File spoon-archives/avant-garde.archive/avant-garde_1998/avant-garde.9806, message 87

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:41:38 +0300
Subject: Re: Artists' unions and anti-art

malgosia askanas wrote:
> Well, I don't know how far this argument goes.  First, I am not sure what is
> meant by art not being "valued".  True, so-called "public sculpture" is not
> much "valued" by the general public who is supposedly its beneficiary, but
> Hollywood films, advertisements, TV, car design, packaging, magazine layouts,
> computer graphics, clothes design, office-furniture design -- these seem to me
> quite ubiquitously popular with one or another segment of the "general public"
> and quite a central item in the culture, no?  And even so-called "fine art"
> is, one assumes, "valued" by people like gallery owners, etc. who make a profit
> off of it.
> Secondly, there have been times and places where artists have unionized in
> some form; the Artists' Union is the US in the 30s is one example.  So I am
> curious about histories, material and philosophical, of such phenomena.

You might like to check out the Finnish Artists' Union at Finland has highly organised artist unions which
are officially recognised (even for tax purposes!).


Andy Best
Avatar breeder, amongst other things

     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005