we have one full time minister, church secretary and director of music ( part time) and janitorial is contracted out. Our minister makes about $70,000 plus housing. I can see in 5 years, we will not be able to afford a full time clergy as church attendance dwindles. We have 3 churches of our denomination in a 3 mile radius and one is supported by a wealthy older woman who pays most of the minister’s salary.

In a rural area, many places are two or three point parishes where one minister drives from church to church. It’s hard to get someone to come because there are no job opportunities for a spouse ( although with more people working at home- maybe this is changing).

MDiv degrees in the US are insanely expensive! I couldn't believe it.

[marion10]

They are- I think part of it is to try and decrease the supply of potential ordinands. I think once it was seen as a mission thing and denominations made most of the cost. Now, it seems like higher education creep has come in.

Been thinking about the changes I have seen- I’m 61- when I graduated college with a ( gasp) liberal arts degree- in 1982 I had three choices- civil service ( claims examiner), working as an Indexer for Encyclopedia Britannia and copy writer trainee for Sears catalog. I couldn’t image that Sears and Encyclopedia Britannia would basically become shells of their former selves in less than 10 years. I went with the civil service and we had file clerks who worked in 3 shifts, 24 hours a day to open mail and file it. We had a whole annex where drafts were shipped by truck ( preprinted checklists that the examiner filled out) to typists ( who later started using word processors) and shipped back the next day to examiners who reviewed and signed them and mailed them out.  We had one fax machine for the entire building. I had to have permission from my boss to send something on it.

A large printing plant in Chicago printed Sears catalogs and Spiegel catalogs and phone books- again going continuously. Branch’s Candy covered city block after city block. When I was 22, I could not imagine how much things would change.

[Cool Friend]

I was trying to prod you to reconsider the binary moralism of "pure" vs. "impure" art. It also may be worth considering that "art" means much more fine painting. Artists make the movies and TV you watch, write books you read, design clothes you wear and the cool gadgets you like, write, record, and perform your favorite music, and much, much more.

No, I get it, and if you read the post you replied to again, you should see a dose of self-irony.

But I hope you also see where the conundrum comes from. There is a near-universally held belief that art has value beyond technical mastery of an artist. That art is not craft. It later developed into a near-total disconnect of value of art from technical mastery of an artist. If anything can be art, and a signed urinal is a pivotal moment in the history of art, then how can a laymen understand if he is paying for art, or is being taken to the cleaners by a charlatan? Alternatively, if I'm buying from someone technically skilled seeking commercial success, how do I know if the promise of value beyond simple craft is fulfilled?

So the heart of the issue isn't moral. It's more a question of value - value of an art piece itself, and value of me as consumer of art.

Ironically, some of it applies to engineering, but in very niche areas. Luxury watches are one of them. The sales pitch is that it is the uncommonly high quality of engineering that makes them that valuable, even if that quality can't really be directly appreciated by a consumer. This is, on the surface, engineering for engineering's sake. Of course, almost nothing filters down to actual engineers, but that's the closest I can think of to art for art's sake. Very high-end audio equipment and exotic cars are also like that.

You know what, you've convinced me. You, personally, should not buy or experience any kind of art.

[BlueHouse]

It's incredibly fortunate for you that you haven't needed more "gross" medical care and aren't forced to appreciate the unique skills of these various professionals.

It's actually called Vasovagal syncope, and while it might seem funny or very mild compared to other maladies, it's pretty inconvenient and it does really suck knowing that in times of distress, I'll probably be pretty useless or even add to the problem.

Make sure you eat something before the procedure,  and shift your weight around to avoid locking your knees.  Stay hydrated at all times. Drinking extremely cold water can help increase blood pressure and alleviate dizziness. Don't hold your breath or bear down. Sit down when you need to. (I'm not giving medical advice,  this is what I tell students).

@Malcat we were typing at the same time. I've had fainters too, although not truly phobic people,  just inexperienced college kids who skipped breakfast.

That's a good observation about the art. I wondered why paintings all seem to look the same these days.

