An Interview with a Creative Soul {it got me thinking}…

“There’s often a disconnect between being an artist
and actually working as an artist. It’s one thing to 
be creative and not get paid for it—you can create until 
your heart’s content—but when money gets involved, 
it’s a whole different animal.”
                                             -Ike Edeani

---

I came upon this really good quote while reading an interview by Tina Essmaker with photographer Ike Ediani. To {way} over-simplify: Ike is a creative soul. Like many before and after him, he balanced this "love for creativity" initially by being "practical…" which lead him to an education and career as an Architect (arguably one of the highest paying of all the creative careers)… then later an art-director / graphic designer… and then eventually a photographer.

I think the quote by Edeani gets to the heart of some of the discontent behind those pursuing visual communications. You may be doing wonderfully innovative work when it is scholastic or a self-commisioned (or perhaps even self-indulgent) work. The fact is that in all probability career-wise, you often trade off  unfettered creativity for the much more confining reality of a steady job. The "no-limits, open-budget, avant-garde-euro-fashion-magazine cover job" you've dreamed of is in reality the "monotonous-but-steady" job where you generate forms and business cards in a preset format.

Times used to be that kids who wanted to be artists, but worried about steady employment, went into visual communications (or 'graphic design') to meet those goals. It seems the modern equivalent has become kids who want to play video games all day. There is another thread here in that ones loves cannot always equate to the reality of compensation to do what you want. You have to find the balance that fits you (and that you can live with). 

Regardless, it seems to me there has to be a moderation of what the centrally motivating factor is for the individual with a creative soul. Some will move between careers or employers until they find the balance they can live with. Others will transition out of their desire to"work in the field," and instead work at a job/career that can more adequately provide them with money, while practicing what it is they truly love on a personal level. There is no one correct answer.

I recently met up with some college friends, and found one of them was now in a financial career. One of our [well-intentioned perhaps] classmates commented that it was "a shame she couldn't work in design."

She had mentioned trying to work in design, but hating it. The creative profession she had dreamed of during her studies had became yet 'just another job.' After trying different agencies and scenarios, she figured she may as well work at a job that paid her more while requiring less of her time. 

Through happenstance, she began processing payroll and handling investments. After several years and a few promotions,  she had doubled what she made in design while working an actual 40 hour week (design insiders will get that one).

Now she is able to do painting and photography on her own terms, (which was why she originally pursued design studies in the first place–as a compromise to pursuing fine arts more fully) and had even had several joint/group shows of her work, and an a few individual shows at a local galleries (something neither I nor our "well-intentioned" classmate had puled off).

She figured out that, for her, being a creative soul didn't necessary mean working in a creative career.