Chris Drew on Thu, 23 Mar 2000 00:43:50 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> ART-ACT Notes 17 |
[ART-ACT unsubscription info deleted @ nettime--tb] Check out Brian Dailey's submission to ART-ACT at http://www.art-teez.org/artists/bd1r.htm Also check out the new additions to our Screen Print Workshop for Artists at http://www.art-teez.org/artists2/ic3.htm WEBSITE ISSUES The latest art submission page above is a different design from those going before. It puts the art at the top of the page. It places our logo and titles at the bottom. Is this a better design? Should we make it our template and apply it to all our art pages? I had an interesting time at the "Building Democracy Conference" put on by the Center for New Community ( http://www.newcomm.org ) this past March 10-11th. I debuted "comment fliers" inviting the public to make comments on eight images from ART-ACT submissions or to visit our site to comment on the other art submissions posted. It was a mailer that folded to enclose the comments. It is another opportunity to promote our site. It is also a way that someone not connected to the Internet could contribute to and participate on the World Wide Web. This is another small way we are bridging the digital divide! If we can't bring the Internet to them - we can still bring them to the Internet. CONTINUED FROM ....The Beginning We nearly died on that highway together but as you can tell - it was not meant to be. So how did Alvin Carter, the oil painter whose murals dotted the landscapes of African American communities around the Twin Cities, and I meet? When I left the University of Minnesota in 1975 to move to St. Paul Minnesota a counterpart of mine at the Art School, similarly filled with the spirit of adventure, sought association with a collective dominated by Arts Institute (of Minneapolis) graduates. They exhibited in community places - shopping malls and had perfected their techniques of on the fly exhibits. Retail centers in refurbished factories that needed artists to give them an image boost, in community centers, at colleges - where ever an upwardly mobile audience could be accessed and/or their mailing list could be encouraged to visit - they put on shows. They were the avante-guard of the Twin-Cities art scene and they practiced their brand of community art by busting out of the museums - by putting art out in trendy and not so trendy - accessible - locations. These young artists supported by activists attacked foundations and government funders alike in the 60's and early 70's for funding mainly major institutions. They demanded these institutions be accountable and serve everyone more equally. They made "community art" a buzzword in funding circles. Throughout the 70's small art agencies and groups found fund raising much easier than now. Twenty years of cutback to the community sectors of our national life have left community arts activitiy unencouraged. A few of the collective were great proposal writers with some connections established at the Institute. They were ready to share some of the wealth and knowledge with other artists struggling to show. This says much about their belief in the "community arts" because as blessed as they seemed with respect to others and to today, they still had to create their events and art largely in a vacuum of support with liberal elbow grease to make events happen. They held their arts group together for well over a decade and presented a number of new artists. They built themselves a niche in the youthful twenties something, thirty something's crowd, on the edge but with a foot in the mainstream. They earned the title - survivors! They were business slick. They knew how to use developers who used them for gentrification. They advanced their cause of community art in the cracks and corners of society. That was and remains simply a reality artists deal with. For many a businessmen the role of an artist in society is as a tool to gentrify a community - to move poor people elsewhere and to move upper income people in. They see artists as a dime a dozen and the art as an investment - like a bond. Once artists, who invest their sweat equity over a five to ten year period to build their art business at a location taking advantage of the low rent, are successful at attracting their audience to the community being gentrified then the rents rise. When the rents rise and the artists must move they lose the business value to the location they advertised for so long. It is not a good deal over the long haul for most artists . In the ethnic communities in urban America - the artist - who becomes part of a community - can experience a social role that is much more meaningful. In the ghetto, an active artist is a leader able to create cultural visions that inspire and for this draw support from the community. This can encourage an artist to pursue directions outside forces (mainstream art circles) would never patronize. If the artist is from outside a community - involvement in that community's arts life is an entrance to acceptance in that community. The arts create an atmosphere conducive to communication and people are primed to relate with one another. Artists can not onlyn make a community attractive to outsiders, we can make it attractive to anyone and raise everyones cultural standard of living without any change in wages.This is another reason small community art centers are so important. The community artist slugs it out in the inner-city alongside the local residents. Life in the big city is not always kind. It is well known that those that fight a war together tend to bond. The spirit of creativity in the midst of depression that an artist exudes tells