Creativity - and making a living

[Dave2002]

This article is interesting - https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...he-digital-age

Many creative people "work" for very little financial reward. A tax system which then retrospectively dismisses their claim for what might have been reasonable expenses and then penalises them further does not seem helpful.

One could argue that people who do such creative "work" are not doing anything "valuable" - thogh in the example quoted it would seem that although the rewards weren't great, there was sufficient interest to generate some sort of income on which to survive.

Over centuries people have worked in creative fields, and maybe sometimes doing and creating work which they enjoyed, though often their work/output was determined by market forces - yes - even centuries ago.

For a present day example, many photographers are not particularly keen on wedding photography, but that is where many of them make their money. They do the weddings and cross subsidise their other activities.

There are doubtless many examples in the field of music. Currently much of the money seems to be in films, but does that mean that many composers really enjoy or want to write film music? Well - actually some may enjoy the challenge, but it may not be what they would do if they had a completely free hand. There may be at least three aspects of survival for a creative artist:

* creating a marketable product or output
* responding to challenges - as an intellectual stimulus - which may or may not be financially viable
* producing work which at least in the short term gives minimal financial reward - perhaps out of a desire to do it, rather than for monetary benefit

To this I'll add another one, which I think is important for some - but not all - creative workers:

* working with other people

though in the last case there are some artists who really don't like working with other people, so it's not a universal.

[johncorrigan]

Thank you, Dave. That was very interesting. Sadly, there is a sense that in our modern world art is a luxury. My wife is an artist. Over the years she has painted, drawn, printed, often supported by community art work, teaching etc. Every so often over our years together she has found a wee niche where people are interested in an element of her work. I remember once she was doing a whole project around the automation of the lighthouses on Scotland's coasts, gathering stories for families of lightkeepers, and creating work from it. It attracted a lot of attention and people asked for more, but she was already off exploring some new avenue for her art. 'I'm not doing that anymore,' I recall her saying to me. That's the artist for you, I suppose.

When the kids were young she was the person who created the backdrops for the school play in the village hall etc, the posters for fundraisers, and, of course, like other artists in the area, people would look for pieces of work for a raffle, like you've got lots to give away. There was an expectation that this was something that she enjoyed doing and she was obviously good at it so she should do it for nothing. It's an interesting idea...the contribution of the artist is so often undervalued, not seen as a real job. And yet I see the delight that people who have worked with her get when they realise that she can help them find and release some element of their creativity. And she loves that too, seeing students have work accepted for prestigious shows, selling work etc.

Why does she do it? I don't think she can help it. She often says that she wishes she had followed some path that got her monetary return, but that's only when she's feeling skint. She can never understand artists who just churn out the same stuff year after year. She doesn't deny their right to do it; she just can't understand it.

A few years ago we had a discussion about the easy availability of free art on the web, and that if she wanted to sell work she had to create things that you can't just print off. Lately she has turning her works into small Artist Books which are well received. They look and feel wonderful. During lockdown she has been able to get her online shop a bit more organised, but she's missing working with groups of people sharing ideas and exploring creativity, and playing with materials together. Like a lot of us, I suppose!

[teamsaint]

UBI would be an absolute godsend for people who want to unlock their creativity. And in the longer term, the treasury might get the benefit of future profits.

But politicians are terrified of giving people that kind of financial freedom. In fact they are generally pretty terrified of any freedoms !

[Dave2002]

There was an expectation that this was something that she enjoyed doing and she was obviously good at it so she should do it for nothing.

First, I wish you and your wife well re future enterprises - whether financially rewarding or otherwise.

It sounds as though she is one of the artists who does like working with, or for, other people, but not being a slave to their fashion and market demands.

There is often an assumption that if one is good at something, then that is what one wants to do (and therefore should do ...). This is quite often false. There are many people who are very good at doing things they don't particularly like. Some get paid - some do not.

I once had a discussion with a friend about something he had done, and I was trying to encourage him to give a talk about a very major project he'd done. He didn't want to do it. When I said that he was obviously very good at it, and it would be good to hear about the work, his reply was that he didn't like public speaking, and there was no longer any need for him to do that. This led on to a discussion about other people, and his observation that people can be good at doing things that they don't like very much.

Obviously being paid for doing things which one doesn't like much is more financially sustainable than otherwise, but if there are very many people doing similar things, then maybe it would be better to at least provide a basic income for those who like to do other things, and may give pleasure to themselves and others.

[eighthobstruction]

Thank you, Dave. That was very interesting. Sadly, there is a sense that in our modern world art is a luxury. My wife is an artist. Over the years she has painted, drawn, printed, often supported by community art work, teaching etc. Every so often over our years together she has found a wee niche where people are interested in an element of her work. I remember once she was doing a whole project around the automation of the lighthouses on Scotland's coasts, gathering stories for families of lightkeepers, and creating work from it. It attracted a lot of attention and people asked for more, but she was already off exploring some new avenue for her art. 'I'm not doing that anymore,' I recall her saying to me. That's the artist for you, I suppose.

