0 Comments

From Leigh French, continued

Given what will be a shortfall, if not initially then quite quickly, Fabiani has stated: “If formed, Creative Scotland will add to the range of funding sources available to artists and creative practitioners. As well as grants, it will develop a wider portfolio of funding methods including loans and investments." According to the same Sunday Herald article, "A spokeswoman from the Creative Scotland transition team said: 'Creative Scotland will be looking at a range of alternative investment models, with the aim of finding and increasing sources of funding.' Tax incentives, venture capital, loans and corporate investment are all potential models previously mentioned by the transition team."

This is a fundamental ideological shift.

Before the credit crunch and the property bubble bursting, there was a received notion (via Richard Florida) that there is such a thing as a 'creative class' intensely interested in cultural goods of many kinds, which in turn gave rise to the idea that cities must 'invest' in and through culture; supposedly-benign terms such as 'creative cities' and 'creative clusters' have become increasingly prevalent as a way of describing culture-led regeneration strategies that appropriate the 'moral prestige' of the creative artist.

An abstract rhetoric of creativity has also become increasingly important to the fueling of labour markets marked by irregular, insecure and unprotected work; this argument in turn has had much wider implications in that it has pushed education policy much more strongly in the direction of a discourse of skills, on the basis that future national prosperity depends upon making-up for a supposed lack of creative, innovative workers. But Creative Industries policy, while seeming to offer a certain freedom of creative autonomy and self-realisation for workers, is in fact explicitly bound up in finding new articulations of existing power relations – the way in which notions of passion for, and pleasure in, work serve as disciplinary devices, enabling very high levels of (self-) exploitation, noting the extremely low levels of union organisation in most cultural industries.

This unqualified policy and theory using the term Creative Industries tends to be based on arguments which all too often come close to accommodating, if not explicitly endorsing, rising inequality and a considerable degree of exploitation associated with contemporary neoliberalism — and now its failure. With 'Creative Industries' policy there is a lack of attention to the way capitalist markets repeatedly work with other processes to produce inequalities of access and outcome in the domain of culture, as in many other aspects of society. Ultimately, the limits of the discourse appear to serve policies that reinforce both economic and cultural inequalities in our societies and diminish real social freedoms which remain enshrined in UNESCO universal declarations. Something the formation of Creative Scotland has no choice but to address, at some level.


0 Comments

From Leigh French, continued

We believe that Creative Scotland will look to generate income streams through the exploitation of 'creatives'. Increasingly, they will be treated as the consumer base for a new financialised system of commercial 'creative' exploitation — indebting artists and exploiting retention of Intellectual Property Rights.

" [T]he cultural industries are seen as complex value chains where profit is extracted at key nodes in the chain through control of production investment and distribution and the key “creative” labour is exploited not, as in the classic Marxist analysis of surplus value, through the wage bargain, but through contracts determining the distribution of profits to various rights holders negotiated between parties with highly unequal power (Caves 2000). [For example, through the exploitation of Intellectual Property Right, as NESTA advocates & promotes] … [T]he political economy approach placed its major emphasis on the technologies of distribution, on the ways in which key economic and regulatory debates were to be seen as struggles over access to distribution under shifting technological conditions without any necessary effect on either the nature of the product being distributed or the relation with the audience. In particular, this analysis stressed the ways in which the profits of the whole process were returned to controllers of technological distribution systems rather than to the original producers of the cultural products or services."
('From Cultural to Creative Industries: An analysis of the implications of the “creative industries” approach to arts and media policy making in the United Kingdom', Nicholas Garnham, International Journal of Cultural Policy Vol 11, No. 1 2005)

Liberal MSP Jeremy Purvis challenged Fabiani over the "provision to provide loans for business enterprise, although we still do not know how that will be delivered, or, indeed, what priority the new organisation will give to business support — as opposed to acting as a grant-making organisation for arts bodies — as there must be some form of financial assistance and there will be a cost in creative Scotland providing such services." Indeed, a significant aspect of the financial crisis has been "financial institutions that aren't banks from a regulatory point of view but nonetheless perform banking functions." (Guardian Weekend, Dec 6 2008) It is doubtful a coincidence that an ex-banker, complicit in 'greed is good' demutualisation and deregulation of financial services, has been placed in charge of overseeing the creation of Creative Scotland Ltd and its transition. No doubt banks would like a little liquidity from the Scottish government via Creative Scotland… and the SNP is desperate to show an independent economy is viable at a time when it has effectively lost two significant financial institutions.


