The SAN FRANCISCO ARTS TOWN HALL MEETING
Hello Everybody.
Yesterday, 800 artists and arts administrators from all over the bay area signed up to go to Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in downtown San Francisco for a day long gathering to consider the future of arts practice and provision amid changing times and circumstances. This was the largest confluence of artists and arts leadership in recent memory, and like most such events provided those in attendance to not only consider the principal issues the arts & culture sector is facing, but also the rare opportunity to intersect and interact with peers. To view the Grafitti Wall with entries by attendees at the Town Hall meeting and the Graphic Arts Summation at the wrap-up session, click on these links:
Grafitti Wall
Closing Session
Organized by a committee of 67, led by E. San San Wong (San Francisco Arts Commission) and Cora Mirikitani (Center for Cultural Innovation), this effort was made possible by a virtual who’s who of bay area arts organizations, foundations and local agencies who supported the planning and execution of the meeting. What was impressive to me, was the across the board, widespread community effort by the entire nonprofit arts sector, and that the attendance was balanced between arts organizations and individual artists. Among these groups were some of our best and brightest thinkers and leaders - both on the stage and in the audiences.
This blog is an attempt to recap some of the day’s highlights, raise some of the issues that were on attendees' minds, and hopefully provide a forum for those in attendance as well as those who could not be there, to discuss some of those and other issues. At the end of this blog YOU can enter your comment and we hope you will.
The Plenary Session sought to set the day’s tone by looking at the big picture of the bay area arts fabric – considering four issues: survival, creativity, reach and impact (which four issues were the four tracks for the day’s workshops and sessions). Panel moderator, JOHN KILLACKY, the Program Officer for Arts & Culture at the San Francisco Foundation, used the SWOT model (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) and asked the panel participants to discuss the issues in those terms. The program agenda describes the prelude better than I could: "Although the Bay Area is a uniquely rich artistic and culturally diverse locale and laboratory for aesthetic exploration, cross-cultural dialogue, community engagement practices, and the evolution of new organizing structures, many stakeholders in the arts ecology feel the pressures of change."
MICHAEL MORGAN – Music Director and Conductor, Oakland East Bay Symphony – opined that survivability necessitates that you (or your organization) constantly need to re-think “What it is that you do, and for whom”. Ask these questions: “What impact can you have and what impact do you want to have? Where do you fit? What works for you? Knowing when to stop and when goals have been met is important. Michael suggested that collaboration is more important than competition, and that one of the weaknesses in our matrix is that we are sometimes oblivious to the potential of connection with each other. He added that leaving something for the succeeding generations has got to guide our actions.
FAVIANNA RODRIGUEZ – Printmaker and Social Entrepreneur – and the youngest member of the panel, offered bay area creativity has been nurtured by the depth of diversity of the immigrant community, and that the bay area’s leadership in absorbing the multiple levels that community has to offer is one of the area’s strengths. She thought that we have a level of experience in dealing with communities of color that other areas don’t yet match, and that experience is one of our assets – leading to levels of opportunities for collaboration. On the weaknesses side, Favianna suggested that even though we are at the epicenter of technology in the bay area, we still don’t really take advantage of online / website opportunities that might link us. And while we collaborate effectively within our own community, she thought we still don’t collaborate enough with other community groups in their change efforts. She also thought that our outreach to young artists under the age of 30 still needs improvement; that we need to address high turnover rates in our arts organizations and that we need to identify and expand our organizational and business models so that they are more self-sustaining.
MOY ENG – Program Director, Performing Arts Program, The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation – noted with respect to “reach” the current simultaneous intersection (most pronounced in the bay area) of “live” and “virtual” time options, the impact of which has changed the cultural menu in the bay area. She provided an extraordinary statistic: next year, 200 million computers will be sold world-wide, but two billion digital devices (phones, ipods, navigation devices etc.) will be sold. Somehow the arts need to be available as content on the growing dependence on these digital devices as the planet shifts its means to access information.
Moy also noted the still prevalent “sense of the possible” in the bay area, an asset not as strong in other areas, and that this attitude nurtured our creative environment. But she also warned that content on the internet is now increasingly thought of as an entitlement; that downloaders feel that all content is and should always be – free. That may be a future problem or it may be an advantage.
Noted audience researcher, ALAN BROWN – Principal in his own firm Wolf/Brown – talked about “reach” as having three different meanings: physical reach (evidenced by the examples of audience statistics); emotional reach (how do the arts “grab” people); and reach as when one grows because of the transformative experience of the arts.
Alan offered – as an example of the reach of the arts – that if everyone in the Yerba Buena auditorium were to send out some consensus message at the same time on the same day to its own email listserv and asked all those people to pass on that message, that it would likely be that the message would “reach” one third of the entire bay area population by day’s end. That is the potential “reach” the arts community might have, and Alan challenged the community, as a whole, to test its reach, and do exactly that every couple of years.
Alan opined that the decentralized nature of the arts sector is like having 10,000 branch offices and no headquarters. Without suggesting it is good or bad thing, but simply a reality, we have no cultural CEO and so our decision making apparatus is hard to identify. He thought that the glue that holds everything together in the bay area arts sector is the extraordinarily strong philanthropic community we have here that most communities can only envy.
On another plane, Alan thought we need to rethink the physical places where we offer art to the public. Thus, for example, he asked: “Where is the room you go to after a performance to discuss with other people (should you so desire) what you have just seen?” Not the “green room” where performers await, not the lobby where ushers want you to vacate as quickly as possible. Where then? Are we not facilitators of social experiences – of people wanting to spend time together?
Alan offered that the arts scene is an ecology and growth is natural but cannot be forced. You can fertilize it, but not make it grow. (And he also offered that death in an ecology is not unnatural – but suggested that was whole other topic for another day).
Finally, Alan cautioned that we still don’t really have any idea about how arts transforms people. We don’t have a clue as to the cumulative impact of the arts on people’s lives in the bay area or anywhere. At best, we are only beginning to built a lexicon that will allow us to talk about how art makes better human beings.
LUIS CANCEL – the new Director of Cultural Affairs of the San Francisco Arts Commission – suggested that the whole of the bay area arts community needs to adopt candor as it discusses how to address the various issues it faces, so that we can move forward quicker than if we talk around issues. He thought one of the major challenges we face is the unhealthy economic climate for working artists to find the physical space in which to work. (He was careful to distinguish working space with live / work space – as the bay area housing situation makes the latter challenge exponentially more difficult).
Luis offered that the bay area enjoyed some enormous advantages, including the huge amount of residents with enormous dollar liquid assets, and the growing tourism industry (16 million tourists last year, 2 million of whom were from foreign countries).
Formerly from the Bronx Museum of the Arts, as a newcomer Luis, like many others, is outraged that state per capita support ranks California dead last of all the states).
As to challenges, Luis thought we need to take greater advantage of online opportunities to help us to create more common connections. And finally, he noted that we have to figure out how to make sure our nonprofit boards of directors take more seriously their obligation to raise funds for our arts organizations, noting that those Boards that do accept that responsibility have track records of success.
Concluding the session, JOHN KILLACKY asked the panelists for some opinions about what they would like to see for the arts in the future – five, ten years down the line.
MOY hoped for and was optimistic that the arts would move towards being an increased part of every child’s K-12 experience.
MICHAEL wanted to see the orchestras move towards really using the internet to distribute music content and increasing public access to what they had to offer.
ALAN hoped that five years from now everyone would have an icon on the home page that said “groups” and that the arts sector would evolve in its capacity to harness the power of social networking. He noted that all our managerial and other institutional experience resided in our minds, and hoped that we could develop some program to pay mentors to coach our administrators; that someday every arts leader would have the option to both be, and have, a coach.
LUIS thought we would continue our leadership in the diversity area and that would provide us ever newer opportunities.
And FAVIANNA hoped the arts community would have progressed in taking back some control of the way the media treats arts & culture.
BARRY: What follows are some brief summaries of some of the day’s break out sessions by the moderators of each session. Throughout the day I will be posting additional session summaries as I receive them from key observers and session leaders. Check back today and over the course of the next four days and participate in the ongoing discussion of the issues facing the arts sector in the bay area by entering your own comment, observations, thoughts and ideas. And please help us by alerting your constituents and clients about this blog discussion.
