Artists and their own work

I'm always amused when I hear of unexpected timelessness in works of art. By this I mean two things. The first is amply illustrated by Pyotr Ilych Tchaikovsky, one of the most famous composers of the Romantic era from Tsarist Russia. Tchaikovsky was commissioned to compose what is today popularly known as "The 1812 Overture" for the 1880 dedication of the Cathedral of Christ, which had been commissioned way back when the victory of 1812 was still relatively fresh, by Tsar Alexander I. (Sadly, the original was torn down a few decades later by Stalin, in one of the worst acts of cultural vandalism, a hallmark of Marxists then and now. It has, however since been rebuilt.) It was written fairly quickly, and Tchaikovsky himself was not a fan of it, saying that it would be, "Very loud and noisy, but [without] artistic merit, because I wrote it without warmth and without love."

But artists should not be the authoritative commentators on their own work. The 1812 Overture is, of course, one of the most popular titles of the "classical" music repertoire, and made his estate a fair bit of money. Popularity is, of course, not necessarily an indication of merit, but popularity that lasts decades and spans many nations and peoples, ususally indicates a kind of timeless greatness that few works of art are able to achieve. Sometimes this itself is seen as undesireable; there certainly exists a kind of snobbish exclusiveness to art appreciation in which if a work doesn't gain widespread approval of the "masses" then that's seen as indicative of some kind of quality, but that's really just pretentiousness, snobbery and is really quite childish and stupid, in my opinion. Widespread appeal is not something to be shunned, unless you confuse widespread appeal with novelty or faddish appeal. The two things are really quite different. Maybe Tchaikovsky himself thought his work was bourgeois or low-brow, but it was enduringly popular and ultimately a timeless classic.

In fact, much of what we now consider high-brow entertainment from a bygone era was originally low brow entertainment anyway. Shakespeare and Dickens are almost synonymous with "Great English Literature™" but both were wildly entertaining to the masses at the time. In fact, I sometimes wonder if their migration to being percieved as high brow has more to do with the fact that as the culture and language have changed, they've become a bit more difficult to appreciate today, so it appeals to the snob who only wants to like stuff that the bourgeousie doesn't. (Which, really, is the only explanation at all for the advent of "modern art" and all of its associated perambulations.)

A little closer to home, I'm amused by stories of how OMD's best hit, "If You Leave" was literally written as an emergency overnight and became their biggest hit, especially in America. OMD themselves seem to be alternatively annoyed by this and willing to embrace it. But the reality is that that situation isn't too unusual; a lot of bands don't actually much like or appreciate their own biggest hits, the ones that go on to have an enduring audience years or even decades after their release. Sometimes like in the case of Tchaikovsky and OMD, it may be related to how little time they spent on writing it, relatively speaking. Honestly, though, I truly believe that the constraint of not having time or opportunity for overthinking often makes art (or literature or music) much better. This is in line with something that's always stuck with me from Dean Wesley Smith's famous advice about writing at pulp speed and killing the sacred cows of writing. (https://www.deanwesleysmith.com/killing-the-top-ten-sacred-covers-of-publishing-3-rewriting/) Spending more time on something usually has very quickly diminishing returns for improving the quality of something. Or, to use the phrase from the link: "No matter how much  you stir a steaming pile of crap, it's still a steaming pile of crap." If the work is good, it's probably pretty good right out the gate and doesn't need nearly as much rework as you think. If it's not, spending more time on it isn't likely to make it much better.