John Smith
Thoughts From My Studio WHAT IS AN ARTIST? I was asked recently by a very dear friend of mine, who has been reading my articles for years, why these articles tend to look on the ‘darker’ side of art, and if it is so problematic, why do it? Cecil started school with me many years ago and has been my close friend ever since. He has been enormously successful in the corporate world and is an art collector who has a keen interest in the visual arts per se, so it would have been silly to dismiss his question. His question set off the ‘Thoughts from my Studio’ process once again. “If art is so tough and fraught with unanswerable questions and obstacles, WHY BE AN ARTIST – especially a professional artist? I have spent a lot of time thinking about this, and it seems that it is the more established artists who tend to have a rather jaundiced view of the current art situation. Perhaps with some reason, that is that they have lived and worked through changing times. The new less established artists, and artists who are not so dependent on their art for their livelihood and who know only the contemporary scene, accept the current situation as ‘just the way it is and imagine it to be the way it has always been’. The older artists remember how thing had been in the past and what is possible and so draw comparisons. Being of that older group I tend to think things are not the best they could or should be and try to expose problems and possible solutions by highlighting them in places such as in these articles. The hope is of getting people to think about the options. (To some that may appear to be dark?) An interesting fact is that most of the letters I receive supporting my observations and suggestions are from the longer established artists, and the letters of censure are most often from the less established artists. Very interesting! This sort of jaded view of the current art situation also spills over into another area of the visual arts, and that is the definition of painting professionally, semi-professionally or as an amateur. I originally intended to write an article on this subject alone, and sent out a questionnaire to a fairly wide range of people to ascertain what artists and industry member’s opinions were, and found the subject to be a veritable ‘hot-potato’. Everyone seemed to have a different take on it, and in some cases appeared to find the subject quite emotive. After this I thought, “Does it really matter what people call themselves, and perhaps I should rather discuss something less controversial and make everyone happy?” That wouldn’t be me! My objective is to get people to think about things pertaining to the practice of making visual art and if possible to try and find solutions to those problems as I have already indicated. The first time I became aware of the debate relating to who should be called a professional painter/artist and who not, was many years ago when I was invited to a meeting at the Johannesburg Civic to discuss the formation of a Visual Arts Networking organisation. This eventually became, and in fact is still known as VANSA (Visual Arts Network of SA). This was to be the sister organisation to similar network organisations in the Performing Arts, Crafts, Literature etc., so was no lightweight group. This was a serious meeting and there must have been thirty representatives from most areas of the Visual Arts. There were among others academic lecturers, artists, curators and administrators. I was in fact quite overawed by the whole thing. That aside, we had hardly begun discussing the embryonic organisation when this thing came up about who was considered a professional artist and who not. When you are pottering away in your studio supplying one or two local galleries it really does not make much difference what you are known as. Call yourself artist, painter, sculptor etc who cares, but when you move into the wider fields of art, it seems it does matter. Here being known as an artist or professional artist describes pretty much what you do and in fact who you are. I guess it is a bit like comparing a nurse and doctor. The nurse is in medicine and does a great many things the doctor does but does that make her/him a doctor? I must add that the problem wasn’t resolved although some did believe that at least part of a ‘Professional Artist’s’ income should emanate from the sale of artworks through reasonably reputable outlets. Also there are many Painters and Sculptors producing excellent work that may be described as Semi-professional. Later the same debate came up while I served on the Council of the KZNSA (KZN Society of Art) it seemed to me that here the ‘Title’ was claimed by decree rather than earned. Some say it really doesn’t matter, but I think it does because until it is resolved, like so much else in the Visual Arts community it will cause confusion. As things are the Visual Arts are in a terribly confused and fractured state which is not good for anyone. When I started thinking about writing this article I went to the most obvious place to find some resolution, and that was to my dictionaries. The two huge tomes we have were almost as confusing as the debates, (Perhaps a reason to ask for a new dictionary for my birthday?), but then I had a peek into my little South African Oxford word book that I keep in my office, and this is what it says – I quote: PROFESSION noun 1.An occupation that requires special education and training. “PROFESSIONAL adjective 1 of a profession. 