MICHAEL WARR: Session: “Beyond 501c3- New Structures, Leadership, and Sustenance for Tomorrow’s Arts Organizations”
The Panelists were: Todd Brown, Founder/Co-Director, Red Poppy Art House; Courtney Fink, Executive Director, Southern Exposure; Heather Hiles, Chief Operating Officer, RippleSend; Michael Warr, Poet, Transitions Consultant, Projects Director at CompassPoint Nonprofit Services; Josh Wilson, Acting Executive Director, Independent Arts & Media; and Moderator, Nancy Quinn, Founder and Principal of Quinn Associates.
Knowing there were panelists and audience members who were actively avoiding becoming 501(c)3s I gave a broad sweep of “real world factors” to be considered in the undertaking of sustainable alternates to the 501(c)3 model. Those factors included 1. The role of leadership (collective and individual), which plays a critical role in determining what is possible; 2. The local Arts Ecosystem (Does that system encourage fiscal agent relationships for instance?); and, 3. How will that system adjust to a changing economic environment. The feasibility of alternative models to the 501(c)3 cannot be determined in the abstract.
Ken Foster, Executive Director at Yerba Buena Center for the Arts noted from the audience that 501(c)3 status is a tool to use when it is helpful and avoid when it is not. There were examples of doing things differently within the 501(c)3 structure. Courtney Fink spoke of how Southern Exposure “questioned and embraced its own model” of supporting its own artists and experimented in reinventing its programming. In evaluating “what it does” Southern Exposure challenged itself to “Imagine a day when we don’t exist?” The grants program it created has become a model of supporting smaller organizations and fueling the arts in San Francisco. This is an example of what the Arts Ecosystem makes possible, so is the Red Poppy Art House.
The Red Poppy is not a 501(c)3, but like more than 100 other local arts groups uses Intersection for the Arts as a fiscal agent. Todd Brown described it as “less an organization and more an experiment that is always rethinking and questioning what it does and where it fits.” Further refining and defining the Red Poppy he compared it to a “Mom and Pop corner store” that strives to be just as integral to the community’s daily life as opposed to the typical relationship of arts organizations and communities that have to wait for programming to start in order to participate or go out of their way to get there.
Turning things on their head the question was posed “While most organizations think of growing larger, why not consider growing smaller?” Red Poppy’s Co-Director Meklit Hadero, also speaking from the audience, posed another significant question in determining the trajectory and path of an arts organization: What does success mean? That answer should be different for each organization or experiment. I heard some participants saying it takes different structures to pursue distinct missions and specific tools to build those structures.
Independent Arts & Media’s Josh Wilson spoke of his organization aspiring to be an association of producers sharing services that sustain art under an umbrella that brings community together. Rejecting the hierarchic model, his group has an advisory board that makes decisions collectively, instead of following the typical Executive Director model. Social capital drives the organization’s engine.
Heather Hiles argued that the 501c3 model is limiting creativity in arts even arguing that when you are in a meeting with funders that it takes away from creativity. She encouraged advocacy and organizing around common interests to back up our demands for financial support.
One participant complained that “all these structures are strangling us” and that it “was impossible to find money as individual artists.” She offered a solution in which Californians could vote with their dollars by checking a box on the ballot for how much they want to give to the arts.
If there was a common thought in the room it was that more collectivity is needed. There was a strong sense of cooperatives being more a part of our future in the arts community. Heather Hiles described that future being made up of more community-led groups. And Nancy Quinn summarized our commonality when she ended the session by saying being "mission-driven is at the heart of cooperation."
JESSICA ROBINSON: Throughout the Arts Town Hall, the Reach track focused on what we as artists and arts administrators can learn about audiences and communities, and how that knowledge can help us connect with them better. In the earlier session, I was particularly taken by Alan Brown's five modes of engagement: inventive, interpretive, curatorial, observational and ambient.
It's been my experiences that when we think about marketing, we spend too much time focusing on the observational form of engagement (the old goal of "getting butts in seats"), at the expense of a deeper investigation of how we might deeply engage our audiences in a way that changes their lives.... or at least makes them want to come back.
And so the second Reach session, "Reaching Tomorrow's Audience: New Ideas In Action," was designed as an opportunity for those on the frontlines to share some tools around how to engage audiences, particularly using newer technology. My hope was to avoid a "talking heads" panel, but instead create a "skill-share" atmosphere that would enable everyone to go home with some useful tools.
I think it was a success. Ron Evans from Artsopolis talked about his strategies for motivating arts attendance in the South Bay; Jez Kuono`ono Lee and I spoke about our work with CounterPULSE, using our blog as an extension of our live interaction with audiences; Nishat Kurwa of Youth Radio spoke about their dynamic programming to develop young voices, and shared a very funny Youth Radio clip entitled, "Psychics are the new Psychologists"; Nicole Neditch relayed the inspiring story of how a handful of Oakland art galleries banded together to form a gallery crawl that has become a social phenomenon; and Chris Wiltsee spoke about his inspiring work creating a youth-run record label.
Much of our time was spent telling our stories and sharing specific tools that we all use in the work that we do. Through this, a few common ideas emerged:
1) Incentivize-- when you're asking audiences to do something new (whether post to a blog or participate in a chat room), it's good to offer an incentive-- a contest or prize for participation
2) Create the content, and then get out of the way-- when you're using social networking or blogging, you have to let the participants have their own voice... even if you don't like what they have to say.
3) Collaboration, not competition-- this was a theme for the whole day, really. Nicole's story about what can happen when art galleries start seeing themselves as collaborators rather than competitors was a really powerful illustration.
After the panel, a colleague approached me and said how good it was to see "all you young people" on the panel sharing our ideas. It struck me that we hadn't particularly set out to create a youth-oriented panel-- it just happened that way. It was particularly gratifying to me to see such an age range in the leadership and participation at the Arts Town Hall. From Favianna Rodriguez in the plenary session, to panels throughout the afternoon, younger leadership was well-represented throughout the gathering. And we were all united in honoring the "evergreens" in our community-- those who have been doing this work for 30 years or more. I so appreciated that range.
As I said at the panel, I believe that the lines between our communities, our audiences, our constituents, and our participants are becoming more and more blurred. I am hopeful that as we expand our ideas of who are audiences are, we can also expand our concepts of how to engage them.
SABRINA KLEIN: “Justice: A frame for the arts in the 21st Century”
We talked about justice and how frequently it is identified as a specific need (e.g., homeless kids or adults with Alzheimer’s) that can be targeted by arts-based activities. Carl Anthony expanded the conversation about justice by putting it in the context of all of us being the end products of 13.7 billion years of life in the universe, and projected the future as deeply as possible. He pointed to a clear intersection between environmental justice, racial equity, and sustainable communities and the role of artists in that intersection. We can pull ourselves outside of this moment in time and open ourselves up to “deep time” where past, present and future call for us to act consciously on behalf of ourselves and our communities. Paloma Pavel then talked about her personal journey as an artist and activist when she realized that she had the power to make small gestures become significant by randomly repeating them, hence launching the grassroots movement to commit Random Acts of Kindness and Senseless Beauty. Jayeesha Dutta traced her local, focused work in establishing MindPower Collective through personal experience of social inequity on a global level. Then the group broke out in to smaller discussions to reflect on the intersections between Justice and Art. The discoveries included:
· we can all tell our stories through the frame of justice, if we reflect about what matters to us in our art-making
· we need to change our language to tell our stories in ways that help us make the justice frame clear to our listeners
· although everyone’s story and everyone’s art-making were different, they shared common threads
· beauty has a tremendous role to play in working toward justice
· and personal transformation in the specific and particular provides access to universal understandings and connections.
LILLY KHARRAZI, Alliance for California Traditional Arts
Issue Track 4: IMPACT “To Be Traditional is To Be Political” facilitated by the Alliance for California Traditional Arts 3:00-4:30 pm
Workshop description: Traditional Arts are far from “safe” or “conservative” ventures. This panel of artists, community organizers and activist’s impact communities here and abroad with their work. What challenges do they face as artists or émigrés who have been historically ignored? What sustains the spirit and life of these art makers? What are the issues they face? This workshop produced by the Alliance for CA Traditional Arts will be a lively show and tell, coming directly from the experiences of artists and activists whose art making is reaching beyond Bay Area zip codes.
