Do you mean that being a new media curator is the same as
trying to sell stuff by phones that usually people don't
need or put a "nice" box around a bad piece of food ? This
is interesting, I had never seen new media art curator's job
that way, I need to think about it and think about what it
means regarding the art those people are curating.
But I think it is interesting to immediately compare income
and work of new media art curators to what is considered be
some of the lowest jobs. It says a lot ...
Annick
Sam Ayres wrote:
> Yeah, I just thought I'd let you know that I weep about how much New Media
> Curators are paid compared to people working in call centres or MacDonalds.
> It really is a disgrace...
>
>
>
>
>
> On 25/1/07 16:44, "Sarah Cook" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi CRUMB list readers,
>>
>>apologies for a quiet month of mostly announcements - Beryl and I are
>>in the grim end days of writing a book that gathers together much of
>>the new knowledge brought forward by CRUMB these last years... and
>>preparing for the future with plans for new research posts at our
>>humble offices in Sunderland. Woohoo!
>>
>>But this process has brought a question to the fore, also prompted by a
>>conversation I had with another CRUMB list lurker: how much is what you
>>do worth?
>>
>>We've seen new media curators downsized by their institutions/museums
>>in the name of financial cut-backs, and over tea at the Crisis Centre
>>at ISEA I heard many a lament from curators whose responsibility it is
>>to not only fundraise for their programme of media art, but for their
>>own salaries too. Recent job ads for new media curators have made
>>apparent that, for instance, in the words of said list-lurker,
>>
>>"The Human Resource Manager will get paid more than the Curator
>>despite the requirement for the curator to be an equally highly skilled
>>individual, who will additionally be expected to have immense knowledge
>>and experience, and to bring his or her own wealth of personal
>>connections, networks and contacts."
>>The lurker continues,
>>
>>"This perpetuates the expectation and acceptance of low wages which has
>>become standard for professionals working in the not-for-profit arts
>>sector. In comparison to national job listings, in similar regions
>>(outside the centres like London) one would be paid more as a personal
>>assistant, a computing systems assistant, an admin officer; essentially
>>a whole swathe of jobs for which one is given much less responsibility,
>>and expected to be much less experienced, and will likely not have to
>>work every hour god sends to ensure projects happen at a high standard,
>>purely for the love of it. And thatıs the real sticking point. Itıs
>>poorly paid because people really want to see these things happen, and
>>to see them done well, and so is accepted as standard within a sector
>>which has traditionally been poorly funded. The economy has changed
>>dramatically in the last 8 years, and the Arts are now recognized as a
>>financially important sector [certainly in the UK where the arts are
>>tied to cultural and economic regeneration schemes, tourism and the
>>like]."
>>
>>So, do the wages offered reflect the work involved? I suspect the
>>answer is no, but why?
>>
>>I graduated from a masters programme in curatorial studies 8 years ago
>>and was recently asked for my earnings history so that the current MA
>>programme administrators could work out appropriate levels of financial
>>aid so students didn't graduate with unmanageable student debts (like
>>mine!). I am aware that working for a university and being able to
>>curate projects from that base, with incredibly grateful thanks for our
>>academic funding, I earn probably slightly more than the curator at the
>>artist-run gallery down the street. Yet I also know in the UK a number
>>of fellow researchers within the university sector who run programs for
>>digital media artists (outreach projects, not necessarily students),
>>and who are however, still in a position of having to get grants to
>>cover their salaries as well as funding for their programme. As more MA
>>programs for curators are accredited, how can we ensure the salaries
>>these curators might earn are in keeping with similarly skilled
>>graduates in other fields? The Tate (obvious example, sorry) has
>>traditionally offered very low salaries for entry-level curatorial
>>positions with the reason that the prestige and experience will balance
>>the risk out. But when curators are also expected to have technical
>>knowledge (as is the case with the, for instance, webcasting /
>>educational / media arts curators), and are getting paid far less that
>>the museum's systems administrator (who might know less about
>>technology than they do, or spend their days fixing the office printer
>>and firewall), is that really fair?
>>
>>Your thoughts, rants, suggestions are most welcome, as we all file our
>>year end financial accounts ;-)
>>
>>and again, apologies that this is slightly left field...
>>Sarah
>
>
> !DSPAM:45b8edcc219171804284693!
>
>
>
--
***************
Annick Bureaud ([log in to unmask])
tel/fax : 33/ (0)143 20 92 23
mobile : 33/ (0)6 86 77 65 76
*****************
Leonardo/Olats : http://www.olats.org
|