I agree that artists struggle to make their work commercially viable, but I strongly disagree with the continuum concept.
The definition of a continuum is a sequence in which incremental changes can be almost imperceptible, but the two ends are drastically different.
Take, for example, the cold to hot continuum. You can move from cold to hot imperceptibly. A degree at a time. Lobster in the cooking pot. But the two ends are vastly different; freezing cold vs boiling hot. Diametrically opposite.
That does not apply to art →business. They are not opposites. Steve Jobs and Apple. Cirque du Soleil. Just 2 examples, but there’s a world of examples where art and business combine very well. They are not opposites.
I do think there IS a continuum that trips up creatives, but it’s not Art → Business. It’s Poverty → Profit. Two ends that are drastically different.
A lot of artists think their art is somehow nobler or more pure/honest/untainted/etc if they eschew profit and “sacrifice” themselves to make it. Not true, of course, but it’s a common belief spouted by creatives.
(The head-trash behind that thought process is an entire article unto itself.)
The one thing I agree with loudly is that work needs an audience. With over 7 billion people on the planet and roughly using the Internet, it’s never been easier to find that audience. But the desire to do so has to be present first.
Thanks for a great read… :)