Art =/= Money
Strap in readers, this is a long one. But don't worry, no NFT chats at all.
In 2018 I decided I would never be a High School teacher ever again. I had completely burned out, wasn't sleeping much, was irritable, resentful, angry and sick of it. As I pondered what to do next, my girlfriend asked me if I'd have a crack at making it as an artist. I can't remember exactly how I phrased it but I think I said something like 'fuck no, I'd just be broke'. Reconciling the desire to spend a large amount of time, energy, emotion and identity doing something that doesn't pay the bills easily is, in some ways, completely insane. But, on the other hand, I think the 'square peg, round hole' of art and money is interesting in its own weird ways. If things can't go together seamlessly, how do we deal with the friction?
I think most of us can relate: don't we all want to spend our time doing whatever the fuck we want without worrying about the bills? Similarly, doesn't the desire to have financial security hold us back in some ways? Don't we find ourselves working more, taking on more hours than we 'need' to so that we can have a larger bank account or more options? These aren't evil or worrying things by any stretch, but there is this tension between the desire to create and the desire to be well off (whatever that means to you) that will maybe always exist. I've grown to accept that this tension will never be resolved, it will just be life.
For those of you reading who aren't artists, there's basically very little in the way of stable money in art. That's no surprise but it is worth re-iterating. If someone wants to make a living as an artist they are probably working as a teacher, in a casual job or a full-time, low intensity job that gives them enough space to keep going (that's me). We've seen this really clearly with Spotify in the last few weeks - if someone wants to make $40,000 a year (which in Australia puts you $10,000 LOWER than the median income) you need 10,000,000 streams. Let's put this another way: if an artist is significant and compelling enough for their work to be played 10,000,000 times they get the privilege of being below average income earners. Of course if that money needs to be split between band mates, well, that's less. This is just a small example of how little income is actually possible for artists.
This means that there are very, very few people who make art full time. Of those, very few are visual artists, as there are fewer avenues to make money from visual art (generally speaking), especially compared with music.
It's worth saying that art doesn't need to make money to be a positive addition in our lives. Even great artists don't need to make their money from art to make their best work. There is not some magical quality upgrade that happens when people get income from art necessarily. But also, there might be. From my point of view, I don't look down on folks making in their spare time, in fact a lot of the work that has moved me the most was made by people who are, from a money point of view, hobbyists, but their art is so good.
Over the years, I've been trying to take my own art more seriously. From embarrassing exhibition panic attacks (see a newsletter from two weeks ago) to flying all over Australia to try and take one great photo, to founding online platforms to showcase art work, to starting a publishing company - I see what I do as increasingly being taken more seriously and that starts with me. This is a bit odd as most people who have met me will know I'm a bit of a silly sausage and tend to enjoy being slightly naive. Nevertheless, it's my dream to one day be able to work 3 or 4 days a week at a day job and have 1 or 2 days a week just for art and this will only happen if I'm quite effortful and deliberate about making art, thinking about businesses and money because my desire for a certain type of financial security does restrict me - I lack the courage to step away from paid work's generous buffer.
In the last 6 months one of my big projects I've been working on is to turn the art that I do (photography, writing and publishing) into a business. I've found this to be a really fascinating journey with a lot of really curious subplots so far and I want to write a bit about art, money, businesses, government support and how it all does (and doesn't) fit together.
Here's a few points that need to be said:
I have a day job that pays well, does not over-work me and provides a good income - I work for the government writing policy. Mostly I have enjoyed my day jobs and the people I work with, though currently my job makes me want to scream 'I FUCKING QUIT!' at least 4 times a day. I've been given, actually, a week of mental health leave. Big perk. Generally I've been lucky and my work has broadened my life and what perspective, while allowing me to buy food, shelter, holidays, etc.
I am not trying to go full time and become an artist all the time non-stop. That's a great thing, and I'm envious of those who make it work, but I just can't. I'd be broke. I've got a mortgage to pay.
