"I feel like I've learned a lesson... which is that the work's all that matters. I should not be trying to be an advocate for change. If I feel like there's a lack of vibrancy in the art form, then I damn well better deliver it myself, as opposed to bemoaning the fact that it's not there."
-- Michael John LaChiusa in today's NYTimes profile of him.
I've noticed an interesting binary opposition in my time in the blogosphere. People somehow seem to think that advocating for change in an art form publicly and actually creating said change in your artistic work are two activities that are mutually exclusive. I personally disagree. I think that having this blog to complain in day in and day out has made me a better and more creative artist, personally. But I know a lot of artists who look askance at blogging as a waste of time and energy, and I usually get at least one comment or e-mail a month that says "who gives a shit what you think, go out and direct a show!" as if it were that easy.
Anyway... interesting argument from someone whose work is regularly produced. Your thoughts?