Measuring the experience: the scope and value of artist-led organisations

MEASURING THE EXPERIENCE #38

By supporting artist-led galleries, for example, the funding bodies are supporting the making, showing and contextualising of work by less established artists, encouraging the presentation of visual arts outwith traditional gallery spaces and at the same time providing the established gallery sector with a valuable resource by giving visibility to the up-coming generation of artists. City Racing has commented that its role is to “show people whose work we think is interesting and is not being taken up by a gallery”[1]. By showing Sarah Lucas at an early stage of her career, City Racing introduced her to the Saatchi Gallery thus demonstrating the role of artist-run spaces as ‘stepping stones’ within the gallery hierarchy.[2] London Arts Board has supported this gallery, and others working in a similar way, since 1992, recognising that “some of the most exciting and innovative shows have been organised outside the so-called mainstream galleries. Support of galleries such as City Racing has enabled this gallery to develop a risk-taking programme, show new work and, significantly, allow artists control of what and how work is presented.”[3] Notably, City Racing was one of ten UK artist-run ventures whose work was included in ‘Life/Live’ at Museé d’Art Modern in Paris in late 1996.[4] This was an exhibition which set out to demonstrate that the “degree of development and influence attained by… artists’ collectives in the UK is unique”.

Just like the other types of artist-led ventures examined by the case studies, artist-run galleries present a highly cost-effective way for funding bodies to extend visual arts provision, in that because much organisational work is done on a voluntary basis, the relatively small amounts of funds (in comparison with funds to mainstream institutions) will tend to be spent largely on the exhibitions and projects themselves. As the studies indicate, support to artist-run ventures is often on a project-by-project basis rather than made as an on-going commitment. Although this works to the advantage of groups in that they are not restricted by the conditions placed on regular and larger clients and can respond quickly to new ideas or trends, the disadvantages include having no security on which to plan over and above the short-term, being heavily reliant on the commitment of the artists concerned, and overall, being less able to influence the arts planning processes and therefore the policies to which their work must relate in order to gain support.

This raises the questions about the longevity of artist-led organisations and whether in order to be around in the future, doing the work that they and others perceive to be important, they must as a matter of course begin to conform, adopting the working methods and organisational structures employed elsewhere in the arts world. The case studies demonstrate that in order to achieve their aims, many organisations have made what are radical changes in their approach to running and developing their organisation. Some have chosen not to remain as loosely formed groups in which the processes of art-making are melded with all the other processes necessary to get a project done, moving instead to create a regular institution. Although none have been dragged kicking and screaming to this position, it could be argued that because the larger sums of funds which they know are needed to support their artistic aims are more readily available to formally-constituted organisations, this is a positive disincentive for them to stay as they are. Groups must then decide whether it is better to stay on the outside poking at the system, or whether to join in and hope they can effect change from the inside. In either situation, it is likely that “artists will need to continually shift position to adopt guerrilla tactics, side-stepping and infiltrating bureaucratic and institutional procedures in order to gain space for ideas”.[5]

[1] Matthew Hale, quoted in an article in Everything 7, March 1993

[2] See also Stepping Stones: a study of artist-run galleries, Sarah Clarke, 1994 and Investigating Galleries, Debbie Duffin, AN Publications, 1994

[3] Annual Report, London Arts Board, 1993/94

[4] Others were Bank, Cairn Gallery, City Racing, Cubitt Gallery, Imprint 93, Independent Art Space, Locus+ and Transmission.

[5] ‘Rescuing the Avant-Garde’, Kleinert, Endangered Spaces – Artist-run Initiatives in New South Wales, Sydney Artspace, 1989

MEASURING THE EXPERIENCE #37

As pool of creators, artists might be visualised by the arts funding system as the material in which the arts system ‘tree’ is planted, the seemingly naturally-occurring resource which nourishes the roots so that the tree grows stronger and brings forth healthy leaves and fruits. An alternative visualisation might be to place the artist-constituency around the rim of a wheel which also contains the other enablers and promoters of the visual arts and which is therefore driven by the interaction between, and the combined strengths of, each of its parts. Because such a diagram recognises that all elements hold a equal role within the arts infrastructure, it is a model which offers the “new ways of talking”, describing and understanding things which are crucial not only within the specific area of urban planning[1], but within other areas of social development. This approach also suggests the possibility of interaction and exchange between artists and other disciplines and interest-groups, as well as with the movers and shakers whose beliefs and energies shape the cultural identity of the country and define the part the arts plays within it.

