What is an arts organization?

For over two years, Intersection for the Arts, has been in search of a building- a permanent home. Although I vowed not to talk much about Intersection in my blog, primarily because this isn't an official organization blog, I find it hard to resist this time, specially since all our talks about finding a permanent home led me to think of a pretty important question; a question I was sure I had the answer to: What is an arts organization? is it the space? is it the director? is it the aesthetics? is it the audience or community it serves? Is it all of the above? What is it? what makes an arts organization an arts organization?

Since my moto is "if you don't know it Goggle it," I took on to my favorite search engine for an answer.

Wikipedia says: "A not-for-profit arts organization is usually in the form of a not-for-profit corporation, association or foundation. Such organizations are formed fir the purpose of developing and promoting the work of artists in various visual and performing art forms such as film. sculpture, dance, painting, multimedia, poetry and performance art"

Although I think this definition pretty much hits the nail in the head, I am surprised that it makes no mention of space, place or location. Fair enough I guess, but I then I wonder, why are we so married to the idea of a space? and why do we call theater companies, "companies" instead of organizations, by this definition they should be, right? And what about art groups that are not incorporated, for-profit or fiscal sponsored, are they all of the sudden not arts organizations because they lack a 501(c)3 or the drive to be for profit?

Is the definition then constricting, and does it prevent us from thinking about other things as such? or are those things completely different entirely and we then are forced to find other definitions for them, better definitions. Why do we need to define things? and are we limiting ourselves by having definitions? (ugh, insert much larger philosophical debate here)

I have no answers here. I guess I was pretty certain that I knew what an arts organization is...was...can be, but maybe it is much like all things in life, an ever-changing concept, one that like water fits in the mold in which we put it.

What is an arts organization? Who needs to know?

So I'm chatty, now what?

Yesterday, I attended The StrengthsFinder, a workshop presented in part by Gallup and Future Women Leaders, designed to help you identify the "patterns in your life that lead you to success and teach you how to apply them to maximize what you do best". This workshop was twofold, first you take an assessment test at home and then you go to the workshop to learn about your results. I'm not going to lie, but at first I was hesitant, I mean, how accurate is this test? and is the way I see myself really the way I am?

I took the test and showed up to the workshop with low expectations (how accurate are these things anyways?), but I was pleasantly surprised by my results. Here are my top 5 according to the StrengthsFinder test:

Communications - You like to describe, to host, to speak in public, and to write Ideas are the beginning, you like to bring them to life, to energize them, to make them exciting and vivid. And so you turn events into stories and practice telling them.

Input - You are inquisitive. You collect things - words, facts, books, quotations. The world is exciting because there is a an infinite variety of information. If you read a great deal is not to refine your theories, but rather to add more information to your archives. If you like to travel, it is because each new location offers novel artifacts and facts.

Woo - stands for winning others over. You enjoy the challenge of meeting new people and getting them to like you. You like to learn strangers names, and find an area of common interest so that you can strike up conversation and build rapport.

Restorative - You love to solve problems. Whereas some are dismayed when they encounter yet another breakdown, you can be energized by it. You enjoy the challenge of analyzing the symptoms, identifying what is wrong and finding a solution.

Ideation - you are fascinated by ideas. You are delighted when you discover beneath the surface an elegantly simple concept to explain why things are the way they are.

The workshop taught us that we need to focus on our strengths to maximize our potential, that we have to forget about the idea that improving our weaknesses will makes us stronger, because innately even if we improve, the improvement will not be as high as to make weaknesses turn into strengths. I get it, focus on what you have and stop coveting what you don't have (disclaimer the workshop presenters never used the work weakness).

OK, so this sounds pretty awesome right?And if you know me, my results are pretty dead on. Well yes, I was very happy. But also kinda disappointed. During the workshop we were given sets of activities that helped us share our strengths with other participants, and realize how different yet similar we can be. Again and again, I was reminded that I was in essence a communicator, a chatty social butterfly that loves talking. This is true, but it made me feel so one dimensional, which I guess its something I've kinda always known. Sadly, this shattered my idea that I was complex and full of contradictions. In a weird way I wanted to look at the report and feel like a "Renaissance Woman", I wanted to see it and see a better version on me, I wanted to discover something new and use that to my advantage. Hmm the big we want what we don't have thing...

As I vent, I realize that I am being ungrateful, the workshop was lovely, and I learned a lot about the way we view strengths and weaknesses; the way we perceive each other and how I come across. It also made me feel secure about my career path, I am interested in communications, relationship building, research and creation, and I am working in a position that plays to my strengths. But now what? Should I stop striving to be this "Renaissance Woman"? Should I never consider other career options? What does it mean to be a communicator and how can I better display this without seeming one dimensional? and more over, why am I being so critical of something that is good?