@BlueHouse I didn't mean to pick on you either.  When I saw the eww gross I briefly launched into a story about fingers falling off but then thought better of it. I can't eat cheetos without that coming to mind, but if I liked cheetos I would get over it. Sorry. I'm doing it again. There are always going to be jobs for people with strong stomachs.

Thanks that is great advice!  I’m no where near as bad as my sister. Mine is quite mild.   

[Metalcat]

They are- I think part of it is to try and decrease the supply of potential ordinands. I think once it was seen as a mission thing and denominations made most of the cost. Now, it seems like higher education creep has come in.

Why would they want fewer applicants? Here in Canada, MDiv programs are hurting for students and the one accredited one in my city just shut down due to lack of applicants, so it's a Christian University (which is rare here) that doesn't even train ministers. The other accredited MDiv programs are generally hurting for applicants and having to lower their academic standards for application just to fill their classes.

I suppose it's possible that the demand for these programs is wildly different in the US vs Canada since we are generally a much less Christian country.

[grantmeaname]

But I hope you also see where the conundrum comes from. There is a near-universally held belief that art has value beyond technical mastery of an artist. That art is not craft. It later developed into a near-total disconnect of value of art from technical mastery of an artist. If anything can be art, and a signed urinal is a pivotal moment in the history of art, then how can a laymen understand if he is paying for art, or is being taken to the cleaners by a charlatan? Alternatively, if I'm buying from someone technically skilled seeking commercial success, how do I know if the promise of value beyond simple craft is fulfilled?

You know what, you've convinced me. You, personally, should not buy or experience any kind of art.

I thought Godless Commie was asking an interesting pair of questions here. Why not engage with the actual substantive questions instead of throwing out an assholish ad hominem attack? Why is Commie wrong?

[Cool Friend]

But I hope you also see where the conundrum comes from. There is a near-universally held belief that art has value beyond technical mastery of an artist. That art is not craft. It later developed into a near-total disconnect of value of art from technical mastery of an artist. If anything can be art, and a signed urinal is a pivotal moment in the history of art, then how can a laymen understand if he is paying for art, or is being taken to the cleaners by a charlatan? Alternatively, if I'm buying from someone technically skilled seeking commercial success, how do I know if the promise of value beyond simple craft is fulfilled?

You know what, you've convinced me. You, personally, should not buy or experience any kind of art.

I thought Godless Commie was asking an interesting pair of questions here. Why not engage with the actual substantive questions instead of throwing out an assholish ad hominem attack? Why is Commie wrong?

I didn't say he was wrong. I said he was right.

[roomtempmayo]

My father in law was a Protestant minister, my BIL is a retired minister and we’re pretty active in the church. For a good sized congregation that is in or near a big city and financially stable, we can easily get 75-100 applicants. The salary is decent, good benefits, pension. Being in a metro area means your trailing spouse can find a job. 50 years ago, your mainline Protestant pastor was a white male with a wife who helped out at church. Now, you don’t have to be male or straight or white, so the applicant pool is much larger- it’s very hard to get into seminary and expensive to boot. 40 years ago, our church staff was a full time minister, and full time or 3/4 time assistant that was paid or partially paid by the National church, church secretary, organist/director of music and a janitor. Now we have one full time minister, church secretary and director of music ( part time) and janitorial is contracted out. Our minister makes about $70,000 plus housing.

While this discussion is on both clergy and the arts, I'll mention that in large historical congregations with money, church music is thriving.

To provide one example, our music director has a Ph.D. in sacred music, is our highest paid employee by a good margin, and the only one who breaks six figures.  He does Wednesday nights and Sunday mornings, coordinates an endowed concert series with professional musicians, and seems to spend a fair amount of time composing and arranging.  He farms out all of the kids programming to volunteers.

Talking to pastors and musicians I know, he's not an outlier within that sort of congregation.  Granted, there might be <1000 congregations with a music endowment in the United States, but they seem like really good jobs for the right person.  There's no expectation that you move on (i.e. you can expect indefinite tenure, unlike many clergy), there's zero expectation of spousal involvement/work, and you don't need to manage the congregation/church council.  I imagine all the weekend and evening work gets old, but that's pretty common across performance work.