This session was born out the work that ACTA (Alliance for Ca Traditional Arts www.actaonline.org ) is passionately devoted to. We work with California’s diverse cultural communities through our funding opportunities, advocacy and convenings to ensure that important cultural values and assets of the past will continue into the future. Embedded in this complex idea are a multiplicity of issues that touch upon definitions of what is traditional, how will cultural continuity look in the future, what impacts our indigenous communities, how to support endangered languages which is a lifeline to culture, identifying culture bearers and master artists of today and tomorrow, and how the following generations will continue, adapt or abandon their cultural inheritance.
Our participants were chosen for this panel because each of them are engaged in doing work with peoples who have been historically silenced. They are silenced by a variety of complex reasons which can be because of their minority status, racism, political policies, self-hatred, generations removed from the source culture, etc. They have made an impact on the population they work with nationally and internationally by engaging in traditional arts. By doing so, their work de- facto becomes politicized. ACTA was deeply honored to have our grantees share their experiences with us yesterday:
Douglas Mundo, Executive Director of Canal Welcome Center of San Rafael (www.canalcenter.org) works in a social service setting that primarily serves day laborers. An important program of the Center is the arts and culture component that serves the Mayan population that in the Bay Area is over 5,000 strong. Accompanying him were members of the Mayan community: Mario Gongora, Jordi Gongora, Gerardo Ortiz, Alma, Pech, Leticia Chacon and priest and artisan Ernesto Olmos who began the seesion with invocations to the divine. We stood with him as he led us in salutations to the four directions and downwards toward the earth’s center. He blew the conch shell and other hand made wind instruments that evoked sounds of the natural world like the wind and gentle bird calls. Our senses were filled by the sound and sights of the natural world. One flute that had two small bowls at its end were lit with tiny pools of fire. Other members of the community including younger boys danced for us a regional dance from the Yucatan. They wore their regional dress which is hand embroidered with motifs of the natural world as well: flowers and vines.
(Q--Think about the lives that people live. Day laborer here, sending money home, keeping a connection to your culture, your language, your customs. Is this the story of all immigrant groups? What are the challenges here for an indigenous community in particular? In a time of innovation and globalization, how can one articulate one’s power in practicing traditional arts? )
Door Dog Music Productions, founders of the San Francisco World Music Festival (www.sfworldmusicfestival.org) was represented by executive director, Michael Santoro and program director, Kutay Derin Kugay. As artists, activists and educators their mission has been to showcase and empower artists that have historically been under-represented due to cultural, political and economic barriers. These are primarily traditional artists. Working with communities closely in the U. S. and abroad, they have created opportunities for collaborations from diverse cultures. They shared with us their work in the Kurdish communities here and in Turkey. Joined by two Kurdish women musicians, we heard a song sung and written by Ms. Duygu Bayar, a 21 year old who accompanied herself with the frame drum. Her short song sung in a Kurdish dialect, we were told was written to commemorate the death of a child who got caught in the crossfire of police breaking up a Kurdish event in her hometown. The free usage of the Kurdish language has been denied to the population for decades. Ms. Bayar who is a children’s choral group director came to the U.S. last year to perform at the SF World Music Festival. Her children, ages 8-16 sang in the SFWMF in several languages including Kurdish and upon their return to Turkey, Ms. Bayar was questioned about her activities with the choral group. She fled back to the US and has is now a pending political refugee status. She has been sentenced in absentia to 15 years in prison. Her children who are over 12 will be facing a court sentence next week.
We also heard from Ms. Ozden Ostoprak, an accomplished conservatory trained vocalist and musician who accompanied herself with the saz (lute), singing in another Kurdish dialect. Her daughter Berfin, age 12, joined for the last song. They are supported in our Apprenticeship program to assure the continuation of this strong and beautiful tradition.
(Q-Can traditional arts practice mobilize communities and make one’s voice heard? What is the role of culture bearers as community leaders? How do politics and cultural identity intersect? )
Ma’afa is a kiswahaili term for “disaster” or “terrible occurrence”. This word has been used to describe the results of the European slave trade that brought the Africans to the new world. We heard from Ms. Wanda Sabir, artist, journalist, and founder of this remembrance ritual which takes place at dawn each October. (www.maafasfbayarea.com) Ms. Sabir talked about the generational memory of trauma and healing that must take place in order to understand the connections of culture that link every African together in the Diaspora. The ritual is by and for African Americans utilizing drumming, dance, and libations. It is the catalyst for art making, community dialogues and introspection. It is a time to reflect on the legacy of slavery, its economic, political and social impact on African peoples in order to heal from the trauma. We saw a slide show of the ritual observance which is available on the website. Ms. Sabir also spoke of the reluctance of some in her community to be so Black-identified which resonated with our next speaker.
(Q- What does a community do when your histories have been erased or denied?)
A natural segue to the work of Voice of Roma (www.voiceofroma.org) followed. Sani Rifati and Carol Bloom are the founders and activists of VOR. As a people and as a culture, the Roma have been and continue to be misrepresented, mythologized and romanticized as “gypsies”. VOR’s domestic work presents authentic Romani culture, music and art to No. California audiences. Abroad, they are involved primarily in Kosovo and through a variety of services work to increase safety, stability and economic opportunities of the Roma, particularly women. Each year they produce a spring equinox event called the Herdeljezi. Sani spoke passionately about people robbing his identity and culture. What resonated with Ms. Sabir’s point of community participation was that the Romani peoples have been hesitant to publicly form an activists’ block, due to historical reasons of persecution. Both the Maafa ritual and Voice of Roma have been the inspiration for other communities to adopt their cultural programs.
(Q-How can one develop into a cultural organizer? )
Please post your comments and feedback. We would love to hear from you. Thank you for attending our session and thanks in advance for your thinking.
LINDA SCHANFEIN Great group of varied arts administrators and individual artists interested in developing cultural facilities and how to find and develop live/work spaces.We discussed the basics…….vision, finding space, true to the mission, financing and most of all being creative in your approach to leasing. How to negotiate a lease, Opportunities in creating raw arts spaces, how to program arts spaces, finding the right tenants. Building communities. Being flexible in your search and your goals. The dilemma in finding live/work space. Creative ways to develop live/work on a small scale……does it work? Discussed an example of live/work in a condo environment……rules, regs and the community of artists.Basically the positives and negatives of that structure. Excellent questions from the group. Several things I left them with:
1) In your search for art space – what’s your vision of the space and how will it function,
2) Is it financially feasible ………how do you get to that point.
3) Learn how to negotiate for what you want………find out what the bottomline is and go from there.
4) Don’t give up on your goals and always network your “vision” to others……..you never know when an opportunity will present itself.
JULIE FRY – Board of Director Roundtable
The group realized during the introductions that the participants were from fairly small organizations, and so we agreed that we would discuss how to build a small board. Topics included the optimal number of board members (it depends on the needs of the organization) and how to find potential board members (one participant attends a dinner hosted by a board member purely for board recruitment). We discussed the need to balance having new, young and diverse voices on the board to reflect the community the organizations serve, with the need to have board members who are connected to potential donors. Some participants made it clear to their board members that they need to contribute to their organization (charity begins at home) before they can make any fundraising asks and it was agreed that setting board members up for success by providing them with the fundraising tools and training they need is imperative. One participant mentioned that they identify potential board members from their audience and invite them to participate in an organizational planning process. That gives both sides a chance to engage with each other before issuing a board invitation.
Overall, my sense is that there are great ideas in practice for board development, and that it would be great to have an ongoing forum for small and mid-sized organizations in particular to share their ideas – what works and what doesn’t in recruiting and retaining highly-engaged board members.
BELINDA TAYLOR: "What We Know About Audience Participation."
We deliberately took a wide-ranging, nontraditional look at what is meant by audience, from ticket buyers -- the so-called "butts in seats" (to use the crass industry term)-- to people like and unlike ourselves, but who universally lead busy lives, engage in some form of personal arts practice in their lives, and who want their kids to have an array of arts in school. We explored consumer trends -- people wanting to engage more meaningfully with arts presenters, wanting to control and customize their arts experiences, waanting to be part of the process rather than passive receivers. Are we, as arts-makers and presenters, willing to lift the curtain and let them in on the fun?
