Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net  

Go Back  Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net > Sculpture Roundtable Discussions > Sculpture focus topics
User Name
Password
Home Sculpture Community Photo Gallery ISC Sculpture.org Register FAQ Members List Search New posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 06-13-2012, 03:47 PM
scrapartoz scrapartoz is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: oz
Posts: 459
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

The art and the success are two separate entities. A poor man in a cave can make art that no one will see and be very content with his creation. a gifted child using a stick in the dirt ..the same.

'The price' for the same prize "success" varies with each individual. for some with no concience and blind ambition it may be zero. For those that are more reserved or do not possess the necessary social skills of business savvy the price may be fatal. Luck and connections are critical game changers . Each of us knows what we must pay .and payment occurs when we look in the mirror or lay our head on the pillow.

be happy with what you are prepared to pay.
__________________
SCRAPARTOZ
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-13-2012, 06:10 PM
KatyL KatyL is offline
Level 9 user
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Clovis, New Mexico
Posts: 269
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilkenny View Post
Of course, if you want to 'make it' like Warhol or Hirst, take a lot of risks but only if you are young enough to follow through or survive the damage.
I think the biggest risk for an artist to take in art is NOT to do it.

Whether one makes money from it is unfair assessment of success, but I'm tending to follow that dream. I've done my 7 years living on minimum wage, and my 4 years of "barely paying rent." I want to balance making art and making money even if this means having a "real" job-- at least part time.

I'm a truck driver so I can actually make some decent money part time now. Not so when I was just a College Graduate. Funny how that success works out.
__________________
My Blog http://www.crlarkinart.com
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-13-2012, 10:29 PM
rika rika is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,451
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by KatyL View Post
I think the biggest risk for an artist to take in art is NOT to do it.
Well said, Katy. I recall a few faces who didn't, cross-hatched by regret, envy and even bitterness. I don't want to end up one of them...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-14-2012, 06:50 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
The art and the success are two separate entities.
Scrap says it all right there. The very thing that separates a human from all the other desperate writhing beasts and bugs on the planet is the ability to be dual or plural; to be many things at once - and to have it within them to defy the natural orders imposed upon them.

So one you tends to the survival, the proliferation, the maintenance, the food, the shelter...the "success". And the OTHER you MIGHT make art. If there is enough nerve there.

There is a possiblilty of these two stumbling into each other, and servicing each other, but its no necessity, and they will never be friends. They are far too different.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-14-2012, 11:08 AM
Mack Mack is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 604
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

For me "art" has turned out to be a great "business". After stints as laborer, factory worker, mason's helper,kennel man, carpenter, remodeler and candle maker, among others, I happened one day into the art gallery business and knew I was finished with the sweat, the calloused hands and sawdust. I sold "art' that I liked and a lot that I didn't. I was pretty good at it (anything to keep from going back to 'real' work!) Over time I became director of three California galleries and ultimately put some of my own pieces on the floor to see what the reaction might be. (I had been making sculptures as a hobby (clay and plaster) for years.
My first bronze (a big investment!)got a great reception and sold pretty quickly. I made a second bronze that also went over well. The third pretty much changed everything for me.
I had had enough of the art gallery business; didn't like being a boss and didn't want to get 'dressed up' anymore and also disliked the pressure. I quit, hung up my tie and contacted several galleries that agreed to take my bronzes on consignment.
Twenty years later, I'm still showing in some of them. Its been up and down over the years and especially the last few but generally it's (the money) been good. I haven't had to go back to 'work'. I'm very fortunate that the sculpture I enjoy making ,that turns me on when it comes out 'right', resonates with some others as well. I work with a great foundry, show in several good galleries and now have my own studio (that I actually built myself..!)
No longer working on that little table in the corner of the kitchen (though I think some nice stuff did come out of there.)

