ART PHIL 7: Competition In Art

The entrepreneur and investor Peter Thiel in his book Zero To One states that competition is for losers. I sometimes thought that competition was a corrosive thing and that I was above it. After all, with my art I create my own world and that world is nobody else’s but my own. I am not competing with anyone. 

But what is competition and is it a bad thing?

Within the realm of art and the art world, one could objectively and in a plain vanilla black and white way come to the not unreasonable conclusion that it is a highly competitive space. And along those lines I guess one could look at competition in two different ways;

  1. To view competition as a healthy and positive thing. Dare I say, as something inspirational. That it is used as fuel to be not just a better and more driven and committed artist. But also to be a better person; a less self absorbed and narcissistic person who better understands other artists and what they are trying to convey rather than to just be stuck, entangled and rutted in their own world. 
  1. To view competition as a threat resulting in chronic envy whenever an artist, especially an artist you may know, becomes very successful while you find that success is always eluding you. You begin to develop negative and destructive thoughts along the lines of believing that you deserve success just as much simply because you believe yourself to be a unique artist and that “mediocre or bad art should not be rewarded”. This mindset is a one way ticket to terminal misery. It is a veritable road to perdition. 

I think that being too fixated on the morality/fairness aspect of the art world is deadly; it is like drinking from a cup of slow acting poison. What is “bad/good art” anyway? As I said, getting into the shoes and mind of an artist you do not rate and whose work you think “doesn’t cut it” is far healthier than explicitly condemning them and lamenting “how unfair” and “how full of sh*t” the art world is. 

We all have insecurities and having some insecurities can be good. It keeps you on your toes and ignites a fire in the soul. Too much comfort often leads to lethargy and inertia. However, being submerged in insecurities to the point where it is toxic and unhealthy, instilling bad vibes and negative energy, is not a good thing. 

By Nicholas Peart

12th August 2026

©All Rights Reserved 

Image: manfredrichter

ART PHIL 6: The Right To Make “Bad Art”

The art critic David Sylvester said that, “Artists must be allowed to go through bad periods! They must be allowed to do bad work! They must be allowed to get in a mess! They must be allowed to have dud experiments! They must also be allowed to have periods where they repeat themselves in a rather aimless, fruitless way before they can pick up and go on.”

Sylvester said this all in 1969. Yet, I think today, in the age of social media, his words are more important then ever. Social media platforms like Instagram can be useful vehicles for making connections and sharing our artwork and processes. However, it can sometimes breed in us a rigid perfectionism; that we must showcase the best of what we have to offer and never be encouraged to fail and take risks. This duality of what is good and bard art is unnecessary and quite destructive. Similarly is being too precious to the point where it kind of functions as a straitjacket and we don’t realise the whole totality of everything that we have to offer.

The right to make “bad art” is almost paradoxically a very emancipating, inspiring and edifying thing. To the point where it renders perfectionism a cul-de-sac.

By Nicholas Peart

11th August 2026

(c)All Rights Reserved

Image: photosforyou

ART PHIL 5: Being Misunderstood

As an artist I’ve come to the realisation that I now care less regarding whether I and/or my work is “understood”. It is of little to no importance to me since I do not paint or create works with a primary overarching mission to “be understood”. In fact, there is nothing to understand in my paintings. I don’t have any “goal” nor am I trying to make any kind of statement. If I have to say anything in relation to my work it is what I’ve said many times in the past; “I paint my feelings”. Or, more broadly, I paint my inner invisible world. And my paintings are visible artefacts of this invisible world. Thus my paintings are meant to be “felt” more than “understood”.

There are artists I admire, but there is no single artist that really influences me since essentially my core root/source is my inner world. Take the artist Jackson Pollock, for example. His paintings are not meant to be understood and its a fool’s errand to attempt to understand them. For me, his paintings are 100% about feeling. The duality of him as a person and his processes of creating are for me all about energy and feeling. No other artist matches Pollock here. And its a very permanent, primordial and universal thing; transcending the parameters of space and time.

By Nicholas Peart

10th August 2026

(c)All Rights Reserved

Image: Couleur