The audience at hand, those seated in the screening room at Yerba Buena Center, responded well to our eclectic approach to the topic of marketing. Two of our panelists described inspiring arts-related advocacy and social marketing campaigns. Tenoch Flores of Fenton Communications described Fenton's campaign that used art to advocate for an idea: creating a positive image of American Muslims through an on-line film contest. The winning video is circulating now on the Internet. Tenoch measures the many hits it has received as "mind share." Louise Music of the Alameda County Office of Education Alliance for Arts Learning Leadership spoke of the Alliance's campaign to use an idea to advocate for art. The idea: Art IS Education, a galvanizing concept that resonates at many levels and is helping to restore arts learning to public schools in Alameda County.
Arts participation researcher Alan Brown provided a peek (pre-publication) at new research into personal arts practices among folks living in the Central Valley and Inland Empire. He reported that 80% of those surveyed engage in broadly-defined "creative" activities which may or may not have much to do with what we consider "art." Is cooking traditional foods art? Is gardening art? Possibly. I wondered if these "art in everyday life" hobbies and activities correlate with attending arts events. We will have to await the Irvine Foundation-funded study results for an answer. Carlos Velázquez, marketing director of Teatro Vision in San Jose, provided a close up view of his organization's effort's to serve many constituencies at this Latino/Chicano company. Relying on a values-based marketing approach, he focused on a handful of local teachers to launch educational outreach; the payoff was huge: students, entire schools, families and community people made the connection to the teatro. However, the range of mono and bilingual language skills was challenging. Meeting these challenges required tremendous work...multilingual outreach, translation of materials, performance supertitles ...and ingenuity. But it has paid off with increased attendance. Making the teatro a welcoming place for many diverse people (market segments) is a challenge that Carlos and his colleagues continue to meet.
FRANCES PHILLIPS: Finding Balance: Living to Create
I took away from this conversation a spirit of generosity—three speakers were trying hard to address identified needs of artists and three artists were wise and thoughtful in sharing their life/work balance advice. The room was packed and a show of hands suggested that visual artists dominated.
Judilee Reed, Executive Director of Leveraging Investments in Creativity (LINC), talked about key needs of artists that surfaced in the Investing in Creativity study of U.S. artists: demands and markets, direct support, artists’ space, information, and health insurance. In each of the cities and regions where LINC is operating, local partners identify the theme to be addressed. (In the Bay Area, it is helping four community foundations increase direct support to artists.)
Linda Park, a program officer at New York Foundation for the Arts, described the evolution of NYFA Source (www.nyfa.org/source), a national data source for artists which began as the artists’ hotline and has evolved into a web based tool—likely to serve more than 110,000 artists this year.
Don’t be fooled by the name “The Actors Fund”: it has long served the needs of artists in front of and behind the camera, a broad swath of performing artists and, now, visual artists. Research demonstrates that artists are twice as likely to be uninsured than other members of the general population (though most of the artists in the room were insured). Dan Kitowski, M.S.W., Manager of the Health Insurance Resource Center, introduced the Center’s Web resource for artists, www.ahirc.org, which includes a PDF that is focused on San Francisco and Oakland.
I invited performing artist and poet Marc David Pinate; choreographer Judith Smith, and visual artist Amy Franceschini to describe how they support themselves, and challenges they face in balancing personal and professional goals. Marc had an amazing array of jobs (at least three) and art activities (far more than three). Because of having a disability, for a number of years Judy was able to work as artistic director of Axis Dance Company without paying herself. While she’s now salaried, she pays her administrative staff more than she pays herself. Amy just took a full-time teaching position at University of San Francisco, but up to this point was piecing together multiple jobs. Many challenges were identified, from Amy’s loss of both her apartment and studio space several years ago to Judy’s wish to pay her dancers a living wage.
The artists were asked to share the advice they would give to emerging artists. Their answers where generous and inspiring. Here’s a sampling:
Judy: Make your home your sanctuary; set your own schedule; meditate; therapy/therapy/therapy, whatever that means to you; seek advice; find the friends you can bitch and moan to; set personal goals; define your limits and know when to say “no”; find a passion outside of your art; thank everybody and don’t expect anything back from that.
Amy: Intern and volunteer, spending as much time as you can at arts institutions (a handy way to use your Project 20 hours if you have racked up a lot of parking tickets in San Francisco); if you can’t afford something, barter for it; think about what you want your world to be and make that what you create. (Amy has no space to garden where she lives and has made a major project that has gardening at its core.)
Marc: Be true to your art; take workshops and learn new skills; being the best performer/artist that you can be is more important than being a self-promoter—
if you are really good, opportunity will come to you; invest time in your community—fun comes from working with other people; include others in your work; have a spiritual practice; exercise—use your body.
Hearing the artists’ challenges and advice, Judilee wondered if the researchers and program designers in the room were doing the right things, “At best, it is our job to incentivize local communities to think strategically about how to create programs on your behalf.” Some things that panelists found to be inspiring were a recent gathering of urban planners in Cleveland who were interested in artists’ role in rebuilding urban areas (Judilee); studies linking arts activities with economic activity (Linda); a shift in the use of language from “networking” to “community” (Linda); building of new live-work developments in Oakland (Judy); state and national political candidates’ focus on the topic of health care reform and a very useful tool for those who want to get involved in artists’ healthcare: www.artistsunitedforhealthcare.com (Dan).
Audience members wanted more help with affordable space and with kinds of support that could benefit artists with families. In our particular room at Yerba Buena Center, many had health insurance but affordable studio and living space remained on the table as a question to rally around.
BARRY: Clearly there is no shortage of challenges facing the arts in the bay area as elsewhere – everything from money woes and daunting fundraising demands, to competition for audiences, from content issues, to generational succession, from figuring out how to mobilize our advocacy efforts to opening lines of new collaboration. And there are also extraordinary opportunities for us to grow as a field.
If you would like to comment on any of the issues raised here – or any other issue not touched on in this summary re-cap of yesterday’s gathering, please scroll down and enter your comment. We hope that over the next four days we might begin an ongoing dialogue and discussion within our community that can continue offline in thousands of conversations.
One central consensus opinion from yesterday was that we need more opportunities to gather as we did.
This morning when I awoke and looked out the window (I live in a relatively rural part of central Marin country – a canyon that enjoys wildlife in abundance), I saw sitting right outside my bedroom window a young mother deer and her two new babies – not more than a couple of weeks old, still a little unsure on their feet, but enormously curious. The mother kept a close eye on them as they explored, and they were so cute and precious that one could not have failed to be captivated by the wonder of new life. The differences between these magnificent little animals and human beings are fewer than we might imagine, but one is that human beings have the capacity to make art, and it is that capacity and the end product that is our legacy; it is our art that survives us, and that helps us to give meaning to our existence. There can be no doubt that we have one of the best products that any sector can possibly offer the public. While the obstacles we face and the threats to our hopes are real, together we can overcome them. I would like to once again personally salute each and every one of you out there who are dedicated to creativity. Bless you all. Your contribution to the well being of all of us is incalculable. What you do is extremely important.
Thank you,
Remember – Don’t Quit.
Barry
Comments
We apologize for some minor glitches in the layout of the blog that delayed posting at noon.
thank you for your patience.
Barry
Posted by: barry | June 10, 2008 07:54 PM
Barry's report is thorough enough, but if you want to see a different take on the Town Hall, check Music News on Classical Voice.
Posted by: Janos Gereben | June 10, 2008 08:02 PM
Just a short note of appreciation to all who participated and organized this event. As an artist, it was helpful and inspiring for me to meet, hear and speak with so many other people who value the arts - one of the significant pluses of living in the Bay Area.
Posted by: Seamus Berkeley | June 10, 2008 09:04 PM
This was a great gathering: inspiring, invigorating and information filled, it really proved the wealth of talent and resource we DO have here. I'd love to see us all take the challenged posted in the plenary session to 'harness our reach.' What the world needs now is all our innovative thinking.
Posted by: Deborah Crooks | June 10, 2008 10:02 PM
I'd like to thank Jessica Robinson for organizing the Session, "Reaching Tomorrow's Audience: New Ideas In Action". As a participant in the panel, I learned a lot from listening to fellow panelists, and from the questions asked from the audience post discussion.