Last edited by Mack : 06-15-2012 at 07:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 06-14-2012, 04:26 PM
Kilkenny's Avatar
Kilkenny Kilkenny is offline
Level 6 user
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Devon, United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by KatyL View Post
I think the biggest risk for an artist to take in art is NOT to do it.
We may be talkng at cross-purposes here, Katy. There is no great risk to pursuing a career in the arts, if you proceed through art college, and go into one of the professions; when you skill up and then apply your skills.

When you talk about taking risks - what are you referring to?
__________________
From the carver actually known as Sam Bell
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 06-14-2012, 10:58 PM
cdjordjievski cdjordjievski is offline
Level 2 user
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 21
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Originally, I started this post after a discussion I had with someone in regard to art and the business nature of it. I was little puzzled and (and still am) about relevance and irrelevance of education in art as a major force in the crating process. Perhaps, it will be more precise to state that art as a business or a profession is in category on its own. Art is one of the few professions that I can think of where you don’t have to pay your dues go to school. You can state I am a “self-taught” it is acceptable and you will be judged by your work. What do you think will happen if during an interview for a position you make a statement “ I am a self-taught brain surgeon” or “I am a self-taught lawyer” or “I am a self-taught judge”? Somehow I do not believe that you will get the opportunity to be judged by your work. This is what leads me to believe that art is unique when it comes to considering it as a business. I do few street shows and there is a young sculptor I got to know and respect (very family oriented always brings his wife and kids to art shows). He does not have any formal education in art but with in the last few years he developed remarkable body of work. Last few shows I did with him he got the best of show (that comes with nice chunk of money). I am convinced that the fact he was not exposed to any formal art education made him handicapped in any way shape or form when it comes to the creative process. He developed his own.

Someone here mentioned that you have to adjust and if necessary commercialize what you are doing in order to make sales. I believe that is a personal decision and if it works for some more power to them. In my case I guess I should consider myself fortunate because selling sculpture is not my main source of income therefore I can afford do what I want, when I want and how I want. Yes, of course I want to sell but I do not allow it to be deciding factor in what I do. The process of what I do is what I enjoy the most and it is very seldom negotiable. I remember long time ago watching Jack Custo being interviewed by a young sassy reporter. She asked him why did he spend so much time of his life researching when there was plenty of information out there on the subject already. Custo replied with something like “About lovemaking you could learn many things from books and movies but when you do it yourself it is always different and more enjoyable”. The old Frenchman got it; it was the process of making, doing, creating something that is most rewarding and one of the fundamental reasons, forces that make us do what we do.

Good night everyone
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 06-15-2012, 10:18 AM
KatyL KatyL is offline
Level 9 user
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Clovis, New Mexico
Posts: 269
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by cdjordjievski View Post
Originally, I started this post after a discussion I had with someone in regard to art and the business nature of it. I was little puzzled and (and still am) about relevance and irrelevance of education in art as a major force in the crating process. Perhaps, it will be more precise to state that art as a business or a profession is in category on its own. Art is one of the few professions that I can think of where you don’t have to pay your dues go to school. You can state I am a “self-taught” it is acceptable and you will be judged by your work. What do you think will happen if during an interview for a position you make a statement “ I am a self-taught brain surgeon” or “I am a self-taught lawyer” or “I am a self-taught judge”? Somehow I do not believe that you will get the opportunity to be judged by your work. This is what leads me to believe that art is unique when it comes to considering it as a business. I do few street shows and there is a young sculptor I got to know and respect (very family oriented always brings his wife and kids to art shows). He does not have any formal education in art but with in the last few years he developed remarkable body of work. Last few shows I did with him he got the best of show (that comes with nice chunk of money). I am convinced that the fact he was not exposed to any formal art education made him handicapped in any way shape or form when it comes to the creative process. He developed his own.
Your last post seemed to be about 2 different subjects, so I will focus on the upper one.

I agree with the ideas as stated. You cannot be a brain sergeon or lawyer (I've said this many times) by simply hanging out a shingle and practicing -- and yet, a hundred years ago you could, and it was often the practice. Those particular fields are heavily technical and regulated these days, and yet you still hear about a young prisoner studying the law books and winning many cases (and of course, a well seasoned paralegal, and also a very experienced nurse some times have the same knowledge as a doctor/lawyer). Art is a totally different animal.

