Andreas, I certainly agree that unpaid internships can be valuable
experiences - indeed, they seem to have become a necessary step for entry
into the art world, making them *in*valuable.
The problem is that this experience is only available to those who can
afford to work for free - as you yourself point out. And since it is
difficult to get serious paid work without unpaid internships on one's
resume, this system tends to create a class of art workers who are (to a
greater or lesser extent) independently wealthy. This is not only terribly
unfair, but also conducive to a kind of homogeneity that has negative
consequences for the whole system. (Don't we want to encourage a variety of
backgrounds and perspectives?)
Simply put, when internships are not paid, then the hiring criterion is no
longer about merit but about money. That is why they are unethical.
Best, J.
--
Julia Pelta Feldman
Director, *Room & Board*
*artist's residency and salon*
*Williamsburg, Brooklyn*
www.roomandboard.nyc
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Andreas Broeckmann <[log in to unmask]
> wrote:
> dear sarah,
>
> it is great to hear that the organisers of ISEA2015 Vancouver managed to
> pay most artists for showing their work; this is, however, not a "first",
> because we managed to do the same at ISEA2010 RUHR in
> dortmund/essen/duisburg, and i assume that other ISEAs had varying
> policies, too. - this just for the record.
>
> also, i wouldn't speak of "showing the lead", since the principle of
> pay-to-show is inbuilt with the ISEA structure, and exceptions from this,
> mostly enabled by comfortable funding, are, i guess, only this - exceptions
> to its explicitly "academic" symposium format.
>
> regards,
> -a
>
> ps: however, i think that the original question of this thread -
> compensation for interns - is a different matter which should be treated
> separately. the battering of poor martin and katie could stop, but the
> question of how to develop an ethical approach is well worth pursuing. in
> my experience, an internship without monetary compensation can be useful
> and educational - one of my first was as a curatorial assistant for the
> 1988 Joseph Beuys retrospective in Berlin; the main benefit was working
> inside the core organisational team for a couple of months and seeing
> everything, ups and downs. i felt lucky and privileged at the time to be
> given that opportunity. for me, personally, it was well worth the
> investment of going to Dahlem, and then to Martin-Gropius-Bau, for so many
> days, without pay. i would certainly not say that interns need not get
> paid; but as an ex-intern, and as an organiser, i know that there are
> situations when a good deal can be struck without paying people in cash, if
> there is a stimulating working environment in which (mostly) students can
> learn stuff they cannot learn in class. whether these students want to, and
> can afford to, work without pay, is a question of their own choice, ethics,
> and economics, and of their bargaining power with potential employers. in
> my view, it would be a pity if unpaid internships were called illegal in
> principle, or judged generally unethical.
>
>
> Am 25.08.15 um 16:33 schrieb Sarah Cook (Staff):
>
>>
>> I was very keen to know that ISEA in Vancouver this year was the first of
>> that (now) annual meeting/symposium/exhibition where artists were paid (or
>> at least didn't have to pay symposium registration fees) to show their
>> work. I understand that wasn't water-tight across all aspects of the large
>> event (exhibitions which were curated by external partners or were adjunct
>> to the main juried programme may have had a different economic model), but
>> it was encouraging to see Canada showing the lead again, as Stacey pointed
>> out by linking to the CARFAC guidelines.
>
>
|