Two practical topics that came up were:
1. Artists might like to familiarize yourself with the Terms of Service for companies like YouTube, Blip.tv, etc... By uploading your content, you are granting them rights to your material. If that doesn't sound like an even trade, or, if your content may violate their T.O.S. consider other options.
2. Moderation of comments - there's no right or wrong way to moderate comments; if playing moderator is a way to keep critical comments on point, then go with it. Allowing comments could be a great way to incorporate participation, but it's not for everyone.
As our blog is still in it's 1 month old state, we welcome people to view it and make suggestions via our contact form or through commenting. We also welcome contributors, and any other interests.
Thanks!
Jez Lee
Board President
CounterPULSE ~ a Catalyst for Art + Activism
www.counterpulse.org
*Our blog!
www.counterpulse.org/blog
Posted by: Jez Lee | June 10, 2008 10:20 PM
ON THE FINAL SESSION:
After 8 hours of conferencing, the Final Session of the Art Town Hall was surprisingly energized. We asked people to help summarize the day and imagine steps forward. What was most inspiring? What was most terrifying? What are we going to do about it? We heard enthusiasm around the possibilities for collaboration, continued networking and exchange, and a louder articulation of just how powerful and valuable the Bay Area's creative community is and can be. Several groups expressed fear around technology, real estate, and an increasingly challenging funding environment. More than anything, we heard from people who want to make bold and beautiful things happen across the Bay Area. People who are activists and problem solvers. We are onto something. We are, indeed, immensely powerful. The question is, how do we harness this power? What are concrete next steps?
Posted by: Deborah Cullinan | June 10, 2008 11:17 PM
I thought it was great to get all of the artist, and organizations together in one space.
It is always encouraging to know that you are "not alone" in this being an artist think ( whatever that means).
It was easy to identify the many wonderful organizations.
What would have been more helpful for me personally,
would have been some type of list of all the artist attending, and what their artist field was.
Since all the people I was able to talk to were great people, I felt like I missed out on meeting some other great people as well.
It would be great to start a list of some sort, since the organizers have everyones e-mail, just to get an idea of who was there, and what services we could barter, or trade with each other.
The round table discussions were loud, and it was hard to hear everyone at the tables I was at.
I'm not sure how effective they were since most people wanted to get information, and less were willing to share.
Over all it was a great start, and I hope it was just that, a start.
Posted by: Naru Kwina | June 11, 2008 03:28 AM
The "Beyond 501(c)(3)" panel was terrific. Some really significant things were said about cultural independence, the enterprising nature of the arts, commitment to mission and collective organizing.
It feels like more and more culture-makers and institutions are looking to these ideas for guidance in developing arts organizations that are optimally suited to their needs, and those of the communities they serve.
A little bit of info about Independent Arts & Media that didn't make into the main blog posting or my comments on the panel:
* founded in 2000 as a nonprofit producer's co-op
* funded by individual donors, earned income and grants
* provides sponsorship and services to more than a dozen (and counting) autonomous media and culture projects, including:
= Hyphen Magazine: Asian America Unabridged
= 924 Gilman Street/Alternative Music Foundation
= Newsdesk.org
= The Public Press
= Old Growth Arts Residencies
= The Comix Board
Finally, I would be neglecting my duties if I did not invite all readers to attend the Ninth Expo for Independent Arts (formerly Expo for the Artist & Musician).
* SATURDAY, SEPT. 27, DOLORES PARK: The Expo for Independent Arts
http://artsandmedia.net/expo/register/
Posted by: Future of 501(c)(3) | June 11, 2008 08:55 AM
Here is some urgent news for our larger community...
At the ACTA session on Monday,"To Be Traditional is To Be Political", we introduced artist Duygu Bayar, a 21 year old Kurdish woman to the Bay Area arts community. She sang in her native Kurdish language, accompanying herself with a traditional frame drum. She unfortunately is in a desperate situation.
For over a decade we have been dedicated to bringing master musicians from other countries to the Bay Area to perform in the San Francisco World Music Festival. Last year as part of the Festival, we brought Duygu and the Kurdish Youth Chorus that she directs (15 children ages 10-16) from Diyarbakir, Turkey to San Francisco to perform. After they returned home to Turkey, all of them were interrogated by the police. They were all accused of spreading propaganda and separatism by singing songs in Kurdish here in California, an act which is against the law in Turkey.
As the interrogations intensified, Duygu was forced to flee Turkey for her own safety. She arrived in San Francisco a couple of months ago. While her political asylum status is pending approval, we just learned that she has been sentenced by the Turkish courts to 15 years in absentia for singing in her mother language of Kurdish in our Festival. We have also learned today that 3 of the children (all age 16) have been charged and are about to be tried for separatism. The case will be heard by High Criminal Court on June 19, 2008. The children face up to 5 years imprisonment if found guilty of these charges.
Duygu Bayar and these three children really need our help. As an arts community, our collective voice can bring some pressure to bear on this situation. Please help us send a message that our efforts to bring musicians to the Bay Area are ones of peace making and intended to promote global cultural understanding, not ones of separatism and political propaganda. You can help right now by signing a petition to register your voice. Amnesty International is already on this case, as well as, our local congress people. It's free and takes less than a minute of your time. Its a concrete step.
"Freedom for Gokhan Ok (16), Servan Yilmaz (16), .."
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ozgurluk?
This is a very important cause. I'd like to encourage you to add your signature to this petition. If you are inspired to help in other ways, please contact me at 415-561-6571.
Thank you,
Michael Santoro,
Executive Director
Door Dog Music Productions
San Francisco World Music Festival
Posted by: Michael Santoro | June 11, 2008 01:50 PM
California Lawyers for the Arts hosted two roundtables on legal issues at the Bay Area Arts Town Hall, one on Intellectual Property and a second on Contracts and Negotiations. Stephen Camber, C.L.A. President Emeritus, and a member of the organization's attorney panel, fielded a number of questions about copyright protection, work for hire issues, fair use, and the proposed "Orphan" amendment to the U.S. Copyright Act. C.L.A.'s Board of Directors recently endorsed a letter asking Congress to table the orphan amendment pending further review. On the fair use issue, Steve noted that a non-commercial use that does not compete with the author of the original work, may be more likely to be considered as a "fair use" of the copyrighted material. However, his basic advice was, if you can't find the creator of the work you want to use, "don't leave it to chance." Similarly, if you have questions about whether you may be subject to an infringement claim if you use another's work: better to seek permission and work out an agreement in advance.
The Contracts and Negotiations Roundtable was hosted by Jill Roisen and Alma Robinson, with the assistance of our mediation case manager, Maija Grasis. Several artists and one arts council representative asked a number of questions about public art contracts and commissions. Conflict situations can be handled by the C.L.A. alternative dispute resolution program, Arts Arbitration and Mediation Services. However, the best way to avoid conflicts to make sure that agreements are memorialized in writing prior to starting the work. Artists were cautioned not to sign "standard" contracts without getting a legal review in advance to make sure that they understand all of the provisions of the agreement. In terms of basic negotiation strategies, the participants were urged to enter the negotiations with a framework of basic fairness in mind, and consider the overall purpose of the agreement before negotiating specific details. A contract can be changed if both parties agree to and sign a written modification.
Advocacy footnote: It's election season, so it's a good time to write your elected officials and those who recently won primaries for state offices, urging them to support more generous funding for the arts during the next budget cycle. Congratulations are in order for those who have won their June primaries, followed by: "We hope that you are going to find a way to increase the budget of the California Arts Council in order to support arts in all our communities," followed by..."We appreciate your leadership."
Posted by: Alma Robinson | June 11, 2008 05:05 PM
As the moderator of the "Beyond 501(c)(3)" panel, I felt our conversation could have gone on much longer, mainly because the panelists themselves had so much to offer (thanks to Michael Warr, for organizing such an outstanding group), but also because of the huge gaps that exist between individual artists and arts organizations, and between artists and organizations of different disciplines. Chamber music ensembles, artist collectives, playwrights, ballet schools, piano studios, jazz groups, ensemble theatre companies, choreographers, community choirs -- all are approaching the creation and delivery of art in very different ways, and need innovative tools for resource development to sustain their work, including access to grants in the 501(c)(3) world. I'd love to hear more from artists and arts organizations in all disciplines about this issue, especially focusing on scaling up (when and if you do) and hanging on (sustaining the work without burning the artists out.)
