[jack_riminton]

I don’t think there’s a direct correlation between commercial and artistic value. But there has to come a point where people who create this kind of stuff realise they’re not Van Gogh. Top points for edginess though, I guess

[thorum]

Someone probably said the same thing to Van Gogh during his life.

[dentemple]

Nearly everyone said the same thing to Van Gogh during his life. He was only recognized for his artwork after his death.

[animal_spirits]

That’s not quite true. Yes people cared less about his art while he was alive, but that was because of his erratic behavior. There was no doubt that the people surrounding him found his art beautiful, especially In his later years when he was staying at the clinics

[jack_riminton]

Well that was entirely my point, Van Gogh took a completely new approach to colour, use of light, painting en plein air etc.

People never appreciated him but at least Van Gogh could say he’s doing something groundbreaking and new.

Whereas the artist in question here, I can’t imagine they’ve ever legitimately thought that of their own art, it’s just not that groundbreaking or good.

Maybe they just realise that they’re unemployable elsewhere so they may as well carry on

[adamtaylor_13]

Just because he beat the odds, doesn’t mean their advice was wrong.

[dclowd9901]

Their advice wasn’t wrong. He never enjoyed any of the success or fame he has now. Not even a fraction of it.

The world was lucky to have Van Gogh, but Van Gogh was very unlucky to have this world.

[IshKebab]

Van Gogh wasn't Van Gogh. If by "Van Gogh" you mean "had the rare combination of skill and luck to be a successful artist within his lifetime".

[underlipton]

Someone told Van Gogh that he wasn't Van Gogh? No wonder he went crazy, that's some hardcore gaslighting.