Tag Archives: arts funding

FUNDEE

25 Apr

SOME NOTES AND CONCLUSIONS

303-dairyfree-dundee-cake-a10bd4f1-3a26-410e-8a04-709fe0cc6be3-0-1400x919

I’m seriously tardy because the event in question was several months ago, but SEVERAL MONTHS AGO I was invited to the artist-run Generator Projects in Dundee to talk about a-n’s Paying Artists campaign, which I have worked on over the past year or so. Generator paid me, by the way. Not very much, but proportionately more than some places have paid me when they could afford to do better. QED. In keeping with my observations about this subject over the course of many years finally, at long last, being on the agenda of artists and the organisations that work with them, the room was completely full and it didn’t take long for almost everybody to have something (often many things) to say on the subject. The conversation also bore out the same things that I and other people advocating for fair pay– or in some cases, any pay at all– have heard repeatedly when it comes to artists describing their experiences of publicly funded or otherwise not short of money institutions forming relationships with them. Generator itself is an example of how much artist-led, mostly volunteer, low-to-no-budget groups do and how important they are to the arts ecosystem in Britain, and with no prompting from me whatsoever conclusion one was:

Exactly… look how much artist-led, low-to-no-budget groups do without funding, FFS. There’s no excuse for larger and better funded galleries, museums or commissioners with full-time employees not to do at least as well in providing opportunities and support for large numbers of artists. Most of them don’t. Alongside this we should also remember, though, that just because most artists don’t do it for the money it doesn’t mean they should do it without any money. There’s a huge value in grassroots peer support (and in fact I’m putting together an experiment along those lines now) but the discussion in Dundee and a-n’s other national consultations have revealed a fairly firm consensus that small, self-organised and artist-led groups should not be held to the same standards as a formal organisation, nor should they be expected to compete with these organisations for funding and other resources. They also shouldn’t be pressured to take up the slack left by locally and nationally funded organisations not facing up to their responsibilities.

On the contrary, a number of people voiced another widely held view among artists: the large flagship institutions that grew up around the UK over the past fifteen years or so– often as Millennium projects, or as part of a regeneration agenda– could and should be acting as umbrellas for smaller organisations (and non-organisations). Self-organised groups of artists, and grassroots projects trying to revive dead buildings or moribund high streets don’t have PR people, administrators or technicians sitting around flicking themselves off in brand new custom-built offices, but the capital and regional flagship galleries do. I know from firsthand experience that people who work for small and barely funded non-building-based arts organisations all work their arses off, just as I also know from firsthand experience that some of their overpaid counterparts in the largest and most prestigious organisations wouldn’t know what hard work was if it hit them in the face. This is particularly galling when some of them offer “free publicity” or something similar as if it’s a fair substitute for not being paid. Why can’t they offer this PR and admin support unconditionally, say one day a week, since everyone knows it’s spare capacity anyway? And why don’t the likes of the Arts Council or Creative Scotland make it a condition of their funding that they do? This is, after all, the ostensible logic behind these big, purpose built arts hubs being built and supported in the first place: that they act as beacons for art going and art making in their vicinity. Again, they mostly don’t. This is especially cogent now, because to get Grants for the Arts funding, individual artists, Community Interest Companies and unincorporated arts groups are all now having to compete (unpaid, of course) not only with libraries and museums but also with huge commissioners or public galleries, all of whom have full-time staff.

At this point we started getting utopian and discussing the notion of artists just fucking it all off and simply seeking their validation and their connections with people outside of all these institutions. Cooperatives, mutuals, free love communes, etc. Actually we didn’t talk about free love communes, but I think we probably would have done if we’d been there longer.

Then we went back to misery a bit when we talked about unions and the remarkable fact that after many years of existence the Scottish Artists Union currently rejoices in having about a thousand members. I was a member when I lived in Scotland, and good for SAU, but that’s a shockingly low number of artists for a nation of 5 million people or so. Obviously they’re not all artists, but it’s still not a great number of members and therefore one major benefit of unionisation– collective bargaining– is hardly a factor. I likewise wish the newly formed artists’ union in England all the best in their endeavours, but it doesn’t bode well that they seem to be having so much trouble with recruitment. I can’t help thinking that old school unions have probably had their day anyway, because we need much more nimble, responsive and unignorable means of organising resistance and change if we really want it. Less Jeremy Corbyn, more Anonymous or Occupy.

Advertisements

THE LOGIC OF AUSTERITY

17 Jun

woodcuttingman

“What’s this for?”

Says the carpenter

As he cuts it off

Anonymous Japanese poem, circa 1800.

LET THEM EAT BUILDINGS (REDUX)

11 Feb

My article about Arts Council England’s “small” (£100,000-£499,999) funding for stylish foyers, gardening and service lifts (while artists often can’t even get paid for an exhibition) has been picked up and republished in The Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture-professionals-network/culture-professionals-blog/2013/feb/11/ace-capital-arts-funding-response

LET THEM EAT BUILDINGS

28 Jan

I bet you wish you could get half a million quid in grants because you need a new bathroom, your garden needs doing, you’d like “state of the art lighting”, or you have “inadequate foyer facilities.” As similar as this may sound to the recent scandal of British MPs and their expense claims for absurd items like duck houses while some of their constituents can’t even find homes fit for human habitation (and it is very similar, though not quite so scandalous), it’s actually Arts Council England’s capital grants scheme for organisations that are already in receipt of regular, long term funding.

MissPiggyAntoinette

I’ve sometimes had to escalate to just a hair’s breadth away from taking galleries or arts organisations to court in order to extract a few hundred pounds that they owe me; and this is a situation where I’m supposed to be paid and they agree that I should be. I know artists who’ve just given up fighting for their money. It’s increasingly common for galleries to not even mention budgets or payments, as if it’s something an artist shouldn’t even consider. We’re constantly being told that it’s austerity all the way and everyone has to suffer. And yet… £500K for goods lifts, washrooms and gardening still seems valid to some people, apparently. Read my latest article at a-n about the topsy-turvy, through-the-looking-glass priorities of arts council mandarins:

http://new.a-n.co.uk/news/single/let-them-eat-buildings

PS: Cut from the article for brevity and clarity, but an interesting footnote: in answering objections to huge sums being spent on offices and coffee shops while artists struggle to get a few hundred pounds for an exhibition or workshop if they’re lucky, the Arts Council says it’s addressing decades of under-investment in England’s arts infrastructure with these grants. As the main funding body for the arts in England over the past sixty years or so, whose fault could this under-investment possibly be other than that of the Arts Council itself?

HALF A MILLION POUNDS?

8 Jan

WeimarMoneyStack

What does £500,000 of Arts Council funding get the people of Merseyside? Ha ha, it’s a trick question! The answer is nothing at all, apart from some excuses and a plea for more money. And it’s not even meant to be a high concept semi-rehash of the K Foundation burning a million quid. Please join me at a-n to read all about it.

http://new.a-n.co.uk/news/single/artist-proposes-a-vortex-gets-a-black-hole-instead/1

%d bloggers like this: