I’m running out the door but while I was in the shower a few ideas started coming together.
First off – the financial and organizational problems of arts institutions are intrinsically related to the current non-profit funding model and the role arts and culture plays in our society. That’s obvious. When institutional change occurs it is more deeply problematic than in the for-profit world because people are KNOWINGLY working for less money than they could get elsewhere, they do it because of the camaraderie and a common belief in art and creativity. In some ways, the ripple effects are more personal. And that is taxing on everybody involved. The ability to create, produce and present art – moreso even than business – relies on trust and good will. All of that is predicated on security. (open to debate, i’m sure).
Anyway – the point is that the government will step in and save Bear Sterns but won’t support the arts because they don’t believe it has value. But arts and culture that is solely market-driven does not assure quality or innovation. In fact, do we really feel that rap music that extols misogyny, homophobia, violence and crime, though commercially viable, is really good for a civil society? Are movies that reinforce cultural and class stereotypes, that glorify violence, warfare, that promote the de-personalization of violence and de-sensitize the public, and cultivate prejudice and rampant consumerism REALLY of value to society?
The arts are actually a meaningful place for constructive social discourse. They promote creativity, collaboration and cooperation. Arts & Culture Build Community (online and offline in the real world!) They promote education and engagement, scholarship, innovation and a broader sense of involvement in the world at large. Yes, art for art’s sake is wonderful, but the ROLE of arts and creativity in a civilized society, the esteem in which it is held, is a direct measure of the sophistication and humanity of that society. The arts can make us more thoughtful and human. We’ve all seen situations where artists -particularly musicians – from all over the world, in all different situations, can come together and just make art. It can be an amazing thing.
So one step towards trying to solve the ongoing dysfunction in the industry is to wage a larger societal campaign to encourage valuing the arts, valuing the people who make it and the people who support it and make it possible.
Filed under: From the Editor
I’m glad you’re writing about this.
My two cents is (and this is not something I say about many issues) is that it can only start with us valuing ourselves more. When we do that other people might, too.
I see many artists and small companies forgo paying themselves for their work, for a whole slew of very understandable reasons. Companies won’t commit to paying or asking for decent; everyone goes along with it, then everyone feels victimized and complains that there’s no money.
I think, and I mean this, it’s time for some of us to turn down the gigs that don’t pay enough. To tell the NPN, for example, that their contracted rates of pay for touring productions is not close to a living wage. Hell, maybe we even get on Equity’s case because even their off-Broadway pay scale is pretty damn low.
Whenever we decide not to get paid (because we need that extra prop or we think we need that gig at the TBA festival or we need whatever else), we set the bar lower for our entire field.
I am not saying I believe that it’s a quick fix – that if we all start asking for more dough it’s gonna rain down from the newly opened skies, but I do think that when we agree to NOT be compensated for what we do, and we don’t even make it clear to ourselves that that’s what we’re doing, we’re hobbling ourselves.
We have to make a commitment to ourselves first, as artists, and then I do think the institutions, funders and audiences will begin to follow. I’ve seen it play out in the workshops I teach across the country. It actually starts with us.
So, a campaign to make people value us more? I’d say we start reminding each other what we’re worth first. And what we’re worth is what we decide we’re worth.
Here’s what i suggest we all do:
1. Figure out what it takes you to live for a year, comfortably (including a little rainy-day money, health insurance and a vacation – a what? a vacation!) Like, not what you think you can squeak by on, but what would it cost to really live the decent life that allows you to function creatively at your best. For everyone it will probably be a bit different. You might have to go back to your taxes and your pay stubs, but really do the math and think about this. This is what normal citizens do.
2. From that annual figure, break it down into a weekly rate, a day rate and an hourly.
3. Next time someone says they want to hire you for some artistic gig or another, see if what they’re offering is going to pay for what your time really costs, based on these rates.
4. If not, then you have some choices: You can decide the work is important enough for you to partially subsidize by taking the lower amount. Or, you can turn it down flat because it’s not enough. OR, you can go back and say, “I need to make more than that for me to be able to do this work, which I really love doing, but I can’t lose money on it or eventually I’ll have to stop. Can you come up with some more.” Maybe they’ll cough up some more dough. Maybe they won’t. Then you all have more choices to make. Either way, you’ll have initiated a conversation that is honest and edifying.
The bottom line is that if you know what your life costs you, then you can start having a real conversation with funders, presenters and colleagues. And you can make meaningful decisions that contribute to how all of us are valued.
We are all subsidizing the arts to some degree. That will not change, probably. But we do have a choice as to how far we’re willing to go with that.