First, I think I need to come to terms with the fact that I am chatty, that I love talking to people, that I do love dialoguing, arguing and debating; that I do check Wikipedia compulsively, that I am the queen of "Googling it", that I get excited when new ideas, technologies and developments come around, and that I have a freaking blog cause I like writing (tho I don't do it enough). I guess I need to be happy being me, cause its ok to be me. To be honest, I'm going to keep trying to be the Renaissance Woman, who says that just because you suck at something you shouldn't try?

I will take what I've learned in this workshop and continue to master my strengths; but I am also going to continue to waste my time trying to improve my weaknesses. I guess that is the Restorative part me, looking at my problems and trying to fix them.

Sustainability in the arts, funny haha...?

Lately, I've been reading some wonderfully hilarious articles about what it means to be employed by the arts. The Top 20 Most Powerless People in the Art World, and the Arts Handlers Olympics, both poke fun at the issue of sustainability in the arts, specially as it relates to young, "emerging" people in the field. I am not going to lie, I laughed so hard reading these, but I kinda also wanted to cry. This is sad.

As someone without a trust-fund, a ton of student loans (thank you year abroad!), who lives in one of the most expensive city in the U.S., and has two other part time weekend jobs, the articles hit a little too close to home.

Every two weeks I am painfully reminded that I am not in this for the money, and although it is refreshing and quite wonderful to meet countless talented people who are so passionate about what they do that they forgo "bigger and better things", hearing them talk about their 3 jobs, lack of 401 (k) and issues with health insurance and stability in general, worries me, specially cause here I am committed to stay in this field (cue my parents saying "why?!!!").

I wonder if we like feeling like martyrs, I guess I shouldn't generalize, but I have noticed that there is a romantic idea about poverty in the arts. The starving artist is not only normal, but cool.

A beloved program director (from one of Intersection's fiscal sponsor projects, don't try to guess there is over 100 of them), who infuriates me to no end, recently wrote in a grant report that his project had found a new sustainability model or "pre-non-profit", that puts all funding to creative risk by making all administrative and staff positions volunteer. Seriously! How is this a sustainable model? "Hey you should work for us for free because we are so cool! How you are going to eat, pay rent or live is of no concern to me!". Ugh! How do you expect to not only attract but retain the necessary talent that will propel your creative endeavors forward if you don't want to pay them! Ok yes, I could possibly see a model where people come together and volunteer their time and make something wonderful. Call me a B!@#$, but what do I get out of it? how is this worth my time? and what guarantees that I will give my best to something when I am tired from figuring out ways to be able to eat?!

I mean don't get me wrong, I volunteer for non-profit organizations often and I got my current gig thanks to an unpaid internship, but assuming that it is ok for your entire staff to be volunteer based, well that is just ridiculous! and the thing that bothers me the most is that, he is not alone in this way of thinking. Seriously! (and please forgive all my "seriouslys", I tend to do this when I get worked up, that and busting into Spanish), seriously! Who came up with the idea that making $25,000.00 or less from a job in the arts, sometimes after graduate work is sustainable? No wonder the arts is plagued with trust-fund babies, no wonder few people of color are leaders in the arts, no wonder government agencies, politicians and some people outside the arts have a hard time taking the field seriously (again!).

I read this great blog at artsjournal.com (I've been doing more reading than writing lately) that talks about art jobs and the fact that when addressing arts funding at a National level, we (artists, arts workers, arts advocates) fail to paint the picture that the arts aren't just a hobby or a form of entertainment, but the livelihood of a lot of people.

In a weird way I guess that having "improper" wages in the arts is assuming that they are a hobby, and I take it personally because it is not a hobby to me. I am by no means saying that arts organizations are "rolling in the dough" or hoarding their money, no way! we get paid what our employers can afford, but something is off. ( I am also not assuming that no one makes a living of the arts, I am actually certain that I could live just fine with what I make, but I love eating out). I guess what I am trying to say....yes, what was my point?....Oh yes, is that I feel like it is disrespectful to assume that only those who are truly committed forgo profit, to say that passion and payment are mutually exclusive, and that making a living from art is ridiculous.

Its sad, I have seen extremely talented people leave the arts, and non-profit for that matter, and not because they were less passionate or committed, but because they got a job that paid more.

My head is now starting to spin, again I feel like I've started with one thing and ended with another. I think that is just how my brain works, and since I have no real solution, all I can say is, that the arts will never stop being in crisis unless we find a way to attract and retain the talent we need to succeed - talent with or without trust-funds.