in a world shaped by social media, it’s time we learned to value Art not just as content, but as a viable career.
For the last decade or so, the Academy Awards have been a matter of contention in popular media. Whether a catalyst for fierce debates over alleged ‘snubs’ or the arbiter of each year’s most fashionable red carpet stylings, the Oscars are among Hollywood’s most anticipated and revered accolades.
Following the 98th Academy Awards, much of the recent media buzz has been making quips about one Timothée Chalamet and his latest film, Marty Supreme, going home sans the coveted golden statuette. Indeed, much of the night was spent mocking Chalamet for his controversial remarks about ballet and opera.
“Security is extremely tight tonight,” ceremony-host Conan O’Brien said in his monologue, joking that there were serious “concerns about attacks from both the opera and ballet communities.”
I’m quite certain that, by now, most of our readers have heard Timothée Chalamet’s “shots fired” against these classical art forms.
“I don’t want to be working in ballet, or opera,” the young actor declared in a recent recorded conversation for Variety, labelling these revered performances as “things where it’s like, ‘Hey, keep this thing alive, even though, like, no one cares about this anymore’.”
Needless to say, his hasty follow-up, offering “respect to the ballet and opera people out there,” failed to reverse the damage. Critical figures in these art forms have responded: Prima Ballerina Misty Copeland rebuked his comments, emphasising that there is “a reason that the opera and ballet have been around for over 400 years,” and that “[Chalamet] wouldn’t be an actor and have the opportunities he has as a movie star” if it weren’t for opera and ballet and their relevance in that medium.
London’s Royal Ballet and Opera captioned a social media post by reminding Chalamet that each night, “thousands of people gather for ballet and opera. For the music. For the storytelling. For the sheer magic of live performance.” The Seattle Opera offered discounted tickets for its production of Carmen for its audience members using the promotion code ‘Timothée.’
LOSS OF INTEREST OR LACK OF INVESTMENT?
Yet, what these large organisations must reckon with is that ticket sales have been dwindling over the last decade; fewer stage shows are being produced, and many workers across these disciplines are finding themselves out of work. These realities inevitably raise concerns about the relevance of traditional art forms in our modern world. Can artists still prosper in the 21st-century? What about the 22nd?
If you were to ask me, the answer is a resounding yes.
As a student of history, I would argue that artists have contributed just as much to historiography as chroniclers or historians themselves. Through their lens, whether that be lyric, dance, or physical mediums, we are gifted the ability to bring the past to life. Recall Breugel’s The Tower of Babel or the School of Athens by Raphael, transforming distant abstractions of our history into something tangible. Oscar Wilde’s words, “life imitates art far more than art imitates life,” capture this idea perfectly.
In today’s world, it feels more important than ever to turn to creatives, weaving their passion and joie de vivre into the everyday. Art, in its innumerable forms, reminds us of the beauty and sacredness of being alive. Marc Chagall, a Franco-Russo artist distinguished by his whimsical, absurdist style, believed that “in art, just as in life, everything is possible if it is based on love.”
Just as it was born from times of prosperity and joy, art has often been born out of hardship and despair, perhaps for no reason other than its use as an instrument of “letting the light in.” But in today’s fast-paced, capital-forward society – wherein social media, market trends, and financial pressures so often dictate our lives – is art still enough to redeem us?
While I believe that art would survive even the most abhorrent apocalypse (such as the destruction of civilization and whatnot), I also believe that for art to truly prosper, it must be loved, cherished, and supported by our society. Perhaps it is more productive to view Chalamet’s earlier, somewhat insensitive remark not as mere ignorance, but as a critical reminder from the younger generation – the very audience these art forms must engage to survive – that more must be done to sustain cultural production.
THE PROFESSIONALISATION OF THE ARTIST
When we are constantly fed the image of the so-called ‘struggling artist’, the notion of pursuing art as a career can be daunting, even impossible for many. Before the mid-twentieth century, art training was largely informal, consisting of apprenticeships, ateliers, and certificates. While technique certainly mattered, art as a discipline had not yet been incorporated into the system of higher education.
In the post-war period, this system swelled to the point that not only could rich men receive a university degree, but art was soon institutionalised as a member of such distinguished studies. The 1960s–most often remembered as a period of artistic liberation, unconformity, and radicalism–was also an era of professionalisation.
Universities increasingly positioned themselves as the custodians of cultural innovation, a process that goes hand-in-hand with artistic production. This expansion of the universities into the art world had a myriad of consequences, not the least of which was the inception of the MFA (Master of Fine Arts), wherein legitimacy as an artist, performer, writer, what-have-you, could now be conferred, ranked, and even purchased.
By the late 80s, collectives such as the Young British Artists enabled creatives to garner a kind of celebrity status and branding, and their work circulated through the media. Visibility was synonymous with value. In the United States, such an idea was not entirely foreign; geniuses such as Warhol or Baryshnikov had been elevated by institutions and public recognition for decades.
And thus, the notion of a modern artist – and a successful one at that – was fully established. Art schools promised to actualise this notion, offering legitimacy by proximity. Yet access to these institutions is no longer determined by merit alone, as it once was in apprenticeship systems; instead, the cost of entry has become egregious. According to the BFAMFAPhD, only about 10 percent of American arts graduates are able to secure a living from their work. Alongside many young people in today’s economy, many leave school utterly drowning in debt.
THE NECESSITY OF ART IN THE AGE OF ALGORITHMS
As mentioned earlier, it cannot be ignored that younger generations are drifting away from traditional art forms, with fewer theatre and dance productions taking centre stage–especially when set against the dominance of film, television, and, perhaps most troublingly, social media. Is it true that we are just ‘keeping this thing alive, even though, like, no one cares about this anymore, ” as Chalamet so clearly believes?
In times of drought, perhaps it is inevitable that artistry becomes severed from its traditional values – such as integrity, spirituality, and emotion – in favour of capital and profit, as we often see exemplified in the film and music industry. In a similar vein, could it be that opera and ballet, by resisting commodification, are simply too rarefied for modern audiences to fully embrace?
I think the answer lies in a restructuring of the way we consume art. Many of the responses to Chalamet’s inflammatory comment argued that one art form should never be judged against another. This idea goes beyond online feuding: it emphasises creativity as a pillar of culture. Art thrives when it is seen, heard, and cherished. When artists support artists–indeed, when artists love other artists–beauty will follow. Its survival depends not just on the creators themselves but on a society willing to sustain it.
By engaging with all art forms, we not only support the careers of individual artists but also preserve the stories, emotions, and passions that eternalise our society. And, if nothing else, perhaps we can all agree that when Chalamet is finally awarded with an Academy Award, he might consider attending in a tutu and slippers.