On the largely computer professional forum that is the Internet, I have encounted many anti-artistic attitudes. As someone who's been both a computer professional and an artist, I know for a fact that one does not need to have an anti-artistic attitude in order to be an adequate engineer. In 1920s, technology and art coexisted side by side. There were Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Nikolai Tesla; there were also Louis Armstrong, Scott Fitzgerald and Edna St. Vincent-Millay. In 1920s America became the undisputed leader of the world. It did so by tapping into genius both artistic and engineering. In recent times the attitudes were less favorable. In 1960s there was respect for the arts, but also lots of anti-capitalist agitation. In 1980s and 1990s there was a technological boom but no value for the arts. Both were half-right. It is right to affirm both arts and technology and wrong to attack either. So I seek to bring back the attitudes of 1920s on this matter. Once again, there is value for both arts and technology. Not only do both constitute a contribution to the civilization, but they can also work together. 1920s produced beautiful architecture such as the Chrysler Building and magnificent machinery such as the Packard. In both cases there was art and engineering involved. Can artists and engineers get along? If they can co-exist in the same pursuit, then there is no reason why they would not be able to work with one another. The problem is the belief held by many in engineering that art is impractical, even narcissistic. In fact there is nothing at all impractical about the arts. Arts find practical implications in many things, such as once again architecture and machinery as well as interior decoration. As for narcissism, that is ridiculous. The artists that I have known were more, not less, compassionate than the average person, and I've also seen in them much greater humility that we see in people who think that only their pursuit – engineering – matters and that everyone else is a fool, a lunatic or a bum. So I advocate better relations between artists and engineers. Both contribute, and in the best cases both contribute together. Let artists and engineers work together to produce beautiful architecture and machinery. And save some time for poetry, good music and classical painting at that.
First of all, full disclosure: I'm an artist myself. Second, to answer the question can artists and engineers get along, the answer is yes - they can and do get along. That goes for whether we're talking about fine artists or graphic designers. I think where some people - including some artists - get the view that art is narcissistic is when artists choose to create art for art's sake or for artists' sake, instead of the broader public. It's important to note that this is a decision that artists make - not others - so the artists have to take responsibility for that decision. Personally, I don't see this as a problem for the arts - artists are always going to keep pushing the envelope on their media and they should keep pushing and expanding their limits. What I don't care for is the superficial political tripe that masquerades as art these days. I get that art is in the eye of the beholder, but I don't consider that shallow, tedious pap art. Perhaps, I got spoiled on novelist William Faulkner's view of what constitutes art, and how real art inspires, illuminates, and at times allow us to appreciate beauty in its many different forms, whether it be the beauty that lives inside or outside of us. If I were to convey and/or recommend any advice to young artists it would be to consider what Faulkner stated in his Nobel Prize address after receiving the award for Literature, and many older artists could learn a thing or two from him, too: William Faulkner Nobel Banquet Speech (1950) https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/1949/faulkner/speech/
