Well past #paythedancers there is a much bigger problem then our Kylie:
The recent push to ask local dancers to work on a high-profile music video for free highlights an endemic misunderstanding about the value of artistic work and therefore proper compensation for artists. Let’s be clear here, I’m not talking about any underlying social or artistic value of their practice. What I am talking about here is the often foolish hope that an artist should be recompensed for their time and work; a bullet-proof expectation of an employee in any other industry. Let’s also, for now, leave our Kylie out of it as investigations into her rebuttals of the claims play out elsewhere in the media. Let us just examine the idea that it could be OK to not value artistic work, to not pay your artists and how that affects all of us.
There are innumerable examples where goods and services are not assigned economic value. This can be for a variety of reasons that range from the justifiable to the downright opportunistic. Undervaluation is not inherently indicative of a lack of fundamental value of the goods or services in question but is sometimes caused by a breakdown elsewhere in the transaction, normally due to the opportunistic behaviour of one of the parties involved. The blocked transactions created by this adverse selection are serious for the market involved as a blocked transaction simply does not happen. (i.e. artists make less art)
There is clearly demand for the work of artists such as Ms. Minogue, Mr. Sebastian or the Sydney Dance Company so there is no failure in the basic economics of the transaction. Despite the spectre of Internet piracy hanging over the industry, the Australian public will still happily part ways with their cash in exchange for access to the particular experience that they want.
But who is the audience paying for? After all does it really matter if the dancer (in this particular example) is paid? Hasn’t everyone come for Kylie not for Dancer A, B or C on the left?
Yes, it matters. In fact, it is fundamental.
Certainly there are nuances of responsibility, workload and experience reflected in the amounts and frequency that somebody should be paid but nobody would argue that if you do the work, you should be paid for it. It is no different with our back-up dancers. (or, for that matter, the band / singer / actor / painter / insert-artist-here that has to regularly contend with pro-bono requests because ‘we just don’t have the budget to pay you’)
Of course much of this is old hat to the sector and the various agreements of the MEAA as well as the policywork of other arts bodies go a large way towards addressing at least some of these issues. An enforced price (assuming that it is enforced) is better then nothing.
However as the role of union and group bargaining continues to wax and wane with the political climate and the burden to set his or her wage is placed more and more on the individual more needs to be done by the sector to address the other pink elephant in this discussion. Namely; how can any organisation be so sure that anybody would respond to a call-out for what is effectively unpaid work? After all it’s hard to imagine a slew of construction workers answering a similar call on a building site anywhere in Austraila.
The truth is that arts companies, individuals and the sector at large are aware of the hundreds, if not thousands, of enthusiastic people out there who just love to make art in all it’s myriad forms. Some of these people might be intending to pursue a professional career in their art form and hope that a little free work now might lead to something bigger down the track. Others might be those wonderful people who vary greatly in ability or training but just love their hobby. And there’s the crux. We know all of these wonderfully well-intentioned and potentially suitably skilled people will answer these calls for ‘unpaid but great opportunities’ simply because it’s so much fun. Because some of them don’t need or want to charge for it. Because some of them don’t need to. Because some of them already have a job. The problem is not whether or not Kylie or Guy (or even Beyoncé) did or didn’t pay their dancers. The problem is that with our present situation in the arts in Australia it is possible that this inequity could occur.
This situation is not any one person’s fault. Like any market failure it is simply a collection of skewed motivations that has not yet reached equilibrium through self or external regulation. Of course organisations will pursue the most cost-effective approach. Of course young or possibly amateur dancers will want to record with Kylie. However at the end of the day this transaction of goodwill damages the ability of those hard-working, trained and ultimately professional artists to charge for their services. The damage is not just restricted to the individual artist however. As I mentioned above, a blocked transaction is a transaction that doesn’t happen. If an artist can’t be sure that they will even be paid for their work, then why bother in the first place? Art just doesn’t happen. If you are someone who enjoys the cultural products of our small sector then you have a real vested interest in artists always being paid for their work.
If government arts bodies and other organisations are serious about continuing to grow the arts sector into a true ‘industry’ in this country, additional steps need to be taken to correct and regulate this market failure. Whether this is in the form of a formal professional accreditation (similar to the CA accreditation for accountants or CFA for analysts) or some other process ought to be the subject of further discussion amongst the sector, organisations and the artists themselves.
Simply put; an artist’s time is worth money, namely money from the people who benefit from the work of the artist or from any intermediary that will sell access to the work. Our fee is representative of the countless hours chasing our own or another’s expectations of perfection. Our fee is an aggregate of the perspiration and inspiration required just for the work to occur. It is the role of the government, applicable bodies and the entire sector to ensure that sufficient regulation takes place to protect this fledging industry, not only for the artists who rely on their work for their living but for the growing audience for whom this is something worth paying for.
Trevor Maitland is an artist, producer and MBA candidate at the Melbourne Business School. | trevormaitland at me dot com |