Thanks peeps for your hysteria-inducing posts.
<ironic> unfortunately my current state of wage-slavery makes it
impossible for me to write a considered response </irony>
R
On 22/04/2014 15:06, James Wallbank wrote:
This is particularly relevant for me, because it's my birthday today.
I wonder how many more opportunities I'm no longer eligible for...
I strongly suspect it's is because, as an industry, the fine arts are
a complete basket-case.
Compare (for instance) the number of unpaid internships with the
number of of paid posts, and you'll realise that MOST arts workers are
working for free. I wonder whether these age restrictions are code for
"Must be naive enough to put up with this nonsense". I don't criticise
organisations that are recruiting these interns, either. They're
simply reflecting an economic reality - which is that a significant
number of arts workers are prepared to gamble their time against the
promise of mysterious, undefined "symbolic benefits" that may (or may
not) manifest some time later.
And there won't be an arts shortage, either. A side-effect of the
wringing out of arts resources outside of London (it's gone way beyond
"squeezing") is simply that artists from less well financed
backgrounds opt out and do something more economically chancey. So -
fine art's inherently the province of toffs - and critical art is
perhaps the most risky type of practice of the lot.
As creative people, we must stop accepting this.
My proposal is a new form of "art working" that considers the economic
transactions around a work, and the enterprise model of the artist
that creates it, as part of the meaning of the work. An artist that
subsidises time-consuming and expensive practice because, well, they
can afford to, must acknowledge that this is part of the meaning of
their practice. Do they have the same relationship to art as an addict
has to their habit? "Lucky I got this job, man... helps me pay for my
regular art fix."
What does that say about how positive art is as a cultural manifestation?
Does this suggest that decorative, crafty and salable arts are
potentially the most economically equitable and incrementally
self-financing, and therefore the location of the most interesting
practitioners? Should we be looking to etsy.com for the next wave of
radicalism? Is "depoliticised" the new "politicised"?
All the best,
James
=====
On 22/04/14 14:32, marc garrett wrote:
Question of age: ‘old’ artists need not apply.
Glasgow-based artist Ally Wallace asks: Why is ageism seen as an
acceptable form of discrimination by so many in the art world?
Looking through the jobs and opportunities on a-n.co.uk recently, I
spotted this listing for a residency in Luxembourg. It looked
interesting, but then I noticed this: ‘Applicants should not be older
than 40 years’. Why 40, I wondered? Why has someone sat down and
decided they don’t want any resident artists over the age of 40?
This age restriction thing always bugs me – especially when there
seems to be no reason for it. Usually the opportunity will specify
that applicants should be under the age of 35, or occasionally even
30. Sometimes, you read these listings and then you’ll have a look at
the organisation’s website, and it’s only when you get the full brief
– maybe at the very end – that it states you have to be under 35.
It’s happened to me so many times: an opportunity will look promising
but then you read on and realise you can’t apply because you’re too old.
When I mention this to people who aren’t involved in the art world
they can't quite believe it. If you apply for a job in any other
realm, it's common practice not to ask your age, sex or race –
positions are generally offered without any prejudice or bias. It
seems so strange that when it comes to art, age discrimination is
relatively widespread. If something is obviously sexist or racist,
we’re pretty much all in agreement that it's a bad thing, but it
seems like we haven’t yet decided if ageism is wrong. We’re all a bit
vague about it.
http://new.a-n.co.uk/news/single/question-of-age-old-artists-need-not-apply
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
