If you take creativity remotely seriously you need to know that cartoonist Hugh MacLeod has a book coming out. You probably know already. Either way, you’ll want to download the sample chapters from the book.
And if you haven’t read it before, pour yourself a large coffee/whiskey/absinthe and treat yourself to Hugh’s original article How to Be Creative, which spawned the book. It will probably be the best thing you read this week.
One of the sample chapters in the free download is devoted to Hugh’s ‘Sex and Cash’ theory:
THE SEX & CASH THEORY
The creative person basically has two kinds of jobs: One is the sexy, creative kind. Second is the kind that pays the bills. Sometimes the task at hand covers both bases, but not often. This tense duality will always play center stage. It will never be transcended.
A good example is Phil, a New York photographer friend of mine. He does really wild stuff for the small, hipster magazines—it pays virtually nothing, but it allows him to build his portfolio. Then he’ll leverage that to go off and shoot some retail catalogues for a while. Nothing too exciting, but it pays the bills.
…
One year John Travolta will be in an ultrahip flick like Pulp Fiction (“Sex”), another he’ll be in some forgettable, big- budget thriller like Broken Arrow (“Cash”).
…
I’m thinking about the young writer who has to wait tables to pay the bills, in spite of her writing appearing in all the cool and hip magazines . . . who dreams of one day not having her life divided so harshly.
Well, over time the “harshly” bit might go away, but not the “divided.”
This tense duality will always play center stage. It will never be transcended.
And nobody is immune. Not the struggling waiter, nor the movie star.
What Do You Think of Hugh’s ‘Sex and Cash’ Theory?
Do you recognise the tension between sexy creative work and work that pays the bills?
Do you agree that this tension ‘will never be transcended’ however successful you are?
How do you resolve this tension?
About the Author: Mark McGuinness is a Coach for Artists, Creatives and Entrepreneurs. For a free 25-week guide to success as a creative professional, sign up for Mark’s course The Creative Pathfinder.
Mark,
I laughed with recognition when I read this. Yes, it’s the eternal dilemma. But…
… one, I hope I’ll transcend it permanently someday and always do work that’s as sexy as it is profitable, and
… two, I hope Hugh will. I adore his work and I’ve had my eye on him forever. If anyone can, it’s Hugh.
Regards,
Kelly
As I started to read this article I was laughing by the second line. I can relate at times some of the work I do as a. freelance webdesigner is far from sexy or intersting.
I have to pay the bills so this article gives me confort in knowing I’m not alone thanks.
I wholeheartedly agree with the “sex and cash” theory — particularly as it relates to artists and creativity. I think the less sexy the career, the less prominent the duality.
For myself? Hey, I’m an organizer. That sort of thing is sexy only to dorks like me. 🙂
Back when I was in med school, I had 2 hobby passions: SCUBA diving and martial arts. Lots of dives occurred on the weekends; lots of martial arts classes and tournaments on the weekends.
Being the donkey between the 2 hay bales was driving me B-A-T-T-Y.
Finally, my wife said, “Why don’t you start an underwater martial arts school?”
Today, I’m not a hand-to-flipper instructor for the Navy SEALS. But I never forgot the lesson, originally voiced by Robert Heinlein – instead of being a Dead Lion or a Live Jackal, be a live lion; it’s more fun, and easier, too.
Creative vs. Utilitarian are archetypes, very real and immediate — we all either live in those boxes, or know folks who do — but they are boxes. Fitting as they’ve been until now, many job opps don’t fit neatly into them any more — see http://vimeo.com/2030361. And for some folks, in any time and place, those particular boxes never held much appeal.
“People aren’t interested in buying a drill. They want to make a hole.”
It’s time to refocus on how big and deep you want the hole to be.
I think this is true for nearly all creative people, but a few make money doing their sexy, creative thing.
Even fewer experience life as a moment-to-moment act of creativity.
I agree that the duality exists, but I don’t believe that it has to be necessary. There’s a lot of mindset involved.