2 Doing a certain kind of work as a full-time job for payment, not as an amateur.” I believe that similar to becoming a lawyer where education and training is concerned, {see PROFESSION noun} artists can be trained outside of academic institutions e.g. such as articles in the legal or accounting professions. Not so very long ago that was in fact the training method used in all professions. When I sent out the questionnaire I had some really interesting responses relating to expertise, excellence and things that one would imagine would be part of being ‘professional’. One response did give me pause for thought and that was from Lara who felt that if one is going to define professionalism then one should also make some attempt at defining ‘Artist’ or in our case Visual Artist. This is as much a hot-potato as ‘Professional’ but again I felt I should peep into my little SA Oxford dictionary, and see what they had to say on the matter before taking a great leap of faith. This is what it says. As in its description of PRO, it says very simply: ARTIST noun 1. A person who produces works of art. 2. An entertainer… and then artistic adjective 1. Of art and artists 2. Showing skill and good taste.. A person who ‘produces works of art’ – with the accent on ART? Very simply stated it could be understood to mean that a Professional Artist then is someone that has paid his or her dues of 10,000 hours In a survey I sent to you recently compiled by a University in Canada, certain statistics were presented and I was surprised at how many people responded to those statistics with concern and surprise. We have very much the same thing here. That there are a huge number of people who own paint sets calling themselves ‘artists or professional artists’. Conversely there are very few making a living out of their ART. In a survey a few years back when an Arts tabloid was trying to find where they should position their publication, they found that less than 10% of the Visual Arts/Artists community were academics or were interested in the Academic/Contemporary sphere of Visual Arts. If accurate (and I have no reason to believe that it wasn’t accurate) then this leaves 90% of artists who are not academics, and who do not earn a living from lecturing, claiming to be Professional Artists? This poses another question. Can people who teach art be considered to be Professional Artists? Surely they are professional lecturers and teachers rather than professional artists? Of course people can be both lecturers and artists or even professional artists, but one doesn’t necessarily follow the other. One can assume that as in Canada, (In Canada 900,000 artists) there are in South Africa a huge number of people calling themselves professional artists and artists who are in fact not? What are they then? Are they amateur painters or sculptors? Is being an amateur artist, or artist in training a bad thing? Some seem to think so even though I cannot imagine why! People are happy to be amateur golfers or tennis players and are happy to participate in those pursuits and pay to do that, not at any stage expecting any compensation. Strange then that when it comes to painting or sculpture everyone expects to be paid large sums of money, even though by comparison to golf etc. art is a comparatively cheap hobby. We also cannot omit the Semi Professional artist. These are artists that retain a full time job but are highly competent artists who sell their work through very reputable outlets, often for very high prices. I know a few of these people and have the highest regard for them. An excellent example of this was Irmin Henkel who was an esteemed orthopaedic surgeon while at the same time being one of the countries leading artists. It now begs the question: can a painter who sells a few paintings at essentially amateur exhibitions or shows really call themselves professional? Does selling the odd painting at such outlets entitle you to the right to call yourself ‘Artist’ and ‘Professional’, or does it require persistent selling through established outlets? (I do appreciate that some very experienced professionals do self-market via inter alia the Internet, and have every right to refer to themselves as Professional Artists) Does this mean however that every painter who has a website or advertises via the net is a professional artist? We have had a fairly incisive look at artists, both professional and amateur so far but what about the market that those artists work through? An academic at the opening of an exhibition some time back mentioned that they had done some research at the Pretoria University where they found that there was something like 36,000 establishments in SA calling themselves Gallery. One has to wonder how many really are? That question we will come back to at a later stage! The three important issues discussed above are: I guess the last question is like asking why climb mountains? Partly it is to see if one can do it. I was interviewed some time back, and in the conversation all the many problems facing the arts and artists came up. The interviewer frowned at me and then asked if things were so difficult for artists, then why do it? She asked if I had a chance to start all over again what would I do or be? I thought about it for a while and eventually decided that if I had a second chance I would have no hesitation in becoming a career artist all over again, warts and all. I love it and can think of nothing else I would rather do or be. Although they often drive me wild I love the people in the arts, the work especially, the excitement of each day, so full of surprises one just can never be bored. Not even for one minute, and most of all the never ending challenges. I assume that other artists both professional and amateur feel the same way. Many make a lot of money. Others make very little. This thing called art has many facets. That is everything from painters and sculptors who work out formulas and do the same old thing day in and day out, but financially do very well, to those breaking new ground all the time. All are important and part of the whole. So now we must ask ourselves these probing questions “What is an Artist?” What is a Professional Artist?” and “Why do people become Artists?” I have given you my ‘thoughts’ and observations, but you decide! Till next month.... |
||||||