There's a mighty ginormous topic I've been putting off for quite a few weeks now, largely due to the fact that my synapses have been firing pretty much nonstop on the right side of my brain, leaving the left side with no other choice but to go on vacation--anyone wanna come over for the slide show? In other words, I've been feeling mentally lopsided, and that's no condition to be in if you're gonna tackle an issue requiring logical thought combined with emotional understanding, now is it? No it ain't.
But today I'm fairly confident that the whole of my gray matter is engaged--you, of course, will be the ultimate judge of that--and, thus, I am taking this opportunity of clarity to lay out an argument against--wait for it--rampant volunteerism in the arts and cultural community!
"Wha?!" I hear you cry. "Surely the arts/cultural community cannot survive without volunteerism. You've finally gone off the deep end, Cricky!" I hear ya, peeps, and to some extent I don't disagree. But hear me out before ya give a call to the men in the white coats 'cause I think ya may find some sound points in what I have to offer up, 'kay? 'Kay.
To be perfectly clear, I am not calling for an end to all forms of volunteerism--I love volunteers! I hug 'em snug in my heart and call 'em very my own. Nor am I calling for all arts and cultural groups, institutions and organizations to stop using volunteers because, well, that would indeed spell doom for many and give good reason for my admittance into the nearest rubber room. So, just to briefly accentuate the positive here, we all heartily agree that volunteerism in general is a good thing and that art lovers who choose to give of their time, and maybe their money, are our very bestest friends in the whole wide world--let's keep that particular ball rollin'.
What I am calling for is an end to the abuse of artistic/creative volunteerism. Specifically, for large and medium arts/cultural institutions and orgs to end their expectation of artists and creatives to volunteer each and every time they call, and for artists and creatives to end their constant tendency to give in to that expectation time and time again.
Why do I not include small arts and cultural groups in my call? Simple, because they more often than not display a remarkable restraint in the amount of time, effort and skill they ask artists/creatives to volunteer, and because they exist on the very real brink of collapse every moment of every day and cannot accomplish their goals any other way. They are also the most surprised, grateful and generous when they do get volunteers, ferreting out amazing ways to offer compensation and making the kinds of sacrifices that wouldn't even appear on the radar screen of larger institutions and orgs. Besides, small groups and independent artists will always survive no matter what.
But to get to the heart of the matter concerning the abuse of artistic/creative volunteerism, we need to ask a question: Is there a point when volunteerism within the arts and cultural community itself becomes a disservice to the community as a whole? It is my argument that, yes, there is, and it comes at the precise moment when both the institutions/orgs and the artists/creatives reach a conciliatory agreement of expectation, culminating in an unsustainable situation for the institutions/orgs and a consensual cycle of abuse of the artists/creatives. Phew! Got all that?
Let me explain. As much as we all like to believe that art and culture do not constitute an "industry"--eew, I feel dirty!--they do, and we willingly drink from that figurative trough, no matter how icky it makes us feel, when we need to explain to government, business, foundations and the general public why art and culture are worth supporting monetarily and otherwise. But here, good people, is our shameful secret: There is no other legitimate industry on this planet that asks and expects its inventors, creators and builders to give so much of their talent, skill and knowledge without compensation. We, unfortunately, win that prize.
How did we get here? Very easily, it turns out. See, a loooooong time ago there were no arts and cultural institutions and organizations, there were just rich folks--ya know, kings, queens, dukes, emperors, god kings, et al--and, in the Western World, what we so generally call The Church--that's the Roman Catholic Church--who would hire artists and creative types to make stuff for 'em. During these times, a measurable number of lucky artists got contracts for commissions and countless numbers of unlucky artists either died in obscurity or got their heads chopped off 'cause the rich/clergy folk didn't like what they created, said or did. Ah, it was a gentle time.
Then came the spreading peasant revolts, bringing death to feudalism, which was followed by the establishment of democratic leaning nations, the Industrial Revolution and the current Age o' The Internets™. Over these hundreds of years, a new sense of artistic freedom swelled and new economies were born, and, lo, arts and cultural institutions and organizations were founded.
At first it seemed like the perfect system to allow many more artists and creatives to realize bigger and better opportunities than had been available in the past. If we work together, the thinking was, we can create a stable and sustainable working life for us all! And that theory, for the most part, held true for a time.
But then a slowly creeping shadow began to move across the community. It seemed that the larger the arts and cultural institutions and organizations got the more they began to expect the artists to give of their time and talent for free. Concurrently, the more artists consented to give of themselves and their talent the more they began to believe that this was just part and parcel of the artistic life and who were they to balk at not being offered payment or equal-value barter.
And so it is that, by our own collective failure to perceive the insidious nature of the shadow, all of us--artists, creatives and anyone working for arts and cultural institutions and organizations--now find our work underappreciated and undervalued, both within our own community and the larger society.
To be sure, the blame is equally shared. The problem was stealthy in its approach and not easily recognized when pressing concerns continually cropped up elsewhere, but now that we see it for what is we must drive it back by valuing each other for what we are truly worth, and that translates into compensation.
For large and medium arts and cultural institutions and orgs, it means you must reevaluate your budgets and pay scales, and start treating artists/creatives with the respect they deserve through fair compensation. An executive director or similar bigwig shouldn't be making 200 to 300 times more than the lowest paid artist who actually performs/creates the work. As much as you think you've dug into your budgets, there is always waste--boy howdy!--that can be shifted to pay artists and creatives for their time, effort and talent. In plain fact, your primary mission is to support and cultivate art and by association the artist, and without that you have no reason to exist.
For artists and creatives, it means you must to learn how to say "No!" to the abuse of rampant volunteerism. I know it's difficult and an extremely emotional issue, but you have a right to value your skills, your talent for what they are worth and, baby, if you don't do it nobody will.
For all of us, we must rid ourselves of the scurrilous abuse that has brought us to this sorry state. If we cannot find a way to value the work each of us does, why then should anyone else value it?
Comment away, peeps!