[markbike528CBX]

While I agree the ministerial profession has peaked, it wasn't that long ago (late 1800's) that pastors often had to make a circuit of several churches (Methodists come to mind).
As I think I discovered, some congregations shared a building. https://www.ucc.org/about-us_hidden-histories-2_the-union-church-a-case-of/

So, like the nuclear family, the single church supporting a building, pastor, etc is a fairly recent phenomenon.

[StarBright]

But I hope you also see where the conundrum comes from. There is a near-universally held belief that art has value beyond technical mastery of an artist. That art is not craft. It later developed into a near-total disconnect of value of art from technical mastery of an artist. If anything can be art, and a signed urinal is a pivotal moment in the history of art, then how can a laymen understand if he is paying for art, or is being taken to the cleaners by a charlatan? Alternatively, if I'm buying from someone technically skilled seeking commercial success, how do I know if the promise of value beyond simple craft is fulfilled?

You know what, you've convinced me. You, personally, should not buy or experience any kind of art.

I thought Godless Commie was asking an interesting pair of questions here. Why not engage with the actual substantive questions instead of throwing out an assholish ad hominem attack? Why is Commie wrong?

I didn't say he was wrong. I said he was right.

I'll bite: How do you know the promise of something beyond craft has been fulfilled? If you haven't done the work, you absolutely don't know. But you can pay someone else to do that work for you if you care.

But also, there is no right way to consume art. Art can have value beyond craft, but sometimes exquisite craft is worth the money. Craftsmanship can absolutely be art.

If you are looking to buy what is "good" and "valuable", but aren't interested in doing the work to learn why something like "Fountain" is those things, then you must rely and pay for the work of experts to tell you what is valuable. There is a reason why me handing you a urinal is not art, but DuChamp going to lengths to enter it into an exhibition under a pseudonym is. Someone has done that work and is an expert on why. You can pay them to make sure you don't get scammed.

SO here is part 2: You can also buy art because you love it, but it might never be valuable. Your own subjectivity absolutely matters. A lack of commercial value does not mean that it isn't art. I have pieces that are listed in my estate plan and I have pieces that make me smile but have very little real world value - they both hold pride of place postitions in my home.

There is an element to the post of dismissing value because you don't want to take the time or spend the dollars to understand it. And it is absolutely okay if it holds no value for you, as an individual, but there is often a larger societal or community value that also gets thrown out with the bathwater.

The Arts often make life better: good design makes life friendlier, public art and music can create places where communities come together and give you a sense of place. 

The idea of having valuable art only as something that you individually consume ignores that the arts are a constant background to our lives. We notice the dreariness when they aren't there, but often have a hard time appreciating them when they are right in front of us if they aren't specifically doing something for us as an individual.

okay- off soapbox :) 

[GodlessCommie]

I'll bite: How do you know the promise of something beyond craft has been fulfilled? If you haven't done the work, you absolutely don't know. But you can pay someone else to do that work for you if you care.

"Bite" suggest that questions weren't asked in good faith. Let me assure you that they were, and I appreciate you response.

[StarBright]

I'll bite: How do you know the promise of something beyond craft has been fulfilled? If you haven't done the work, you absolutely don't know. But you can pay someone else to do that work for you if you care.

"Bite" suggest that questions weren't asked in good faith. Let me assure you that they were, and I appreciate you response.

Thanks for letting me know! I was using it more like "I'm about to bite off more than I can chew" :)

[former player]

Peaked and gone: honest right-wing politicians.

[partgypsy]

I want to.point out that art, music careers have always been, 1% or less doing fabulously well, another 10% decent, and rest struggle. Because whether ballet, classical music, painting there is an intrinsic enjoyment in achieving a high level, so there will always be artists. As far as art, you should buy what you like. Honestly I have a space on one wall above a couch I may measure it, and might commission a long time friend whose art I admire to make something. Does that make it couch art? Who knows and I don't care. I appreciate art, I like to surround my self with esthetically pleasing objects, but i'm never going to pay a ton for art because I know so many artists and am an artist myself (trades, friend discount). Because of the shift to the internet direct to consumer channels including patreon (some of my friends are doing better than they ever have) I would put art gallery owner on the dying category.

