Yesterday I posted about some bigger discussions to have when engaging in the discourse on funding for the arts. I spoke about communities and artist support & integration. Today, as promised I want to talk about the power of the arts community and the myth of scarcity.

The myth of scarcity in the arts is the long held belief that there’s not enough X to go around. Where X represents one patrons, audience, venues, whatever. This myth creates a sometimes vicious competitive environment.

The myth is detrimental to both individual artists and the community.

The good news is that it really is BS. But that does mean coming to terms with some understanding and reality checks. The first concept to grasp is that the current system of the arts industry is broken, the pyramid is inverted. Artists, who should be at the top of the pyramid (all other services should be in support of artist) are currently at the bottom (playing the support role to all the services). This is not a complaint, just a statement of (important word choice coming up) current fact. In order to change this, artists will need to begin with reconsidering how to succeed in the art world (more on that later).

Another reality check is that there is only a minuscule number (I’ve heard rumours that it is 1% of 1% of all artists) make a large amount of money off their artwork. And by large amount of money, I mean rockstar lifestyle. We could probably figure out who they are right now, ummm, Damien Hirst, Olafur Elliasson, maybe Jeff Koons and tangentially Christo & Jean Claude (tan. because they make money off sketches of their work). Am I missing anyone?

Here’s the secret, everyone else is making money off alternative sources of income which are funding their work (teaching, speaking, working in the arts, etc). Now, there are probably quite a lot of artists who make a reasonable amount of money off their work (as opposed to the rockstar levels of money), mostly these are artists who can create easy to market & sell work, which, often is not even the work they would consider the most important or interesting. Like the e-bay and painting-a-day people (there’s a lot of merit in these methods of funding). If you are doing large scale public projects (say a chalk line around NYC) then your funding might come in a small part from grants and individuals, but in a larger part from speaking opportunities, image rights and some amount of commodification. My painter friend is pursuing painting portraits as a means to fund his work, a couple of my other friends who create non-object based work subsist on teaching and occasional fellowships. It’s a good idea to understand that you will be the biggest funder of your own work, so you should find something you can do to make money that will make you happy.

So, about how this community concept can help. It’s quite simple actually, so simple in fact that there is a cliche already made for it: a rising tide lifts all boats.

If as a community we decide that we are going to help one another, whether that is sharing knowledge, resources, experience whatever, then we all rise up together. Don’t even think it isn’t selfish, don’t you think that if I help my friend the painter get a show in a gallery or out at Coney Island, well one day he will turn around and help me when I need it. Sharing is a way of creating greater strength in numbers. (What you give is what you get).

Yes we should all be talking about money too. It empowers us all to know what people are paying for services and products so that we can price our own products and services accordingly. (For example, in my experience speaker fees can range anywhere from $200 [for local panel] to $1000 [for individual presentation outside NYC], and stipends for showing work that is documentary in nature [documentation of a project already completed] is about $300). It also helps us all present a more united front, sure there are lots of artists doing things for free (even I admit to that for a select situation), but the more we all ask for the money we rightly deserve, the more likely people will pay for it. The power of a positive no is a great thing.

So think about it, and figure out what you have to share with your fellow artists, and go out there and give that away (while simultaneously asking to be paid for your creativity).

Photos all creative commons license, courtesy of flickr and: (top to bottom)
“Support Starving Artists” by dltq
“Inverted Pyramide” by megafon (ironic that it is at the louvre no?)
“community kitchen” by smallestbones

I was invited recently to participate on a panel regarding fundraising in the arts. I was told by the organizer that I was being invited for my experience in fundraising for the HighWaterLine project. I told them, you know I only raised about 30% of the cost of the project and funded the rest of it independent filmmaker style (credit cards) and am still working on ways to recoup, so I’m not sure I am the best representative. They said, actually that’s the other reason we have invited you, we want someone who is honest about their fundraising achievements and challenges.

I’m pretty excited about the panel, since, as you may have noticed, I am really interested in talking about new funding models.
I think there are a couple of important parts of the conversation around fundraising which need to be addressed, I will look at value/integration and support of artistic communities today…

First, how we talk about value of the arts in a community. The argument on the monetary value of the arts, while valuable and of great merit is overused and doesn’t fully address all of the facets of a strong arts economy. I just read a good article in the New York Times Magazine about arts in education, it profiles a report which debunks the power of the arts in strengthening skills in the “tested” subject areas. (I’ve had a problem with this argument for a while). Instead it notes that what was witnessed was: “persistence in tackling problems, observational acuity, expressive clarity, reflective capacity to question and judge, ability to envision alternative possibilities and openness to exploration.” (Nowhere has this been made more visible to me than the week I spent at ACPA, where high school students undertook a week long art project with me where they solved problems, collaborated, focused and expressed).Similarly it is important to find ways to talk about the broader impact that the arts has on our community psyche and collective consciousness. What does it mean culturally and socially to be a creative community?

