02/26/2016
Hello dear Estheticist:
The problem I am faced with is one that is particular to making work in a debt-ridden, neo-liberal country, and in the midst of budget cuts to the arts (and education, health, etc…).
The national galleries devoted to contemporary art invited me last year to do an ambitious show. The budget was small, but there WAS a budget, and a publication attached to the project. I said yes informally.
But, in the past few months the combination of budget cuts and a large international exhibition depleted the galleries’ budget completely and they are now offering me an exhibition with 0 budget. This means there might be projectors and media players and benches…but no artist fee, no programming budget, no publication, no money for production.
Of course, to accept this state of affairs and do the show is to say to the state that it can cut all it wants, down to nothing, and artists will still do the job for free and subsidize the state’s programming with our own labor. It seems then like the only option is to say no, and this is what I am leaning towards.
I wonder if saying no is enough and I wonder if saying no does what I think it does. Does it have the effect of making de-funding and its consequences visible? Or—in this crisis state is it just going to make the ministry of culture look ineffectual and incompetent and get even less funding? It’s hard to tell.
Another option…would be to use whatever resources the ministry of culture can give me—anything—to design a project that would use whatever these resources are towards a critical project that could create a space for discussion about these precise issues. I wonder if this is a viable option, or if it is still simply extending the problem. Criticality from within…I don’t know about that.
A third option would be to use the time—I have about 7 months—to get grants that would cover some of the costs. This doesn’t seem any better…it is also accepting state budget cuts as a permanent state of affairs.
Anything I’m not seeing here? Is there an ethical option within this?
Dear Artist,
Unfortunately, the conundrum that you face is all too familiar to most artists. In fact you have experienced two situations: first, you were offered a budget and later the budget is taken away from you; secondly, you are given an opportunity to exhibit that, even if the venue is attractive, would put the pressure on you to make it happen.
First it is important to recognize that the way governmental spaces are run is generally chaotic and poorly planned, so any injustice on the conditions under which an artist is invited may more likely be due to incompetence than to a calculated strategy. This is important to keep in mind mainly because any “protest action” you might take (e.g. canceling the exhibition) would probably not be understood by those who work in the museum, nor it would be productive in the short or long run to change the politics around funding of that museum or culture in the city.
It goes without saying, but it needs to be said: in the art world it is best to agree to arrangements through a formal contract. It is true that in many circumstances one is constantly pressured to agree to things on an informal basis. But this generally puts the artist in a very weak position when situations like the one you are describing arise. A contract would have perhaps put you in a stronger position to demand the organization to comply with what it originally agreed to do.
The question for you, now that you are left to your own resources, is what advantages are offered to you by this museum, and if this environment, in it of itself, is worth the economic and creative effort you would put in it. Artists who are invited to the Havana biennial know that this biennial has no budget and no resources, but when invited they usually opt to participate (and search for outside funding) because the context of Havana is of great interest. Would the museum offer you things like visibility, a public event, and any kind of reputational benefit? Is the building in itself of interest? And more importantly, does the context offer an exciting opportunity for you to develop an exhibition that could have positive impact in your career? ( think of the many people who may see the exhibition, or know about the exhibition in the future, without knowing the pains or institutional fights that you went through) You should think about those factors when making your decision, and if you think that the risk and the costs that you will undertake are too much, don’t do it. However, if you do move forward, It is very important to consider here that the last thing you want to do is to accept to do the project there while at the same time publicizing your misery doing it on your own.
If you think that you have been put in a position where you would have to invest greatly to do the work of a number of incompetent workers (which is often the case in these circumstances) you would be better served by either exhibiting existing work or canceling the exhibition altogether and instead produce the project on your own or with people that you can trust and who support your work and your ideas.
Sincerely,
The Estheticist.