However, regardless of which philosophical framework the arts funding system opts for in future, there will be a requirement to invest more heavily in creativity and in practice of artists, with at the same time an acknowledgement that artistic risk and experiment have the potential to result in failure or no tangible outcome in the short term. As has been noted previously, there is already a renewed interest amongst funding bodies in providing artists with grants for personal artistic development and which, at the same time, contribute to the quality of art activity overall. Ruth Towse has suggested that this is not only justified on artistic grounds, but that “short-term grants for specific innovative purposes to… creative artists are justified on economic grounds; the analysis of artists’ supply functions suggests that such grants could be cost-effective”. Joan Jeffri, however, cautions against the funding system having a too simplistic an approach in terms of the impact of such funds, commenting that “The impetus behind public funding is not that we put this dollar here and we get quality back for that dollar, [but] is to create a critical mass so that quality can emerge”.[2]

Looking specifically at the role of artist-led organisations within this context, the studies show a growing interest across the visual arts profession and the within the arts funding system in this way of working. This is in part because artist-led practice is perceived as being experimental and innovatory and of filling some of the gaps which funders have identified in the range of visual arts provision which exists. Equally though, a practice-lead approach can suggest ways of delivering arts provision or approaching audience development which are new to the funding structure and which provide interesting alternatives which are worthy of investigation.

[1] See The Creative City, Charles Landry and Franco Bianchini, Demos, 1995

[2] Joan Jeffri, Columbia University, USA speaking at ‘The Artists in the Changing City’ conference, 1992.

MEASURING THE EXPERIENCE #36

The case studies similarly highlight how artists-led organisations have contributed to aspirations elsewhere for an enhanced local or regional cultural identity. Funding bodies have been keen to nurture and sustain artist-communities, not least because their presence has been demonstrated as an excellent way to revitalise an area as a prerequisite to economic regeneration. For example, Artspace Bristol’s activities are said by Bristol City Council to fit into strategies aimed at creating a “sustainable city”. The organisation is viewed not only as a providing a valuable resource for artists, but as being capable, along with galleries and other institutions, of making a major contribution to the city’s cultural identity as a whole. The work of The Pioneers is felt to have become a role model for community action across South Wales, not least because the national prizes and awards it has achieved. In terms of its status within Cardiff, the former city council featured the group’s work alongside that of Welsh National Opera in a promotional video to exemplify the quality of arts in the city.

In these situations, it could be argued that the energies and activities of artists at grassroots levels and over a period of time have provided a valuable ‘personal’ face to what is sometimes otherwise perceived to be the ‘institution’ of the arts, serving to deflect the oft-quoted criticism that the arts are an elitist activity and as such have no place in the lives of ordinary people.

In looking at the new sources of funds available to the arts, the National Lottery undoubtedly has the largest resources. In range of awards it makes, the National Lottery seeks to demonstrate that the arts are of value to the broad spectrum of the general public. As the case studies demonstrate, the National Lottery’s substantial funds for capital development have the potential of playing a major role in developing artist-led resources and community-based activities. Such ventures serve to contribute to the artistic vitality, cultural identity and to arts participation within a region or location whilst at the same time providing a secure working environment for practitioners, thus ensuring they can remain in, and contribute to, an area for a period of time. Major funding has already been allocated to groups in Hampshire and Bristol, with other artist-led organisations waiting in the wings. In response to this new and considerable fund, regional arts boards and local authorities have been sharpening their strategies as regards studio provision because these are recognised as not only “being a way to attract capital investment [but also as a way of retaining visual artists in the region”[1] However, as creating artists’ resources and studio provision is only one of the conditions which will enable artists to remain in an area, the funding system will need to address how to fulfil the other conditions. As part of this, it will need to review how and where practitioners fit into the current and future patterns of arts delivery, particularly given the lack of real income-generating opportunities which have been described earlier.

To fulfil their public obligations, galleries, arts centres, agencies and other arts organisations seek ways of engaging with audiences: as visitors, participants in activities and events, purchasers of artworks, sponsors of programmes of work and so on. In addition, these organisations are increasingly expected to engage with partners in the worlds of business and education, and also as a matter of course with other professionals in the arts and other related disciplines. In such a pattern of operation, the common factor is artists. They are the instigators of art, developers of audiences and as creative people, they are committed to activating the relationships and collaborations with other professionals which are crucial to contemporary arts development.