I also think that the whole idea of informal education is different from what some people think of as "self-taught." A home schooled individual may have a much better education than a public school child. One of the reasons for home schooling in the first place was that the child was so much farther above his or her peers in the first place, and public school would have killed this genius.

I look back at my own art education. Much of it happened through the random talk and museum visits of my high school art teacher, who is now a well known Western impressionist artist. By the time I got to college, I was so much farther than my peers in many ways because I was fortunate to have studied under a master.

Breaking down the BFA (which I did not complete), out of 120 hours plus or minus, about 33 hours were in studio art, and 15 in art history. Breaking down that 33 hours into 10 classes (typical 3 per class) and 3 classes in art history-- which were probably 2 survey courses and one specialist course.

10 classes in studio art:

beginning darwing painting, printmaking and whatever, and a few secondary classes and a few tertiary (advanced) classes. One class is about 3 hours long.

So-- you tell me, could you get the same instruction and experience yourself without college?

With this breakdown in mind, I believe that any intelligent, well rounded individual who is serious about learning something can pick it up through self study. Better if that person has an artist who will guide them in the specifics of certain skills.

Going to school is not necessarily "paying your dues." College is there, but many highly talented people never get to school. Look at the cost. That is beyond the resources of many people.

Education is relevant in that it tells you what has gone before, why, and gives you a guideline to develop your own thinking processes. But why could you not achieve this result with a stack of books and some people to talk to for far less money.

All school ends up being is introductory only. Even college simply "introduces" you to the various techniques-- it is up to you to use the tools you get there. You may be lucky enough to have a well known artist as a teacher, but mostly people get graduate students, who are only a few books ahead of them as far as education is concerned.
__________________
My Blog http://www.crlarkinart.com
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 06-15-2012, 05:18 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

College can be beneficial for those who lack imagination and initiative and have lots of money and several years to waste, or don't mind being in debt for a decade. It is also helpful for those who want to go through the system so they can be accepted by the system and eventually be a representative of the system.

But we were talking about artists.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 06-15-2012, 05:31 PM
Chris_Johns's Avatar
Chris_Johns Chris_Johns is offline
Level 5 user
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Warwickshire UK
Posts: 87
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

I would say that, in itself, art in neither a good or a bad business.

what it is, at its core, is total lacking in insulation from reality whic means that its not something that suits everybody. as an artist you are basically selling yourself,your vision and your skills directly to your audience/customer.

Personally I feel that a lot of the commercial problems which artists have stem from hiding from this reality and expecting galleries or agents to selflessly run their whole lives for them.


I t end to take the view that the business aspect of art is by no means its most attractive aspect but its is something that all artists need to get a grip of if they want to take control of what they do. In the long run developing a bt of business discipline will give you a lot more freedom and control over your work than abdicating that responsibility.

To be honest if you've got the ability to make a decent piece of art then running a business should be pretty easy in comparison.


On the plus side if you can take control of your art practice as a business then there are very few things which offer the same satisfaction and fulfilment as being an artist. After all you can get paid for doing something that you love.

Ultimately I suspect that for most artists this isn't even a choice, we do it because we can't imagine doing anything else ...and remember that this is the kind of drive and motivation that most employers would chew off their right arms to instil in their staff so any real artist is off to a good start a as business.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 06-15-2012, 06:12 PM
GarryRicketson's Avatar
GarryRicketson GarryRicketson is offline
Level 7 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cuencame, Dgo. Mexico
Posts: 167
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilkenny View Post
But you do have to get out there and network and be seen. You have to do the management.

Have to say, I now have a lot more requests for my work for large shows, even in London now. This all comes down to making oneself visible (internet; galleries; going to private views; etc). I'm also doing much better since I got involved in more commercial galleries. I now do 'pop' stuff as well - It's still work that allows me to explore form and line in ways that interest me, and it is commercial work, but it gets me into the high street galleries, which IS helpful. This just is BUSINESS - do it.

