Artists Resource Centre (ARC) Overview/Summary
Written by Lee Simmons 2011, commissioned by Artist Resource Centre (ARC - Aspex)
My awareness of, and involvement with, arc began in 2005 with a callout for practitioners and interviews at Aspex in Portsmouth. Following this I was appointed as one of four artist advisers with one coordinator. We received a days training in ‘listening, questioning and challenging’ with ‘Always Learning’ as well as a day getting to know each other and working as a team.
In the first year of arc, the advisers visited Artist Led Initiatives at their studios, for a series of day surgeries to assist with planning and actualisation of projects. Specialised advisers were also available on request at this point. Due to a low sign up rate of artist groups this element was discontinued, though groups of artists did book surgeries and visit during the allocated slots at the site of arc partners. One to one sessions continued long over the initial contract (of seventeen months) for over five years in a format that closely resembled this initial model.
Background
In the first year I was mostly based in South Hill Park, Berkshire and continued working in partnership with South Hill Park for the next six years (at the time of this writing). This work developed from one to one surgeries with artists, to working groups consisting of peer critiques, statement, CV writing and presentation skills workshops. This was linked with networking events, such as presentations by a variety of speakers that included artists, researchers, gallery directors and also days out in London visiting the galleries and meeting curators, as a group with an artist adviser. These days were prepared and facilitated by myself as an artist adviser using my own contacts and information sources, in consultation with the arc partner’s staff point of contact.
The development of the programme at South Hill Park was informed by the network of artists and galleries working across the South East of England whom met regularly throughout the programme. Feedback was gathered from every session, as well as through focus groups with local artists. For the duration of arc at South Hill Park from 2005 to 2011, I worked closely with the Head of Exhibitions. Visiting artists and the team of ARC advisers also took part in the programme at South Hill Park.
My involvement with South Hill Park has continued to the present day and Outi Remes has given helpful feedback and a sense of value for the work so far, as well as realism in terms of what can be offered and what level of resource is needed. Her predecessor Tom Freshwater, whom I worked with in the first year, was also very supportive of the scheme and myself.
As well as a network of artists the network of galleries has been an unusual opportunity that whilst present, is not as dynamic as initially hoped for. Meetings are far between meaning relationships can be difficult to build. It is understood that more regular meetings would be a novelty in terms of availability of people and funds – but would also allow for a stronger sense of purpose, relationship building and development of feedback and proposals.
Rotating (artist advisers) services
Susan Diab provided a consistent point of contact and regular adviser at De La Warr Pavilion for the first five years, Fabrica, Lighthouse and Ovada worked mainly with Paul Stanley and Catherine Bertola and I worked closely with South Hill Park and Turner Contemporary. We also arranged for the advisers to shift between the establishments to meet more artists and give the artists greater diversity of experience to draw from in terms of the person available to them, whilst recognising and maintaining the value of consistency (artists being able to speak to someone who knows the project or work history). We managed this by retaining the primary contact and arranging additional days (flexibly), between the advisers and venues.
Need and uptake
Through monitoring uptake and gathering feedback it is apparent that there was a need for regular surgeries, though holding the days monthly was not necessary in remote areas with a low density of artists. South Hill Park has found (since limited funding has reduced services available) that quarterly days are in great demand, whereas the monthly sessions were often not fully booked nor networking events fully attended.
This was the case for much of the scheme and was addressed in Kent by bringing in satellite surgeries making the scheme available in different geographical areas with effort from Lucy Kirke to build the local artists contact lists and interest. When Lucy left Turner Contemporary the satellite surgeries continued for a short time, though discontinued in most areas through lack of funding and administrative reach. They were however continued and developed in Medway; the Visual Arts Development officer was happy to administrate this element and pay to take part in the programme.
Advisors professional development
The original advisers contracts were extended for those whom wished to continue with arc. Rona Lee and Sonya Dyer (two of the original four) discontinued their roles by choice and the posts were advertised widely – with Catherine Bertola and Paul Stanley being taken on. Susan Diab and I continued to be based with our original organisations (whilst visiting other areas) and as I had a history of working in Kent it occurred naturally that I became the regular adviser for Turner Contemporary in the second year of the scheme, for four/five years.
