June 15, 2007

Should An Artist Turn Down Work Because Their Economic Situation Tells Them They Must?

Brian Hotter       posted 13 Jun 2007, 09:26 AM / edited 13 Jun 2007, 09:25 PM

I have recently found myself in a compromising position:  I was due to fly overseas to perform in a production as part of an international festival and with two weeks to go I pulled out.

My reasons for doing this were purely economic.

My airfare, accommodation and two out of three weeks of food would be paid for but I myself would not be paid.  This of course would be fine if I was on a fixed salary and was able to continue having an income while I was away.   Unfortunately I have three jobs, one which is casual, one part-time and one income source of 8 hours a week.  If I stop working I get nothing.  To add to all of this I have a family and like everybody else bills to pay.

I should have turned down the work when I was first offered it but I was hoping (foolishly some might say) to get funding and receive a wage.  Soon after I found out we had no funding I worked the cost to me of going overseas verses being offered another role in a production where I would get paid.  I took up the offer of the paid work and pulled out of the overseas production.

My fear now is that my reputation has been tarnished and that people in the industry will no longer think of me as reliable.  Any body who has worked with me previously will agree that this is not so.

Now I am standing up to be called a hypocrite because I have a production coming up at Bats Theatre which is currently unfunded and I am expecting professional actors, director, producer, tech, designers all to work for what little we may earn through box office.  Essentially unpaid work and of course they are all aware of this and I will be devastated if any of them where to pull out at the 11th hour.  Yet I hope the script that I have written and the experience of being in the production will pull them through.  Unfortunately I couldn’t afford to do the same as much as I would have liked to…

My questions to all of you out there in the industry and all followers of the industry are:   What would you have done in my situation?  Should an artist work unpaid and just for the experience?  Should an artist turn down work because of economic reasons?

I look forward to debating this topic.

Brian Hotter                 Actor/Writer

neil furby             posted 13 Jun 2007, 04:27 PM / edited 13 Jun 2007, 09:24 PM

The question of unpaid work should not be considered in any situation.

It is time the Arts was valued in our society and given the respect it deserves.

Brian you did right in turning down the unpaid work.

In what other trade and profession does this unpaid work carry on occur?

The Bats Production financial set up you describe has unfortunately been in use for years in New Zealand so do not beat yourself up on this issue.

Let us all ask to be being paid for work in the future at home and abroad

It’s a basic human right I would have thought.

Simon Bennett posted 13 Jun 2007, 04:45 PM   

You shouldn’t feel bad about withdrawing from unpaid work. If you can’t afford to do it, then there’s no reason why you should. This decision will have no bearing on your reputation or future employment prospects. As far as the BATS show is concerned, again you must make your decision based on your current circumstances. People mounting shows at BATS don’t expect to be well paid. They’re usually co-operative situations where a group of people get together to mount a production because they’re passionate about the work, want the exposure, or want to partake in a kind of theatre that is unlikely to be available in one of the more commercial theatres.

Brian Hotter       posted 13 Jun 2007, 08:38 PM / edited 14 Jun 2007, 07:47 AM

I think the guilt comes from the fact I withdrew at the 11th hour or 23rd hour if you like.  If I could simply continue getting just enough money to sustain myself I would have gone.   My pulling out cost the production more money and more time and more energy than it had to give.

I think people enter a Bats show with the knowledge that they aren’t in it for the money but does that mean that they should?  Should professionals work for little or nothing?  Does a plumber just spend a couple of months on a major construction site and then walk away with $300 in his pocket?  No but we are artists right?  Doesn’t that mean we need to be starving artists?  We should stand up and say hey no way no money no go.  But does anybody think that New Zealand civilisation as we know it will fall over if all the professionals doing it for the love it just stopped?  Nope

I write even though I am not getting paid, sure it is with the hope and intention of one day making something resembling a living from it.  But right now I do it because I have to do it.  I do it because I love it.  Because it is my passion.  Because it is what I think about then I am working my “normal” job.

I’d like to point out that Bats Theatre is one of the if not the cheapest form of theatre in Wellington, yet hardly anybody putting on a show their receives a wage …  What does that say?

I mean if you are like certain New Zealand publications and do not think Bats is worthy of review for whatever reason then fair enough however I believe some of the strongest new New Zealand theatre is coming from Bats … And most of it is for little or no pay….  What does that say?

 Brian Hotter                Writer/Actor

Charlotte Larsen               posted 14 Jun 2007, 04:42 AM

Brian, I can totally understand your situation. I’ve had discussions with numerous people about the current state of funding vs creativity/passion and as such have done something about it (hopefully).

The Emerging Artists Trust (any chance for shameless self promotion on my part!) has been set up to do exactly what is needed: fund shows. There’s even a category for Actors wages. And that even means you get paid for the rehearsal period.

It wont be much to start with as we don’t have a lot of money, but as soon as that magic corporate philanthropic fairy or 10 comes along we can give out more. Hopefully one day we can fund entire shows without artists having to scrape together enough to buy luxuries, like food.