Great job on the panel everyone!
Posted by: Nancy Quinn | June 11, 2008 07:18 PM
So many thoughts generated by the day. Next steps is an important place to start. I’ve been in San Francisco for 20 years; I’m a painter now, but in the past, I’ve worked on the staff of the Magic & Eureka theaters, and ran a translational AIDS research non-profit, and I have to admit that my greatest fear, in seeing this town hall, was daring to hope. It was good to see plenary session panelists--many in positions to institute change—with an understanding of the realities of the Bay Area. But the bottom line to me, is that it is no surprise at all that so many arts organizations have survived 30+ years here; the overwhelming majority of support in the Bay Area goes to institutions, with the assumption that institutions will then support artists. But having worked for some great institutions, I know exactly how overmatched every single organization is in this city. They are very very busy just staying afloat and presenting a handful of artists each year. If the question had been asked how many artists—of any stripe—have been here 30 years, and more to the point, how many artists who practice their art a majority of their working hours, and who receive a majority of their income from their art (especially if they are not employed by an arts organization) the number would be far less impressive. I say this as someone who has been a part of arts organizations I love, and I loved what I could get done from that position—but I also know that every single artist I worked with in theater has left the Bay Area either for someplace where the cost of living and the policies that effect day to day life (like parking tickets) are less harsh to people of low income, or where there is a stronger market for their art.
So what can be done on a practical level? The economics of the Bay Area are a mountain we probably can’t move, but we should be able to impact it, especially with all that liquid income floating nearby. I agreed with Mr. Brown’s observation that the 10,000 branch offices could use a headquarters; I think some of that liquid income should be cornered to staff an office, perhaps within the SF Arts Commission to serve as an advocate for artists—and I mean artists, not arts organizations; organizations can put together a 501c3 for the purpose of advocating for organizations, if that’s felt necessary.
A few things on an Artists’ Advocate agenda could be: 1) SPACE: negotiation of work and display space for artists—perhaps create a program whereby real estate in transition could be made available to artists for rehearsal, studio or exhibit space…a win-win that puts tenants in open buildings, provides space to artists, and brings arts into communities; negotiation of permanent work or live-work spaces; negotiation of partnerships between local bars/restaurants/coffee shops for coordinated hours/services with art events—referencing that need for meeting space Alan Brown noted (a side note that in Seattle, where I did theater before I came here, every theater had an associated bar where cast and audience convened after a show—everyone knew about it, and everyone went there; for a variety of reasons, I’ve found that that doesn’t much happen here. Also, TheaterWorks used to have a policy of “meet & greet” with actors directly after a show, and they also have regular events inviting audience comment on works under consideration—there are ways to connect between audience and artists, even with less than ideal circumstances, if the artists and arts organizations commit to them.) 2) CITY POLICIES DETRIMENTAL TO ARTISTS: for example, parking tickets--Project 20 has changed a great deal in recent years, and is now unworkable for many artists. Create a Project 20 office that establishes a single, low administrative fee for artists to sign up for Project 20, coordinates assignment of artists to arts organizations, and extends timeline to do the work (as most of us work multiple jobs, and when we’re lucky enough to be on a project, our time is on deadline). 3) TECHNOLOGY: one of the reasons technology overwhelms us is that it’s bloody expensive. For my part, I can’t touch it on what I’m making. Here in the heart of the digital revolution, public advocacy to get technology to working artists would be invaluable. 4) ARTIST CONNECTION: I think face time is important, and hard to get if you need to work several jobs; harder if your art is solitary. At the research center I ran, we did annual “external advisory reviews” where we invited a number of peers/competitors to review our center; we demonstrated everything we had accomplished in a year, and got the feedback of a number of people doing the same thing on a similar level. A similar ritual could be great for artists—not a support group, but a real chance to assess where we are and where we are trying to go, and to receive the perspective of others in a similar place—and to offer the same in turn to other artists.
Two other observations I want to put out there. Collaboration is a wonderful thing, and at it’s best, truly arrives at synergy. But ALL projects and goals are NOT best served by collaboration. I say this as one who grew up, trained and has worked in a collaborative art form the majority of my life—I love it, I understand its magic, and I respect it deeply. But it can also be a waste of time and resources, if there is not a genuine reason for and commitment to the collaboration; and further, there are things that are better developed and executed in more individual models. The trend in funding and thinking is to support “collaborations”—with the hope that the maximum number of people will be hit by the dollars/energy thrown out. It’s really important to know that some ideas, some endeavors should NOT be collaborative.
The second is the idea that artists ought not to expect to live on their art. The Bay Area in particular, in it’s embrace of the arts, has settled into a model in which no one makes a living—and in fact this idea is built into our thinking as we budget our organizations and projects. In doing so, consciously or otherwise, we select for people staffing our organizations who have other forms of support; that effects the thinking of an organization. I’ve had two experiences with this in other settings that I think are worth sharing. In Seattle—granted 20 years ago, and I hear this is now changing—but 20 years ago, there were 6 theaters where, when you were hired for a show, you made enough to get by: to pay the rent, get to work, and have a beer w/friends after the show. Seattle had a large, unionized blue collar community, and that community strongly supported the idea that people—all people, even artists—should be paid a base-level, workable salary for their work. As a non-profit manager during the dot.com boom, I couldn’t attract administrative staff with the typically sub-standard non-profit pay we offered. I learned an important lesson about demanding—even from the government—competitive salary for all staff. As organizations, we do ourselves a disservice by setting our budgets too low to support our staff and artists. I know fundraising is hard—I’ve done it—but it’s better to set the bar at Enough, and raise towards that, than at too little. We set the bar too low all the time, and accept a standard that presumes that art should be an impoverished or on-the-side profession--and every one of us who sets the standard low, establishes it at that level for everyone around us.
All that said, it is incredibly hopeful to me to see organizations like LINC and CCI and the Urban Institute who are seriously going after the tools that could make a difference in making a difference. I lived for a year and a half in Mexico, and I think we could learn a lot about support for the arts, for artists, for the day to day enrichment of life by a vibrant, participatory, universally embraced presence of culture in day to day life. We’ve got all the raw materials here—in magical proportions—if only we can survive the economy and isolation!
Posted by: Montana Murdoch | June 11, 2008 07:22 PM
greetings to everyone!. i really enjoyed being part of the "Beyond the 501c3" panel, and attending the arts town hall in general. i love seeing people coming together to think creatively.
i thought it was telling, however, in our discussion how the dialogue became fixated on the "structure" aspect of organizations at the neglect of other areas of envisioning. I think it demonstrates how big the challenge is for so many of us, of navigating through so many variables/demands to survive in this economy. we become consumed by it, in the same way the conversation did during our panel. i would like to see a dialogue go more into the "envisioning" aspect. what does it mean to be "visionary"?
we had "leadership" in the title, but never seemed to move into that topic except by michael's reference. personally, i'm curious about how deeply and honestly new/proposed models of leadership address the gaps of race and class in the arts world and its relationship to local communities. these are very complex and core issues. interestingly, we never touched on it in our panel. such is the power of the organizational burden to overshadow all other areas!
my thought is - shouldn't structure come later on the list of priorities? like first envision/define values, then conceptualize the structure that supports them. but, in my experience, things seem to work in reverse - we're dealt the structure like a hand of cards we're forced to play with, and then we do the best we can to make our values fit/survive. i'm terribly impatient with this.
two questions that occur to me are in the realm of the practical and the visionary.
in what ways can visionary experiments in arts presenting possibly resolve some practical issues?
and, conversely, how can being practical sometimes undermine our visionary capacity and drive?
the second question is of most concern - the reign of practicality. there seems to be a vein of thinking that sees streamlined commercial-savy non-profit/commercial hybrids as being very forward thinking, as they are posing a more effective model for surviving within the structure of our society. this makes obvious sense in many ways. but we have to acknowledge, i believe, that this is, ultimately, a forfeit of a greater vision. the hybrid model accepts playing field (the status quo) and seeks to maximize it's capacity within it. it ultimately resigns to conforming to the system we are situated in (what else can we possibly do???). i find this discouraging. but that is me, and the fact is there are personal choices at hand here that are relevant.
