The Look That Says “Oh, You’re Doing That?”
There’s a particular look that crosses a face when someone sees a tip jar on an artist’s page. It isn’t disgust, not exactly. It’s etiquette’s little wince: oh, you’re doing that? As if a line has been crossed—some invisible threshold between “serious creative” and “person who needs to eat.” I’ve learned to recognize it, the way you learn to read weather. A Ko-Fi button makes certain people squint like the sun just caught the wrong angle. A commission page makes them clear their throat and say “maybe later,” even when “later” has never existed for them in any other context. Meanwhile, a gallery invoice for five figures is “just business,” and an influencer’s brand deal is “smart.” This is not about the act of getting paid. This is about the aesthetic of how you ask.
The Invention of “Tasteful” Starvation
The etiquette is new; the structure is old. We inherited a story where “real artists” float above money, and if money appears it should be through a discreet side door—grant cheques folded into institutional envelopes, sales transacted by intermediaries in tasteful rooms, royalties dripped through platforms with proper logos. The need is meant to be offstage. The labor is meant to be invisible. The work appears as if by miracle, as if the lights don’t cost anything to keep on. When you say it out loud—this took time, this took materials, this took a life—some people hear a breach of taste. I hear a refusal to lie.
“Tacky” as a Social Weapon
Let’s talk about “tacky.” It’s a word that dresses class prejudice in neutral clothes. It calls certain forms of survival unfashionable and then pretends fashion has nothing to do with it. A tip jar, a sponsor note, a transparent “here’s how to help” gets called tacky most often when the artist doing it is the kind of person who was never meant to ask. If you are working-class in your bones—if your art came out of kitchens and buses and night shifts—your need reads differently than the curated austerity of a white cube. Asking with a link instead of a middleman is a double transgression: it makes money visible, and it makes the lack of gatekeepers visible. There are people who only know how to respect art when a gate is present.
When Presentation Decides Legitimacy
The funny thing is that the same transaction, routed through a different costume, becomes legitimate. Put the identical request behind a Shopify storefront or a gallery’s wall text and it transforms. A tip jar is a beggar’s cup; a storefront is entrepreneurship. A commissions page is “desperate”; a “limited edition drop” is modern. The difference is one of veneers and rituals. If your exchange looks like retail, it passes; if it looks like solidarity, it gets judged. This is not an accident. It is social code enforcing social order: who is permitted to ask, who is permitted to earn, who is permitted to do both without apologizing.
Gendered and Genre-Coded Contempt
The code is also gendered. Disciplines coded feminine—fiber arts, illustration, handmade goods, community publishing—are infantilized even when they pay rent. Disciplines coded masculine—design, studio art in a suit, music production behind glass—are framed as “industries” with strategies and roadmaps. Put the same “buy me a coffee” beneath a watercolor zine and a modular synth pack; watch which one elicits “cute” and which one elicits “savvy.” The contempt is reliable. So is the camouflage: respectability picks its uniforms, and then we pretend the uniform is the merit.
The Starving Artist Myth, Upgraded
Then there’s the oxygen-sucking myth that the “pure artist” should be above money entirely. The starving genius, the patron-blessed visionary, the fellowship-funded scholar: three ghosts that still haunt the studio. The romantic story hides the ledger book. It also hides the inheritance. Much of what gets called purity of intent is simply the comfort of someone else paying your bills. When you don’t have that, purity becomes a cudgel: “If you loved it enough, you wouldn’t talk about money.” The moral math flips the subject so neatly that people don’t notice the trick. Suddenly, the person doing the underpaying looks principled, and the person asking to be paid looks vulgar.