Attached: jpgs of work I just wouldn't have done two years ago.

As regards not being able to teach people to think: firstly, I'm suspicious of the suggesting that art is about thinking (that might be a conceptual approach, and even then I have no doubt that thinking skills CAN be taught. The mind can be educated). Secondly, art is perhaps as much about sensibility and about SEEING. Don't tell me that this can't be developed by a good teacher, by a process of methodical study or by guided experimentation.
http://sculpture.net/community/showp...23&postcount=5 Mostly I am wondering what material the doves are made with,...I like them,...
As a artist, I have found most of the time I have to do some other "job" to make a liveing,
if possible doing something related , for example, I like to draw and paint, but to make a living, I have to draw or paint, what others want me too, so they will buy it, thus I make a living, the same , as a stone carver/sculptor, which I like even better then painting, to make a living, I need to make the things people want, even if in my opinion it is far from being "artistic",.. when I do a "artwork" type project, it is because, I am inspired, to make something, weather it sells or not, or how much others think it is worth, or how much money I make is not the issue,..Completeing the project, or making my "idea", a reality, something I can see and touch, is what counts.
But I guess, this is why, I have to work another job, to "finance" myself, my art work,
I can not stand going to all the "social affairs",etc,..and don't really like to "get out", meeting people,etc, I could go on and on, but ...anyway,...mostly I just wondered what the doves are made out of.
from Garry
__________________
From Garry
New Site:
http://www.garryricketsonartworks.com
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-15-2012, 08:45 PM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
College can be beneficial for those who lack imagination and initiative and have lots of money and several years to waste, or don't mind being in debt for a decade. It is also helpful for those who want to go through the system so they can be accepted by the system and eventually be a representative of the system.
This is the classic stock commentary from folks who didnt go to art school and from those who didnt finish it. I've heard it whined a billion times.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-15-2012, 10:27 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by evaldart View Post
This is the classic stock commentary from folks who didnt go to art school and from those who didnt finish it. I've heard it whined a billion times.
I did not pull it from stock, I pulled it from my experience of many years in architecture school which I did finish and get a degree. Architecture school is a lot more intensive, focused, and disciplined than art school. If that was a waste of time and money, why would art school be any better? I also did take a couple of college art classes after I graduated, and learned the lay of the land from that.

Rather than dimissing the messenger, how about addressing the message? The amount of current outstanding US college debt (not that which has already been paid) is over a trillion dollars. People are either going to have to work for many years to pay that off, or they will default and perhaps cause another financial meltdown. For what? I could spend all night writing about the hyper-inflated financial scam that college in general is, again, not from "stock" "whining" but from an objective analysis of what actually occurs.

I'm not saying that college is of no value, but I am willing to face the facts about relative value of college versus other alternatives. Those alternatives would involve using imagination and initiative. KatyL makes some supportive points about this.

It is ironic that because you (evaldart) teach at a college, you are defending the institution, yet just about any other institution including academia in general you are quite ready to devalue as compared to the freedom and creative initiative of artists....except that artists suddenly need to go to college in order to develop?

College as a training center for art is a relatively recent phenomena. The great artists of prior human history who were not self-taught learned either by apprenticeship with a master artist or by some form of an an atelier method (which I have taken) taught by accomplished professional artists, that is much less costly than college, much more focused, and gives one very practical problem-solving skills that can then be applied to whatever pursuit then follows. My 1 1 /2 years of a 4 year program gave me enough insight to continue on my own with vision and a knowledge base on how to work and improve my skills. And it introduced me to a vastly broader spectrum of artists in genres that interested me than would ever be found on any college syllabus.