Training for the existing advisers and new recruits was requested, there was Professional Development for the team through a day out together in London, visiting galleries and discussing the scheme and general art world. Training was not directly furthered and the advisers drew from their wide-ranging resources.
The regular fee was very helpful for freelance artists, as well as the respect that the institutions treated the advisors with when scheduling and planning sessions, feeding back and reimbursing expenses.
The fee of artists’ advisers increased with experience and inflation over five years. It then flattened out and in recent months (the sixth year) I have negotiated myself with partners to arrange days and a fee (Thames Valley contributed and South Hill Park also paid for my last day).
Activities and events
South Hill Park ran a day out in London, visiting Public Galleries (including Tate Modern) and artist led spaces (including Form Content - then near Vyner Street) and ending in East London private views of a first Thursday, which included visiting commercial, contemporary art spaces.
Bexhill on Sea artists (mainly working with Susan Diab – whom initiated the first gallery field trip with arc) came with me to South East London, visiting a variety of studios and exhibition spaces. This began with a boat trip from the O2 to Trinity Buoy Wharf, went to Peckham, through New Cross and ended in Deptford at the Old Police Station private view and dinner at the Amersham Arms. Project Managers, Gallery Managers and Directors as well as Artists met the group in all of these spaces answering questions and describing their experiences of the South East London art scene.
Later tours of Whitstable Biennale and Freeze Art Fair 2010, were attended by myself as an artist advisor, planned and enabled by Caren Bland for artists in Medway. In 2011 it was explained that the recession meant that artists would prefer supportive workshops to field trips, to develop their own working methods, so these were discontinued for the immediate future.
Workshops and group surgeries
To allow more artists to use the service and encourage a further building of communication and networks, from the second year of arc I began to run double sessions with up to eight artists. These would often be themed and mainly at South Hill Park. At Fabrica, Brighton, I ran a daylong event concerned with working in educational settings, as well as co-presenting with Catherine Bertola on our work in public space. These events received positive feedback, the individual sessions also received overwhelmingly positive responses in forms that artists completed after each session, that were collected by the gallery and by the arc coordinator. There was mixed feedback from focus groups whereby some artists wanted to meet advisors whom had more influence and were able to bring them closer to Directors and could help them get exhibitions more concretely. This was a theme in advisory sessions also – many artists seemed to believe that I was involved with curation of spaces such as Turner and could help them get a show, disappointed to discover it was not the case.
In the past it has been suggested that a ‘frequently asked questions’ section could be added to the arc online resource (by Susan Diab, seconded by myself). This could help to clarify the aim of the sessions and save time of artists and arc advisors, as well as being wider reaching.
Seminars
During the first three years of arc there were seminars that artists from all over the South East could attend, in which the advisors took part. As this evolved arc worked with a range of individuals, from outside of the general service provided, at these open events.
How ARC developed (in Kent) Turner Contemporary to focus groups
Before Lucy Kirke left Turner Contemporary (in mid 2009) we ran focus groups to find out what local artists wanted. The artists chose to meet in Canterbury, which would be easier for them to access than Margate (TC base). After these meetings, which ran concurrently with focus groups through South Hill Park in Berkshire (and with other advisors across the South East), we agreed to run satellite surgeries in different venues across Kent as well as at Turner Contemporary. These were scheduled into early 2010 By Lucy Kirke in consultation with myself.
“It will be great to have a real joined-up approach to providing opportunities like this for artists in Kent and Medway and I know that Duncan is really on board to help support this from a strategic level which is great.” Lucy Kirke
The partners identified to work with at this point included Jonathan Parsons: arc coordinator, Aspex; Duncan Brennan: Visual Arts Officer, KCC; Karen Eslea: Head of Learning, Turner Contemporary; Ellen Amos: Events and Admin Assistant, Turner Contemporary; Lee Simmons: arc artist advisor; Chris Dixon: Arts Development Officer, Ashford Borough Council; Caren Bland: Visual Arts Development Officer, Medway Council and Cassandra Fry: Arts Development Officer, Canterbury City Council.
