For the Love of It

A while ago I had a conversation with a fellow artist about her art and she made the comment that she wasn't professional because she hasn't taken any classes. This made me start to wonder. What do people think makes an artist "professional"? I typically go back to the idea that if you make your living from something; that is your profession. So to me if your "day job" is creating art, then you would seem to be a professional artist. Others qualify the term professional by experience, quality, or education. All of these qualifications, including the "day job" one, may work to classify someone as a professional artist, but why would someone want that title anyway?

We have this idea that a professional artist is, by nature, better or of higher quality than the amateur artist. While it is unlikely that an artist who depends on income from their art would survive very long if their work is of poor quality. It is just as unlikely that an artist would inherently create quality work by virtue of doing the same thing for 20 years. So I think the real question one should ask is, "What is the difference between the 'professional' and the 'amateur'?".

An amateur is a devotee, or an admirer (Merriam-Webster). So an amateur artist is someone does their art for the love of it. Not for fame, wealth, or anything else. So whether that art is their profession or not is irrelevant. I would take an amateur over anyone who treats their art as "just a job". And I think you would too.