Okay, so there’s this one phrase that I don’t really like very much, and it goes like this: “Art is your hobby.” And when you think about it, you might think, Well, what’s wrong with that phrase? It just seems like a very simple, harmless observation. And to some extent, it is because it is true. Art is my hobby. I enjoy doing it a lot. I do it a lot, lot in my spare time. And it's something that brings me great joy and fulfillment. And yet, what the problem I have with this phrase isn’t necessarily the observation that it is, but rather the implications of it in the vast majority of times that has been said to me. Because the implication of this phrase is that art is only my hobby, that it is expendable, that it is just a hobby and not a passion. That it is something that I can give up on because it is an obstacle towards my path to success. And I just think that is blatantly untrue because art is a very important thing to me. It’s a core part of my identity that I’ve kept ever since I was a toddler. It’s something that uses a crucial form of self-expression that I can never give up. But here’s the thing, and I think all of you will agree with me on this when I tell you that individuals have multiple interests, right? It’s very clear, that is true, because you can't have a person define themselves by one singular characteristic and only that characteristic, right? Because individuals have a diverse set of passions and interests and things that they enjoy. And it’s also accepted and promoted by society, right? Curiosity is a trait that is often very, very pushed onto children, varying from elementary to middle school to even high schoolers. It is told that it is an indicator of success. So then, I want to address the double standards of this curiosity when it comes to things such as the arts. Because other narratives, such as the idea that you must pursue your dreams or get a career that you’re passionate about, which I do agree with to some extent, because, I mean like, if you want to do something as a career, ideally you should probably enjoy it, right? You probably want to be happy for most of your life, even like within work and such. But then combine that with the expectations of success, and you get something like this: you get the idea that your career drives your passion and not the other way around, that because I want to go into a career in STEM, that means that STEM is now the only acceptable passion that I could have. That art is now something that I shouldn’t be passionate about because it is seen as an obstacle towards my future career. So then, let’s talk about the idea, the disparity between arts and STEM then. Because when I do art, sometimes I get this remark like, your art’s nice, but you can’t make it to art school. You can’t use it on a portfolio. You should make something “meaningful” with your art. And to some extent, I do agree with it. My art isn’t super good. I'm no child prodigy, right? I’m not exceptionally skilled compared to many of my peers. But at the same time, this leads me to question, why is it that I have to be exceptional in art in order to enjoy it? Why can’t I enjoy art because it makes me happy? But I don’t see this with STEM because in STEM - one time in grade 5 or 6, I don’t remember - I showed this brief interest in biology, but now I’m more of like, physics and math, but like, I digress. But in terms of biology, you want to show an interest in it. I come back, and I see my mom got me a biology textbook, which was very nice of her, but it also led me to question. Well, why is it that there’s no pressure for me to become a biologist now, right? Why is it that I can enjoy STEM and explore it without fear, without facing much backlash or criticism, but I can’t do the same with art. And maybe it’s with career prospects, but maybe it’s something else, right? Maybe it’s the narratives that have been instilled in us since birth. The idea that you have to succeed and the success looks like wealth and awards and competition and fame and such, right? At the end of the day, I feel like right now, arts is gatekept while STEM is encouraged for everyone. In arts and in your life as a whole, there’s this expectation that every part of you is used to do something meaningful, though eventually, after you go out of high school, you’ll grow up and become “somebody”. That you’ll have a nice résumé that you can send to Harvard and wow the admissions officers. That you’ll win a bunch of awards with everything that you do. That if you cannot excel at this passion and monetize it or exploit it and milk it for all it’s worth, then it's essentially worthless. Then finally, let’s talk about the question of what is meaningful. And I know that this is a very difficult question to answer for very good reasons, too. Because it’s subjective to every individual, because every individual has a different set of values and beliefs and passions, and that drives them to create their own definition of what matters to them. And that you can’t fit every individual inside a neatly defined box of the arbitrary idea of “meaningful”. And yet, many times, society still tries anyways. Many times, the idea of meaningful looks like, I don’t know, doing social good in some way, or maybe winning awards, getting first place in a competition, getting money, scholarships, acceptance into ... Ivy League universities in the United States, stuff like that. But then, the question is, Can you make every single thing you enjoy into something meaningful? And I think that is a very difficult thing for me to personally come to terms with, because I know that I don’t have the capacity to excel in every single thing that I’m interested in because there’s only a certain set amount of blocks in a school day that I can fit in subjects. There’s only a set amount of time I have after school to devote myself to my interests and hobbies, and sometimes, I can’t do things at the same time, right? I can't draw while writing a math contest. So at the end of the day, I have to give up on one thing for another. But what I feel like a lot of people might not understand is that just because I give up on art and do math instead doesn’t mean that my passion in art is less meaningful, right? Just because I do one thing less than the other doesn’t necessarily mean that now, I don’t enjoy it as much. That just because I need to care more about one thing doesn’t mean that the other thing is now unacceptable to care for. And I think there’s this very unhealthy sense of competition instilled upon me, and I see in some of my classmates and my peers that you have to turn every part of yourself into something that gets success, into something that can win out a competition and get awards so that your Asian parents can brag about you to other parents and such. I feel like that just makes me miserable in some way, right? It makes me sad to think that maybe I can’t turn my art into something that wins every award. Maybe I can’t win an art contest. Maybe I'm just not the best at art. And I think that when you free yourself from this narrative, that you have to excel at something in order to enjoy it, especially with creative things, such as art and such. I think it allows you to not only feel less miserable, but also feel genuinely happy for the people that can pursue your passions. For the people that are better than you at your passions. Because you know how much it matters to them. Because you can empathize with the joy you feel from doing this thing in the first place. So the important takeaway from my speech is that just because you’re not the best at something doesn’t necessarily mean that you don’t have the right to enjoy it. That you still have the right to enjoy something because of its inherent joy that it brings you, because of the enjoyment you get from doing this action in the first place. At the end of the day, you deserve to care. Thank you. (Applause)