Anyway, bedtime for me so that is it for tonight's stock whining phrases for the billion and oneth time.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-16-2012, 03:32 AM
scrapartoz scrapartoz is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: oz
Posts: 459
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

glen , i have to agree.
__________________
SCRAPARTOZ
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-16-2012, 10:00 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Architecture school is a lot more intensive, focused, and disciplined than art school
The thing about art school is that it is as intesive, focused and disciplined as you have the nerve to make it. Lazy loafers occupy every field, and you can indeed skate through art school quite well without doing to damned much. In the end, Colleges are a business too - and they need you there to keep the big-wigs so sloppily affluent.

.Money is meaningless where the matters of greatest significance are concerned. I realize you would like to tarnish the discussion with political nonsense that might have something to do with the affairs of barter and breach that the beastly ones among us are constantly fumbling-about with; but we here should hold our noses out of that foulness, at long enough to glean from each other some tid-bits of relevant exchange. As if "business" (which is in the title of this thread) should have anything at all to do with art (which is also in the title of this thread). Tsk, tsk.

Yes, I have a love/hate relationship with institutionalized thinking (academia?), same as I do with commerciality and vegetables. Not ironic, because love and hate neednt be seen as opposites - maybe they, those two sensations, are only "different". Contrary to the blundering proclamations of the (academic?) science and math eggheads, who would conveniently relegate everything they regards as necessarily possessing an essential opposer (out of desperation for assigning some "order" into their mundane minds), I would say that from one instant to the next the conditions of reality "restart", which is why I cannot value historical determinism as a viable device for encouraging (the biggest) decisions one might make. Life aint just about Whoppers you know. So academia, while rife with intellectual enthusiasm (unlike the nuts and bolts and trademanship of the atelier), is ever determined by research, reference and a less-than-original looking "backwards". Even an academic venue who would proclaim "contemporary", "current" or progressive curricculi are yet still pandering to a more recent tiredness.

So alas he ENTIRE burden is on the individual to become a better thinker and a more motivated creator quite in DEFIANCE of all the incident that would distract otherwise. And I dont suppose there is anything more de-railing than "business" for fooling an "artist" into thinking they are making "art" when they are actually only making artful things.

So do it ALL. Make the artful things and sell them to keep from being cubicle'd and then step sideways in your studio and make the other things, the significant things, that no "art scene" is even remotely equipped to help you identify for yourself. But, if you prove over and over to yourself that you are not able to differ the artful things from the art/the spectacle from the art/the collaborative commerce from the art - then by all means - get cubicl'd and crunch numbers or whatnot so that you can be clean for the real work of performing originally and unmolested in your OWN special place (the studio).

Glad you're back on here Glenn - this ol' artfart forum has suddenly become re-energized
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 06-16-2012, 11:42 AM
Aaron Schroeder's Avatar
Aaron Schroeder Aaron Schroeder is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Shelby, Ohio
Posts: 856
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Evaldart....I'm lookin for the like button ( that way I don't have to think or type too much..... )........and there isn't one. Dang !

Well said....Like .
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-16-2012, 01:39 PM
CroftonGraphics CroftonGraphics is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 341
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Has anyone heard of-
http://www.uncollege.org/?
I find some of the articles on it good.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-16-2012, 04:53 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Personally, I dropped out of art school twice, after about 3 months each time.
So you would think I am more in Glenn's camp.

But I have worked with Architects for the last 30 years, and I can assure you there is just exactly as much theoretical bullshit in architecture school, and as many clueless graduates with degrees in architecture who can spout buzz words all day long, but cant tell a 2x4 from a thermal pane window if it hit them on the head.

Any school can be fulla bull. And any student can find a way to learn in school, or coast. I know a few art professors- like probably between 50 and 100. Some are idealogues, and spout their own silly insular world view- and, interestingly enough, these types are about equally split between conservative figurative types, and conceptual art types.
And then, there are a LOT of art professors I know who really really care about the kids they are teaching, who tailor their information appropriately, and really help kids learn. I get about 3-5 college classes a year thru my studio. So I see real college kids every year, who are interested in art. And I see real art professors every year, who are doing their best.
I also end up informally counselling a few arty high school kids every year, in my rural area. Many times, I tell them NOT to spend the big bucks on expensive art schools.
Once in a while, it makes sense. Depends on the kid, their financial situation, what kind of art they want to do, and the school they want to attend.
Most times, I tell em, move to a city that has good museums and a vibrant art scene, get a job, and rent a small studio space. Look at as much art as you can, and make as much art as you can.

