Thank you to everyone who joined me and Linda Mann for this fascinating conversation about how she built, and is still building, her career as a professional artist. First, some samples of her work (all of which you can also see and purchase on her website):
Here are some moments from the conversation that particularly stuck with me:
1. Not conceiving of fine art as a plausible career path at first
Linda: “When I was in high school, I was the artist and I took all the art classes. But then when I started looking at colleges and I saw what kind of art was being produced at the time, I didn’t like any of it. Because as you know, I’m a realist artist and what was popular then was much more either abstract or conceptual or much more loose. And I just wasn’t interested. So after I decided that I didn’t want to be an artist, I just never thought about it again because I thought I couldn’t be.
Gena: Because that’s what it is to be an artist. In our day and age, at least. It’s to do this abstract stuff.
Linda: Yeah, that’s not of interest to me. Therefore, there’s no career path here. And I wasn’t informed enough to know that I could have done it anyway. Or done some research and found out. Because sure, that kind of art still existed back then, you know.
Gena: But it’s off the beaten path. Like you really would have had to find it or find someone to mentor you on it and figure out, has anybody monetized it and how are they doing that? And is that path available to me? Those aren’t kind of questions that your parents help you ask or that you ask by default.
2. From industrial design back to fine art
Linda: I ended up getting a job in industrial design and it was sort of cool and it was fun, but it really wasn’t something that I really felt deep down like… I was contributing much to. Like I had nothing to say. And I started branching out and I was taking some classes in graphic design in my spare time and then I started studying fashion design and pattern making and always circling around an art-adjacent, aesthetically-oriented career, but never even thinking about going back to being a fine artist.
And it wasn’t until an assignment in my fashion design class where we had to go to a museum and sketch costumes for a fashion exhibit that it occurred to me that, you know, I love drawing, and I had not done it for so long.
And it was that moment where I decided I was going to quit my job, and I went back to art school and… took classes here and there.
3. Reconnecting with realism, and making it her own
Linda: I thought that realist art only existed in very old museums. And I might love this stuff, but it didn’t exist anymore. So it was surprising to me to see that people were actually doing that… now. But a lot of stuff, it wasn’t that I immediately loved it because a lot of stuff that was presented as realist art to me was very boring. It was just copies of stuff you see in museums or was sort of a trite or like a wine bottle on a table with some fruit. It was boring to me.
So I did have to invent the kind of realism that I found exciting. And that didn’t exist, necessarily. But at the time, I was just very excited to learn that I can actually learn how to draw. And the thing I’m drawing looks like the thing I’m drawing.
…And the thing is that my work has actually changed in the last four or five years and has gotten much more colorful. I think in the beginning when I started painting, I was, without realizing it, emulating a lot of the old masters because they were who I admired. But I think there was a point where I painted this really colorful, beautiful vase and I thought, wow, I’m allowed to paint color… It doesn’t have to look like an old master painting in a museum, it can be me. And that’s when I felt like my paintings really started to look like me.
4. How Instagram has catalyzed Linda’s artistic ambition
Linda: For about, I don’t know, 20 years, I was working on these paintings and selling them through my, I had a website, sort of a very amateur kind of website. And I would sell paintings over my website, you know, now and then. Some years it was more, some years it was less.
And so I had a constant stream of sales, but I didn’t still think of myself as having a career, because I wasn’t in a gallery and I wasn’t really out in the world very much. I was sort of at home doing what I’m doing.
And art can be very isolating in a way, just by yourself a lot, or at least I was. And it wasn’t until five years ago that I hired an art career consultant. Because I was just tired of not having connection with the outside world and having people see my work. And that’s when I got on Instagram.
And that’s when things started to take off. Because suddenly there are millions of people. It wasn’t millions right away. It took a few years to get to that. But eventually it was millions of people seeing… my work. And comparing that with just sitting in my studio every day by myself, my eyes were opened that there was a bigger world out there. And it made me want to have people see my work and made me, I started entering competitions and I started contacting galleries and there were people I met on Instagram.
And I got lots of really nice comments from people looking at my work. And I had this sense that I was—not so much like a popularity contest, which is what Instagram can feel like sometimes. Like, wow, this many people looked at my work. But feeling like these are, many of them were artists and they were hungry for this kind of information. So I thought, well, they were like me. So it felt really good to explain that art could be what you wanted it to be.
[From later in interview] Gena: do you think you would have the career that you have, or anything resembling it, in a world without social media or even without the internet?
Linda: I think not. I mean, it’s hard to imagine now without it. And, I mean, just to know that at any time a gallery could just see my work and see all of my work and see details of it. It’s something that just would never have happened. So I think it’s great.
4. Reflecting on what drew her to still life, as opposed to portraiture or landscapes
Linda: I had nothing to say [with portraiture]... I could just put a face in the middle of a piece of paper and have it look just like the face. But to me, that isn’t a piece of art. That’s a study. And I had no idea, similarly to industrial design… or fashion design. There was nothing I wanted to say with portraiture. So it was the inconvenience, and I didn’t quite know how to make a painting out of it.
And then with still life, especially when I had a young child, it was always there. Like, I always go back to it.There was nothing I wanted to say with portraiture. So it was the inconvenience [of having to hire models], and I didn’t quite know how to make a painting out of it. And then with still life, especially when I had a young child, it was always there….
Gena: There are objects. There are always objects around.