others of an indomitable streak that runs through us all which we can be access in times of need. No matter how often many of these artists are excluded, belittled or berated for defining their own aesthetic by art circles of society - these artists have a home in their community and they have an audience. They create a cultural foundation for their audience by producing art with without condescension and expressing pride in who they are, without apologies. Yes, there is such a thing as a community artist. There would be many more and our urban quality of life would be better if support were encouraged. I met Alvin Carter at Inner City Youth League when I hired on to teach photography to teenage youth-at-risk in 1978. What I had to do to get this job is a story. This was a very rare period in our urban arts history. Another person named Carter was President. President Carter had re-organized the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) putting artists on the top of the priority list for employment in community related ventures. Non-profit organizations from the most prestigious to the lowliest benefited from this wise decision. Ronald Reagon reversed all this in 1980, just as the arts were beginning to make great strides in improving life in urban areas of America. His policy slashed funds for to inner-city communities. I found out about President Carter's action when two artists hired through CETA showed up working at the Summit-University Free Press. I was suspicious and a bit jealous. For over two years, I had volunteered at the Free Press while working a part-time night job for minimum wage. I had paid dues but someone else was getting paid. I swallowed my pride for the sake of the Free Press and resolved to investigate this. The artists were both writers, a man and a woman. The man was several years younger and just out of college by three months. The woman was about five years older - just turning thirty. Both were caucasian but any closeness ended there. He was a preppy suit and tie guy. She was a radical lesbian feminist. She proved to understand our community much better than he did. The editor, Hardy Wright, assigned me to shoot photos with the guy. He was to interview the Executive Director of the Inner-City Youth League, an art center serving the African-American community on Selby Avenue about the role his institution played in the area. At the interview the Director accepted the weak questions my partner offered and with little trouble turned the discussion around to make his points. He stated that African Americans have been systematically excluded from the visual arts - on TV and from other "mainstream" forums with possible the exception of musicians. We need institutions like Inner-City Youth League for our community to build our own cultural directions. The youth in this community have no where else to go. Where else can they can study oil painting, photography, boxing, videotography and theater in one place with instructors sensitive to their needs and culture? We produce art comparable anywhere, he assured us. Film projects coming out of these workshops have won awards in national festivals. We do the art and work wonders with youth the schools can't handle. Yet - it's the "blue blood" arts that gets all the funding. We work wonders with troubled youth and produce excellent art but still struggle over just the crumbs...." The Executive Director presented a view of St. Paul and its institutions that my partner was not eager to hear. After this session my partner came away confused. Nothing prepared him to hear this attack on his exalted system. He felt great work and great acts rose to the top like cream on milk. Racism? Exclusionist? Political Considerations? He admitted none of these. "I can't get a grip on this story," he said when I returned with printed photos from our visit. He never wrote the piece. I did. The guy did not last. He went to COMPAS the prestigious downtown "blue blood" arts agency where access to the important people in the city - where the big cultural funds went. When his time was up on the CETA program he accepted an assistant editorship of the Public Radio - statewide magazine. His career track was set for life. I learned about the way CETA worked from the lady. She respected me for remaining a volunteer - willing to help her in her job even though she was paid and I was not. When the paper went to bed -I would do the all-nighter with Hardy Wright and his new assistants, laying he type out and sizing the photos. She described how the program was set to start three months after college student graduated in the spring. The requirements were that an "artist" be under or unemployed for 90 day or longer. To be underemployed required that an artist not work more than 15 hours a week. The problem is that any artist trying to make it by working a typical low paying part-time job could not pay rent without working more than 15 hours a week. Most of those eligible were college graduates living with parents for their three months after graduation. That was my short lived partners case. My guard job paid minimum wage. I kept it because it was flexible and I could write on the night shifts I worked. My hours varied between 20-36 hours per week. I was not eligible. Always I had worked with great pride in paying my own way. Now, at the age of 27, I considered a drastic change. I was considering quitting my job as a Security Guard and moving to Duluth to go on welfare for the first time in my life so I could become eligible to work as an artist in a community that needed my services. I wanted to be paid, too. (to be continued). # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net