“Institutions would not exist without artists!”

Simon Würsten   What is Wages For Wages Against?

Wages For Wages Against   WFWA is a Swiss-based collective of artists and cultural operators. It was inspired by Working Artists and the Greater Economy (W.A.G.E.), an organisation founded in New York in 2008, and pursues similar goals: to regularise the payment of artist fees by nonprofit art institutions and to raise awareness of the financial inequality that is prevalent in the art world. Through its tireless efforts, W.A.G.E. has had a significant impact on the US art scene. Learning about its work, both practical and theoretical, over the past few years was quite a revelation for us. Its thinking and actions have altered our perception of the environment in which we operate, revealing power structures that had hitherto escaped our attention. By putting its finger on the issue of artist fees, it has uncovered a whole infrastructure of practices based on certain myths and assumptions.

SW How did your campaign start?

WFWA It occurred to us that the debate on remuneration for artists had not yet been addressed seriously in Switzerland. Visarte did produce a guide to remuneration for the services of visual artists1 in 2016, which appeared to be a first step in the right direction, but we found it to be incomplete and saw the solutions it puts forward as being at odds with our perception of the problem. We also have doubts about the guide’s effectiveness, particularly as regards its distribution. We know from experience that institutions are a long way from using it systematically as a reference. The subject was also touched on in debates during Manifesta 11 in Zurich last year and in an article by Brita Polzer for Kunstbulletin2 (in German) back in 2014, but a clear position on it nevertheless remained elusive. The idea behind our campaign was thus first and foremost to spark debate on the issue so that people could begin to form their own opinions and talk to each other about it. In March 2017, WFWA used the exhibition Speak, Lokal at the Kunsthalle Zurich as a springboard. We took advantage of the institution’s high profile to organise our first debate under the heading “Artists, do you want to be paid?” with guest speaker Marina Vishmidt, a critic and art theory expert based in London. Featuring artists as well as representatives from various Swiss institutions, this discussion was a first attempt at understanding what is at stake and which opinions exist. It became clear that there was a real need for people to express themselves openly and as part of a group on these oft-ignored topics. The extent of the challenge we face in shaping opinions was also made plain. The first positive outcome of our campaign was the Kunsthalle Zurich’s offer of fees to some of the artists participating in the exhibition.

SW How is it that artists are often not paid when their work is exhibited by a non-profit institution?

WFWA This is a curious phenomenon that is specific to the visual arts. In all other professions, people are paid for the work they do and could not imagine things ever being otherwise. In the visual arts, on the other hand, there is an unspoken, firmly entrenched and broadly accepted tendency towards not paying artists. We can attribute this to a lack of regulation, transparency and collective agreements, but it is also due to the predominance of the marketplace and the idea that selling artworks is the only way to make money from artistic endeavour. Put simply, institutions do not pay artists because they are under no obligation to do so.

SW Do artists not demand to be paid?

WFWA That rarely happens, especially since there is no clear consensus on systematic remuneration within the art world. Some artists have trouble viewing what they do as work in the stricter sense – and they are not alone. Society as a whole has a rather romantic image of artists, believing that monetising their work compromises their free-thinking, radical, social or political side, regardless of whether it is done through artist fees or via the marketplace. It is true that artists sometimes choose this profession to maintain a degree of independence rather than submitting to the daily grind. Sadly, however, we live in a neoliberal society in which it would be naive for anyone to think that they can remove themselves completely from all financial constraints. WFWA therefore sees financial remuneration as a means for artists to work within this regime on their own terms.

SW How do we lift the taboo on artists’ pay?

WFWA It is difficult and uncomfortable for a lone artist to demand payment from an institution that does not spontaneously offer it. Young artists find it even harder to make such a demand as they are often grateful for the invitation to present their work or perhaps unaware that it is even an option. This is why our collective, public campaign is necessary and could perhaps be followed up by a union like structure providing support in these sensitive matters. The demand to be paid is in fact a gesture of solidarity in defiance of the competitive and individualistic system the art market forces on us. It is a statement of intent against the persistence of a status quo that mainly favours those with money, be it from commercial success, a separate job or a rich family, who do not need to earn an income from their art. Collective agreements and a structure defending artists’ interests would provide a basis for ensuring that those who need an income by dint of their education or financial status or due to discrimination can receive one.

SW Institutions often argue that exhibitions give artists exposure and thus boost sales of their work. Is this not a form of income?