How the Internet Rewired Patronage
These myths mutated beautifully for the internet. Social media took the old patron model and replaced it with the algorithm—a patron that demands constant performance and pays mostly in attention. Exposure is offered like currency, and artists spend years discovering it doesn’t redeem for groceries. The platforms don’t care what your work costs you; they care that it is daily, bite-sized, and easy to sell ads against. The feed rewards frequency, not craft. You are told to be everywhere, speaking constantly, forever “building a brand,” which is a polite way of saying “working in public without pay until something hits.” When you refuse, when you withdraw to make something that takes longer than a news cycle, the machine calls you irrelevant. If you are very lucky it calls you niche. If you are unlucky it calls you lazy.
The Refusal to Be a Free Feed
This is why I don’t treat my livelihood like a free content feed. It is not a moral stance in the abstract; it is a survival boundary in a rigged market. You cannot keep trading days of your life for the promise of future attention. You cannot keep pretending that attention is the same thing as support. You certainly cannot keep apologizing for making your needs visible. A tip jar is not a confession of failure. It is a line item in the truth.
Naming Need Without Apology
“But,” someone says, “isn’t it embarrassing?” Only if you believe the story that a “real” artist never needs anything, and that if they do, someone respectable will whisper it into existence for them. I don’t believe that story. I believe in needs that are named plainly and met collectively. I believe in the difference between charity and mutual aid. Charity is vertical. It carries a moral interest rate. It wants you grateful and quiet. Mutual aid is horizontal. It says: here is what I have, here is what I can give, here is what I need in return to keep going. It treats the artist not as a cause to be rescued but as a worker in a shared ecosystem. If that sounds ideological, it’s only because honesty looks radical next to etiquette.
The Function of Mutual Aid
There’s a practical side to this, too. Direct support works. It turns a reader’s moment of recognition into fuel. It keeps websites up, materials replenished, time reclaimed. It keeps small, careful work alive outside the pace of platforms. It is the difference between writing a thing because you mean it and writing a thing because you must appease the churn. When you make that possible for someone, you aren’t indulging them. You are participating in culture that didn’t have to pass through a sponsor’s palate first.
The Theatre Around Commerce
None of this means I despise commerce. I despise the theatre we do around it. I despise the way artists are told to disguise the ask—wrap it in ten layers of brand-speak, buffer it with a partner network, launder it through a tasteful gate—so that no one has to see the simple fact that art is labor and labor costs. I would rather ask clearly, and let the people who want the work to continue respond clearly. I would rather a hundred small, transparent exchanges than one deal that muzzles the work for a year. The former builds a hall; the latter builds a cage.
Taste, Etiquette, and Distance from Need
You can call this an ethic if you’d like. You can also call it an allergy to being gaslit by taste. Taste is not neutral. It is a set of habits that protects the status quo. If your habits were formed by spaces that never had to name their costs—grant-funded, donor-cushioned, tuition-subsidized—then of course someone’s tip jar looks “off” to you. Your eye hasn’t had to look at that kind of honesty before. The cure is exposure, but not the kind the platforms offer. The cure is unlearning what you mistake for class and recognizing it as distance.
What Retiring Shame Could Look Like
What would it look like to retire the shame around visible survival? It would look like artists listing their support options without apology. It would look like readers treating the “Support” button as part of how they read, not an afterthought. It would look like trades and skill swaps being regarded as legitimate contributions, not second-tier favors. It would look like people saying “thank you for keeping this alive,” not “sorry I can’t pay much,” because even a little is participation in the continuation of something that mattered to you. It would look like a quiet, steady economy of care that doesn’t rely on virality or permission.
The Professionalization of the Ask
There is an objection that always arrives at this point. It says: “If you were good enough, you wouldn’t have to ask.” I have heard it in a hundred dialects. I have never seen it apply evenly. People with access ask all the time—agents ask, publicists ask, galleries ask—and no one calls it need; they call it “outreach.” The difference is who’s holding the phone and what room they’re in. Gatekeeping doesn’t abolish the ask; it professionalizes it, puts it in a blazer, and bills by the hour. If you can’t afford the blazer, you’re told to be quiet. That isn’t quality control. That’s a toll.