Satellite surgeries – Medway
Jonathan is looking at ways that arc may change and provide more county-wide provision for artists; once the satellites are over it will be down to arc to work with the satellite organisations in deciding whether they maintain an involvement in the scheme or not, hopefully this will happen.’ Lucy Kirke
The Visual Arts Officer for Medway County Council became involved and took on the administrative responsibility in consultation with Jonathan Parsons (coordinator) and myself. We provided a year of one to one surgeries and held one group surgery. The motivation and commitment to the scheme/this work, of Caren was what allowed it to continue. It had been made clear that it was not my role to contact other organisations to schedule sessions as there was an emphasis on Aspex taking on the administrative duties of Kent; until it was clear how the potential new partners/venues wished to proceed.
‘Turner Contemporary will continue to take bookings and deal with admin for surgeries in Margate, the admin for the satellite surgeries will be taken on by Aspex. If Aspex wish to hand this over to the appropriate venues this is fine’ Lucy Kirke
Unfortunately the service did not continue more widely in Kent, my guess is that the fairly substantial administrative requirement was not met following Lucy’s departure, meaning opportunities for developing further partnership working were missed.
Closed group work was also discontinued on the grounds that further expertise was needed to select and match group members. My opinion differs here, however administration of the bookings made it difficult for myself to input to this despite having experienced the artists work and approaches in one to one surgeries. The subject was not further explored to present, though could be looked at further in the future and I believe would utilise the service well. This method allows individual artists to get more specific and authentic feedback than in seminars, more numbers are reached than with one to one sessions and skills in presenting and thinking critically can be gained. This is also an opportunity for the natural development and evolution of supportive networks amongst the local artists.
Open group sessions were held with other freelance facilitators from late 2010 – or themed workshops/seminars, which could deliver to large numbers and stimulate networks on a looser level and possibly with greater flexibility.
Development in Medway – initial responses
There was a launch for arc in Medway that was well attended and included a presentation by the artist Emilia Telese, as well as discussion groups facilitated by the arc advisers (Susan Diab and Lee Simmons). Jonathan Parsons was also present. This happening evoked a lively atmosphere and feeling of potential: the advisers’ felt they could have been used more in this, though enjoyed the event and were supportive of what occurred.
This launch was followed by further one to one surgeries which seemed to be well received, though were followed by cancellations of the scheduled days without re-booking. This was the last I heard directly to this point (March 2011) though I received invitations by email to a Medway Artists Resource official launch with new partners and to some events held with arc links. This seems to have been a positive development in Medway though my observations here are speculative and unconfirmed.
Caren Bland asked me to write suggestions for arc or a report of my work so far – it has taken some time for me to reflect and collate my thoughts following these developments; as well as changes in funding and politics influencing activities and ideas about what might be needed in the future.
It is likely that in the next few months there will be further change – for example only next month (in April) we will hear about further funding for the overall scheme – in terms of Arts Council applications made by the arc partners which are currently being processed.
Current developments
Recently I held a discussion group at Thames Valley University, which is something I have done annually with South Hill Park; though will not be repeating due to the closure of the course. This discussion included a presentation of arc, description of the services to date and a discussion of the current climate – including future challenges, opportunities, methods and strategies that artists and graduates are adopting, as well as a brief history of funding for the arts. The current circumstances of internships were explored, as was the concept of Big Society.
Late 2010/early 2011 my involvement with arc in Kent seemed to end without any recognition; though I have been told by Caren Bland and Jonathan Parsons that there will be more information following budget announcements.
Outi Remes at South Hill Park is continuing the work on a reduced scale throughout 2011 and Polly Gifford, the main point of contact for Susan Diab, left De La Warr Pavillion and has not been replaced.
New independent collectives are forming as well as existing ones gathering momentum, which address many issues of working in the cultural sector and education. This might be the future of artists supporting artists – fluid grass roots collectives that challenge current political agendas, alongside schemes that echo them and manage to obtain some of the remaining sources of funding.
Conclusion
The need for support of independent artists seems to have increased in 2011, due to funding cuts to the arts and general anxiety around the future of creative infrastructures under the new Coalition Government. This is apparent in conjunction with the resource becoming less available also due to a lack of funds. The situation is of course not limited to the arts or South East England, but is throughout public services and cultural enterprises in the UK.