From that, passion increases tenfold and the work just keeps getting better 🙂

If the money’s not there, you can’t live. It’s kind of ironic I am saying this right now, as I am currently sitting in a hotel room overlooking Red Square and the Kremlin. Lenin is turning in his mausoleum as we speak 😉

Bronwyn Tweddle            posted 14 Jun 2007, 11:07 AM

In an ideal world, we would of course all like to be paid for our theatre work. Unfortunately, being paid frequently relies on CNZ grants – and they are few and far between. Not taking work because of financial reasons is in itself perfectly acceptable. It is the pulling out at the last moment that is the problem. When it involves overseas travel, the costs of mounting such tours are very high, and pulling out at the last minute can mean that the entire tour may have to be cancelled. Producing a tour to an overseas destination costs thousands of dollars and months of very hard work. Pulling out at the last minute may put the production into huge financial trouble. It also damages the reputation of all people who are involved with the production, as they are all held responsible for your decision. Overseas collaborators may not trust them again. My advice, be very sure that you can do it when you commit to something which has such risks for other people; and only commit if you are willing to bite the bullet no matter what. The financial cost of having to give up part-time work is easy to calculate in advance, before you make a commitment. To me, this sounds like bad planning on your part. As to the question of whether to do something for the experience or not, you need to ask if the experience has benefits beyond the purely monetary: if it might lead to other paid work; an impressive addition to your CV; media reviews that can be cited in future funding applications; opportunities to network with international artists etc. The additional costs to the company of having to replace you at the last moment, and the extreme pressure it puts on the company, can lose you a lot of goodwill, and may cost you future work with any of the people involved in that company. Thus pulling out may cost you more in the long run in terms of your career than the immediate financial loss.

neil furby             posted 14 Jun 2007, 12:09 PM

“What’s gone and what’s past help

Should be past grief.”

–The Winter’s Tale (III, ii, 223-224 )

Brian Hotter       posted 14 Jun 2007, 04:47 PM

Emerging Artist Trust.

That sounds like something I dream about at night.

Reminds me of those patrons of old who kept an artist feed alive and working.  Not calling myself Moliere but I’d sure wouldn’t mind having my own King Louis.

Thomas LaHood                posted 14 Jun 2007, 04:59 PM

Dig the acronym too… just what every starving artist longs to do.

Charlotte Larsen               posted 14 Jun 2007, 05:20 PM

Starving Artists Need To EAT – an already discussed slogan. Well done Mr Thomas!

Hungry for theatre? Just EAT!

Watch this (and many other) spaces for lots of info about us!

Brian Hotter       posted 14 Jun 2007, 05:29 PM   

Despite all my historical referencing I totally missed the acronym…  Hmm.

Thomas Rocks.

Charlotte Larsen               posted 14 Jun 2007, 05:41 PM / edited 15 Jun 2007, 12:36 AM

and now you can EAT Wellington…

www.eatwellington.org.nz

info@eatwellington.org.nz

Patrick Davies    posted 15 Jun 2007, 11:41 AM

Your reputation is part and parcel of your professionalism. When you are engaged by someone else you make a series of judgments – is it paid? who am i working with? what’s the guts of the project? sometimes working with particular people will outweigh the fact there’s no wage at the end of it, or even the possibility of a small amount of co-op share. I believe that when you say yes you, as a self employed artist, have worked through how you’re going to do it. There are those examples where an actor has pulled out of a project because of a better offer. Those actors have weighed up the pros and cons and made a decision and will be judged on it. As the actor who has replaced you Brian, i too am not being paid and have worked out that an expenses paid trip to an international festival is worth losing money from the shifts washing dishes at Fishermans Table on Oriental Parade (sorry about the ad but they have kindly filled my shifts while i’m away and let me make up the shifts by giving me extra work when i return) that pay my rent. Perhaps it is easier as i have no kids to look after. But i do have to say you are muddying the waters by placing the argument within the paid/unpaid context. You were asked two months out if you could do this and you said you had worked it out with your workplace et al.

Its fantastic that EAT is around but it is secondary to whitewashing your own reputation – what’s left of it.

Iago       posted 15 Jun 2007, 12:09 PM

Reputation is an idle and most false imposition, oft got without merit and lost without deserving.  You have lost no reputation at all unless you repute yourself such a loser!

Marc      posted 15 Jun 2007, 03:04 PM

Now this topic starts to get interesting……

Brian Hotter       posted 15 Jun 2007, 08:51 PM

I hope all goes well on the tour and I wish my situation was different and I could have attended it.  I have thought more about this in my own context.  The context of it happening to me.  I believe I would not want to work with the actor again in fear of the same thing happening.

1.  I apologise for “muddying the waters”.

2.  I should not have pulled out at the 23rd hour (I have already stated this in this forum).

3.  I should have turned the work down two months ago*.

4.  Yes having kids makes a difference.

*  (But I wanted to go, I really really wanted to do it.  We had a tour the previous year and it was one of the best experiences of my life).

The thing that saddens me the most is not me “whitewashing my reputation (what’s left of it)” but believe it or not that I may never work with the director or indeed the actor currently working with her (I’ve worked with Patrick in a different context).  As I believe they are both highly talented people and that we work very well together.  Here I lay the olive branch and sign off to let others discuss the forum of, should an artist pull out of work because of their economic situation?  Peace out.