On 9/21/05 10:20 AM, Allan Mccollum's electrons arrived as:
> I haven't got any specific solutions, as I'm sure you might guess, but a
> change in attitude might help. It's a conceptual problem, I think. It doesn't
> occur to anyone that a trucker or a printer or a caterer might work for free,
> but many seem to think artists are desperate for attention, and that their
> participating in art exhibitions constitutes self-promotion of some sort, and
> therefore is to their benefit to such a degree that they OWE for it; but this
> is certainly not always the case.
Both artists and curators are caught in a situation that is partly one of
real economics, and partly one of entrenched conventions. With stunning
irony, artists are the engines that propel the art world, and yet by the
time artists standing in line reach "the pie," there's often nothing left
but crumbs.
The symbiotic tradition between artists and museums (or non-profit
galleries) has its pragmatic and its idealistic side. Pragmatically, the
artists give freely of their time -- the museum gets a show that fulfills
its institutional raison d'etre and attracts donors, members, and
recognition, and the artists get free marketing they can leverage in the
paying (commercial gallery, teaching) world, and some further credibility by
institutional endorsement/validation. Idealistically, the artist gets to
broadcast ideas, concepts, passions, aesthetics, i.e., to express
him/herself through the venue, while the museum gets to use the PR of
certain artists to institutionally "stand for something."
I think these things have evolved the way they have simply due to the
dynamics of supply and demand. There's way too many artists and way too
little demand for their products, and this reverberates throughout the
cultural customs and economic structures of both the profit and non-profit
art worlds -- usually not to the financial benefit of artists because the
high-supply low-demand principle pervades all.
I have worked with internationally known artists who never asked for an
honorarium (but all expenses were paid) and who wouldn't need the money
anyway, who seemed genuinely appreciative of the opportunity to just "show"
for the sake of showing -- without all the exploitation, big business, and
hype. And I've worked with unpaid emerging artists who were genuinely
appreciative of the resources brought to bear on their behalf.
The economics are truly lean for some small institutions, and I don't think
they can be blamed for asking artists to lend their art and donate their
time. As a slightly larger than small-sized enterprise, I've sometimes paid
artists and sometimes haven't, depending on a variety of circumstances. But
down deep I think they should be paid -- and Alan's statement of
appreciation for even a token amount being offered struck home with me.
That's at least what I'm going to do from now on.
_____________________________________
S t e p h e n N o w l i n
http://xrl.us/stephennowlin
Vice President,Director,
Alyce de Roulet Williamson Gallery
Art Center College of Design
1700 Lida Street
Pasadena, CA 91103
626.396.2397
[log in to unmask]
http://www.williamsongallery.net
http://www.artandscience.us
http://www.pasadena-culture.net
_____________________________________
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