The administration of arc has been mainly undertaken by Phyl Payne, whom does a fantastic job in the time she has available. Before her employment it was often difficult to access information and payment was often delayed. It is also helpful to have a regular point of contact for such things and in recent years this has been running smoothly in my experience. In the scheme generally a lot does seem to get missed within the overall organisation/administration: such as numerous questions around training, mapping of artists groups and the use of feedback forms going unanswered. There have also been booking issues in Medway.
Advisers working closely with one venue can help alleviate some of the immediate scheduling issues, though if the venues are responsible for their own arc programming, scheduling and hiring then the scheme changes fundamentally becoming top down rather than artists working for artists. If sustainable I feel that this should be followed through, rather than the scheme be discontinued; though I also feel slightly sceptical following a feeling of disempowerment in recent months.
The scheme has been well communicated using printed and online sources as well as by word of mouth. The discontinuation of printed information was, I believe, a good move and if leaflets are re-introduced they could be bi-annual if (pre)programming allows. The partner organisation websites could be more fully used and also documentation of events available online and in mail outs. The suggestion of ‘Regularly asked Questions’ could be re-visited and implemented to the online resource. Group work could also be re-visited, for closed groups are, from experience, dynamic and valuable opportunities for artists and an efficient use of resources.
The terrain for students and recent graduates is clearly very different in this seventh year of arc to when the scheme started out. My observations are that the field will spilt to the very commercial, business minded and career driven artist and politicized artists. Within the spectrum between them is where I assume arc will be relevant – perhaps through practical advice on developing their artwork and a healthy critical voice, as well as pointing to groups such as free art schools and campaigns that they could join to argue their right to a wage. Helping recent graduates to identify useful internships and how to create their own opportunities will also remain an ongoing task.
Commercial viability is likely at the forefront of many creative peoples’ minds - even more than usual… and while this does need to be thought about and artists will have to work harder to promote themselves and understand the market, self-organisation and partnership working, combined with artistic autonomy also become increasingly relevant.
Written by Lee Simmons 2011, commissioned by Artist Resource Centre (ARC - Aspex)
My awareness of, and involvement with, arc began in 2005 with a callout for practitioners and interviews at Aspex in Portsmouth. Following this I was appointed as one of four artist advisers with one coordinator. We received a days training in ‘listening, questioning and challenging’ with ‘Always Learning’ as well as a day getting to know each other and working as a team.
In the first year of arc, the advisers visited Artist Led Initiatives at their studios, for a series of day surgeries to assist with planning and actualisation of projects. Specialised advisers were also available on request at this point. Due to a low sign up rate of artist groups this element was discontinued, though groups of artists did book surgeries and visit during the allocated slots at the site of arc partners. One to one sessions continued long over the initial contract (of seventeen months) for over five years in a format that closely resembled this initial model.
Background
In the first year I was mostly based in South Hill Park, Berkshire and continued working in partnership with South Hill Park for the next six years (at the time of this writing). This work developed from one to one surgeries with artists, to working groups consisting of peer critiques, statement, CV writing and presentation skills workshops. This was linked with networking events, such as presentations by a variety of speakers that included artists, researchers, gallery directors and also days out in London visiting the galleries and meeting curators, as a group with an artist adviser. These days were prepared and facilitated by myself as an artist adviser using my own contacts and information sources, in consultation with the arc partner’s staff point of contact.
The development of the programme at South Hill Park was informed by the network of artists and galleries working across the South East of England whom met regularly throughout the programme. Feedback was gathered from every session, as well as through focus groups with local artists. For the duration of arc at South Hill Park from 2005 to 2011, I worked closely with the Head of Exhibitions. Visiting artists and the team of ARC advisers also took part in the programme at South Hill Park.
My involvement with South Hill Park has continued to the present day and Outi Remes has given helpful feedback and a sense of value for the work so far, as well as realism in terms of what can be offered and what level of resource is needed. Her predecessor Tom Freshwater, whom I worked with in the first year, was also very supportive of the scheme and myself.