[Villanelle]

I want to.point out that art, music careers have always been, 1% or less doing fabulously well, another 10% decent, and rest struggle. Because whether ballet, classical music, painting there is an intrinsic enjoyment in achieving a high level, so there will always be artists. As far as art, you should buy what you like. Honestly I have a space on one wall above a couch I may measure it, and might commission a long time friend whose art I admire to make something. Does that make it couch art? Who knows and I don't care. I appreciate art, I like to surround my self with esthetically pleasing objects, but i'm never going to pay a ton for art because I know so many artists and am an artist myself (trades, friend discount). Because of the shift to the internet direct to consumer channels including patreon (some of my friends are doing better than they ever have) I would put art gallery owner on the dying category.

This is essentially how (and why) I buy art.  Is it 'worth' $100, $500, or $2000?  To me, that is just a question of what I feel it is worth to have it and look at it everyday.  I wouldn't pay $500 for a Raphael (unless I could resell it!) because I don't want to look at it everyday.  I have art on my walls that cost $15 from a street artist, and $2000 from a small gallery. I don't care what its resale value might be.  I'm not buying it as an investment.  And for an original piece, there's generally no way to get it cheaper, so it costs what it costs.  It's not like a TV that I can price shop and perhaps find cheaper elsewhere, meaning it may be "worth" less than the price tag at the more expensive electronics store.  Original art costs what it costs and it is either worth it to me, or not. 

I think people get caught up in what art is "worth", and worrying they are overpaying.  If it is worth it to me, it's not overpaying, regardless of that number, and regardless of who painted it and what their other pieces go for.  It's not an investment or an asset, where value and future value and other stats are part of the decision to buy or not.  Or at least it's not that to me. And that liberates me from having to stress about "worth", and to worry about overpaying and feeling ignorant.

[Metalcat]

I want to.point out that art, music careers have always been, 1% or less doing fabulously well, another 10% decent, and rest struggle. Because whether ballet, classical music, painting there is an intrinsic enjoyment in achieving a high level, so there will always be artists. As far as art, you should buy what you like. Honestly I have a space on one wall above a couch I may measure it, and might commission a long time friend whose art I admire to make something. Does that make it couch art? Who knows and I don't care. I appreciate art, I like to surround my self with esthetically pleasing objects, but i'm never going to pay a ton for art because I know so many artists and am an artist myself (trades, friend discount). Because of the shift to the internet direct to consumer channels including patreon (some of my friends are doing better than they ever have) I would put art gallery owner on the dying category.

This is essentially how (and why) I buy art.  If is 'worth' $100, $500, or $2000?  To me, that is just a question of what I feel it is worth to have it and look at it everyday.  I wouldn't pay $500 for a Raphael (unless I could resell it!) because I don't want to look at it everyday.  I have art on my walls that cost $15 from a street artist, and $2000 from a small gallery. I don't care what its resale value might be.  I'm not buying it as an investment.  And for an original piece, there's generally no way to get it cheaper, so it costs what it costs.  It's not like a TV that I can price shop and perhaps find cheaper elsewhere, meaning it may be "worth" less than the price tag at the more expensive electronics store.  It costs what it costs and it is either worth it to me, or not. 

I think people get caught up in what art is "worth", and worrying they are overpaying.  If it is worth it to me, it's not overpaying, regardless of that number, and regardless of who painted it and what their other pieces go for.  It's not an investment or an asset, where value and future value and other stats are part of the decision to buy or not.  Or at least it's not that to me. And that liberates me from having to stress about "worth", and to worry about overpaying and feeling ignorant.

It's kind of funny since people over pay for tons of things, but angst about overpaying for art because there's no easily found yardstick for evaluating the relative price of certain types of art.

If you can't easily compare and contrast and conflate the value of small details, then how can you know if you got a "deal"???

[partgypsy]

Yeah. I don't understand that. And ironically things people thought were close to worthless, end up being worth stuff. Cleaning out my attic was going to donate zines (mostly mini comics) I had gotten in trades but I would have to pay for shipping. So I sold them to a collector instead who gave me 400. I was shocked I didn't realize they were worth anything.

[DadJokes]

I think this thread has peaked. We're still talking about the arts two pages later.