there are inspired individuals willing to pursue the path of the 501c3, as there are others who will go the for-profit or non-profit route. it depends on the person. we all can benefit from a multiplicity of organizational sizes and structures. this is the arts ecology we have been referencing. but for myself, still finding my place, i have the patience for none of them. they are just not the paths that my heart wants to follow. this is my particular position as an artist and arts director of a tiny cultural center in the mission district of sf. but i am certain that there are others like me.
in five years, the red poppy art house has come to be known as a "hidden jewel in the mission", a inter-cultural inter-disciplinary crossroads. people feel something vital and geniuine, and without pretense, the moment they walk in the space. i don't say this to boast, but only to acknowledge a most significant fact: that the reality of the art house flies in the face of present models. as the founder (noting the space has survived due to tremendous output of volunteer energy), i have largely ignored all the recommendation for establishing a sustainable structured organization, perhaps even to the level of irresponsibility. every step of the way i chose to put my energy directly into the quality or artistic work (this is what artist do, no?), and to not redirect that energy towards the immense task of grant research, applications, outlining budgets, marketing this and that, etc. etc. i simply could not bring myself to give my energy over to all that. i trusted in the law of quality, quality of artistic endeavor, quality of human relationship/interaction, and quality of the very energy of the space we walk into and inhabit (this was the "molecule" thing i mentioned humorously at the panel). if all the quality is there (of which artistic quality is only part), and if it is exceptional, then people will feel it. and if they feel it, they will talk about it. word of mouth has power beyond all technology, because it automatically enlivens all technology in its service.
so, the point i am clumsily trying to make, is that there are artists out there who will create not only work within their discipline, but have the capacity to create also the physical spaces to house it - they have the imaginative power to create unusual and remarkable "contexts" where work can be presented at all stages. but as artists, their process follows a constantly changing/morphing/spontaneous course that inevitably rebels against the structuring, strategic planning, coding, numbering, accounting, researching, and all other such demands that come with the formalization of any kind of business or organization. it is for this matter, i believe, that today such creative spaces are so few in numbers. the artists/contextual-creators will jump ship before sacrificing their creative freedom, or, if they attempt to make a go of it, inevitably feel compromised, and submerged in the organizational mire.
all this is to say, to ask, where can there be space for such artists/contextual-creators? for it is not the studio, rehearsal room, business, or 501c3 that is their place. this is a crucial question i think, because it is in such informal spaces that artists will gather and a truly thriving cultural base of a city will be formed. such spaces are not beyond 501c3's, but before them. they are before the formalization. this is where the daily living of artistic life ensues. but today, without formalization, there is no validation for such an "artist/contextual-creator". and, therefore, there's no money to support them. only advice (well-meaning) of do this and do that (things they will, in all likelihood, never do), in order to qualify for whatever it is they want to do. so it doesn't happen, and a tremendous asset to our culture goes on being displaced.
i find this extremely challenging to articulate, because it feels like an invisible area, an area off the grid.
today, i have come to think of the red poppy art house as an interactive arts installation dedicated to cultural engagement. it is not a business or an arts organization. it is not simply a studio or a collective. it does not feel like any of those. that's why when people walk in, the first thing they ask, and with perplexity, is, "what IS this place?" We call it an "art house", essentially because it is a place where artists feel at home. There are not many such places, are there?
these questions are much less about the red poppy art house specifically than about what the art house represents within our culture. what possibility DOES it represent? what is it trying to be??? despite being the founder, i am still trying to figure this out. i generally feel stifled by our culture. i am mostly propelled by discontent wedded to idealistic inspiration. i often wonder how much i live in a fantasy (!!!). but i have seen such a tremendous unceasing response to this little art shack on 23rd and folsom that i have to believe in it a little while longer. so, help me sort it out would you!
thank you for reading, if you got this far. to all of you working for a greater arts community, in whatever structure or capacity - thank you for your sweat and imagination!!! this blog is not so much a challenge to present structures as an invitation to look deeply at what is missing from our arts ecology. there is a void in our neighborhoods, of visible, vital, informal gathering places for artists to "be" - the kind of being that lives before the composition or articulation, yet beyond the isolation of the private studio. we need spaces for spontaneous exchange among creative peers outside of formalized projects and formalized hours. these spaces have always existed historically (almost always off the grid) as a kind of natural womb, bearing collaborations, innovations, and the integration of a myriad of social/cultural factors. but today, high costs of leasing/maintaining commercial space and licensing/permits have made this almost impossible.
if we can fund such spaces, i believe we will engender a cultural revolution like no other.
but what kind of "structure" would this require?
(lord help us)
Posted by: todd brown | June 12, 2008 01:40 AM
Congatulations for a job well done. The informations that the town hall meeting had provided are outstanding. I learned so much but still I did not able to address some issues that affect my organization.
I started Fashion Arts & Youth Enterprises in 1993, based in Daly City. This organization was founded because of my desire to help young emerging fashion artist in the Bay Area. With the help of Daly City Mayors and City Councils, I did able to used Daly City Park & Recreations facilities for free from 1993 to 2006. When the interest in the program started to grew, I decided to apply for grants. My first grant was from Peninsula Community Foundation, next was from Philanthrophic Ventures Foundation, Koshland Foundation and private corporations. Because I do not have a 501c3 status, I haved used fiscal agents.
In 2006 I have moved to Boise Idaho (big mistake), thinking that I am going to retire, which did not happen. My passion in helping young emerging fashion artist did not go away, so I decided to form this organization again in Idaho. It got incorporated in January 2007 with pending 501c3 status papers ready to be filed, when I decided to moved back in San Francisco CA. With the short period of time that I was there I did able to find youth that are interested what I have to offer. The problem is looking for resources in Idaho was very hard, like facilities, funding and other organization that I can collaborate with. Inspite of my background and letter of supports from the Bay Area, I did not able to find one. That is the reason why I moved back here in the Bay Area, in which I am more than welcome. I contacted the Mayor of Daly City Carol Klatt, so I can start my program again in Daly City, using Park & Recreation facilities.
The main problem that I have right is that I don't know what to do with my Incorporation Status in Idaho, desolve it or retain and register in the State of California as out of state non profit organization incorporation.
I hope some one can advice me on this.
Posted by: Crisanta Malig | June 12, 2008 12:47 PM
I had the pleasure of faciliting one of the "Creativity Exposed" workshops. We had some wonderful artists including Han Pham, Marc Bamuthi Joseph, Mozel Nealy, John Leanos, and Amber Haselbring. They each took a group of participants and in just one hour, engaged in artmaking with them. The results were excellent. Participants journaled, drew, recorded radio stories, merged movement and text, and envisioned landscape redesigns for public spaces. Afterwards, we re-convened and the lead artists discussed the roles of courage and learning in driving artistic innovation. Within just one day, John Leanos had edited the stories he recorded and posted them online. You can listen to the piece at http://leanos.net/radio.html. The Town Hall was a great idea that met with a lot of interest and energy from participants. Kudos to the organizers and participants. Jaime
Posted by: Jaime Cortez | June 12, 2008 09:48 PM
I thought the workshops I attended and presented at were great. The Arts Town Hall concept was a great first step in creating a sustainable arts presence in a world of shrinking resources. Most, if not all the artists were using their crafts and skills for social change.
At the workshop I presented,"To Be Traditional is to Be Political," I prepared an introductory talk, and one participant asked that I post it. Here it is. I have also posted it with photos from the day at my own blog: http://wandasabir.blogspot.com
Wanda Sabir, co-founder, CEO, Maafa San Francisco Bay Area
http://maafasfbayarea.com
mail@maafasfbayarea.com
· In a time of innovation and globalization, how can one articulate one’s power in practicing traditional arts?
· How can one develop into a cultural organizer?
· Can traditional arts practice mobilize communities and make one’s voice heard?
· What is the role of culture bearers as community leaders?
· How do politics and cultural identity intersect?
I addressed all the questions in my one statement:
I began with a verbal libation following a salute to the ancestors by another panelist and organization.
