The Kenyan Art scene is amazing.
Yes, I’ve finally gotten to use the word ‘amazing’
in my text. It’s probably the single largest industry where rhetoric gets you
places. Also the only existing one where you really don’t have to believe in
what you say.
Minus the art making, it is prolly 10% business and 90% Non-Government/not-for-profit
organizations. Aid. Development aid. The
business part dealings are easy – product/item (artwork), cost, sale, commissions,
chilled drinks, handshakes, been-good-doing-business-with-you. Voilla.
The not for profit? Hmmmm! This is where titles, buzz words and superficial intelligence reign. I’ve encountered numerous words/phrases that absolutely make no sense at all but are supposed to make a lot of it the more they are repeated. I’ve personally discarded them from my lexicon and is even thinking of putting up a disclaimer in my tiny space to the effect that you risk a broken nose should you use any of those words within the sanctity of my Cupboard Studio.
I was pretty successful until I encountered one of the many social media escapades where the ‘art stakeholders’ have a getaway to some
remote/exotic place to discuss ‘really
important things’ about the arts. The deliberations rarely get to Nairobi
but the pictures reach us real time. I must admit that I have no trouble with
it as it offers me my in-between-studio- practice entertainment via the World
Wide Web. A not-so-recent one had participants deliberating our ‘Creative Economy.’ Nice. Today I’m using all the awesome
words (pun intended). It reminded me
of a ‘breakfast meeting’ with a former government functionary whose translation
of the term Creative Economy sent (fellow) artists seething. I’m not sure if
the art stakeholders got the definition right but all I recall is seeing a
dubious art person (not sure if dealer,
seller, connoisseur, groupie) person giving a power point presentation.
Quite dubious!
But that’s not my beef. It happened, was labeled pretty successful and guys came back
home. Irony is, the first joint project
(a majority) of the summiteers
undertook is the Kenyan Art Diary. This
is a deadly concept that was long overdue alongside other merchandizing ventures
that are now commonplace. I respect the brains behind the diary. I personally
have never submitted my work for it since no one wants to answer my (not-so-hard) questions.
The first diary was a hit
(whatever that means). Artists submitted work and even paid to be in it.
Agreement was they’d be given (I think) two copies but when demand outweighed
supply, some never got theirs. There are conflicting reports on how many were
printed versus how much sold. Questions were asked on whether the proprietor could afford to offer some token of appreciation
as artist compensation (long story). The second happened. Repeat. Most artists
don’t ask questions and are okay with the arrangement since majority have never
been published and this loosely translates
to having a glossy image of yourself in a ‘best
seller’. It’s only later when playing with numbers that they realize what might have been!
When I started receiving emails asking me to submit and pay
for next years edition, I asked what they were offering me as artist’s
copyright and/or royalties. Then the emails went cold. Good manners dictate you respond to questions asked whether you
have the ‘right’ answers or not. It’s
okay to say it ‘never crossed’ your mind. Or that you can’t afford it. Or
that you don’t want to pay any copyrights.
But if you go cold, it translates to you being a cold schemer in a well
calculated move. Irony, the emails came back this week inviting me to the diary
launch.
You see (I’ll try
starting the next sentence without using ‘you see’), in this whole arrangement,
the ART in the diary is what is the selling point yet the artist is at the bottom of the food chain. The
photographer gets paid. The designer too. So does the runner. And the wine
supplier. Yet the artist puts his money and his art into it so as to be promoted. To be supported. Assisted.
Most artists, driven by financial instability (not poverty) and (some by) intellectual
incompetence get excited by ‘just
prospects’ that they don’t set their
own requirements or even re-adjust/edit whatever contracts are offered to
them. Whose fault? We may never know. Every not-for-profit outfit is offering
courses/classes with cliché titles like Business of Art, Art Entrepreneurship,
Art Mentorship, Creative Management… etcetera. So where did the rain start on
us? With art stakeholders who are ‘conversant’
with creative economy/economics and artists who’re shuttling between studios
and five star establishments learning creative economy, you’d expect that the
‘goodwill’ from all these institutions and the numerous courses undertaken by
artists, the odds would be better stacked for the artist in such ventures. Wishful thinking!
But it’s quite a shame that we still have
institutions/individuals that thrive on preying on uninformed or desperate creatives
and rather than have a conversation on important aspects of an artist’s
practice (read remuneration/fee/pay),
they run off. To me, this equates to not giving a hoot about the artists. Or
his/her practice. It translates to you being clueless to the whole creative
economy you’re making noise about.
So what it this
Creative Economy isht?
You can’t keep talking of creative economy without
understanding the creative industry as a whole methinks! For my bias to the visual arts, I
shall conveniently disregard/ignore the other segments of this industry and ‘specialize’ (for lack of a better word)
on the visual arts.
Everyone keeps quoting numbers (in millions of USDs) of what the Kenyan creative economy is worth.
But no one can back how these figures come about. As in any industry, there
must be some level of investment in the two (major) segments;
- Pre-Production
- Art Schools, Artist Studios, (Public)Art
Awareness, Art Supply shops, Comprehensive Cultural Policy & government
goodwill.
- Post Production
-Exhibition Spaces(Museums,
Galleries, shops), Support Institutions (An Arts Council, A (functioning)
Copyright board, National gallery, Competent Personnel (Art teachers, Historians,
Curators) and clear & comprehensive intellectual property laws.
Ideally, most of these institutions should be government owned/run
or partnered. And should be held in high regard by all segments of the industry
with artist goodwill, and institution efficiency high up on their priority
list.
With these in place, it should be fairly easy to join dots
and figure out the actual scale in term of numbers of people (directly) employed
and the actual figures of secondary effects like; turnover from museum visits,
sales from publications & copyright remittances, commission from artwork
sales, Exports revenues, value addition from permanent collections, cultural
tourism & education fees.
From here, we may be able to attach the aesthetic value of
our art to the monetary aspect of it. This in the long run will make us
comprehend a more realistic value of our creative economy and will help in
defining visual arts and fitting it
within the (most) relevant government agency - as opposed to forcing art in the
same bracket as Youth & Sports.
Once we have this figured out, we can combine all the creative fields and talk with authority about this thing we keep referring to as Creative Economy.
Once we have this figured out, we can combine all the creative fields and talk with authority about this thing we keep referring to as Creative Economy.
I love the arts. Probably more than it loves me
back (pun intended). I however have
made a conscious decision that if anyone has a noble idea that is good and
beneficial to the team, I shall fully support it. But for some I consider half
baked and somewhat detrimental to artist development, there are no two ways
about it. The days when words like ‘promote’,
‘support’, ‘favour’ would clinch a deal are long gone. It’s time folks
understood that it’s now business. Strictly Business. And that for some of us,
Creative Economy translates to shillings and cents.
Thanks Thom for this,much needed eye opener. The being promoted thingie is especially annoying to me
ReplyDeletei laughed with pain. i have seen these cases. the so called stakeholders make us (artists) believe we can not exist without them. they (stakeholders) are because we are and not the other way round. but again, who can bring together artists to organise themselves and stand against such exploitation?
ReplyDeletethe brackets and italics made the article so alive, that i was reading silently and laughing out loud.