When the kids were young she was the person who created the backdrops for the school play in the village hall etc, the posters for fundraisers, and, of course, like other artists in the area, people would look for pieces of work for a raffle, like you've got lots to give away. There was an expectation that this was something that she enjoyed doing and she was obviously good at it so she should do it for nothing. It's an interesting idea...the contribution of the artist is so often undervalued, not seen as a real job. And yet I see the delight that people who have worked with her get when they realise that she can help them find and release some element of their creativity. And she loves that too, seeing students have work accepted for prestigious shows, selling work etc.

Why does she do it? I don't think she can help it. She often says that she wishes she had followed some path that got her monetary return, but that's only when she's feeling skint. She can never understand artists who just churn out the same stuff year after year. She doesn't deny their right to do it; she just can't understand it.

A few years ago we had a discussion about the easy availability of free art on the web, and that if she wanted to sell work she had to create things that you can't just print off. Lately she has turning her works into small Artist Books which are well received. They look and feel wonderful. During lockdown she has been able to get her online shop a bit more organised, but she's missing working with groups of people sharing ideas and exploring creativity, and playing with materials together. Like a lot of us, I suppose!

....

[oddoneout]

There was an expectation that this was something that she enjoyed doing and she was obviously good at it so she should do it for nothing. It's an interesting idea...the contribution of the artist is so often undervalued, not seen as a real job.

The 'not a real job' attitude gets amplified for female artists, especially when they have children. It's seen as something that's convenient to fit around child or other care responsibilities, and there can be an assumption that once time becomes available they will get a 'proper' job and the art will stay as a hobby.
A single mother colleague of mine got pretty fed up with that attitude; she had to get a part-time job to feed and house herself and her child(father did a runner and lives in another country so no help there), but coupled with childcare duties it did limit what she could do in what she saw as her proper job, namely her art. Expectations of items for raffles etc were an added irritation - not least because what she paints are very time-consuming pieces and just getting commissions finished was more than enough of a challenge. Fortunately now her child is grown and at college things have got easier and the proper job thing doesn't surface nearly as much - not least now her reputation makes it clear this isn't a hobby. She would be the first to agree that her compelling need to paint did not make for an easy life, but it was not something that could be ignored, and the years of awkward compromises and considerable financial difficulties are hopefully largely behind her; although hers will never be a particularly secure life she is at least now able to better pursue her talent.

[johncorrigan]

The 'not a real job' attitude gets amplified for female artists, especially when they have children. It's seen as something that's convenient to fit around child or other care responsibilities, and there can be an assumption that once time becomes available they will get a 'proper' job and the art will stay as a hobby..

As part of my job, I have been very involved with a community business support group in East Perthshire for over ten years. The essential idea of the model was to support people who wished to set up their own business, but lacked the experience to help with their product, marketing and/or financial management...nobody can be good at all three was the initial argument of the model it was using.

One of the things that we had to fight against, in the early days particularly, was the opinion from certain quarters that these people, mainly women, were just indulging in 'hobby businesses' - businesses which suited their lifestyle. 'Not REAL businesses' as was often said to the group by economic development and other enterprise groups.

What the group has discovered was that by supporting people in their own community, folk could network their way to developing a small business, sometimes while holding down another job, or while bringing up children. This supported them to develop the skills so that when they were in a stronger position, their small business was not starting from scratch and had built a market and also a support network with other small businesses.

This has worked particularly well in the field of the art and crafts, perhaps because the peer support networks have allowed clients to see the value of their work encouraged by others. Interestingly, the client group of businesses for this project is almost 70% women, our assumption being that the fact that the project is client-centred and available in the local geography is particularly useful for women, who are more likely to have childcare issues.

[Richard Barrett]

UBI would be an absolute godsend for people who want to unlock their creativity.

That's the kind of golden age that the automation of routine jobs was supposed to bring in, instead of which most people have to work even harder, often in jobs that don't contribute anything meaningful (as the late David Graeber eloquently pointed out), while artistic creativity once more becomes the preserve of those who have privileged backgrounds or commercial priorities or both. But I do think that UBI is coming, whether the current crop of right wing class warrior politicians like it or not.

[Dave2002]

But I do think that UBI is coming, whether the current crop of right wing class warrior politicians like it or not.

UBI - a view from Scotland - https://www.thenational.scot/news/18...ff-immigrants/

and from the USA

https://basicincome.org/news/2016/09/reconciling-ubi-immigration-concerns/

UBI might produce some unexpected consequences, and also (by some people) some expected ones. One worry would be that it wouldn't necessarily help the poorest in society, and it could have an adverse effect on immigrant (even illegal) workers and their families, whiile it could simply help the better off. I don't know how many UBI experiments are currently being carried out. I think Finland was ahead of the game here, but it may have given up or scheduled a pause for a rethink.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-eur...ee%20for%20all. Finland