Can there be multiple streams of benefit?
There are a number of ways we could consider the idea of “benefit” in relation to art. In recent decades the audience (situation, community, context) has become a more direct part of the meaning making process surrounding art and its movements through culture, to the extent that audience is discussed as a material that artists manipulate. The rhetoric of social practice often champions the values of democracy, openness, participation, dialogue and equitable exchange. Whether or not these values are carried out in interactions between artists and communities is a problematic that has been discussed many times and we would like to instead address our attention to the relationships between artists and organizers, in order to understand how “benefit” is negotiated by cultural producers.
In an attempt to concretely analyse this situation, we will look at the example of ourselves being invited to write this blog post. Many unspoken assumptions were made in this process. We assumed there would be no monetary compensation (economic benefit). We considered whether we had time to participate, interest in the project, and if we had something to contribute. We also considered it professionally, as exposure that could lead to other opportunities. In an area of the art world less connected to physical commodities, opportunities and connections are the primary fuel for cultural producers. We wondered who else might benefit from this opportunity; who was not invited? With any project like 100 Questions/100 Days, there must be practical limitations, but given the limit of 100 contributors, what is the benefit of selectively inviting individuals as opposed to creating an open call? An exclusive group might possess more specialized knowledge, while unsolicited submissions might surprise and broaden the conversation. These questions arise from our perception of the implicit values projects such as Open Engagement, and many works under the rubric of social practice promote. The word “open” seems to promote inclusivity and projects that value multiplicity, diversity, and giving voice to underrepresented populations. Is that fair, or are we making gross assumptions?
This last thought had us wondering if there might be other ways to structure such projects. As an extension of the example above, let’s look at this question of benefit from the perspective of labor. For many, the value of labor is most easily understood in terms of money. Whereas social capital is an abstract bet on future opportunity, money precisely quantifies benefit. Say for instance we responded to the invitation to write 500 words with an estimate, paid per word, like many independent contractors do. Would our invitation have been met by negotiations, a contract, or even reconsidered? This isn’t to say that projects need to use money in order to realize the scale of their endeavor, but what other ways might they be completely transparent about the types of exchanges involved? Maybe instead of asking for money we could have asked for higher consideration when determining the artists represented in the next text about socially engaged art (*winks*). Considering questions of who receives benefit and what form it takes could enrich projects that align themselves with ideas of openness and engagement. The exchanges that define relationships between producers and administrators are just as important as the exchanges between artists and communities. These are concerns we (Hideous Beast) often wade through with regard to our organizational projects, and often neglect when structuring our professional artistic practice.
Increasing Consumer Demand Through Exclusivity and Scarcity | Mike Michalowicz | Ask Mike
About the contributor: Hideous Beast is a collaborative effort between two artists, Josh Ippel and Charles Roderick. Since 2004 they have worked organizing structured participatory events, publishing how-to manuals and most recently creating interactive sculptures and installations that examine survival culture.
Currently Hideous Beast operates out of Chicago, IL. Primarily working with non-commercial art spaces, Hideous Beast has exhibited work with a variety artist-run spaces, galleries, museums and festivals nationally and internationally.
Documentation of their work can be found at http://hideousbeast.com