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

MEASURING THE EXPERIENCE #40

There are, however, tremendous differences between the ability of a new group and a well-established one like Artspace to handle the development curve which is necessary. Artspace has had many years to develop its organisational and communication structures and work out how to manage studio space which houses artists with a range of interests and who come and go according to their career needs. A new group needs time to assemble the right mix of personalities and interests, to hone its vision, to assimilate the skills and contacts and, above all, to decide if it wants to think that big.

If it does wish to access lottery funds, with its requirements for formal constitution, an artist-led organisation has to move very quickly to sharing both leadership and vision with others who will have their own motives for getting involved. If such a collaboration becomes a meeting of minds, it is all to the good. But if it doesn’t, the danger is that an organisation is established which may not ultimately be in tune with the artists’ vision and which artists will subsequently reject. This raises the issue of the difference in speed between the way that arts managers and artist-led organisations operate and develop, with the underlying assumption, perhaps, that artists tend to act too slowly and need to be chivvied along to fit various deadlines and strategy plans.

Conversely though, the holistic approach which artists take means that decisions on one aspect of activity need to be set into the context of their practice as a whole, and all aspects of its impact carefully considered before major decisions are made. It may be in some cases that a group will decide to remain small and flexible, even if it means it loses opportunities for public funding. Within the case studies, for example, although Red Herring would like a permanent studio base, within the group there are mixed feelings about whether to pursue this in case their working practices and the ethos of the group are unduly influenced by the requirements of funding bodies.[1]

However, it could be argued that if artists want access to public funds, they simply have to get real and accept the conditions attached to them. Some comments within the case studies reflect such opinions. An alternative view however, is that it may be that a more vital and responsive arts infrastructure will be developed in the long-term if the value of artist-led organisations is more fully acknowledged, and a more flexible and sympathetic approach taken to enabling such groups to fulfil their artistic vision.

This may include reviewing the conditions under which funds can be made available, as well as the processes for monitoring and accounting for them. In addition, as the requirements for dealing with and accounting for National Lottery funds appear to be particularly complex to handle for smaller-scale organisations where staffing levels are deliberately kept low and much work is done voluntarily, it could also be argued that a more ‘user-friendly’ system needs to be evolved which recognises this.

[1] Brighton & Hove Groups case study

MEASURING THE EXPERIENCE #39

This also raises the issue for the arts funding system as regards future investment in the work of artist-led organisations. The commitment of artists to achieving artistic vision has resulted in a considerable amount of valuable work being achieved on low resources. It could be argued therefore that directing additional resources to this area of work would help to avoid the ‘burn out’ in artists which is caused by an over reliance on voluntary work, and would represent a good return in terms of providing an on-going stimulus to the arts environment overall. An assessment of the level of funding which is required to enable artist-led organisations to sustain and develop their artistic practice and achieve their potential would therefore be timely.

However, making increased support conditional on creating permanent institutions may be counter-productive. Because artist-led organisations tend to grow up in response to a particular situation and are seeking to influence and make changes to that situation, it is reasonable to assume that will last only a short time, and the artists move on to work in new contexts. Such groups should not nevertheless be considered as failures, nor financial support be regarded as a waste of money by those who championed the groups. It may be, though, that it will be worth investing again in the key artists, not least because they have demonstrated they are capable of finding creative and original solutions to aspects arts delivery.

Although they are hard-pressed in terms of work-load, it would be beneficial for arts officers to look for ways of locating artists-led practice as a whole within their arts strategies, rather than dealing essentially with specific groups which they fund. This might be achieved by encouraging forums at which ideas and projects are discussed. By offering advice and suggesting useful contacts, groups would be provided with moral support for their work, even if cash grants were not always available.

The large new sums available to the arts through the National Lottery are set to have a huge impact on future arts provision overall in the country and this presents particular challenges for artist-led ventures. As the case studies show, this source is highly significant to artist-led studio and resource-based ventures which previously had access to few sources for capital development.[1] Undoubtedly, lottery awards have been invaluable to a group like Artspace Bristol which has been able to use the grant in conjunction with other funds already raised to progress a development strategy which has been honed over many years and which, so far, has remained broadly in tune with the needs of the artist-constituency. This group’s success will encourage other existing groups to follow suit. At the same time, the arts funding system has noted Artspace’s success and, recognising that studio provision plays a major part in the retention of artists in an area, is encouraging artists to form into groups and follow their example.

[1] The Foundation for Sport & the Arts has been a good supporter of artist-led ventures and between 1992 and 1996 awarded £662,705 for studio and resource development. In comparison, National Lottery funds through the Arts Council of England has already provided almost £2.4 million for similar activities.

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