This might be controversial ...
“With ordinary talent and extraordinary perseverance, all things are attainable.”
~Thomas Foxwell Burton
This question came up in my private membership group and I wanted to share both the question and my response, because I think a lot of people will resonate with it.
The question came from someone who will remain anonymous (as I haven't had time to ask permission). I will also edit her words for her privacy. But basically she said the following:
"I don't like my own abstract paintings. I don’t think I am good enough to do real abstract painting. I think the problem is I am a good technician but I am not a real artist."
She also said that she likes her mixed media work, but doesn't consider that to be 'real art.' So she goes back to trying to make paintings and never enjoys the result.
There are two interesting things that I want tp pick up on here:
1) This idea that some people are 'real' artists and some are not.
2) The idea that art doesn't count unless it meets a certain criteria.
I think these two beliefs cause so much damage - and they're just wrong!
First, let's look at the notion of being a real artist. I believe we are all born with the ability to make unique and interesting art, because art is simply about expression and we can all do that.
I do believe there are aspects of life where talent is a real thing that determines success, such as sport. Some people are born stronger or faster than others and in a competitive realm this matters. No matter how hard I worked, I could never beat Micheal Jordan at basketball. I'm too short, I'm too slow, and I have terrible hand-eye coordination.
But art is different because it's not a competition and there are no rules. In basketball, success is determined when the ball goes in the basket and everyone knows it. In art, success is defined differently for every viewer. Some want art that moves them emotionally. Some want something that matches the sofa. Some want something that replicates real life. And then within those categories there are millions of variations - what moves me might leave you cold. What goes with my sofa might clash with yours.
In short, we have no way of defining success so that we can all agree. Except this: when you love what you make, you won't be alone. Others will love it too. Not everyone - far from it - but some people. And some people is all we need. (There is no artist anywhere in the world who is universally loved).
And that brings me to the second belief lurking in that question. The artist said she loved her own mixed media work but didn't consider it to be 'real painting.' Because of this belief, she dismissed her own natural inclinations. Instead, she tried to force herself to do something that didn't feel good. Not feeling good about what you're making is a huge clue that you are ignoring your own personal talents.
Because - and here's the controversial part - I don't believe in art talent being something some people have and others don't. As I said at the beginning, art is simply expression and we can all do that. BUT, I think we each have an individual unique talent for HOW we express ourselves. Some night be great at drawing accurately, while others are most effective when they work abstractly in paint, and yet others might prefer to work in collage.
The key to success as an artist is to find your unique talent for self-expression. And doing that is easier than you think. It just means listening to yourself. It means noticing your own preferences and honouring them, without ever dismissing them as 'not real art.' Whatever wants to come out of you is real and valid, and we need to see it. I believe the world is richer and better every time an artist expresses something genuine and honest.
So you DO have talent and you'll know you're expressing it when you're happy and fulfilled by what you're doing. Isn't that great? All we have to do is make what we love and the rest takes care of itself.