Art is one of the few things that make humans truly human. The joy of creation is a characteristic that is only seen in us.

So, it’s only natural that many of us would be inclined to create.

Especially with the establishment of social media, people post their art online for the world to see. 

But with so much content, there’s no way all of it is going to be viewed. Some videos may only get fifty views, some posts may only get five likes. 

Does the number of people seeing art correlate to its importance? 

Of course not. That’s an asinine thing to say—art is art, even if it was destroyed immediately after it was created.

There is no such thing as “unknown” art because its existence will always be known, even if only by one person. The creator didn’t close their eyes while making it, never officially seeing it. 

I think the idea of “art is only good if it’s popular and seen by others” is a bit of a dilemma to get around. 

Of course, the reason art is so important is because it’s a way of expression to others. It conveys feelings and thoughts to people. But, on the other hand, it’s the creator’s medium. It’s their art, and they have to enjoy it. 

Think back to your old single-player world in Minecraft—long since abandoned and lost to time. The builds you created on it are considered art. But only you saw it, so is it really art? 

It reminds me of the popular phrase, “If a tree falls in a forest, did it even make a sound?” This quote holds a lot of the same sentiments and fears a lot of artists have today.

A lot of people want their work to be viewed by others, but I think there’s also a lot of importance in people, just making things because they want to. 

This article I’m writing is heavily inspired by “Art for No One”, a video essay made by Jacob Geller. Which talks about this very idea. I had my own ideas about it, and because I’m an annoying teenager, I had to share my opinions. 

Think about all the lost media that have been resurfaced. Art uncovered by archeologists. Do you think those people expected their art to be marveled in museums or online? Probably not. 

Of course, it’s more complex now, but people don’t create things for the sole purpose of being observed by historians decades later. 

Vincent Van Gogh was a renowned artist who created works that people still reference today. But in his life, no one bought his work, and no one even liked it. It was only after he died that people started to notice him. 

In a way, Van Gogh made art for no one—not in the sense no one can enjoy it—but in the sense that no one truly saw it. 

There has to be a balance. A dichotomous relationship between making art meant for others, and art meant for no one. Not to sound like a bad self-help book, but you are allowed to be average. Not everything you do is meant to be reveled by others as your “magnum opus”. That sounds like an easy way to get burnt out.

It’s okay to make mediocre and unfinished art, as long as you enjoy it and nobody’s getting hurt. Ultimately, who really cares?