As well as a network of artists the network of galleries has been an unusual opportunity that whilst present, is not as dynamic as initially hoped for. Meetings are far between meaning relationships can be difficult to build. It is understood that more regular meetings would be a novelty in terms of availability of people and funds – but would also allow for a stronger sense of purpose, relationship building and development of feedback and proposals.
Rotating (artist advisers) services
Susan Diab provided a consistent point of contact and regular adviser at De La Warr Pavilion for the first five years, Fabrica, Lighthouse and Ovada worked mainly with Paul Stanley and Catherine Bertola and I worked closely with South Hill Park and Turner Contemporary. We also arranged for the advisers to shift between the establishments to meet more artists and give the artists greater diversity of experience to draw from in terms of the person available to them, whilst recognising and maintaining the value of consistency (artists being able to speak to someone who knows the project or work history). We managed this by retaining the primary contact and arranging additional days (flexibly), between the advisers and venues.
Need and uptake
Through monitoring uptake and gathering feedback it is apparent that there was a need for regular surgeries, though holding the days monthly was not necessary in remote areas with a low density of artists. South Hill Park has found (since limited funding has reduced services available) that quarterly days are in great demand, whereas the monthly sessions were often not fully booked nor networking events fully attended.
This was the case for much of the scheme and was addressed in Kent by bringing in satellite surgeries making the scheme available in different geographical areas with effort from Lucy Kirke to build the local artists contact lists and interest. When Lucy left Turner Contemporary the satellite surgeries continued for a short time, though discontinued in most areas through lack of funding and administrative reach. They were however continued and developed in Medway; the Visual Arts Development officer was happy to administrate this element and pay to take part in the programme.
Advisors professional development
The original advisers contracts were extended for those whom wished to continue with arc. Rona Lee and Sonya Dyer (two of the original four) discontinued their roles by choice and the posts were advertised widely – with Catherine Bertola and Paul Stanley being taken on. Susan Diab and I continued to be based with our original organisations (whilst visiting other areas) and as I had a history of working in Kent it occurred naturally that I became the regular adviser for Turner Contemporary in the second year of the scheme, for four/five years.
Training for the existing advisers and new recruits was requested, there was Professional Development for the team through a day out together in London, visiting galleries and discussing the scheme and general art world. Training was not directly furthered and the advisers drew from their wide-ranging resources.
The regular fee was very helpful for freelance artists, as well as the respect that the institutions treated the advisors with when scheduling and planning sessions, feeding back and reimbursing expenses.
The fee of artists’ advisers increased with experience and inflation over five years. It then flattened out and in recent months (the sixth year) I have negotiated myself with partners to arrange days and a fee (Thames Valley contributed and South Hill Park also paid for my last day).
Activities and events
South Hill Park ran a day out in London, visiting Public Galleries (including Tate Modern) and artist led spaces (including Form Content - then near Vyner Street) and ending in East London private views of a first Thursday, which included visiting commercial, contemporary art spaces.
Bexhill on Sea artists (mainly working with Susan Diab – whom initiated the first gallery field trip with arc) came with me to South East London, visiting a variety of studios and exhibition spaces. This began with a boat trip from the O2 to Trinity Buoy Wharf, went to Peckham, through New Cross and ended in Deptford at the Old Police Station private view and dinner at the Amersham Arms. Project Managers, Gallery Managers and Directors as well as Artists met the group in all of these spaces answering questions and describing their experiences of the South East London art scene.
Later tours of Whitstable Biennale and Freeze Art Fair 2010, were attended by myself as an artist advisor, planned and enabled by Caren Bland for artists in Medway. In 2011 it was explained that the recession meant that artists would prefer supportive workshops to field trips, to develop their own working methods, so these were discontinued for the immediate future.
Workshops and group surgeries
To allow more artists to use the service and encourage a further building of communication and networks, from the second year of arc I began to run double sessions with up to eight artists. These would often be themed and mainly at South Hill Park. At Fabrica, Brighton, I ran a daylong event concerned with working in educational settings, as well as co-presenting with Catherine Bertola on our work in public space. These events received positive feedback, the individual sessions also received overwhelmingly positive responses in forms that artists completed after each session, that were collected by the gallery and by the arc coordinator. There was mixed feedback from focus groups whereby some artists wanted to meet advisors whom had more influence and were able to bring them closer to Directors and could help them get exhibitions more concretely. This was a theme in advisory sessions also – many artists seemed to believe that I was involved with curation of spaces such as Turner and could help them get a show, disappointed to discover it was not the case.