Linda: They’re in my studio waiting for me. And it wasn’t like a model that I would have to hire for a specific time. And I found that it suited me. There’s something about still life that’s very contemplative. And it’s unlike a landscape. A landscape is kind of far away. And you don’t control it so much unless you start inventing things. And a portrait, I didn’t know what to do with it. It was more about man’s character. And I think I was more interested in just seeing. And with a still life, it’s something we’re all familiar with. It’s something on a table in front of you. And it’s very intimate and close. And it just suited me to be able just to study things without their moving and to observe.
Gena: But also arrange them, is part of what I hear. You have control of the scene.
Linda: That’s crucial, actually. I’m glad you brought that up. Yes, I am arranging these things. So the still life, it was something that I could make, this little world that I could completely control and I could study it.
And there are two things about a still life. One for me is that it looks super real. And the other is that it’s designed… It’s something that I have structured and created to reflect a sense of order and beauty and dynamism that I give to it.
But for me, if it didn’t look real, it wouldn’t be like a world I could step into. I couldn’t live in it. In a way, I live in my paintings. And so both with that capturing the reality and organizing it, the still life just really seemed to work for me.
5. What is it Linda “has to say” with her still life paintings?
Linda: My paintings never tell a story. You know, it’s funny. Somebody once reviewed a painting of mine many years ago and they told this story and I thought, oh, that’s fascinating. It’s not what I would say. Maybe I was thinking that, and I didn’t know I was thinking that.
But there isn’t a story. There’s no narrative. But what it is, is something that, it’s hard to explain… When I was growing up, life seemed kind of chaotic. I had a difficult childhood in a lot of ways. And going into my room and drawing was a way to be organized and make the world… And I still feel like that a little bit in that I can, not that I’m escaping into my work from unhappiness, because I’m happy, but it’s that… in making these arrangements, I am making a structure that feels really like fascinating to me. I can decide where the eye goes and I can have something that is the focal point and I can have it be exciting and I can have it look so real that it’s just sort of cool. And I can take out all the unimportant things and just add the important things.
And if something I’m painting has an angle that I don’t like, I can paint it differently. Or if there’s a color that doesn’t work, I change it… although I’m a realist, I’m not a slave to reality. I want it to look real so you experience it as being possible.
6. Why Linda doesn’t think of herself as “creative,” and never waits to be inspired
Linda: I never really think of myself as a creative person… Because I don’t have an idea in the night like, oh, I have an inspiration for doing this idea. That’s not how I work.
It’s more like I might see my scarf and I think, I like those colors. And I’ll go put the scarf on the table and think, what goes with that scarf? And then I’ll grab something else. And how should I like that? So it’s more like it’s a craft in a way, and it’s hard work… And I guess I’ve often, in my mind… I think, well, creative means like you’re inspired and you just do these crazy wild things… And that’s never how it’s worked
for me. It’s more like I have to build this stuff.
Gena: …Yeah, we have these artist archetypes. In the middle of the night, they’re struck by an image that they now must realize; the spontaneity and the chaos…
Linda: Yeah, that’s a very attractive image.
Gena: There’s a romanticism to it. But if you actually look at the day-to-day experience of making art, there’s so much discipline. There’s so much practice and repetition and iteration on a skill, on an arrangement.
Linda: It’s like, you can’t wait to be inspired. I can’t tell you how scary it is to go in the studio many days… I have to make myself go in there. And I’ve got a certain routine I have to go through, like putting the paint on the palette and getting my supplies. And like I get into this mode. And the night before, I write down something easy to do… I might notice that area needs to be a little bluer. You know, something really simple. And I write it down. So the first thing the next day, I have a very clear step that requires no creativity.
7. How this kind of discipline is different from the “discipline” of doing work you don’t love
Gena: I noticed you saying… it’s hard for you to start. It’s often scary to first go into the studio, which is such a relatable experience for so many of us. It’s different, I imagine, from when you were describing your job in industrial design, and how… you had to make yourself do it. It’s that same wording: you have to make yourself do it. How is it different, on the inside?
Linda: I have the evidence of many, like, 30 years of knowing that when I do get in there, I’m happy as can be until I have to stop for lunch. And then I don’t want to stop for lunch because I know as soon as I stop for lunch…
Gena: Oh, you’ve got to rev up again and get back.
Linda: But with the industrial design… I wasn’t really convinced that the thing I was doing was any good. I wasn’t sure it was good or not. So there was that having to make myself do it, but there wasn’t like the reward at the end.
Gena: Right. Like the whole thing through and through was just a manual kind of override of boredom, of disinterest. It’s not like you were revving up for something that would then nurture you and reward you with meaning and beauty.
Linda: Yeah.
Gena: That’s a really important distinction that I think takes a while for a lot of ambitious people to grok. It’s not that once you find the thing you love, you’ll have an easy time and you won’t struggle and you won’t need discipline and it’ll all just feel easy. It’s that it’ll be worth it, and how it’ll be worth it. It’s very hard to understand in the abstract before you’ve experienced it… You will be able to actually trust… that you will love this once you start.
Linda: And it’s not always a total struggle. I mean, if I haven’t painted in a week, it’s harder. If I painted just yesterday, it’s easier…. There’s always this hump, let’s say.
Linda’s ambitions to scale and monetize
Linda: When you asked me to do this talk, one of my first thoughts was, well, I don’t have a career yet. Which is ridiculous, because I do. But there’s so much more… so much more I want to do. I want to get a better gallery. And I want to have more collectors, and I want my prices to go up, and I want to earn money. That’s something I didn’t used to think about, but I really do want to earn money now… and I want to teach more. So there’s a lot of stuff that I still want to do that I feel like I need to work on.
To support Linda’s ambitions and bring some order, color, and light to your art collection, visit her website and subscribe to her Substack. Or follow her on Instagram to watch and learn from her in real time.
