Just got back from the inspirational assault known as Creative Capital retreat. A complete feast of art and ideas. The retreat combines professional development, idea exchange, professional consultations, skill building, networking, dinner parties and very little sleep. All of which adds up to some kind of incredible mind blow. My survival tactic was to wake up extra early (despite late nights) to get to the gym and run a whole lot. One of the features of the week is a day and a half of artist presentations. So not only did I get to see those, but I also had a chance to get to know the artists behind the work. There were some stand outs (in a crowd of mostly excellent work). A quick run down of my favorites:

SuttonBeresCuller- a wonderfully diverse and prolific trio from Seattle. The team’s project is to convert an unused gas station into ‘Mini Mart City Park’. They will transform the space into a lively green space complete with educational aspects. The SuttonBeresCuller body of work includes performative work (stage makeup as old men to get into the zoo free, stranding themselves on their own man-made island), massive time based installations (erecting a large box inside a gallery and then building a chinese restaurant inside it, which was revealed after 3 weeks of work). The work is a witty examination of our cultural consumption both within and without the ‘arts industrial complex’. They haven’t shown outside of Seattle, but that won’t be true for long now that they are in the hands of Creative Capital.

Matthew Moore- a farmer/artist who is self identified as conflicted as to which moniker to put first. His work (both artistic and professional) asks us to examine the relationship we have with food - both as individuals and as a cultural nation. He has a project on local farms that he plans to put in grocery stores around the country.

Brad Lichtenstein - his project is Quest for the Commons witn DJ Spooky. The project will manifest as a trans-media experience,with film, online, re-mixes and widgets. He is exploring what the commons are in an age that is simultaneously more privatized and more open sourced.

Finally, and most immediate, is the film Trouble the Water. Tip documentary film, by the team Tia Lessin and Carl Deal is built around the story and good video footage me two Katrina refugees/survivors. It lays bare the atrocities which were committed (and continue to occur’) in New Orleans. The film is premiering August 22 at IFC. This is a must see for anyone.

There were a number of other notable works shared over the week - I will try to pull together a list of them to share with you in the coming week. Lots of other things to talk about too!

We (the internet team of Steve, Matthew, Chris and I - we were missing Sue and Daniel) also had a chance to present some me our material which was really well recieved and enthusiastically sought. Like I said, it was a pretty amazing week.

Disclaimer: I work for a professional development program that is offered for free to participants around the country. It is paid for by state and local arts agencies and organizations. It is incredibly affective, and is part of the change in the system, but it serves a small number of people.

I was having a conversation the other day about the art market (yeh, i have those conversations a lot). This one was about the fact that artists aren’t willing to invest in their careers in order to grow. Its a common practice in pretty much every other business on the planet. Invest in new equipment or software to increase productivity and boost profits. Invest in a consultant to create a strategic plan to grow and boost profits. Invest in hiring more people to increase productivity and boost profits. You get the idea.

There is also the personal investment for growth. Loads of people every year go into massive debt to subsidize their law degree, medical degree of MBA. They do this with the belief (usually true) that with this degree their earning potential will be much higher.

We were talking about why artists don’t believe in paying the high price for learning the skills to grow their careers. In particular we were discussing professional development programs. At first I agreed, thinking why don’t artists pay for this kind of training? Especially if they see proven results from those who have taken it. Well, here’s why they don’t: the system is broken.

All those other people investing, are pretty much guaranteed a return on their investment (with work). Artists just aren’t. The return on investment (ROI) is just not that high. Even if they do succeed at getting more shows and grants, and can negotiate better deals the pay still isn’t that significant (unless you are the 1% of 1% who become art stars). Sure, its enough to live on and continue doing your work, but its no doctor, lawyer or CEO salary.*

Here’s another problem. A lot of us already did invest. A LOT. A lot of us have our terminal degree (until this PhD in Fine Arts fad hits critical mass), we have the MFAs. And we paid dearly for them. Probably as much as some MBAs (I know my debt until I retire is enough to rent a small house in some urban areas). So we have made that investment and it probably hasn’t paid off. I know my school did no such thing as professional development which actually prepared you for creating what is, essentially, a business.

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed and learned a lot during my MFA, but really, it was like a really really expensive 2 year residency program. A time to focus on your art and develop your work.

And another thing - I know plenty of artists who are feeling really tapped out from giving away work for auctions, getting underpaid to put on great shows for non-profit arts organizations or state agencies. We won’t pay entry fees or subsidize the gallery system. We won’t pay for consulting or promoting or transport or framing or any of the other things to do with a show we may or may not sell from.

So how can we change all this. Well thats something that takes looking at the entire landscape. The system really is broken. From a misconception by the public and the government about the value of arts. To the hierarchy that exists where the artists are at the bottom instead of the top. To our own undervaluing of what we give to the world.

Where to start? Start with your own circle of friends. Start with talking about it, come up with some creative solutions and help each other grow and learn. Share your knowledge of marketing, planning, fundraising, negotiating, etc. A rising tide and all…

*I have been able to observe and attend a few professional development programs and some are really effective. I also have a pretty good background in business and when I applied that to my art - plus just took the discipline and commitment up a notch (all investment), I have reaped tangible rewards.

Another moment of brilliance…

Chris Doyle has done it again. I know I talk about him a lot on this blog, much to his chagrin, but he’s done it again with some pretty clever thinking. This time its a self marketing idea that is simple, beautiful, brilliant and I hope (for his sake) succesful.
Chris created a limited addition set of drawings called Subscribe. They are some of his personal but not too precious drawings of suburban homes. And they are for sale. (That’s not the clever part, tip is:) Each sale benefits one of a handful of non profits that he has chosen, like Creative Capital, Creative Time, Public Art Fund, Smack Mellon and Socrates Sculpture Park. Why is that so brilliant? Because each of those organizations (and their huge mailing lists) is going to promote the work too!

So everybody wins, the organization and the artist.

I will post images of the work and links soon (writing this from the phone). And if there are some left, go buy one!

So, I am just thinking out loud here, but I have been thinking about the creative process and the current funding models for artists and their projects. My favorite funding model (of course) is that of Creative Capital. They award an initial grant and then can provide follow up grants during key points of the project to take advantage of new opportunities and to ensure its success. They also (I love this part) focus on developing the artists career long term by developing the artist. They provide workshops on professional development which teach fundraising, strategic planning and pr/marketing (I happen to know a lot about these workshops). They also provide extensive one on one consultations, referrals to other professionals and an extended network. They really nurture the whole artist. What this does is ensure that the artist’s career is successful beyond any single project.So here’s what I am thinking - and it is still a little muddy - why not create a loan program that operates in a similar way. Loan artists project monies, train them to ensure the project is successful and as their careers blossom they pay the money back (CC asks all grantees to reinvest - once they reach some level of success many of the artists give donations to CC). Maybe this loan program can be combined with the Artist Pension Trust model? Their model requires participating artists to donate artworks to a pool which is sold after a number of years in which the participating artists’ value is expected to increase, then the entire pool of artists shares the proceeds.So maybe the loan program takes in artworks as payment as well. There is certainly some risk involved, and some works will end up with greater value than others, but it may indeed be worth the risk. (Predicated on having object based work or ancillary product to sell).
Anyway, like I said, just thinking out loud here…

Images, top to bottom:
Chris Doyle, “Leap,” Creative Capital Grantee & Artist Pension Trust Participant
Sanford Biggers, “Kalenda” (mistitled on photo), Creative Capital Grantee & Artist Pension Trust Participant