In the past it has been suggested that a ‘frequently asked questions’ section could be added to the arc online resource (by Susan Diab, seconded by myself). This could help to clarify the aim of the sessions and save time of artists and arc advisors, as well as being wider reaching.
Seminars
During the first three years of arc there were seminars that artists from all over the South East could attend, in which the advisors took part. As this evolved arc worked with a range of individuals, from outside of the general service provided, at these open events.
How ARC developed (in Kent) Turner Contemporary to focus groups
Before Lucy Kirke left Turner Contemporary (in mid 2009) we ran focus groups to find out what local artists wanted. The artists chose to meet in Canterbury, which would be easier for them to access than Margate (TC base). After these meetings, which ran concurrently with focus groups through South Hill Park in Berkshire (and with other advisors across the South East), we agreed to run satellite surgeries in different venues across Kent as well as at Turner Contemporary. These were scheduled into early 2010 By Lucy Kirke in consultation with myself.
“It will be great to have a real joined-up approach to providing opportunities like this for artists in Kent and Medway and I know that Duncan is really on board to help support this from a strategic level which is great.” Lucy Kirke
The partners identified to work with at this point included Jonathan Parsons: arc coordinator, Aspex; Duncan Brennan: Visual Arts Officer, KCC; Karen Eslea: Head of Learning, Turner Contemporary; Ellen Amos: Events and Admin Assistant, Turner Contemporary; Lee Simmons: arc artist advisor; Chris Dixon: Arts Development Officer, Ashford Borough Council; Caren Bland: Visual Arts Development Officer, Medway Council and Cassandra Fry: Arts Development Officer, Canterbury City Council.
Satellite surgeries – Medway
Jonathan is looking at ways that arc may change and provide more county-wide provision for artists; once the satellites are over it will be down to arc to work with the satellite organisations in deciding whether they maintain an involvement in the scheme or not, hopefully this will happen.’ Lucy Kirke
The Visual Arts Officer for Medway County Council became involved and took on the administrative responsibility in consultation with Jonathan Parsons (coordinator) and myself. We provided a year of one to one surgeries and held one group surgery. The motivation and commitment to the scheme/this work, of Caren was what allowed it to continue. It had been made clear that it was not my role to contact other organisations to schedule sessions as there was an emphasis on Aspex taking on the administrative duties of Kent; until it was clear how the potential new partners/venues wished to proceed.
‘Turner Contemporary will continue to take bookings and deal with admin for surgeries in Margate, the admin for the satellite surgeries will be taken on by Aspex. If Aspex wish to hand this over to the appropriate venues this is fine’ Lucy Kirke
Unfortunately the service did not continue more widely in Kent, my guess is that the fairly substantial administrative requirement was not met following Lucy’s departure, meaning opportunities for developing further partnership working were missed.
Closed group work was also discontinued on the grounds that further expertise was needed to select and match group members. My opinion differs here, however administration of the bookings made it difficult for myself to input to this despite having experienced the artists work and approaches in one to one surgeries. The subject was not further explored to present, though could be looked at further in the future and I believe would utilise the service well. This method allows individual artists to get more specific and authentic feedback than in seminars, more numbers are reached than with one to one sessions and skills in presenting and thinking critically can be gained. This is also an opportunity for the natural development and evolution of supportive networks amongst the local artists.
Open group sessions were held with other freelance facilitators from late 2010 – or themed workshops/seminars, which could deliver to large numbers and stimulate networks on a looser level and possibly with greater flexibility.
Development in Medway – initial responses
There was a launch for arc in Medway that was well attended and included a presentation by the artist Emilia Telese, as well as discussion groups facilitated by the arc advisers (Susan Diab and Lee Simmons). Jonathan Parsons was also present. This happening evoked a lively atmosphere and feeling of potential: the advisers’ felt they could have been used more in this, though enjoyed the event and were supportive of what occurred.