Asking as Adult Honesty
Here is the part I will not bend: asking is not tacky. It’s adult. It’s a declaration that art takes inputs and that you won’t pretend otherwise to fit someone else’s decor. If that jars people, let it. Let it reveal who wants the fantasy more than the work. Let it sort your audience by who is willing to be in an actual relationship with a living practice. I would rather be supported by a smaller group that understands this than broadcast to a million who don’t.
The Relationship Between Security and Quality
The irony is that transparency tends to improve the art. When needs are met, the work can slow down into itself. It stops trying to be a billboard. It stops bending toward the algorithm’s taste for short attention and high friction. It recovers patience. It grows teeth and roots at the same time. I have never made anything better by pretending I didn’t need to eat that week. I have often made things worse by performing indifference to keep up appearances. Survival makes room for risk; precarity makes everything timid while calling it hustle.
The Invisible Paywalls of Taste
There’s another inversion I want to name: people sneer at tip jars while normalizing paywalls they never notice. The institution’s paywall is hidden in tuition. The glossy platform’s paywall is hidden in your data sold elsewhere. The gallery’s paywall is hidden in rent you can’t afford to be near. You already pay. You just aren’t invited to recognize it. Direct support is the least predatory version of the same reality because it is honest about the terms: you valued this; you gave; it continued. No loyalty points, no fleecing, no mystery fees. Call it crude if you must. I’ll call it clean.
Anger as Clarity
And yes, there is anger in this. Not the theatrical kind the outrage markets sell by the pound, but the refined anger that comes from counting the hours and seeing the numbers not add up, again. The anger of being told the feed is your friend while it is chewing through everyone you know. The anger of watching people you admire put out their best work and be rewarded with polite silence because the system has trained everyone to scroll past anything that can’t be consumed in a breath. Anger can be clarifying if you let it point outward: at designs, not at people. At incentives, not at individual failures.
An Invitation, Not a Plea
If you hear an invitation buried in this, it’s because I mean one. I’m not asking for pity. I’m inviting you into a different posture. Treat art not as free garnish for an attention economy but as something made by a human with a finite number of afternoons. If a piece mattered to you, help metabolize the cost of its existence. Money is one way. Showing the work to someone who will love it is another. Offering time or knowledge or a tool is a third. None of these are “donations” in the charitable sense. They are how a culture says “stay.”
Unlearning the Reflex
Maybe you were taught that asking was shameful. Consider that you were taught wrong. Maybe you were taught that taste requires distance from need. Consider that such distance is a luxury masquerading as discipline. Maybe you were taught that the market will sort it out. Consider that the market has sorted out entire traditions into silence because they didn’t flatter its metrics. The fix isn’t to plead with the market to be kinder; it’s to build relations that can survive without it.
Living in Daylight
I will keep my tip jar up. I will keep my needs visible. I will keep declining to turn my life into a little circus that performs itself for algorithms. I will keep writing in a voice that refuses to apologize for wanting continuity instead of spectacle. You are welcome here if that voice helps you hear your own. You are welcome if you’re tired of pretending the lights come on by themselves. You are welcome if you’ve ever been made to feel gauche for naming the price of your stamina.
Glitter as Survival Tactic
Call it tacky if you like. It won’t change the ledger. It won’t change the fact that most artists you admire are holding everything together with careful budgets and unglamorous choices. It won’t change that the bright, slow work you want to exist tomorrow needs material today. It will only change one thing: whether you are willing to be honest about what it takes.
I am not tacky. I am unlearning your reflex. I am asking in daylight because daylight is the only chance any of us have to grow something durable. If your conditioning can’t stand the sight of the roots, that is your problem to solve. Out here, in the small halls where we actually make the things we mean, the etiquette is different. We ask. We answer. We keep each other going. And when the work arrives, it doesn’t arrive dressed to deny the price of its own becoming. It arrives with the receipt.
Support independent creativity through the Mutual Aid Fund or by exploring the Shop: Made by Me | Oddities & Convenience. If you’d like: you can follow us on Medium, itch.io, or on ko-fi as well.