Falling Through the Cracks

tunnel.jpegSince the media industry is what optimists call "going through a period of transition" and pessimists call "in the shitter," arts journalists have increasingly found themselves losing their jobs, and, whether on staff or freelance, working harder for less money. Nothing about this is new and it seems unlikely as far as I can tell, that things will change much for the next five to ten years.

But what I've come to realize lately is that under these circumstances, arts journalists are starting to look more and more like artists in terms of the piecemeal way that they are scratching out their existences in order to practice their craft. Like the actor who waits tables for a living or the folk singer who temps in a law office to make ends meet, these days, journos are having to hold down all manner of part- and full-time jobs that have nothing to do with the media in order to continue doing what until a few years ago would have been regarded as a profession. Now, arts journalism is for many a vocational sideline.

With the non-profit model becoming increasingly common among news organizations, the arts-journalist-as-artist concept is similarly taking shape. But the tricky part of this is that while there are lots of mechanisms in place to support the work of artists through residencies and grant-making programs, society hasn't caught up yet with the notion that the people who cover the arts also need this kind of support these days to practice their craft. There are a few isolated financial opportunities for arts journalists out there such as the very enlightened Warhol Foundation funding for members of the visual arts media. (If you cover music, dance or other artforms, the Warhol Foundation can't help you, though.)

But in general, arts journalists are slipping through the funding cracks: Arts funders typically don't fund arts journalism; they want to support artists exclusively. And media-oriented foundations and fellowship programs seem to be far more interested in supporting areas like investigative, education, science and political journalism as well as media entities that serve underprivileged communities than getting behind arts journalists.

It is the nature of the world that some professions are no longer useful to society and therefore become extinct. For example, pianists used to make a good living as employees of cinemas, playing for silent films, but this job barely exists today. It's going to take a lot of educating to make people see that quality journalism - and quality arts journalism in particular - still have value in today's world. But there's no guarantee that this will happen. If the funding mechanisms necessary for supporting the profession don't develop soonish, it won't be long before arts coverage is solely practiced by moonlighting waiters and nighttime corporate security guards. But unlike their colleagues in the novel writing, standup comedy and singer-songwriter worlds, it's unlikely, at least in the present situation, that these hobbyist arts junkies will have even the small light of grants, fellowships, residencies and other forms of patronage to sustain them through the dark hours.
July 22, 2010 9:54 AM | | Comments (8)

8 Comments

By R. Bettmann on July 26, 2010 7:57 PM

And: funding for the arts is tight. There is less of it than there was, and even there wasn't much. But funding for arts writing is entire other level of non-existent.

That's as it should be -- what is more important, arts or writing about arts? But you can not even compare how little funding there is the for the arts to the situation with arts journalism. There is literally almost nowhere in the entire country willing to look at applications for arts journalism projects.

By R. Bettmann on July 26, 2010 3:38 PM

My line advocating for arts journalism has been to use the metaphor of the funnel:

Every year hundreds and thousands of ideas fall into the cultural landscape, and for several hundred years critics have served as a funnel, connecting the ideas of today, to the scholars of tomorrow.

Having applied to both Warhol and Knight for Bourgeon (http://www.bourgeononline.com)let me be clear that the line has not yet worked. It doesn't mean it won't, and I'm encouraged to read your piece. What appears to be valued right now in support for non-profit arts journalism is the new sexy tech stuff that will be surpassed in five years by the new sexy tech approach. As you make clear, what needs supporting is what has already existed - professional arts writing, editing, and publication.

By Nat Silverman on July 26, 2010 11:43 AM

Where, exactly, do those working in "standup comedy" find "grants, fellowships, residencies and other forms of patronage to sustain them through the dark hours"?

By ALXSw on July 25, 2010 10:38 PM

Hello,
I must address the statement that there are "lots of mechanisms in place to support the work of artists through residencies and grant-making programs". As pivoine66 stated these are rare, like fairy godmothers.
The Arts are not really supported in our culture. And I've noticed competitions are getting more expensive - not less.

We must all support each others' fate in the arts, as a capitalist economy
with middlemen at every step from supplies to frames to gallery commisions of 50% ... undermines stability. We have to maintain our
purposes against all odds to reconstruct a very broken system.

By asongbird on July 25, 2010 8:18 PM

"lots of mechanisms in place to support the work of artists through residencies and grant-making programs"

What color is the sky in your world?

Seriously, I've been a professional musician since I was 11 years old and a professional writer since around age 18--(and that is many, many years) and I can count on one hand in all those decades when I received money from grants,etc.

We have to create and continue to create our profession through sheer determination and dedication and some of that has meant that we had to realize we'd sacrifice much that most people you know consider basic necessities, let alone luxuries.

And for us it also meant giving up the idea of having children, since we simply couldn't see how that worked for touring musicians without shortchanging the children.

Welcome to our world.

Arts journalists...all journalists...artists of all kinds... we're all in this together.

Life's lemons. Suck it up.

But do visit our lemonade stand--just come this way, please. (It's one of the ways we fund our exciting, oh-so-decadent lifestyle.)

By Kelly Kleiman on July 23, 2010 8:45 AM

The situation is really just as bad in non-arts journalism (I practice both kinds). Freelance reporters with true professional expertise in a field end up working in the field to make ends meet, and then find themselves precluded from covering the field precisely because of their expertise and participation. Thus, the current system reduces the quality as well as the quantity of all sorts of journalism.

By pivoine66 on July 23, 2010 8:02 AM

You're joking, right, about "lots of mechanisms in place to support the work of artists through residencies and grant-making programs"? These tend to be once-in-a-blue-moon opportunities that very few artists get a chance to experience. No one earns a living this way. In the big picture, artists have to find ways to make it work on an individual basis, and it isn't easy. You have to do it because you can't not do it. It's unfortunate that there is so little support for cultural activity in today's climate, but when the average person thinks the arts are extraneous that's what we have to deal with.

By JHD on July 22, 2010 3:14 PM

Your comparison here is apt. But, actually, the Warhol grants for visual arts journalists are pretty limited, too. They cover only writing about contemporary art -- so if you're writing mostly about museums or non-contemporary art exhibits, you're out of luck.

Leave a comment

Me Elsewhere

previous

Blogroll

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.