[Villanelle]

I want to.point out that art, music careers have always been, 1% or less doing fabulously well, another 10% decent, and rest struggle. Because whether ballet, classical music, painting there is an intrinsic enjoyment in achieving a high level, so there will always be artists. As far as art, you should buy what you like. Honestly I have a space on one wall above a couch I may measure it, and might commission a long time friend whose art I admire to make something. Does that make it couch art? Who knows and I don't care. I appreciate art, I like to surround my self with esthetically pleasing objects, but i'm never going to pay a ton for art because I know so many artists and am an artist myself (trades, friend discount). Because of the shift to the internet direct to consumer channels including patreon (some of my friends are doing better than they ever have) I would put art gallery owner on the dying category.

This is essentially how (and why) I buy art.  If is 'worth' $100, $500, or $2000?  To me, that is just a question of what I feel it is worth to have it and look at it everyday.  I wouldn't pay $500 for a Raphael (unless I could resell it!) because I don't want to look at it everyday.  I have art on my walls that cost $15 from a street artist, and $2000 from a small gallery. I don't care what its resale value might be.  I'm not buying it as an investment.  And for an original piece, there's generally no way to get it cheaper, so it costs what it costs.  It's not like a TV that I can price shop and perhaps find cheaper elsewhere, meaning it may be "worth" less than the price tag at the more expensive electronics store.  It costs what it costs and it is either worth it to me, or not. 

I think people get caught up in what art is "worth", and worrying they are overpaying.  If it is worth it to me, it's not overpaying, regardless of that number, and regardless of who painted it and what their other pieces go for.  It's not an investment or an asset, where value and future value and other stats are part of the decision to buy or not.  Or at least it's not that to me. And that liberates me from having to stress about "worth", and to worry about overpaying and feeling ignorant.

It's kind of funny since people over pay for tons of things, but angst about overpaying for art because there's no easily found yardstick for evaluating the relative price of certain types of art.

If you can't easily compare and contrast and conflate the value of small details, then how can you know if you got a "deal"???

[JetBlast]

Surprised to see "pilot" mentioned several times.  Other than an understandable pause at the beginning of Covid, the airlines seem to be hiring like crazy.  It's one of the reasons that the military is facing a pilot shortage--people can get out and have a job almost immediately, and one that makes more and has a better QOL by most standards.

I mentioned pilots earlier, which was mostly because of some friends talking about the decline of working conditions.  I don't think it was the pay, so much as a combo of bad employers (the major passenger airlines) and bad passengers.

They've all remained pilots.  Some do cargo flights, and some do private passenger charter work.  All are very happy with the move away from the big passenger airlines and being around the general public.

Pilots might be an example of a job that's still great (you fly planes for a living!) but has peaked in the sense that it's not what it once was on some important dimension.

By the way, I started by offering lawyering and academia as professions that have peaked.  By most standards, I think pockets within those professions are still pretty fantastic compared to most work.  It's just that they typical person within those professions likely has a flat to declining career outlook over the coming decades.

I suppose you could say being a pilot has peaked in the US in the sense that pay was better pre-deregulation, 60% final average earnings pensions were common until the bankruptcies post 9/11, and most people don't look at pilots as skygods like is portrayed in films and television reflecting the 1960s. 

I'd be curious when your friends left the airline industry, as it's definitely been a major upswing since around 2013 in pay, benefits, and work rules.  When I started at the regional airlines in 2006 the first year pay at most was about $24,000/yr.  Now, between hourly rate increases and signing bonuses it is closer to $50,000, and many have retention bonuses after the first year.  Pay rates at the major airlines are significantly higher than they were in post-bankruptcy contracts, and gains have been made in 401k contributions to close some of the gap from those terminated pension plans.  In some cases the difference is massive.  After their second bankruptcy a USAirways A320 captain at the top of the longevity scale made $125 per flight hour.  After the merger with American and a couple contract cycles the top of the A320 pay scale is $278 per flight hour. 

[jinga nation]

Accountants, specifically tax accountants.  And there is a major shortage of young CPAs because of that.