I don't necessarily think that money is bad, wanting financial security is a problem, or that there's a root of all evil thing going on. I hope we get a more evolved system than 'wealth = power' but there are some good things about the flexibility currency allows and I'm not philosophically opposed to money, capitalism or finances, as long as they are restrained by ethics, social consciousness and a leave it better than you found it perspective. Which, currently, capitalism isn't restrained by much, so that sucks.
I feel very awkward around other artists when money comes up, awkward because I know I have more of it than others because I have had a more conventional and highly paid career and fewer expenses (my folks haven't become sick, I haven't had any big health scares, etc). I know lots of my mates are poorer and I don't like that, I also know there's a move towards calling out rich kids in art. I know I'm not one of those, but at the same time I understand why people are sick of faux-bohemians making art on their parents' money. Even if it's cool shit it just is a bad vibe when so many folks are struggling. Do we need another family rich artist making something and getting air time? This atmosphere of resentment and criticism makes me want to hide that I do live in a nice house and I do have a nice job, though I don't think I'm anyone's target.
Most folks who are artists that I know have a really disdainful or timid view of money. Either they realise they're going to be broke and just hate the idea of cash at all, or they don't want to be broke but know that's an unpopular opinion, so hide it away. Folks may say 'shouldn't we be working for a Universal Basic Income that allows us all to be free of the shackles of work forever?' Well, I think UBI is likely to increase inequality, and that any labour (even what you love) feels like it's worth escaping from time to time, so that's not the future I'm personally working towards. My future is about making peace with what I cannot change and knowing that I prefer to be middle class comfortable. I guess that's not a courageous stand at all (the opposite) but that's me.
Another popular art-money take is to call out the government, everyone's favourite amorphous boogeyman. Many artists want more money ('support') from the government. They may see this as the easiest one stop shop to get reliable income. I think it's a pipe dream, and actually sort of bullshit. As someone who works for the government, public money should be spent on stuff that brings the best social outcomes. While I want lots of art in my life, we don't have enough public housing or school supports, climate change is vastly under-invested in, principals, junior doctors, teachers and aged care workers are all leaving the profession in droves and this will take public money to fix. I'd rather see money to combat climate change go up 10x than arts funding increase. Sorry everyone, but there are bigger fish to fry.
In my opinion, there is not enough dosh to cover all the good stuff (art included), so the question is what's the best compromise? I get it that we wish there were higher corporate taxes and less rorts in grants, better distribution (which is particularly true of the current Australian government who spend overwhelmingly in electorates they want to hold on to). But here's my point: there is no free lunch, there is no endless pot of gold that someone can just turn around and take from to give endlessly to artists. I think it's reasonable to expect that there are accessible streams of money for emerging, mid-career and established artists (which currently there are not, especially emerging), and that development is worth investing in, but I'd encourage the laziness of thinking that looks for large-scale government support to consider the broader job of governments and the necessity of choice. I think there's a better allocation of financial support for artists possible, but I don't want to see whole-scale, unexamined funding.
I will say one thing I struggle with is knowing that what gets funded most easily in Australia is public art, music and community projects. That's fine, but does leave a gap for development, visual art that's not murals and publishing which are, ummm, all of what I'm interested in.
So, I want to make money from art, but don't expect a lot of that to come from the Government, nor do I expect to be able to quit my day job? What's going on then?
For me, the way forward has been to create a small business. I see having a small business structure as a way to get more freedom and some more regular money in the door. Not just through having a more serious attitude towards products, sales, work, etc, but also through seeing taxation as a form of government grant. My business is made up of three parts, each has the potential to bring in some money, these are:
A) Photography (selling prints, applying for grants and photographing things for people - this is not much money - how many people really need a print, how many want to buy it? No one has ever hired me to photograph something and that's likely to finally change soon!)
