Comments on: What’s Age Got to Do with It?

By: Shaideneuse

Shaideneuse — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 02:10:57 +0000

I think that the obsession with the age of an artist has to do with the amount of work they will be able to complete before they die (assuming, of course, that they have an average life expectancy…whatever that is these days). If you like the artist, you will naturally want the opportunity to see more of their work. If they’re younger, there’s more time to make more of it (assuming they do it regularly) and therefore more will be made available for the happy consumer. Pretty much the idea of instant gratification, which is what everyone’s ALL ABOUT these days (so says everyone else who’s “not”. The world is confusing).

By: Brit Mandelo

Brit Mandelo — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:42:32 +0000

I intentionally don’t talk about my age just because of that crap. There is nothing that irks me more than someone being “impressed” by my work because I’m young. So what? The only reason I’m where I am now is because I started studying craft with serious intensity at a young age, too. It’s just a matter of practice. That “one million words of shit” thing seems pretty accurate to me; doesn’t matter if you start in your forties or your teens.

By: Steve Buchheit

Steve Buchheit — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:32:02 +0000

The age code is also used by perfectionist grandmothers to use against their grandchildren. “See, he/she made his first million before he was out of high school. What’s holding you back?”

On the other end it’s used as a “not too late to do this” kind of argument.

By: Justine

Justine — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:21:40 +0000

Kelly: Hahahaha. Sorry. I’m just laughing at the idea that I can control the internets. I mean, I wish. That would be awesome. First thing I’d do is make all the racist and sexist trolls either go away or reform their evil harrassing ways.

Thanks so much for introducing your family to my books! Much appreciated.

By: Jon

Jon — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 05:18:33 +0000

@AliceB: I think you’re referring to this article:

http://www.gladwell.com/2008/2008_10_20_a_latebloomers.html

(Which may well have wound up incorporated into Outliers, I haven’t read that yet.)

By: Sherwood

Sherwood — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 05:14:05 +0000

Patrick O’Brian got published when he was a teen, but nothing was successful until the Aubrey/Maturin series, which he began publishing at age 55 . . . and then took ten years to become successful.

(I keep telling myself this.)

By: Herenya

Herenya — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 04:20:08 +0000

I find ages of artists interesting. Part of it is being a writer myself, and hence finding information about published writers fascinating. I like knowing that some manage to get somewhere with a story they started writing in high school, or that some don’t publish anything until much later in life. It gives me hope.
Another part of it is background information, wanting to place an artist’s art into some sort of context – what generation they belong to, where they were at in their lives. I find it amazing to think that there are people my age (or younger) who have careers as singers, or actors, or writers, and to compare what their lives must be like with my life (unemployed student).

I agree that art should be judged for its own merits, not for the circumstances of its creator, but I think the circumstances can add to one’s appreciation/understanding of the art. Or maybe it is just simple human curiosity with people, wanting to know about person behind the art.

By: Joey-la

Joey-la — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 03:11:36 +0000

hi
I agree with everything that you are saying, and I have sometimes found that people will think that a piece of art is good purely because the person who created it was young. Take S.E Hinton’s ‘The Outsiders’ she wrote it when she was 18 or something and the year before got a D on her report card for writing. But I have read the book and personally did not think it was fantastic and I think that people only think it is great becuase she was young. Really, her prime writing years were when she was very young because since then there has not been very much from her since then. Okay, I take that back – she has written eight more books, but then only other one I have heard of is Rumble Fish.
I couldn’t care less how old someone is when they the create something the only thing that matters is if what they have made is good or not!

By: AliceB

AliceB — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:45:15 +0000

There’s this theory that “real” genius happens when someone is young. Like Mozart. Or Mendelssohn. And so we’re so excited to see someone young succeed because we’re witnessing the real thing — exotic and unusual. But if you look at lives of geniuses, that isn’t necessarily so — geniuses exhibit their genius at lots of different ages.*

Picasso was brilliant early. Cézanne later. But there’s no question Cézanne was a genius — he had to work at it to get there. Like many writers. Some writers hit a nerve early. Some become better and better with each new piece. I kind of like the second version — it gives me hope.

(And then there’s the idea of genius suggested by Elizabeth Gilbert in her TED talk, which is that genius is really some gremlin outside of the artist’s control. You have to do your work, and sometimes the genius shows up and sometimes it doesn’t, and there’s really no point sweating it. I kind of like that idea, too.)

*I think I’m stealing this from a review I read of Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell — although I haven’t read the book. But the notion stuck with me.

By: El

El — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:33:36 +0000

I like context, I like meta, I find myself fascinated by the intersection between art and life. I don’t argue that others should share this fascination, but it entertains me constantly. Age is a part of that; it’s not necessarily *important* but it’s *interesting*.

By: Kelly

Kelly — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 22:42:28 +0000

Is this opinion about age and artists the reason that there is no place on the Internet where you can find out your age, Justine? I agree with your premise that genius(?) in art should not be associated with age; however, I am interested in the age of the artist, especially an author, so that I can more fully understand their frame of reference/experience. It’s not an obsession, but it is of interest to me. I’m one of your older fans (late 50’s) but that’s good because I buy multiple copies of your books for my daughter and granddaughter.

By: Q

Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:47:29 +0000

This is excellent.

By: christy

christy — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:43:53 +0000

I don’t know. I think maybe one can find the author/artist’s age or some other outside factor interesting or notable without it necessarily being a qualifier.

Like, I love this book. I love it no matter what. On a separate note, the author was really young/old/illiterate/homeless/in Antarctica when he wrote it. He wrote it out freehand on Hello Kitty stationary. He used ketchup as ink. Isn’t that something?

It definitely could sound like you’re saying, wow, this is a good book for something written in ketchup ink. And it may be challenging to find a way to phrase it that makes it clear that’s not what you mean. But it still could be that you appreciate both the work and its circumstances separately.

By: anne

anne — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:39:24 +0000

I think I must agree, the whole age thing is irritating at best. of course, it’s cool when someone writes and they’re “young”, because …well, because they’re creating at an early age, they’re focused, etc. It’s cool when someone (Grandma Moses?) creates later in life, because it’s cool that they’re still creating, not giving into that “too old” idea.
By the by, love your books, love your blog!