This was an issue that came to mind a little while back. All artists, in all forms and disciplines learn, grow and develop in their specific field, and even broaden their skills in other areas. That's life. Whether I'm talking about a music group or a fine artist, that's irrelevant, because each is an individual creative skill. The problem I see here, though, is the unsaid debate that seems to surround these mediums. While it is not spoken aloud, one only has to look hard enough to see that the recipients of these creative arts - the outsiders who see the work from afar and utter a unique point of view - appear to be torn.
Is it better for an artist, of any kind, to fly the nest and leave their comfort zone or are they best holding on to what made them who they are in the first place?
Either way, it seems they cannot win. One way or another, there will always be criticism towards an artist of any discipline.
Take for example, the latest album released at the end of October just passed, by Kamelot. A band known for being one of the most influential power metal bands of the last decade or more. No one would really dispute that, but over the past few years things have begun to change. The power metal element has lessened, leaning towards a progressive style. Now, there's nothing wrong with progressive metal, yet there are people out there who are so narrow-minded who believe that once a group makes their break in one particular genre, then they should have to stay in that threshold. There are those out there who are strictly listeners of one style of music, and anything or anyone who does not fall under that one category they actually consider worthy are automatically shunted and criticised for not being what that individual wants them to be.
Yet the most absurd thing with this particular album, Silverthorn, is that the band have actually turned back to roots. That more melodic, rawer and more vocally powerful and emotional sound has returned! It sounds like the best two albums of their career, Epica and The Black Halo. But apparently for some people that isn't enough.
That selfish attitude is dangerous. It is also unfair. When someone makes music, they have every right to grow and develop, and if they never do then all you will ever receive from them is more of the same. Never will you hear another ground-breaking release because you haven't allowed them that creative freedom.
Every artist has to develop. Yes, they will always grow and change as time goes by. I've seen it with digital painters even, or fine artists, where as an artist begins to experiment with different techniques a regular viewer of theirs shoots down that creativity and tries to dictate that they should stick with what they've always done best. That is wrong. An artist would end up stuck in a rut, going nowhere, learning nothing.
On the other hand, is it truly right for an artist to leave everything else behind? In the beginning they would have developed something, that one unique aspect that makes them recognizable. It wouldn't be right for them to abandon that. So, while that artist, be it a band - like the above example who have remember their roots after a precarious few years and yet kept their more mature sound - or a fine artist, has every right to progress into something new and unexplored, it always pays to stay true to the original. Going back to basics always has its advantages for the sake of those appreciators who were drawn into the art by that first unique spark that defines the artist.
Fans should not try and dictate what the artist does. Honestly, that is really selfish. A real fan should be able to understand and appreciate that a creative mind will never stay in one place. It keeps the excitement alive, knowing that something knew will turn out from it all, carrying with it the essence of the creative person. That spark is like a signature. Without it, that work could belong to anyone.
Just don't tie their hands. An artist must be able to spread his or her wings and find new territory. Taking risks is the only way to achieve something greater than what has already been reached.
Either way, it seems they cannot win. One way or another, there will always be criticism towards an artist of any discipline.
Take for example, the latest album released at the end of October just passed, by Kamelot. A band known for being one of the most influential power metal bands of the last decade or more. No one would really dispute that, but over the past few years things have begun to change. The power metal element has lessened, leaning towards a progressive style. Now, there's nothing wrong with progressive metal, yet there are people out there who are so narrow-minded who believe that once a group makes their break in one particular genre, then they should have to stay in that threshold. There are those out there who are strictly listeners of one style of music, and anything or anyone who does not fall under that one category they actually consider worthy are automatically shunted and criticised for not being what that individual wants them to be.
Yet the most absurd thing with this particular album, Silverthorn, is that the band have actually turned back to roots. That more melodic, rawer and more vocally powerful and emotional sound has returned! It sounds like the best two albums of their career, Epica and The Black Halo. But apparently for some people that isn't enough.
That selfish attitude is dangerous. It is also unfair. When someone makes music, they have every right to grow and develop, and if they never do then all you will ever receive from them is more of the same. Never will you hear another ground-breaking release because you haven't allowed them that creative freedom.
Every artist has to develop. Yes, they will always grow and change as time goes by. I've seen it with digital painters even, or fine artists, where as an artist begins to experiment with different techniques a regular viewer of theirs shoots down that creativity and tries to dictate that they should stick with what they've always done best. That is wrong. An artist would end up stuck in a rut, going nowhere, learning nothing.
On the other hand, is it truly right for an artist to leave everything else behind? In the beginning they would have developed something, that one unique aspect that makes them recognizable. It wouldn't be right for them to abandon that. So, while that artist, be it a band - like the above example who have remember their roots after a precarious few years and yet kept their more mature sound - or a fine artist, has every right to progress into something new and unexplored, it always pays to stay true to the original. Going back to basics always has its advantages for the sake of those appreciators who were drawn into the art by that first unique spark that defines the artist.
Fans should not try and dictate what the artist does. Honestly, that is really selfish. A real fan should be able to understand and appreciate that a creative mind will never stay in one place. It keeps the excitement alive, knowing that something knew will turn out from it all, carrying with it the essence of the creative person. That spark is like a signature. Without it, that work could belong to anyone.
Just don't tie their hands. An artist must be able to spread his or her wings and find new territory. Taking risks is the only way to achieve something greater than what has already been reached.
Nachos x