B) Writing (I write about 5 commissioned pieces a year, these are fun and pay well and I'd love to do more, but are so niche that it's worth not getting too hopeful(
C) Publishing (I started Tall Poppy Press and aim to publish 3-4 books a year, these are sold and I have to be a real business dude to keep this going)
These each allow me to make huge tax deductions off the costs of making art. Buy film, a new lens, a new computer, a flight, petrol, paper, printing or parking near a place I'm photographing? Tax deduction. The way I see it is this: the government may not directly be giving me an endowment for making art, but I can organise my life so my tax return is like a government grant once a year. In 2021, I paid $16,000 in tax. If I can use my art business to deduct expenses I can see $5000 or $10,000 back each year. This is like the government giving me a no strings attached grant once a year. Which is pretty good.
Of course, this is also complicated by income from art - if I'm too successful I will need to PAY tax, WHAT?! This is the first year I'm doing things this way, and I'm looking forward to sharing how it goes in July, when I'll know how much money came in, went out, was spent and what tax was returned..
The other thing I've started trying to do is to find ways to fund the making of art. Making is costly as there's materials, travel, time and production costs. I've been working on trying to find things that I can sell to partially fund the making of work, this may be forward-selling a piece of writing (eg, pitch to a magazine about something I want to photograph) or being very strategic about grants, eg, trying to align with the criteria of a grant early on in a project. These are intertwined as if I can demonstrate there's public interest and that I'm particularly well placed through showing a widely distributed magazine or newspaper I contributed to and get a letter of support from the editor it just adds that momentum to the grant application. This is a bit nerdy to some, but I really enjoy this type of strategic, big-picture, connect-the-dots thinking.
...and look making art can be incredibly expensive. I'm publishing a book of my work and having my first really big ambitious exhibition this year, together that's likely to cost nearly $20,000. Oddly, I'm applying for a grant to cover the costs of exhibiting and through that process sort of really thought 'what's the coolest thing I could do if I got the grant?', now I love those ideas even though it was a brainstorming for money I don't have yet. How awkward.
Now, there's certainly no reason that has to apply to everyone and every project, I don't expect that to be the norm for me, but once every 5 years or so it'd be good to have something really grand. That's a huge amount of money for anyone to pay upfront, and the it has to be paid upfront before there's any chance of selling anything. No one will print for me on the condition that I pay them back IF I make a sale. No one will publish my book on their own money on the condition that I pay them back after selling. It's just the way it is, and it can be hideously expensive.
I've sort of gone off piste here towards the end, I guess because those costs are looming for me and I've been thinking about it a lot. I want to share one final thing someone told me that I found really helpful. She's an actor who does a lot of productions in local theatre and musicals. She talked to me once about how the money comes and goes, some years the council or state government are really generous, the next the well dries up. To her, she say this as a having a really good effect on the work she saw made. Some years there are lavish productions with all the bells and whistles, in others there are lean, stripped back, almost aggressively lo-fi events. There's a seasonality that's creatively productive - people still want to make plays and musicals happen, they just find out how to do it for less and in doing so find something interesting in a way that a more well funded option just won't be.
At the end of the day I try to encourage everyone to support artists as directly as possible. A lot of us consume art and media in ways that don't pay people, so it's good to balance that with occasional times we buy things really directly. Buy a print, click a 'donate' link on a writer's newsletter once a year, buy a t shirt of a musician, buy someone's book instead of getting it on audible. Not all the time, but sometimes. Just think: have you been enriched by this? Have you given back for how much it's brought you? If you're like me, you'll never be able to: art has made your life beautiful and transcendent, you can't repay that debt, but you can, once in a while, kick over a bit more than you'd usually do so. It won't change the world, but it is something that you should try and do.
I'd love to talk to anyone about art, money and finances at any time. I'm happy to be 100% transparent about money, I'm not worried about it or prefer it to be hidden. In fact I find it frustrating that more artists don't name dollar figures for things when talking about them. Information buoys us up, euphemisms confuse us. Let's me more clear with each other where we can be. Feel free to ask me anything :)
Matt