0 Comments

From Leigh French, continued

If Creative Scotland mirrors other European models, and given what the Culture Minister has said to date, the likelihood is that in Scotland, too, there will be significant financial pressure to replace grants with a system of credit or loans for both artists and organisations. Adopting an exploitative commercial model for 'creative' production would immediately place Creative Scotland at ideological odds with cultural organisations and services in Scotland established as not-for-profit. Furthermore, given the economic climate is predicted to worsen, such a move is sure to be ruinous for the organisations and infrastructure reliant on grant funding. There is evidence. A credit/loans system for arts organisation has only recently been tried and tested in Europe, before the height of the credit crunch. It failed. The Catalan Department of Creative Industries is currently under investigation for their calamity.

What of the 'creatives' that are to be the consumer base for any new financialised system of commercial 'creative' development? A study by Push.co.uk, the student guide, in August 2008 expects undergraduate students to be more than £21,500 in debt by the time most graduate in 2011. The normally Labour-loyal NUS has said: "It is clear that many students are sleepwalking into financial crisis. As the credit crunch kicks in, and with food and fuel costs set to rise even further, we can expect more and more students to get into serious financial difficulty, with many having to resort to taking out [additional] commercial loans…" The Council of Mortgage Lenders reported in October that 45,000 homes in the UK are expected to be repossessed by the end of this year.

It is widely accepted that a cause of the current financial crisis was the rampant free-market exploitation of debt/credit and the introduction of speculation and risk into an otherwise marginally more stable affair. With regard to Creative Scotland, we can detect no acknowledgement of this global tectonic shift and the deepening international financial crisis and how it will affect artists in Scotland.

Leigh French, Variant

[email protected]

http://www.variant.org.uk


0 Comments

Value matters

Art and economics. Are they closely related or completely incompatible? I personally go for the former. In the early years of deciding to train as an artist, I remember having deep and prolonged conversations with my father, who was an entrepreneur, walking amongst industrial estates in the stark and difficult working environment of the Puglian landscape. He always used to say to me that being an artist, as well as anything else, is also about understanding and valuing what you offer, be it ideas, products, or life-changing affirmations. And he meant value not only in ideal, but also in financial terms. "People will only value what they perceive as valuable. If you don't value what you do, nobody will". A deceptively simple statement, that has stayed with me all this time.

What are the consequences of that value? What are its characteristics?The concept of "cultural entrepreneur" is one of material as well as idea-related value. Being an artist can't be isolated from the larger economic values and infrastructures that surround us. And at the same time, the monetary value of art cannot be isolated from its idealistic, vocational value.

Throughout my practice as an artist, I have tried to make that value come across in different ways. Questioning why art is necessary, even in difficult economic times, even after a tragedy like a landslide, an economic downturn, an earthquake.

A few weeks ago I was in Gothenburg, Sweden for the ELIA (European League of Institutes of the Art) conference. Zou Xianping, the director of the Department of Music at Mianyang College, a region of China badly affected by the recent earthquake, said to me that especially in those circumstances people need art to restore hope, humanity and belief in future change beyond just survival. An opinion mirrored by that of Rahraw Omarzad, the director of the Centre for Contemporary Art in Kabul, Afghanistan, who said in its manifesto in 2004: "Art should be valued as a major discipline which should contribute to cultural development and the advancement of society."

In this blog, I will be examining that value, interfacing it with the global economic environment that we find ourselves in, drawing from art and non-art economic landscapes.

Links: CCA Kabul manifesto: http://universes-in-universe.org/deu/content/view/…


0 Comments

Incipit

The first post of this blog describes the focus of the NAN event in France, The Artist As Social Entrepreneur. During the event, organised by NAN and Fabrica, Brighton, which involved 15 artists from all around the UK and several artists from France and Belgium, a discussion was made around these points:

On both sides of the Channel, the past twenty years have witnessed the emergence, consolidation and networking of more or less loosely knit associative structures in the field of the visual arts, opening up production, residency and exhibition spaces outside of the established museum and market circuit. The very proliferation of these artist-run spaces, their proximity to often experimental practices, and their hard-nosed determination to withstand the pressures of time and under-funding underscore the extent to which they have managed to offset a palpable deficiency in the institutional artworld. Yet, as they become in their own right full-fledged “social enterprises”, fostering new practices and activities in the creative economy, are these structures not at risk of falling prey to their own success? For better or for worse, have they not already acquired a “proto-institutional” status? Is it their role, their ambition, their fate to operate as “laboratories” and proving grounds for the market and the museums, participating in producing a value that ultimately eludes their capture? It is these questions regarding the paradoxes and the future of these associative structures which will be discussed. Above all, perhaps, in order to deploy these questions in the very place where the institutional market would be inclined to impose its solution.

On our return from France, I felt the urge to start a blog about the issues discussed. What are the political implications of the idea of artists as social entrepreneurs? Can this idea be parallel to the idea of capitalism and reappropriate the word to give it a less self-centred, more ideas-centred meaning?

Links:

NAN:

Fabrica


0 Comments