Artists, their art, and the people.

Many consider art to be the embodiment of a person's soul in visible form. Thus, an artist who changes his art depending upon the public's demand may be viewed as having compromised his artistic integrity. Such a person is only giving the public what they want from him and not necessarily what he wants to give them.

However, who is to say that an artist's vision and the public's demand are not both heading towards the same target. It is essential to keep in mind that the audience generally wants a better show, and the showman wants more audience, thus driving him to make better and better shows. With that in mind, let us assume that an artist's vision is directly opposed to what the public wants. Should the artist continue to pursue it? The answer is mostly yes, a satiric caricaturist may emphasize unfavorable trends in society through his art, causing public backlash, but that certainly does not mean that he should stop from representing what he views as corrupt. Another example of this would be graffiti art, which is generally looked down upon by the public and viewed by some as distortions of public property, but the themes contained in some of these illustrations -such as anonymous political statements- might have needed to be said.

On the other hand, sometimes listening to your audience could be the smart thing to do. From a monetary perspective, at least, a person that uses his art to make a living will most certainly benefit from adhering to the public's opinions in the form of more demand on his art. From an artistic perspective, obliging the public opinion may also be beneficial, as they may have unique views on the art that would be more difficult for the artist himself to observe as he is too involved with his art form. An example of this would be a director adapting a novel into a motion picture. Having not read the novel himself, the director relies upon the script given to him by the screen writer, and thus has a vision in his head of what the movie should look like. this is where the influence of the public, specifically, those who have read the novel, would come in. The director is informed via the public of a scene or a line that is in the novel but not in the script, and so he integrates it into his vision to make a better overall movie that also receives the public's -and the critic's- praise.

In short, an artist should not allow the public's judgment to influence his integrity, his morals, or his beliefs. However, there are certain circumstances where the artist needs to listen to his fans (or even to naysayers) in order to continuously self-improve his art and his product, especially when their judgment is designed with the artist's best interest in mind.