Obviously, a hundred grand in student loan debt is crazy. I see more kids going to state schools, and to community colleges, unless they are getting big scholarships. Which doesnt happen often, but does still happen.

Personally, I am in favor of state supported, free undergraduate education for everybody who qualifies. It works well in a bunch of countries that are kicking our ass economically. An educated populace raises all boats a heckuva lot more than low taxes do.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-16-2012, 07:59 PM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
I know a few art professors- like probably between 50 and 100. Some are idealogues, and spout their own silly insular world view- and, interestingly enough, these types are about equally split between conservative figurative types, and conceptual art types.
And then, there are a LOT of art professors I know who really really care about the kids they are teaching, who tailor their information appropriately, and really help kids learn.

So that is the three types of professors huh? The idealogues, the conservative figurative types and the conceptual types. I wouldnt say that there arent ANY of those three (non) categories teaching in any colleges. Ries, I dont think you've spent much time in college classrooms, despite how your 100 or so university professor friends have regaled themselves to you. I think they were intimidated by you because of your studio and massive creative output and felt the need to build themselves up.

Actually, an art teacher at the college level must certainly be ideologically secure, conservatively figurative and conceptually avante-garde. And Glenn would be right to note that few teachers are those heroes. Of course the pay is shit so if a teacher is worth a shit they wont be doing it for money.

Because YES, there is very much value in exchange, even with "pre" artists. We help each other. And Ries, when you've got the teenage artfarts at your studio remember that hat you must show them something that they could NEVER do...no matter how long they work at it. And that will remind them that they must find something to do that is also unimaginable.

Last edited by evaldart : 06-17-2012 at 08:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-16-2012, 08:52 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ries View Post

Personally, I am in favor of state supported, free undergraduate education for everybody who qualifies.

Me too. I'm for free everything. Government pays everything. Where do they get the money? Why should I care? Viva Greece! Viva Espangna! Viva the collapings socialist dream!


It works well in a bunch of countries that are kicking our ass economically.

I did not know there were countries kicking our ass economically. Name two.


An educated populace raises all boats a heckuva lot more than low taxes do.

This is such a brilliant non-sequitar of unlinked concepts that I wonder why the kazoos have come to roost on the piano bench.
Yes e, I'm back and I'm not gonna take it any more!!!
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-17-2012, 07:36 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

I have spent a lot of time in a lot of different art schools- I speak to college classes once or twice a year, my wife ran a design and art department for about five years, my ex-partner (in the licensed architectural firm that we had together) is now the dean of a school. I attended two colleges and a trade school, but then I had a girlfriend who was in an MFA program, and I spent many many hours in that program, sitting in on crits.
I currently have regular contact with 2 or 3 universities and several community colleges around here, doing crits, speaking to classes, and judging competitions every year.
I have employed probably 50 or more students and recent grads over the years.
All this in addition to all my friends who teach at schools nationwide.
I am pretty aware of what goes on in college art departments. A lot of college art departments.

I am not naming any names, but I can think of a dozen or so idealogues, off the top of my head, just locally. Old, stodgy fuddy duddies who pay no attention to what their students are doing, who just preach, and, generally are unaware if anybody is even listening.
I also could easily name several insecure but pompous conceptual profs I know. Their students graduate not knowing how to do anything.

There are great college art professors out there. Plenty of em. And there are also lots of people, some of them very old friends of mine, who just phone it in for the benefits and salaries. And there are some very successful artists, again, some of them old and good friends of mine, who are employed for their name brand, and who dont do diddly in terms of teaching. They are too busy making their own work, and exhibiting internationally. Again, I aint naming names, but this is not rumor or gossip- I know these people, some of em for 30 years.

