I think to succeed at art in any capacity/genre you need to have both talent, and raw impressing ideas. They don’t have to be good ideas, necessarily, but they need to impress basically the culture of the times and probably touch on something going on within culture at the time which hasn’t been articulated very well or in the same way as that particular artist’s nouveau presentation.
If you are an artist with technical skill and good ideas that don’t resonate with a bunch of people, you’re SOL on being famous. If you are an artist with technical skill who happens to prefer artistry of a previous period which has already come to vogue, you’re also SOL.
If you want to be a groundbreaking, successful artiste, you have to have a thumb on the pulse of society in some way that really resonates with a large artist. It has little to do with talent. See the duchamp klein references, etc.
It’s not enough to express something meaningful, well. That’s fine and I’m fine with it. I also don’t think you can fake or manufacture what will resonate with people very well; I think part of the success of art in that way has a lot to do with people presenting new and fresh perspectives.
I think the author is frustrated because she feels she is talented but not in vogue.
Well, honey, it takes more than that.