It isn’t every day that I get a resounding response to a blog. I have now had two that have created lots of communication, and one that has garnered lots of attention. Art in the Abstract was a blog that I wrote from a passionate place as a local artist, theorist, lover and philosopher. To be completely frank, this topic has stunted my writing for a while as I have not said everything that I have needed to on the subject. I have had long conversations with several arts people, theorists, lovers and philosophers, and similar things resound with us. You can be guaranteed that this isn’t the last time I treat this topic… It is boiling now below the surface and is in the hearts and minds of many. Artists are not objects! We are not the products even though we have to market ourselves as much as we do our art. Our names, our images and the products of our souls are up on the auction block – people rarely buy art for the art itself, but rather for the name. People don’t talk about a specific piece they bought or saw but rather refer to it through the name: “She bought a Picasso” or “We saw a Warhol”. Even the nature of some art seems deliberately made to exploit that postmodern divorce between art and piece: like a Warhol print – mass-produced, often a simple print, and valuable because the legend attached to it. Being in on the joke and creating for the sake of exploiting postmodern phenomena is one thing (being the subject). Being the object of alienating exploitation is another.
Another point: artists in this community have marketed themselves to the point of being significant on a large scale. With several emerging artists in all disciplines, three major contemporary festivals and a culmination of talent that is rarely seen in a city this size, I would say the artists here have done very well for themselves without the condescending hand of being told they can’t grant write or do business. The fact that the business community and bureaucrats are taking notice now is rather telling of where they sit in the creative process… and it has to do with making money. Culture as a commodity. Not culture as something of beauty, something natural. Whether that commodity is the increasing of status, or money itself, that is where this is angled. I can almost hear Theodor Adorno rolling in his grave at the implications of this phenomenon. The postmodern freakery of every last thing, including the most sacrosanct parts of community being used as a bargaining chip, a piece of meat, yet another thing off which someone can make a buck is truly a loss in some of the greater aspects of being human.
A letter I received:
“I’m reading your blog again about our culture camp experiences. I still find your blog to be the most relevant to my experience.
“I think some of the main concerns during my conversations with the “business minded” revolved around the idea that artists are less savvy business/marketing people-hence the need for the prosperity council to fund art-related industries. I feel that artists are excellent business people that work hard to promote themselves in a highly competitive world with very few funding opportunities available to them.
“As an emerging contemporary artist, I am learning an abundance of new skills related to a practice which is both extremely personal and difficult to market as a commodity. I’ve managed traditional types of businesses in the past and my art practice tends to be multi-faceted. Most of my income is gathered from a combination of events and activities which are spin-offs from my art practice. Such as art instruction, grants, community art events, and artist talks. Only a small portion of my actual artwork results as direct income such as artist fees from public art galleries. My work is extremely large and not currently for sale.
“In my community, artists have cornered the market on DIY marketing. We create our own websites, marketing material, have business cards and are effective grant writers. If the money was given to cultural and marketing industries, I wonder how much (if any) of the prosperity council’s money would actually reach the painters, sculptors and installation artists?
“Some during the culture camp discussions suggested grant writing workshops could potentially help artists succeed. Grant writing workshops are a novel idea to help emerging artists however, there are still only a small amount of grants available for the creation of artwork. Artists are constantly fighting over the same tiny slice of pie.
“I would rather have this money invested in facilitating an environment to help artist directly make their work. Such as the need for good studio spaces in the area, more grants for art projects, the development of more art projects and the creation of an artist-run centre. All of which help us create our work and offer spin-off potential for employment and other sources of income.
“These are just some of my thoughts!
Keep writing good stuff!
Ann H.”
Urbanely Urban 
erich nolan bertussi davies
January 7, 2010
Key issue I observe with the quote “cornered DIY marketing market” Marketing is NOT ART yes it should look nice, sure it should reflect your/Thee Artists brand identity or even Parti, but it is a communication piece and it has some Rules many Artists bend to far to the point of un-usability or poor usability to the point it no longer COMMUNICATES, (btw all caps is actually harder to read 😉 ) and the entire point of marketing is to be quick and communicate a brand effectivly, so that when word of mouth hits, recognition exsists. Simple shit really.
Urbanely Urban
January 7, 2010
OOOHHHhhhh. I am going to leave this one for others to respond to!!! Compelling.. 😉
erich nolan bertussi davies
January 7, 2010
Brand consistency is so important for any market efforts.
to try and imbue ones art into ones marketing efforts is a dis-genuine mis-representation of the actual art it’s self, unless you are doing an art as art marketing as commentary piece as a collection of comments in medium form.
basically, you undervalue your art when you misrepresent it with other mimicries & ill-communicative overly designed and uberly unique marketing items or Artist brand objects.
the only thing that gets in the way of that common business sense is EGO. That is indeed not exclusive to the artist alone.
making and marketing art are two very separate issues, to put your artists art into the business side of your life is just plain lacking of business maturity. if one so chooses to remain un-open to embodiment of more sophisticated memes of marketing self and branding self then they choose to remain in the category prefaced by “starving” exclusively.
in this thing we call life, there are systems. yes we must change them. yes we must challenge them and hold them accountable.
but dear gifted artist do us all a favour and communicate your brand effectively so we can show up to your showings and take in your message in your medium!
Urbanely Urban
January 7, 2010
ah, but you at a showing will not garner the artist money. You, or anyone else at a contemporary arts installation will not get that artist more dollars. No one will buy that “off the wall” piece as it is outside of commodification… well, not always, but often. So what of this brilliant art that cannot be marketed? That is the point. Not all ideas are ones that a company will invest in, but many of these should still be heard. In fact, these are the ones that are probably more important to be heard. However, advancement of humanity and advancement of status or finance rarely meet and breed.
erich nolan bertussi davies
January 7, 2010
if you could eliminate some of the brokering that goes on where too much of the money goes and showings were putting money into their own hands and business management was something that was normalised then those who accumulate resources can play with resources as the old way plays…
at what point do you draw a line, it is too easy to stand up and say “Today i am an artist feed me, so i can create art” o and BTW give me 10’s or 100’s of thousands of dollars so i can do this kewl installation idea that came to me in a vision last night.
i am a metal sculptor at heart, but i am working hard to gain the resources necessary in the business realm before i can create with my hands again.
Urbanely Urban
January 7, 2010
But who doesn’t say that? I am a software developer, but my trade is of capitalist benefit, so feed me. Artists are of capitalist benefit too, but they never reap the rewards that their trade inspires. Never. Even under the best funding formula, there isn’t likely a single artist from Yorkville in the 60s who benefits from the regeneration. No – artists get transplanted, don’t benefit and even when their job is not to do any of these things despite the extraordinary amount of work and commitment they put into this. It is just the trade off. They work their asses off, make the place cool, funky, a place to be-live-think and then are shifted off due to them not being paid, and those who could pay seeing something else fit… like Pottery Barn (which is right across from where Rochdale College used to be!!!). This is the next blog… the place of the muse.
Did you not read my previous blog? Art is deterministic. The artist, doesn’t choose it, nor does society get to choose the art that gets made. It determines it’s own path outside of all of these machinations, these structures. Art is not yours, mine or anyone’s but truly part of something else from muse, genius, synergy. This is the topic of yet another blog… trust me, at this point they will be rolling out faster than I can type. For now they are in the rolodex of my mind.
This is the last I will chime in on this particular line of comment. I am tired and must write a paper. Thanks for chiming in!
T