When you say the pay is shit, I am assuming you are talking about non-tenure, year by year contracts, which a lot of friends of mine do. But if you are a tenured prof at a real university, the pay is quite decent, and it includes medical and retirement, both of which are things no artist I know has. So I know a couple dozen profs who are totally bored and uninterested in teaching, but cannot afford to quit. They dont do squat, they keep no office hours, they let grad students run everything, and leave campus at the slightest provocation. They then take maximum sabbatical, and then whine constantly about how horrible the politics are, and how much they hate working, all while pulling down about three times the income of the artists who they are complaining to. I feel bad for the kids. I have hired some of these kids, who tell me about how so and so is never on campus, how they dont come to student openings, dont talk to students outside of class, and are, in general, just not there. These are kids who are paying thousands of dollars for this pathetic excuse for teaching, and this happens all the time at many many schools, all over the country. State schools, private schools, Art only colleges with alphabet letters for names.

Again, I feel like for some people, art school is the right thing. But for many people, its a waste of time and money. If you get into Yale, and your parents are paying, by all means, go.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-17-2012, 07:49 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennT View Post
Personally, I am in favor of state supported, free undergraduate education for everybody who qualifies.

Me too. I'm for free everything. Government pays everything. Where do they get the money? Why should I care? Viva Greece! Viva Espangna! Viva the collapings socialist dream!


It works well in a bunch of countries that are kicking our ass economically.

I did not know there were countries kicking our ass economically. Name two.


An educated populace raises all boats a heckuva lot more than low taxes do.

This is such a brilliant non-sequitar of unlinked concepts that I wonder why the kazoos have come to roost on the piano bench.
Taxes pay for education in most countries. I am in favor of taxes, and pay them myself.

Some countries where tax dollars pay for undergraduate education include:
Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Argentina, Canada, France, and Austria, just to name a few. Some are totally free, others have some fees attached- for instance, in the UK, there is a very large state subsidy, and there is a maximum tuition, which was quite low, although it recently went up. Its still free in Scotland.

As far as countries who are doing better than us economically, and who are still much more "socialist" than we are, and which subsidize undergraduate education, Germany would be the best example- at a tiny fraction of our population, they match or beat us dollar for dollar in manufacturing and exporting. But Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland are all much less in debt than we are, doing well economically, and have universal education AND health care.

As for your kazoo orchestra- it seems pretty simple to me- the current republican dogma, which I hear repeated daily, is that if we lower taxes, we will all benefit. This has not proven true historically. These same national republican politicans claim we must raise tuition rates, and cut education. I maintain that history shows that countries with higher taxes and higher education rates do better economically, across the board, than the opposite. By "raising all boats", I am of course referring to the Ronald Reagan thesis that lower taxes will make everyone do better, not just the rich. Again, the evidence disproves this theory. But the evidence worldwide shows that all incomes go up as education goes up. So I think its pretty obvious that my statement implies that education is a better investment than low taxes for the wealthy.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-17-2012, 08:08 PM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Well Ries, you definitely summed up the bad profs pretty well - but all those variations of inadequacies exist across the board in all the departments. It can too easily be made into a cake job, at the expense of and at a disservice to the students. But then those professors are missing the boat too, out of ignorance. Because every class session, with so many different kinds of minds involved, can be a thrill. A good teacher advantages this momentum and keeps the "lesson" exciting. Even if the goal for the day is simply to learn how NOT to saw off your fingers in the band saw.

Last edited by evaldart : 06-18-2012 at 10:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-18-2012, 09:39 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

The countries that I asked Ries to name who are" kicking our ass economically" have such a small GDP compared to ours that the only measure he uses is dollar to dollar, ie. , the same argument that an ant is stronger than a human, because if we were as small as an ant the ant would kick our ass. However, we aren't ants.

