Chris Hayden says: They should. But even if they are will they ever be
paid what they are worth? I think of Van Gogh who, I think sold only one
painting during his lifetime, and the millions his work brings in today. I
think of Otis Blackwell, who outright sold several hit songs to Elvis
Presley for $50 bucks--no royalties. I remember going to see Willie Dixon
on the Northside of Chicago, walking out and seeing several Southside
residents at the entrance balking at paying $5.00 to see him live.

Will artists ever be paid what they are worth? Probably not--they will
either be overpaid or underpaid if they are paid at all.

Gillian Savage comments: Surely it is simplistic to debate whether artists
should be paid. The meaningful debate is about WHICH 'artists' should be
paid, and HOW MUCH should they get. Think of all the worthless 'art' you've
seen which has made it past the keepers of the shrine and into print or onto
gallery walls.

The keyword in that sentence is 'worthless' -- what I consider worthless,
you may consider valuable. My impression is that market forces indicate that
most people do, indeed, consider most artistic production to be worthless.
That's why the producers need to huddle together in sheltered workshops and
proclaim each others value.

I'm 'haunted' by the night at the theatre in the converted rail yard which
turned out to be 'art as therapy' - some rather needy people were government
funded to produce theatrical works which were probably very helpful for
re-building their esteem and 'finding themselves' etc. But, should the
audience be asked to pay? The answer is probably 'yes', not for the worth of
the art, but because payment helps build esteem.

Lots of tricky aspects to the 'artists should be paid' debate.


Chris Hayden says: Perhaps. Maybe it is because the artist does not value
his or her talents enough, maybe it is because the audience does not value
these talents enough. Surely the artists may insist on being paid--but this
may mean that he or she will miss an opportunity to showcase the work,to
communicate with an audience, which is after all, unless we are Emily
Dickinson, what we want to do--and maybe miss some opportunity to get paid
down the line.

Gillian: The trouble lies with all the 'artists' who over value their
'talents'.


Chris Hayden says: Sad but true. I consider how expensive tickets are to
rap concerts and that poets with tons more craft experience and dedication
have trouble getting people to hear them for free. I think it is a source
of the frustration many poets feel--they have worked hard at their craft,
they know what they have produced is good, by all standards they ought to
be compensated much more highly for their talents than some idiot who
scrawled his lyrics on a napkin in his dressing room between pulls on a
blunt five minutes before he hit the stage--but that aint how it is.

I don't think it will change. I think we are in a game that we play because
we are going to do it whether we get paid or not, and that if there are any
payoffs, they may come around after we are gone.


Gillian: Yep, yep, yep. My main line of work is social research into
audience/visitor experience. So, I'd be asking what kind of experience are
the poets offering the market they seek payment from? Rapsters seem to know
what their audience wants and what they are prepared to pay for. My
experience of 'artists' of various persuasions is that they are much more
inward focussed - they serve the inner muse.

Whenever the issue of $$$ enters the question, you have to look beyond
deemed intrinsic worth and reflect upon the effects of market forces.
Artists who ignore this context are no different from 'flat earthers'.

So, I figure that it is probably best to separate making a living from
artistic production. Someone wrote this to me last month -- "I have returned
to your lovely site once again. Your poems seem to bring me back to life
every time I read them." Hell! does it get any better than that? Why do I
write? To bring life. And there seem to be some people who find life in what
I write. Who put that life there? Was it me? I'm not sure. But, I'm
grateful.

Rambling on. Creative production touches the mysterious. It is undependable.
So, it must be nerve wracking to wring weekly paychecks out of it.

So, as you say, it is a game we play whether we get paid or not.

It's always good to hear your voice at poetryetc.

Cheers,
Gillian