Moderator Alexis Clements with panelists Ventiko, Jillian Steinhauer, Ross Perlin, Tal Beery, and Maureen Connor; photo by Diego Gil
An impressive panel of writer’s, activists, and artists met at Radio Bushwick for Arts in Bushwick’s second Panel Discussion: Unpaid Labor in the Arts – Art Workers Rights and Wages. They gathered to discuss a fundamental issue of the human condition, investigating the question “What is work?” Work is something that, in a positive sense, enriches our lives, engages our minds, and sustains us financially; in the negative, work constrains our time, drains our energy, and does not pay us a living wage. In the twenty-first century, the traditional standards of employment are being obscured as our economy evolves, technology becomes more prevalent, and technological knowledge replaces technical skill. Panelists Jillian Steinhauer (Hyperallergic), Ross Perlin (author, Intern Nation), Tal Beery (Occupy Museums), Maureen Connor (Occupy Museums), Ventiko (Ventiko Animamus Art Salon), and panel moderator Alexis Clements (Hyperallergic) shared their viewpoints and discussed the various ways that they are trying to navigate today’s job market. Fundamentally, the conversation boiled down to defining work and articulating how our culture prescribes value to work. As Perlin poignantly stated, the idea of loving what you do has obscured the economy.
Referencing his research for Intern Nation, Perlin discussed the historic precedents that have created the contemporary work landscape. Citing the historical norm of struggle if you are not part of the elite, Pelin raised the question of whether this struggle, the struggle to be compensated for effort, is recycling an old precarity or creating a new one. Employment standards, things such as pensions and health insurance, evolved over the first half of the twentieth century. These standards are based on factors including clearly defined roles, lifetime employment, and set working hours. A cultural shift that began in the 1960s has continued into the 2000s: People are seeking more diversity in their employment, including negotiable schedules and engaging work. These desires have partially informed the contemporary job market as experienced today, one consisting of an overeducated workforce that desires jobs that are in line with individuals’ lifestyles. Perlin says that this mentality has allowed employers to offer what this new workforce wants, yet in doing so are also able to “enforce flexibility on their terms.” The merger of these two desires has, not shockingly, created a reverse effect: From the employers viewpoint, the ideal workforce is now considered disposable and changeable. As a result, we find ourselves in a situation of “deep precarity,” as the hope that cultural capital will pay off in real capital is too often just a myth. We are in need of a new set of standards as we venture further into this century, but what is it?
Referencing his research for Intern Nation, Perlin discussed the historic precedents that have created the contemporary work landscape. Citing the historical norm of struggle if you are not part of the elite, Pelin raised the question of whether this struggle, the struggle to be compensated for effort, is recycling an old precarity or creating a new one. Employment standards, things such as pensions and health insurance, evolved over the first half of the twentieth century. These standards are based on factors including clearly defined roles, lifetime employment, and set working hours. A cultural shift that began in the 1960s has continued into the 2000s: People are seeking more diversity in their employment, including negotiable schedules and engaging work. These desires have partially informed the contemporary job market as experienced today, one consisting of an overeducated workforce that desires jobs that are in line with individuals’ lifestyles. Perlin says that this mentality has allowed employers to offer what this new workforce wants, yet in doing so are also able to “enforce flexibility on their terms.” The merger of these two desires has, not shockingly, created a reverse effect: From the employers viewpoint, the ideal workforce is now considered disposable and changeable. As a result, we find ourselves in a situation of “deep precarity,” as the hope that cultural capital will pay off in real capital is too often just a myth. We are in need of a new set of standards as we venture further into this century, but what is it?
Stepping away from the historical trajectory, panelists Beery, Connor, and Ventiko raised concerns around the cultural conditions and values that create the present reality. The fantasy of going from MFA to MoMA, as Perlin put it, leaves graduates feeling undervalued and ineffective. As an artist, Ventiko expressed, “[it is a struggle] finding the value in my work, finding the [monetary] value in my time.” Yet, she formed Animamus Art Salon in an attempt to collectivize the internal struggles that many of us undergo. Working with groups such as Occupy Museums, Beery identifies a need for “immediate collective action.” Reading from a statement he prepared, Beery speaks the language of an activist, unveiling our neoliberal logic as a logic of exploitation wherein the concentrated capital in the world today has created a “fantasy value of cultural capital.” An artist and activist, Connor addressed the needs of our society as a whole. Understanding Western society as one that functions largely through an individualistic lens, where much is internalized, can make it difficult to see other models. Connor finds this mentality extends to and is set by our cultural institutions. Thus, with a vacancy of adequate institutions to address our needs, she queries, “What is social practice? How can we have some real input into [the] definition of social practice? What keeps it as an activist form of art making?”
Moderator Alexis Clements stepped in to highlight the similarities among the panelists, including the myths, fantasies, and misinformation surrounding the labor market. Under its multiple monikers, “free labor” (internships, offering opportunities, etc.) is being mislabeled and marketed as if it were for the unpaid worker’s benefit. This issue reintroduced a topic to which the conversation returned several times throughout the debate—the question of privilege. Are internships a privilege of the middle class, just another form of exploitation, or are they actually beneficial? Whereas Ventiko adamantly heralded the benefits that she received via her internships, Beery countered with the hardships of student debt and the cruelness of a system that fails to deliver on its promises or to value its investments, saying “taking an unpaid internship is an impossible privilege…an MFA is a stamp of desperation.”
Asking “What is work these days? Is coming to speak here today work?” Perlin challenged the audience to interrogate and investigate the value we attribute to our time. In light of recent protests against institutions such as the Guggenheim, Jillian Steinhauer discussed how institutions inspire opacity and promote competition. One way to use collective action is to resist this opacity. In standard evaluation systems, income is a direct indicator of worth; therefore, lack of or inadequate compensation shrouds endeavors in a cloud of shame and fear. Transparency is needed, especially among creatives, to combat such competition, which is counterproductive to establishing a healthy standard. Refusing to work for free is one strategy that creatives can use to raise the bar. The Freelancer’s Union is another step that people can take toward establishing collective bargaining power. Understanding the nature of the situation is also necessary. Nonprofit status does not necessarily mean anything other than signifying the tax bracket of an organization. The panel reminded us that artists have a distinct set of skills, including the ability to think creatively and to be innovative problem solvers. Connor affirms, “Artists can do more than this idealized, internalized self-expressive thinking.” In consideration of the myriad complexities and potential actions, the first step toward changing the realities of our labor market is clearly to begin valuing oneself.
###
Arts in Bushwick continues the AiB Panel Discussion Series with the third panel, The Role of Art and Funding Progress, taking place on Sunday, June 1, 2014, 5-6PM, at Brooklyn Fire Proof East.