[1] Northern Arts’ Annual Report 1995/96

MEASURING THE EXPERIENCE #35

Such a situation suggests therefore that the arts funding system must have other intentions for its support of artists and artist-led organisations over and above their value as ‘economic units’. An alternative way of recognising the contribution visual artists make might be derived from looking at how their work contributes to a ‘visual arts critical mass’. In order to operate effectively, the arts infrastructure relies on there being a steady stream of artistic activity from which it can select the most appropriate artists and the highest quality work for exhibitions, commissions, residencies, public and private collections and so on. In this way, it is not dissimilar to the world of professional football. This depends for its success on there being a pool of would-be star players, whose abilities are viewed over time by scouts and managers whose job it is to identify new talent and facilitate transfer of promising players up the rungs of the ladder from smaller to bigger clubs and eventually, for some, to the premier league. By supporting the critical mass of artists, the arts funding structure can be said to be ensuring that quality will emerge and investing in artistic posterity.

It has been recognised both historically and contemporaneously that, in their own right, communities of artists are a valuable commodity to a location. This as much because of the ‘life-style’ approach artists adopt and their non nine-to-five pattern of working as because of their willingness to colonise and create an identity for locations which because they are surplus to requirements and run-down (and therefore cheap to rent), are largely undesirable to other users. In such ways, artists are recognised as contributing to the cultural vibrancy of an area, in a climate when culture is used to demonstrate quality of life, social well-being and to indicate economic stability.

The requirement to have a vibrant visual arts critical mass is apparent when looking at the development of arts strategies which are concerned with long-term change. For example, a key aim for Visual Arts UK, the year-long visual arts festival in the North of England, was to engage in new ways with communities and audiences and by doing so, change the poor perceptions of the visual arts that existed there. To achieve this, the Year needed access to the pool of artists nationally and regionally from which the “over 3,000 individual exhibitions, events, commissions and residencies”[1] could be drawn. To be effective, Visual Arts UK as a whole needed a high-quality programme which included the input of well-established artists of national and international status as well as that of artists from the region who were at various stages of their careers. It could be argued that it was these two elements which created the winning combination of high-profile projects which attracted national media coverage and the programme of grassroots activities which, because they involved artists from the area, would appear to have encouraged considerable local and community involvement.[2]

[1] Alan Sykes writing in Northern Review, December/January 1996

[2] The total number of people who visited galleries and events during 1996 was 500,000, roughly double the number from the previous year, see Northern Review as above.

MEASURING THE EXPERIENCE #34

A similar variation in numbers of artists in an area occurs within the case studies. For example, Eastern Arts Board, which covers the counties of Bedford, Cambridge, Essex, Hertford, Lincoln, Norfolk and Suffolk holds a database of visual artists which contains a total of 200 names.[1] In comparison, 250 artists took part in the Cambridge Open Studios between 1993-1995, and 258 artists contributed to the Norfolk & Norwich Visual Arts Festival between 1994 and 1996. However, grant aiding both of these ventures offers Eastern Arts a means of working beyond the relatively small artist constituency already known to it. Notably, both Eastern Arts and the local authorities who assist these ventures view their input as a positive way of assisting a broad range of artists and makers who may otherwise have a limited input to the arts environment.

However, the ability of funding bodies to maintain and expand such areas of support has been limited by the funds available and the call made on them by a diverse range of arts organisations. This raises the question of how the arts funding system can hope in future years to respond to the expectations and artistic aspirations of a growing and arguably more street-wise artist population. Support to artists policies have tended to focus on improving artists’ economic base through involvement in public art and community-based schemes, provision of training, advice and information aimed at heightening their business acumen, and support of artists’ resources including studios and workshops. However, the over-supply of artists which has been identified by recent research will inevitably affect the level of income that might in the future be achieved by artists. This is because a larger artist population has the effect of reducing opportunities for each one to be economically viable, whether through sales of work or provision of visual arts services or by achieving art world recognition through exhibitions, commissions, prizes, etc.

In any case, as has been referred to earlier, the profession of visual artist is not readily defined in economic terms. The recent research by the National Artists Association[2] has confirmed earlier studies by Ruth Towse[3] and others which had demonstrated that artists exist on extraordinarily low levels of income and that only a small percentage can hope to earn their main income from their artistic practice. It would therefore only seem to be possible for more artists to earn any income from artistic activity if the volume of opportunities for paid work and the various ‘markets’ for artwork were to increase dramatically, and there is no evidence so far that this is likely to be the case. Indeed, it has been argued that a pool of artists operating in highly-competitive conditions is a prerequisite of a thriving art scene, just as a capitalist economy depends for its efficacy on a high level of unemployment.

[1] Note that this figure was provided by Eastern Arts which was in the process of updating the database. The Crafts Council study above suggests there are 1,387 craftspeople in the Eastern Arts Board area.

[2] Draft report on fees and payments to artists, Phyllida Shaw & Keith Allen, National Artists Association, 1996

[3] See surveys discussed in The economics of artists’ labour markets, Ruth Towse, Arts Council of England, 1996