This launch was followed by further one to one surgeries which seemed to be well received, though were followed by cancellations of the scheduled days without re-booking. This was the last I heard directly to this point (March 2011) though I received invitations by email to a Medway Artists Resource official launch with new partners and to some events held with arc links. This seems to have been a positive development in Medway though my observations here are speculative and unconfirmed.
Caren Bland asked me to write suggestions for arc or a report of my work so far – it has taken some time for me to reflect and collate my thoughts following these developments; as well as changes in funding and politics influencing activities and ideas about what might be needed in the future.
It is likely that in the next few months there will be further change – for example only next month (in April) we will hear about further funding for the overall scheme – in terms of Arts Council applications made by the arc partners which are currently being processed.
Current developments
Recently I held a discussion group at Thames Valley University, which is something I have done annually with South Hill Park; though will not be repeating due to the closure of the course. This discussion included a presentation of arc, description of the services to date and a discussion of the current climate – including future challenges, opportunities, methods and strategies that artists and graduates are adopting, as well as a brief history of funding for the arts. The current circumstances of internships were explored, as was the concept of Big Society.
Late 2010/early 2011 my involvement with arc in Kent seemed to end without any recognition; though I have been told by Caren Bland and Jonathan Parsons that there will be more information following budget announcements.
Outi Remes at South Hill Park is continuing the work on a reduced scale throughout 2011 and Polly Gifford, the main point of contact for Susan Diab, left De La Warr Pavillion and has not been replaced.
New independent collectives are forming as well as existing ones gathering momentum, which address many issues of working in the cultural sector and education. This might be the future of artists supporting artists – fluid grass roots collectives that challenge current political agendas, alongside schemes that echo them and manage to obtain some of the remaining sources of funding.
Conclusion
The need for support of independent artists seems to have increased in 2011, due to funding cuts to the arts and general anxiety around the future of creative infrastructures under the new Coalition Government. This is apparent in conjunction with the resource becoming less available also due to a lack of funds. The situation is of course not limited to the arts or South East England, but is throughout public services and cultural enterprises in the UK.
The administration of arc has been mainly undertaken by Phyl Payne, whom does a fantastic job in the time she has available. Before her employment it was often difficult to access information and payment was often delayed. It is also helpful to have a regular point of contact for such things and in recent years this has been running smoothly in my experience. In the scheme generally a lot does seem to get missed within the overall organisation/administration: such as numerous questions around training, mapping of artists groups and the use of feedback forms going unanswered. There have also been booking issues in Medway.
Advisers working closely with one venue can help alleviate some of the immediate scheduling issues, though if the venues are responsible for their own arc programming, scheduling and hiring then the scheme changes fundamentally becoming top down rather than artists working for artists. If sustainable I feel that this should be followed through, rather than the scheme be discontinued; though I also feel slightly sceptical following a feeling of disempowerment in recent months.
The scheme has been well communicated using printed and online sources as well as by word of mouth. The discontinuation of printed information was, I believe, a good move and if leaflets are re-introduced they could be bi-annual if (pre)programming allows. The partner organisation websites could be more fully used and also documentation of events available online and in mail outs. The suggestion of ‘Regularly asked Questions’ could be re-visited and implemented to the online resource. Group work could also be re-visited, for closed groups are, from experience, dynamic and valuable opportunities for artists and an efficient use of resources.
The terrain for students and recent graduates is clearly very different in this seventh year of arc to when the scheme started out. My observations are that the field will spilt to the very commercial, business minded and career driven artist and politicized artists. Within the spectrum between them is where I assume arc will be relevant – perhaps through practical advice on developing their artwork and a healthy critical voice, as well as pointing to groups such as free art schools and campaigns that they could join to argue their right to a wage. Helping recent graduates to identify useful internships and how to create their own opportunities will also remain an ongoing task.
Commercial viability is likely at the forefront of many creative peoples’ minds - even more than usual… and while this does need to be thought about and artists will have to work harder to promote themselves and understand the market, self-organisation and partnership working, combined with artistic autonomy also become increasingly relevant.