And what does all this have to do with arts funding? It’s re-framing the argument and looking deeper at the value of the arts and encouraging broader support, which gets us back to the other facets of a healthy funding environment for the arts. While city, state, and federal support of the arts combined with private support giving money or resources to both organizations and individuals provides fertile ground, an active patronage also needs to exist to help create a sustainable environment (somebody has to buy the work/tickets/etc).

The final (and possibly most complicated) pieces are both government regulation in support of arts (low rent/tax breaks for venues and orgs, housing subsidy for artists, open permitting and city agency support) and integration of arts and artists into private sector economy.
The integration could occur in a variety of ways - one idea I like is to hire artists within the corporate community to inspire creative thinking. I guarantee that if you put me on your board of directors that I would be able to see things from a different point of view and come up with creative solutions. Within the private sector artists have the ability to inspire the creativity necessary to advance companies. I would also advocate for institutions to host, essentially, artist residencies. I could provide a number of inspiring community based projects to help with any variety of Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club or NRDC initiatives.

Tomorrow I will write about creating a supportive artistic community, as an artist, and how we can help each other overcome the scarcity myth.

Images courtesy of Creative Commons on Flickr (from top to bottom):
“Fund Public Art” by bourgeoisbee
“Funds Please” by otherthings
“Creative Hands - Mindy” by Dalydose
“fuck it i’ll fund that.” by yatta

crossposted from seedingthecity.org

I like to approach projects from an “outside the box” (boy, thats an overused term) point of view. When I mentioned the “Seeding the City” to a friend who works with green roofs, he questioned the value of planting such a small plot of greenery - how is that going to have any real affect on the Urban Heat Island Effect?

May answer, “Each individual module may have a negligible affect, but what would hundreds of modules spread across the city do to both our environment, our awareness and our social fabric?”

When you consider the potential of the project, creating potentially enough greenery on rooftops to recreate a Central Park in the sky? Now it gets interesting.

I have also been considering how to raise money for the project outside of the “normal” channels (i.e. grants). A couple of things have come up recently which I am investigating:

• ThePoint.com is a tipping point model for fundraising and social action. Get enough people to commit to something, and then it can happen. I posted the project on there with enough funds to launch the project, its a pretty high price, so we will see how close I get, but it does allow many people to be involved at a small level - it is a further exploration of microfinancing.
• Another idea is to exchange money for experience or special commodities from the project, this is based on the model of artistshare.com. The funding is given up front and then the funders are invited to participate in interesting ways throughout the project.
• Finally, my own thought of allowing people to “sponsor” grm’s throughout the city. Pay $50 and you would sponsor a grm in your choice of one of the neighborhoods. This wouldn’t be on your own roof, but would include your sponsorship information on the signage and website.

So, does anyone have any thoughts on any of this? Are there ways you would want to participate financially? Would you give a small amount for nothing in return or prefer a larger amount and a unique experience or commodity (if so what would that experience or commodity be?) or would you prefer to know that your funds are directed at a specific piece of action?

I’ve talked before about the collective power of artists and why we should share. I’ve been seeing it repeated on Sellout and in the comments over there recently too. (Basically it is the idea that by sharing resources and knowledge we can actually create a greater wealth of opportunities and resources). In light of that, I was trying to figure out the best way to share those resources with one another. Of course a forum seems like the obvious answer - but that can easily become unweildy and devalues quickly. (It would be hard to replicate the success of chow nee chowhound).

I will start by offering what I know here in these pages…
I will start with the basics, some good places to get reference materials-

• Fractured Atlas: Good place to learn more (professional development), get more (fiscal sponsorship, health insurance, liability insurance [for events, film production & public art], publicize (promote & learn marketing), and get some member discounts.
• Sellout: Participate in an ongoing discussion regarding artist issues.
• Chicago Artist Resource: a fantastic site with loads of information and interviews for artists everywhere (most of the content is not location specific). Check out articles and links to other resources on your practice (incl. health & safety, health insurance links, public art, community & social issue arts, magazines & journals, and a great collection of artist and art professional’s stories), career (incl. strategic planning, marketing & promotion, community, organizations & unions) and business (incl. branding, financial planning, legal issues, and advocacy)
• NYFA: New York Foundation for the Arts is a great site (you have to register to use it) which provides an international listing of resources, called NYFA Source. It is a searchable database of residencies, grants, space, apprenticeships, etc). They also list classifieds - jobs & opportunities.
• International Sculpture Center: Given that the definition of ’sculpture’ has expanded to include installation, video and some time-based works, these resources are for more than sculptors. They host a sculptor community forum, artist’s registry, and resources.
• Artists Space: The most useful (anecdotally) non-fee based, uncurated online image registry.
• Artist Career Guide: Right now it is mostly a promo site for Jackie’s upcoming book, but she is posting interviews with professionals semi-regularly (currently there are interviews with two curators), but it also lists workshops she is teaching - and she can definitely whip your under-promoted butt into shape.

Anyone know of others I should include?

Note to self, other posts should include: grant writing tips, making sticky websites, the theory of becoming an expert, online fundraising…

In trade, anyone know a financial planner who works with artists (needs to know our particular situation) based here in NYC?

Found the image on: http://www.business-improvement.org/.

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