There is a power associated with knowing one’s history and its people. A lot of time one feels isolated, an imagined isolation fostered by distance from the who and what we are. This is a major factor in the lives of African people in the Diaspora—the millions of descendants of African people traded in the largest human removal and economic exploitation in human history, the European slave trade and by extension the colonization of Africa.
Because we lost so much during the 400 year era of commerce, such as language and culture –those of us who want to reconnect find a disconnect because of the misperception that we lack these communication tools.
The Maafa, the great calamity or reoccurring disaster, is a way to reconnect—to heal from the broken trust and trauma associate with this horrific time in world history. Culture is the only language African people in the Disapora still speak—we might be separated by the enslaver’s language or even dialiects of our own, but let someone play the drum or blow a horn or start dancing or singing and we’ll find such commonality, especially thematically, that is, in the lyrics and values we still hold paramount. We’ll see similarities in the way we move, how we raise our kids, how the family is structured, in our indigenous political systems.
Culture is the bridge between the nomad and the water or guidance she seeks. It’s that fluid and that easy to assess, the only problem often is the absence of exposure to the various tributaries within the African Diaspora.
Last year the committee wanted to focus more attention on the children and youth in the San Francisco Bay Area. We wanted to take the Healing Passage into the recreation centers and juvenile prisons and halfway houses and into afterschool programs to help our communities heal from this trauma that has many youth so angry they are blowing up daily—killing or maiming their friends and themselves, family members and strangers.
Knowledge is the most powerful instrument. When I've shared the language of the Maafa and the legacy of slavery and how this trauma leaks into our daily lives here in American for no other reason that white skin privilege still calls the shots, then the kids feel validated. The gorilla in the room is called out and named, and then we can address next steps.
The healing passage uses art as a medium: visual art, movement or dance, literary arts or writing, often poetry and theatre, and of course music, often rap or hip hop to tell these kids' stories…reinterpret the Maafa as it appears in their lives and also developing an interpretive vision for healing and love and power which come with economic justice, but starts with knowledge of one’s self and one’s history.
It’s important to address the trauma to move on. The sankofa symbol—the bird with its head facing to the rear is a powerful image in what Dr. Marimba Ani sees as the three step process for black recovery: Maafa, Sankofa and Ayaresa.
Ayaresa is the healing—a holistic healing. I believe that Martin King was right when he spoke about love. I think this is why African people were drawn to the church despite it’s support of their enslavement. It was here they saw, scripturally the idea of redemption and grace and love.
I think American citizens, the first world nation, need to remember what happened to African people from the fifteenth through nineteenth century, because until we codify this memory African people will continue to suffer.
American history is black history. Instead of a month, we need the entire year and when black people benefit, the entire country and by extension the world benefits also. Look at the Civil rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and all subsequent legislation these two acts, not to mention the Emancipation Proclamation and the Constitutional Amendments 14, 15 and 16, have set a presendent for subsequent human rights legislation such as women’s rights, hate crimes, gay rights, etc.
Culturally, the Maafa Commemoration would like to bridge the gap between black people here and abroad beginning in this hemisphere. We’d like to take families on trips abroad so they can meet other black people and learn that we have more in common than we differ, even after 500 years apart. We want to mend the rift and heal ourselves and our community, which is impossible as long as we remain strangers both here and abroad.
Last year we had a series of Maafa Townhalls on topics ranging from domestic violence to AIDS and police brutality and the rise of the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense. We hosted an art exhibit and an artist talk. Out partners were many, but the monetary resources limited, unlike in 2006 when with the aid of ACTA funds, we were able to rent vans for transportation to bring youth to the beach at sunrise.
2007 also had a film festival with screenings tied to the Maafa Townhall themes last year, and of course we had the ritual at where we gave our ancestors a funeral and asked for their continued guidance and blessings. Last year about 30 youth weren’t able to attend because we didn’t have the resources to provide transportation or the staff to secure in-kind assistance.
There is money, but for some reason the Maafa Commemoration and the healing work associated with it, is not a priority in the black community. Hundreds of people come to the ritual, but few attend the healing sessions, this is why we want to take it to the streets literally to the youth who seem most at risk and most in crisis, the youth and our elders.
It’s all volunteer with in-kind donations to do everything, which is why we are maintaining but the vision, is still just that, an idea. We want to commemorate and to build monuments to our ancestors here in California. Wherever there was an enslaved black person, we want a monument with his or her name listed. I envisioned all the port cities along the western coast with monuments beginning with Oakland and San Francisco and Richmond and find all the names on those counties of formally enslaved African and list them and have ceremonies annually to commemorate them.
We have to call their names, if no one else has, if no one else will. If you believe in the concept, "nommo" or the word or the power of naming, then you understand how these vibrations increase the energy, the power, and strengthen the connection between what is past which is not really past, the present moment and the future.
I’m looking for collaboarations with self-starters. If you are such a person or organization please send me a message: mail@maafasfbayarea.com
Posted by: Wanda Sabir | June 13, 2008 12:32 AM
My expectation for this panel was that we would come out of it with more questions than we had going into it. There is a considerable need to codify the practice of alternative models, including those that are reprogramming old practices to adapt to their needs. There is also a need for sharing what we learn with other across the country confronted with the same challenges.
I promised Todd that I would respond if he posted. He presents much that is worth responding to here. I will not attempt to do that. I do want to touch on the issues of structure, leadership, process and change.
It is telling that the origins of the word “structure” refer to “action or process of building or construction” a “fitting together,” and “adjustment.” Those origins are related to “spread, extend, stretch out.” What strikes me about this language is that it describes something that is fluid, active, in motion, as opposed to being static or fixed. The further the word gets away from its origins (traced back to c. 1440) the more it is associated with permanence. By 1615 it meant “that which is constructed, a building or edifice.” By 1956 the meaning was reduced to “organized so as to produce results.” What was active or in formation was now in place or “constructed” as opposed to being in construction.
Perhaps we need to look at structure as construction – in process as opposed to an edifice in stasis.
All of us are in the process of building. When we speak of vision and mission we are describing a pursuit that is in motion. That is why leadership – individual and collective -- is essential to creating new models. I too was surprised that my comments on leadership did not have much traction. Partially that may have been because I spoke first, and frankly when you pose the issue as “Beyond 501(c)3” people will want to know what alternative you have in mind. On another level I think the focus on structure reflects an inherent contradiction. The current national tsunami of leadership transition is based in Baby Boomers leaving organizations they have lead for the past 25 or 30 years. The organizational forms we are discussing were embedded during that period. Ultimately new forms will emerge under new leadership. The two cannot be separated.
Change can be messy. We want form to follow function. We want to envision first, and then respond with structure. These are ideals that make sense. However, the world does not always work that way. Which is what makes the process so complex.
None of us is starting from scratch. We have inherited ways of doing things as well as ways of thinking. Even in our rejection or questioning of what seems not to work, we are stuck with language, methodologies, and people (this includes most of us) that are steeped in exactly what we are trying to change.
It is not just leaders that are changing. Society as we know is changing. There was a sense of such change in the room and that we need to envision a different future and finds the forms to implement it. This is what I tried to say in my panel summary when I wrote "I heard some participants saying it takes different structures to pursue distinct missions and specific tools to build those structures."
There was also recognition that the seeds of whatever you want to become exist in the arts ecosystem we are struggling to transform. In other words there is no pristine divide between the world of the 501(c)3 and the evolution of new or even resurrected forms. They are all interconnected.
I love Todd’s statement “I have come to think of the red poppy art house as an interactive arts installation dedicated to cultural engagement.” I see this installation as being in flux. A constantly changing integrated installation, not just individually created art pieces that come up and down, but the embodiment of all that takes place within and outside of its walls. So the space itself is art. Sounds good. We all know ultimately our ideas have to deal with gravity – they come back to earth, which is where Todd’s post ends. He writes “If we can fund such spaces, I believe we will engender a cultural revolution like no other.” Such is the challenge. One that I think can be met.
Trace the roots of the word “fund” and you find “bottom, floor, ground,” and ironically “foundation,” meaning in this case of course the source. I see the “ground” and “foundation” as community. What community needs and wants that “interactive arts installation”? Might that community serve as the foundation? I am excited about answering the question “how?” I can’t help it – I circle back to the practical.
Posted by: Michael Warr | June 13, 2008 09:36 AM