�

i've always resented the phrase "suffer for your art." possibly because it's caused so much posturing and deliberate martyrdom among artists and self-proclaimed intellectual elite -- who are, honestly, the people i usually hang out with, pretentions aside -- who could be genuinely happy people if they'd just let go of the notion that to be artistic or smart, they must suffer.

i've probably never suffered a day in my life. i've been unhappy, depressed, downright miserable (who hasn't, aside from bob barker? maybe pat sajak.) but suffering? the word connotes a pain so deep i can only imagine its significance. and i'm proud that i haven't let myself suffer. i'm proud that i have the strength and persistance to keep myself from suffering and, instead, bettering my circumstances.

but this purposeful suffering? this belief that to acheive depth, one must succumb to absolute hopelessness and misery? i don't buy it. plenty of good art has come out of happiness, more out of observation. none has come out of falsity. suffer for your art, but don't contrive your suffering. more likely than not, that plastic, two-dimentional pain will dilute your art anyway.

so i say, revel in your art. celebrate for it.

or suffer the consequences.