Artists Who Base Their Work on Their Life

Hey Guys,

Artists have always based their work on either personal life or things that have happened close to them but there is a difference between basing your work on your life and completely immersing your life in your work.

Now, for a start let's define the role of an artist. I am not just talking about painters such as Van Gogh who immersed his life into his work. I'm also talking about artists as in singers, musicians, writers and even Directors.

An example of a singer who immersed their life into their work is Amy Winehouse. Now I know there is a lot of controversy over her music and the way she lived, and yes I get she made major mistakes that eventually led to her downfall, but this is what I'm trying to explain. We all have history, and a past: Let's say we've all made mistakes.

I'm not trying to put people off having their lives and work connect, it is a very powerful thing to do, but very dangerous at the same time, as Winehouse did you can start to take it too far and even start searching and creating trouble in your life to work with. In her first album she speaks about failed relationships and friendships, she also speaks of how she had a drug habit, in the second album she speaks of her demise and how she does search for trouble and how her problems became more serious. Then she fell dramatically and it killed her work, killed her visions and then finally, unfortunately killed her.

As I said I'm not trying to put people off basing their work on their lives, it's when their lives are then based on their work; and Amy Winehouse did try and turn her life around, she quit the drugs and although she did not do it the correct way and it was a little too late, she wrote the start of her first album based on the facts that she wanted to change and how she wanted to make herself better. The third 'Hidden Tracks' album is one of the most beautiful albums I've heard in quite some time and each time I hear it, by the end I am bound to be in tears, half of joy and half of upset and fear.

All artists, classing the role of a director as an artist, want to be able to effect people and make people who are suffering, or have suffered from the same problems as they are showing feel better, or make them think and of course, me wanting to be a director, I do want to add personal happenings of my life to my films. But how far do you take it? How much of your own life would you add? If you're too much involved then your life and work collide. Yet if you're not involved enough then it feels empty and has no meaning behind what is being portrayed.

A director whose old work used to be based a little bit on his life is Tim Burton, his themes use to be about main characters loneliness and they would always have some sort of resemblance toward Burton. He would use dark colours and spirals to simulate the downward spiral of a character. His work has changed as he has become more involved with his wife Helena Bonner-Carter and his work has become slightly more colourful, yet with little flashes of his old life and how he got to the way he is today.

So In a way basing your work on your life will get you more noticed than if you just work for the sake of it but it is when the life is based on the work, or the work and the life both get tangled and cause problems. The thing is, even if this does eventually happen, isn't it more the work that gets attention than the person? The work will live on forever, so if you base it on your life and give it a more personal touch then if you think about it, you will therefore metaphorically 'live forever' and isn't this what everyone wants? Not just artists.

Stay safe,

Matt