WFWA When they talk about exposure, institutions are shirking their responsibility towards the artists they engage and represent. They are leaving it to the art market to decide the artists’ fate, thus playing their own part in the speculation game and contributing to the climate of financial uncertainty. This affects output in that artists are constrained to produce works with the market in mind, seeking to satisfy the demands of wealthy collectors. Artistic effort is therefore remunerated if (and only if) it is marketable, which is not always the case. The chances are drastically reduced, for example, for female artists. The art market is fickle. It has its own rules and selection criteria, dictates production and promotes the work of a minority of so-called “exceptional” artists. This means that institutions are not guaranteeing artists an income by providing them with exposure or even by funding the production of new works. In fact, very few artists make an income through sales over the long term. Those lucky enough to have a commercial career often find that it is very short. We want non-profit institutions to take their responsibilities seriously and maintain their in-
dependence from market forces.

SW What are your demands with regard to non-profit institutions?

WFWA We are asking them to pay fees to all artists involved in a project, irrespective of their medium, their cultural capital and the market value of their work. These institutions receive funding to produce and showcase works of art. Each person who contributes to a project has a right to financial compensation for their time, be they
the artist, curator, installer, director, copywriter, intern etc. Each artist invited by an institution is commissioned to fit in with the precise spatio-temporal context defined by the institution. The artist is thus providing conceptualisation, planning, production, installation, consultation, mediation and other services. The artistic research does not enter into this equation. The fee covers the services provided under the institution’s commission within the specific frame-work of the project. We believe it is self-evident that institutions should include artist fees in their operating budgets. After all, they would not exist without artists!

SW The WFWA website calls for artists to be “compensated” for the services they provide. Does this compensation really have to be financial?

WFWA Yes, it has to be financial. In its guide, Visarte suggests that artists could be compensated “in kind”, for example through the production of a catalogue. We do not
agree with this idea. Catalogues are as useful for institutions as they are for artists, so this does not represent a fair exchange. Indeed, artists should be paid specifically for any work they do in connection with compiling the catalogue.

SW WFWA is specifically focused on artists and exhibitions at non-profit institutions, but the art world is fraught with inequalities, and the difficulties are not confined to artists. What about unpaid internships and volunteer work? Are these issues also part of your campaign, or are you exclusively concerned with practising artists?

WFWA All of these things are part of the same system, they are not specific to the artistic milieu. Exploitation can be found in all lines of work. Capitalism is a system that puts profit above all else, and culture should not be profitable. WFWA is a campaign led by artists, and as such it does focus on the issue of artist fees. There is plenty of work to do just on this subject! Our main goal is to achieve progress in this respect. Further down the line, we hope to have the resources in place to offer real-world solutions that are attuned to Switzerland’s particular economic circumstances. We are currently in the experimental phase. We do not have a solution, but we do have avenues to explore.
In Denmark, for example, the public funding body does not give financial support to institutions that do not pay artists. This incentive-based system could easily be implemented in Switzerland, where public funding makes up a large share of institutions’ budgets.

SW In other words, the sort of artist pay you are calling for would be indirectly funded from the public coffers, which already foot the bill for grants, prizes, residences and ad-hoc project contributions in addition to the financial support for institutions you mention. How does your concept of artist pay fit into the wider system of cultural promotion and funding in Switzerland?

WFWA We are simply calling for the work artists do in providing services to institutions to be remunerated by those institutions. The institutions are funded to a great extent with the aim of ensuring that artists are paid for their work,so the cost of this remuneration is effectively covered by public funds or private foundations that also support non-profit institutions. The decision to pay an artist and the amount of the transaction must not be based on merit, which is based on grants, prizes, residences and commercial success. Instead, all artists should be paid equally in accordance with defined criteria. Meritocracy is an arbitrary way of thinking and is discriminatory in practice. The artistic research itself, which is not part of the work involved in producing an exhibition at an institution, is funded in Switzerland through prizes, grants, residences and other adhoc contributions. These should thus be seen as complementary to artist fees, not substitutes for them.

SW What feedback have you received since your campaign began? What is next for WFWA?

WFWA Many artists support our cause because they are annoyed at the chronic absence of remuneration. We were pleasantly surprised to learn that the Kunsthalle Bern had introduced artist fees just before we started our campaign, and we hope other Swiss institutions will follow its lead. That said, there is still a lot of work to do, and we currently have no money to put a structure in place or carry out other actions. Some art spaces have already contacted us to organise events, debates and conferences. For the time being, we are also heavily reliant on small factors such as word of mouth to spread our message. We hope that we will eventually have the resources needed to work with public funding bodies to draw up new rules and establish guideline criteria governing artist remuneration

1 Visarte, “Rémunération de prestations d’artistes visuels”, 2016
(also available in German and Italian). http://visarte.ch
rémunération-de-prestations-d’artistes-visuels

2 Brita Polzer, “Ausstellungshonorare – Was zahlen Kunsthäuser an
Künstler/innen?” (artist fees – what do galleries pay artists?), Kunstbulletin, 5, 2014. http://www.kunstbulletin.ch/router.cfm?a=1404241138346S3-7