Well,
I have always earned less in the art arena generally, than in any other
job - and I have had plenty of crap jobs in my time.
marc
> 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!
>>
>>
>>
>
|