This. I cannot do another tax season like the last two have been, but this one is likely to be just as bad if not worse. It gets more and more complicated, clients are more and more demanding, and I've just about hit my limit for hearing rich people whine.

Being a tax CPA has been hard for my wife and her co-workers. Employers and the two tax periods make it difficult to start/raise a family. And it is hard on the dads who want to participate in their child's upbringing. All of my wife's coworkers quit the large regional (then national) firm within a year of having their first child. It took 6 years before the firm decided to "think about doing something" in late 2019. And nothing was done.

My wife went into industry to be a financial controller, works full-time at 32H/week. Two co-workers went to private equity companies to work on client's returns. Another two went to work at a furniture company's family investment firm to work on returns for the owners and kin.

Big Tax CPA firms are notorious for churn. And they aren't family friendly despite all the social media posts they make, internal family welfare committees, work-life balance talk and policies, and adverts in CPA magazines.

[cerat0n1a]

Electrical engineers.  Designing circuits is becoming a niche profession.  Much has been replaced with software or consolidated into IC’s.  Headcount has been slowly declining for some time.

Hmm. The people I know who design ICs consider themselves circuit designers and earn on a par with top software engineers because it's difficult to recruit and the semiconductor industry is booming. I guess the people who were designing with valves in the 1950s probably experienced something similar when germanium transistors came along?

[cerat0n1a]

I think this thread has peaked. We're still talking about the arts two pages later.

Well, just to prolong things a little further, I think talking about 'the arts' in this context is a little too broad brush anyway.

We have an art gallery in our village (4000 people) selling paintings from local painters. Another nearby village has one too. The nearby town (150 000 people) has more than twenty. The local council operates an arts centre and a public gallery. None of those things existed a generation ago. I know several people who make their living from selling paintings. It used to be that only very wealthy patrons could afford to buy paintings; we now have millions of people wealthy enough to do so. I'd argue there's never been a better time for that particular branch of the arts.

Being a rock star, on the other hand, has definitely peaked. Nobody is ever again going to become fabulously rich just from selling their music.

[Villanelle]

I think this thread has peaked. We're still talking about the arts two pages later.

Well, just to prolong things a little further, I think talking about 'the arts' in this context is a little too broad brush anyway.

We have an art gallery in our village (4000 people) selling paintings from local painters. Another nearby village has one too. The nearby town (150 000 people) has more than twenty. The local council operates an arts centre and a public gallery. None of those things existed a generation ago. I know several people who make their living from selling paintings. It used to be that only very wealthy patrons could afford to buy paintings; we now have millions of people wealthy enough to do so. I'd argue there's never been a better time for that particular branch of the arts.

Being a rock star, on the other hand, has definitely peaked. Nobody is ever again going to become fabulously rich just from selling their music.

I think Drake, The Weeknd, and Taylor Swift, among others, would beg to differ.  Unless you are not counting concerts and other revenue streams as "selling their music".  (I picked those three because they were among the best selling artists of 2020, according to a quick web search.)

[cerat0n1a]

I think this thread has peaked. We're still talking about the arts two pages later.

Well, just to prolong things a little further, I think talking about 'the arts' in this context is a little too broad brush anyway.

We have an art gallery in our village (4000 people) selling paintings from local painters. Another nearby village has one too. The nearby town (150 000 people) has more than twenty. The local council operates an arts centre and a public gallery. None of those things existed a generation ago. I know several people who make their living from selling paintings. It used to be that only very wealthy patrons could afford to buy paintings; we now have millions of people wealthy enough to do so. I'd argue there's never been a better time for that particular branch of the arts.

Being a rock star, on the other hand, has definitely peaked. Nobody is ever again going to become fabulously rich just from selling their music.

I think Drake, The Weeknd, and Taylor Swift, among others, would beg to differ.  Unless you are not counting concerts and other revenue streams as "selling their music".  (I picked those three because they were among the best selling artists of 2020, according to a quick web search.)

Yes, I was too imprecise. Performing music absolutely can still make large sums of money and catapult someone to fame. But just selling recordings of it is far less lucrative than it was decades ago. Taking Drake as an example, his earnings from paid endorsements ($100m+ pa) absolutely dwarf what he makes from people paying for streaming his music.