We're pretty broke most of the time; charging "small" amounts depends on who's calculating. I wouldn't mind paying for services rendered, i.e. showing, but I do mind paying for someone else to show, i.e. for me to be judged and then turned down. Artists in the US at least have it bad; there's very little money for avant work of any sort, and what there is, is increasingly drying up. What money's available usually goes into health care. $20 for submission might seem small, but if you enter 6-7 of these contests - for that's what they are - you end up paying substantially.
- Alan On Sun, 9 Jan 2011, marc garrett wrote: > Hi Catherine & all, > > I personally do not have an issue with anyone charging a small amount to > get a project into gear. I have been involved in various shared ventures > where the group throws money in the tin to get things happening, > especially if there is no funding for the project out there. Which is > more apparent these days, with the neoliberalist attack on humanities > across the board. > > And yes - I agree, why people are paying the money in the first place > needs to be openly declared so others can make a decision on whether > worth it. It also depends what the actual project is, people could be > being payed for travel, fees for showing and all quite minimal. It does > raise ideas around the concept of crreating a functional system which > allows a kiinf levelling system, which produces a layout where every > monetary interaction is seen as part of the process of doing the > project. It would have to be small though, inputting the data would be > quite demanding. > > wishing you well. > > marc > > > > > I'm glad people are mentioning it, because there seems to be a very > large group of even otherwise economically and politically aware artists > who have no problem with submission fees. While I understand the ideal > that even guerilla administrators (curators, fundraisers, pr people, and > the like) ought to be respected for their work, perhaps by payments of > money or reimbursement for expenses... at the lowest level, one is > paying a fee for a service or product that one can execute alone. And why? > > > > But when did it become ok to charge fees, in time? > > > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Michael Szpakowski <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Except under very exceptional circumstances I don't submit for > things that involve fees and I've backed out of shows when even a small > one has been retrospectively raised. If people want to mount shows they > should do the proper preparation and raise funds, preferably enough > (although I appreciate this is entirely unrealistic) to pay a fee the > artists they show > > . > > An interesting test is whether the person behind the call is > salaried/in receipt of a fee... > > > > cheers > > michael > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NetBehaviour mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > == email archive: http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/ webpage http://www.alansondheim.org music archive: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/ current text http://www.alansondheim.org/qv.txt == _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