The glory of the socialist system ponzi scheme of robbing from the future to pay for the present hasn't yet caught up with itself in some countries, and is also made possible by the military might and expenditures of the USA keeping the peace so that Europe only maintainsarmies the size neccessary to fend off mobs of angry anarchist youths, but nothing much more threatening. I won't get into whether or not the US should be playing that role and spending money that way, just mentioning that often overlooked factor.

I'll never convince some who believes Paul Krugman (who probably thinks children who sell lemonade at the sidewalk aren't paying enough taxes) that over taxing and regulating is killing job growth, and that letting people spend the money they earn is what stimulates the economy, not taking it from productive people and giving it to non-productive people or the cronies who helped elect you. I don't expect him to understand that "the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen". The failed policies and current economic malaise of the Obama administration are no doubt still "Bush's fault". The upper 10% of earners who pay 65% of all taxes aren't "paying their fair share", but it is fair for 50% of the workers to pay nothing, and vote for the wealthy to pay even more.

I don't know of any conservative who want to raise tuition rates. Most are appalled at how they have gone up, and blame government subsidies of student loans as one part of the problem, because with that system colleges do not have to be rate-competative. Liberals always want to spend more money on education. There is never any sense of accountablility for money wasted, such as bloated salaries for professors who as Ries described care nothing for their classes but only for their perks and tenure, and use the time to write books. That is only the tip of the iceberg of wateful and unaccountable spending. Same with public schools. Private schools get much better results with a fraction of the money per pupil that is spent in the public schools. And the myth is that the better results are because the pulbic schools have to take everyone including the problem kids. My wife gets problem kids and at a fraction of the salary and with no perks turns them into interested learners who out perform by several grades their peers in the public schools.

The point being that you can't solve problems by taking peoples money and giving it to others, and enlarging the power and scope of the corrupt entity doing the taking and handing out. You don't make education better by throwing more money at it. You solve problems by coming up with methods and solutions have been demonstrated to work.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-18-2012, 02:54 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: Art is the worse business to be in

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennT View Post
The countries that I asked Ries to name who are" kicking our ass economically" have such a small GDP compared to ours that the only measure he uses is dollar to dollar, ie. , the same argument that an ant is stronger than a human, because if we were as small as an ant the ant would kick our ass. However, we aren't ants.
France and Germany are numbers 4 and 5, internationally, in terms of GDP. The only countries with higher GDP's are China and Japan.

So, by your reckoning, everybody in the world but China is an ant?


Every elected conservative in my state, Washington, has consistently voted to raise tuition at the state schools. You must not know them.

Historically, in the US, when taxes have been high, and the government spent lots of money on university education, the economy was better for the middle class. Now, when taxes are at an all time low, and, in my state anyway, state support of higher education is at an all time low, our economy is in the crapper.

One socialist experiment that I look to for inspiration- in the 1950's, when the maximum income tax rate was 90%, the government took people's money and gave it to others, in the form of giving 7.8 million veterans free university education, in the 1950's alone. The population then was about half what it is now, so that would be the modern equivalent of giving 14 million college students today free higher education. Those college grads, many of whom would never have been able to go to college otherwise, lifted an entire generation up to the middle class. This was my father's generation, I knew, personally, a bunch of guys who came from poor backgrounds and tiny towns, and because of the GI bill, became lawyers and doctors, or started businesses. The economy of the USA in the 50's and 60's was boosted immensely by this education.
In the arts, I knew several college professors who would have been dirt farmers if not for the GI bill, but who became extremely good art professors instead, and who taught and inspired generations of artists.
I see that as a very good thing, something we, as a nation, should invest in again- both for our veterans, and for our young people in general. I would love to see a voluntary program where young people could volunteer for 2 years, either in the military, the peace corps, or in domestic education, construction, and other civic programs, and then receive government paid for 4 year college educations. I think the experience of the 50's and 60's proves that this is better for america than having 20 somethings with 100,000 dollar loan debt.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.

Last edited by Ries : 06-18-2012 at 03:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Sculpture Community, Sculpture.net
International Sculpture Center, Sculpture.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Russ RuBert