This is how much I want to see any of the exhibitions or commissions on in Britain right now:
Discussions of economics and making a living from Henry David Thoreau’s Walden (1854):
“Not long since, a strolling Indian went to sell baskets at the house of a well-known lawyer in my neighborhood. “Do you wish to buy any baskets?” he asked. “No, we do not want any,” was the reply. “What!” exclaimed the Indian as he went out the gate, “do you mean to starve us?” Having seen his industrious white neighbors so well off—that the lawyer had only to weave arguments, and, by some magic, wealth and standing followed—he had said to himself: I will go into business; I will weave baskets; it is a thing which I can do. Thinking that when he had made the baskets he would have done his part, and then it would be the white man’s to buy them. He had not discovered that it was necessary for him to make it worth the other’s while to buy them, or at least make him think that it was so, or to make something else which it would be worth his while to buy. I too had woven a kind of basket of a delicate texture, but I had not made it worth any one’s while to buy them. Yet not the less, in my case, did I think it worth my while to weave them, and instead of studying how to make it worth men’s while to buy my baskets, I studied rather how to avoid the necessity of selling them. The life which men praise and regard as successful is but one kind. Why should we exaggerate any one kind at the expense of the others?”
“This spending of the best part of one’s life earning money in order to enjoy a questionable liberty during the least valuable part of it reminds me of the Englishman who went to India to make a fortune first, in order that he might return to England and live the life of a poet. He should have gone up garret at once.”
Some new research on artists working outside the gallery system has just been published by Axis : Validation Beyond the Gallery. As an artist who has little interest in making objects that can be sold, collected or otherwise institutionalised, as a relative outsider (and Outsider) even among the outlying group of artists who feel the same , and as somebody doing ongoing work related to artists’ livelihoods and pay, there’s some interesting stuff in there. The only caveat I’d add is that the study is by their own description qualitative , i.e. an interpretation of narrative from only 25 participants, so personally I’d be very cautious about forming policy or drawing universal conclusions from such an incredibly small sample of participants.
Having said that, the TLDR version will perhaps be unsurprising to anyone with any experience in the matters under discussion, although evidently it still needs to be said:
Link for an introduction to the research and the wider project of which it is a part. It’s worth reading, for artists and commissioners or policy people alike, with some thought-provoking quotes from the artists and producers who were interviewed.
NB Reading it in the embedded publication viewer is like trying to knit socks onto a flea, and the way to access it at a comfortably readable size or download it is not immediately obvious: to do so, click the “i” at top right or just cut out the middle man and click here.
 For people outside the UK, this refers to the artists’ database and networking platform, not the WWII coalition of powers opposed to the Allies. Man, I never tire of this gag.
 It’s a bit less blatantly obnoxious and the artists are a bit less cut-throat about it, if only because it’s hardly worth cutting anybody’s throat over the meagre sums usually available for commissions and performances, but performance and community artists have a definite inner circle as well. You tend to see the same people– some of them, at best, one trick ponies– and the same narrow types of work on the same circuits time and time again because it’s still who you know that counts for more than what you know. That’s artbiz.
 Some artists might like to make sure they know the difference between qualitative research, quantitive research, and “research” that is only research is the most literal, basic sense of “systematically finding facts”; this applies especially to the most recent generation of people mangled through an art pedagogy regime which is currently obsessed with brainwashing artists into believing their art is research and research is art, without ever training them in anything resembling actual research methodologies, objectivity, or how to interpret data.
The early Christian writer Lactantius– who advised the first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine I– told the story of how the Roman king Tarquinius Priscus acquired the Sibylline books which were kept in Rome’s Capitoline temple for consultation, guidance and divination in times of trouble. Although Priscus bought them, they were eventually considered priceless and remained in the temple for many centuries until they and the temple were destroyed by fire in 83 BC.
The Sibylline books took their name from their keeper, the Cumaean Sibyl, high priestess of the Apollonian Oracle at Cumae near modern day Naples. At some point between 616 and 579 BC, she made Priscus an offer he initially thought he could refuse:
They say that Amalthea, the Sibyl from Cumae, brought nine books to the king Tarquinius Priscus, and asked 300 gold pieces for them. The king refused, saying it was far too much, and derided the woman, saying she was mad. So in the sight of the king, she burnt three of the books, and demanded the same price for the remaining six. Tarquinius thought her even madder. When she burnt three more, but persisted in demanding the same price, the king was thrown into turmoil and bought the remaining books for the original price.
In recent years some people have occasionally mooted the idea of artists going on strike to drive home how much local, national, international and art world economies rely upon the work that creative people do, much of it– as we all know– woefully underpaid and unappreciated, taken for granted, or not paid at all. I have no idea how an artist strike would work in practice, or what artists comprehensively withdrawing their labour would actually entail; I don’t think anybody does because it’s pretty much a cloud cuckoo land proposition. We already have a huge cohort of scab artists who’ll undercut and undermine colleagues who refuse to work for low or no pay. The artistic and creative industries rely upon this fact to a very large extent, actually, hence the constant issuing forth from corporate offices of so-called opportunities that are “viral”, “get your work in front of industry leaders” or “great exposure” but also PURELY BY COINCIDENCE OBVIOUSLY would cost them thousands if they paid anybody to do them properly.
Even so, I do think it’s worth artists maintaining an inner Sibyl who simply won’t negotiate or be bullied when it comes to the value of what she does and how much value it brings to other people. Be the prophetess who would rather burn her work and be thought mad than give it away.
@AylwinGL on Twitter, with reference to the aforementioned horrorshow that is Amazon Art, a useful observation from the lovely Jeff Goldblum as the least realistic mathematician ever in Jurassic Park.
Dr. Ian Malcolm: If I may… Um, I’ll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you’re using here, it didn’t require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn’t earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don’t take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now… you’re selling it, you wanna sell it. Well…
John Hammond: I don’t think you’re giving us our due credit. Our scientists have done things which nobody’s ever done before…
Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should.
Don’t mention the exhibition!
Are you a crap artist? NO! You’re “resisting artisanal virtuosity”.
Influenced by animism and OOO.
An artist expresses his utter disdain for and rejection of the fetishised, unique art object by creating unique, fetishised art objects.
“The consummate illusion of a particularly dreaded cinema-photo-digital aesthetics.”
Brunch, cocktails, drayage.
Special Executive for Shit Performance Art strikes again.
“The consummate illusion of a particularly dreaded cinema-photo-digital aesthetics.”
I hereby pronounce this genre WOMBLE INSTALLATION.
… also known as arranging papers in box files.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from being a nutter.
Worshipping a snake puppet, as you do.
“Three hairs from a virgin heifer.”
Bodyless on Lesbos.
Lafcadio Hearn, in his Glimpses of Unfamiliar Japan (1894), sums up nicely how I feel about the place over a century later: “The largest steamer that crosses the Pacific could not contain what you wish to purchase. For, although you may not, perhaps, confess the fact to yourself, what you really want to buy is […]