[zenogantner]

People here in the comments seem to focus on whether it is possible to predict an artist's success based on secondary "civic" virtues, and criticize the author for having subjective criteria for what "success" means. I'd argue that independently of how you measure success, all other things being equal, having diligence and other civic virtues will get you further, on average.

That said, the most interesting lessons are in the first and sixth (the 2nd 6th, the actual 6th) item: How to do a better/more widely scoped job than what you got hired for (by understanding how interests, incentives and responsibilities align in an org) and the fact that in most places, most people are not serious (meaning they tend to not go deeper, look at the big picture, etc.).

[riazrizvi]

I think the point is more that there are indicators that a person is in conflict with their own mission. Struggles to respond, complains, focuses on the immaterial. I think OP is completely right. When a person is aligned, they get out of their own way, this people are easy to differentiate. One produces mediocre work, the other produces great stuff. I also agree it’s within the power of the individual to be either.

[thih9]

I like this view. Still, this seems a way of reasoning about that artist’s success at that particular gallery - perhaps the artist is busy with art projects that are better aligned with them.

[riazrizvi]

Quite likely, though I think we are talking about different things. OP and I are talking to shared alignment, where they came together to sell art for mutual benefit and how to spot good partners to work with. Sure if a partner isn’t good for you, they might have other places where they work well, but I think that’s out of scope to the article IMO.