How much money do you really need to live comfortably (we’re not talking starving artist here)? Are you willing to leverage the work that you love to make money out of it?
Yes, there has to be a market that you can reach (for starters), but to see it as a permanent either/or situation blinds you to the opportunities to have both.
For some people, there is little or no social value in what they want to do for the people they can currently provide it to. So no money to be made. Can they find new people? Move? Expand? Reframe their work? Or can they find something else that will pay the bills that isn’t too difficult and doesn’t require all their energy? And are they ok with that?
It’s a continuum, from someone who earns all they need from what they love, to someone who earns nothing. And every point on that line plays an important part in allowing people to share what they have with others. No one place is ideal, except for the place that feels right to you. And that can change.
Life is too complex for black and white.
Catherine’s comment also got me thinking about career fields. What is ‘sexy’ to one person is not for another (as Catherine said). So people who are lucky enough to find something that generally pays well as sexy (e.g. being a CEO, stock markets – though they are not guarantees of wealth) can find it easier to do sexy, well paid work. Those who find work with lower demand or fewer tangible profits sexy will find it more difficult to get paid well for their sexy work. That just means the latter need to work harder on marketing their social value.
I enjoy the struggle. I truly believe that the duality will be transcended eventually if I have full time control over what I do. Even if I’m not working on sustainable technology or corporate social responsibility, if I’m writing all the time for a living, I consider the duality at least met or partially transcended.
I think web design IS sexy. Guess it’s all in where you’re coming from.
I’m doing The Artist’s Way right now, and it completely teaches the opposite. Haven’t gotten to the practical part of “how” yet…that will be interesting.
The forces to crush creativity is so real- internal and external elements something simply make my creative ideas that I am so passionate about becomes a shitty job- indeed a shitty idea sucks.
None-the-less, I derive more gratification from the self-actualisation of creating my creative shit- despite what they might say. Yet, the compromise often would be, does it pay? A dilemma I frequently face is- what sells, and does that betray my soul…
A creative sexy spirit
john yeo
singapore
I’m not sure. Maybe for some people. I’m in that position right – sex AND cash. There are people who are all sex though. Maybe not a lot but I know some. My gut is that a lot more of us could be there and the new interconnected world will enable that even more.
Hm, well if Hugh’s book does well (which is nearly a given!), he might just transcend his own rule. That is, of course, assuming that writing a book is sexy :).
I’d say that yes, the rule is true for many people, but it doesn’t apply to the significant number of creative people who are famous for their work — and get paid big money for it.
This post is great timing for me. I just wrote about getting paid for your passion on my blog, and whether there *should* be a separation (i.e., making your passion your job can make you less passionate about it), or if we should take any chance we can get to make a career of our passion.
After thinking about it and reading the insightful comments, I realized that the main distinction is between finding a way to “monetize” your passion, and becoming successful for the passionate work you’re doing. The former is riskier, because you may end up making money as a freelance writer, but you really wish you were writing fiction. The latter is ideal — but alas, also the toughest to attain!
The trick is not to view work as either exclusively sex or exclusively cash. While there are some jobs that really are (or quickly become) about paying the bills – the real challenge is to find some tiny part of even those ones that can be about the sex. And strangely enough, by doing so, you tend to make more cash.
It seems to me it’s largely a myth that movie stars and rock stars do not have this to deal with, which is why it’s so cool you mention John Travolta. I know famous people, and they have the same issues…we just don’t want to believe it; we want to believe money and fame fixes everything. It doesn’t. I know rich people who are far from famous but who have tons of money…same deal. Wealth and fame, if anything, exacerbate some problems more than help. Creativity is a worthwhile burden, but it’s still a burden.
I promise: when the division in my life between the pursuit of art-creation and the ‘money-making gig’ is one day not as harsh as it is for me now, that I won’t complain. I promise! I promise! Now make it stop!!
Thanks for the post — this is a book I’ll look out for…
Thanks everyone, I can see we’re not going to resolve this one any time soon! 🙂
Tom — You’ve said it publicly now, you’d better keep your word! 😉