Creative workers deserve monetary compensation for
their work. I agree with this. I run an online literary site/magazine that pays
writers thanks to the help of local government. However, I also run a
micropress with print and online publications that do not offer financial
compensation to our contributors because I do not seek out government grants to
pay for their existence. We offer complementary copies for print publication,
but that’s it.
The administrative work that goes into applying for
financial assistance is huge and it’s not a burden I’m prepared to take on more
than I already do. I am always uncertain, when I ask for free contributions
from artists whose work I admire or have discovered whether I should not be a
publisher at all because I am unwilling to do the work required to ensure that
we are all financially compensated.
I am fortunate to be able to work as a volunteer for
everything I do. We limit micropress publishing activity to what we can afford,
which isn’t a lot. Money received from those who purchase chapbooks goes
directly into paper costs and the cost of hosting the online publications. The
expense is greater than what is received. I receive occasional grants for my own work
and the occasional honorarium from literary magazines or reading fees. The
advance from my poetry book was small and after two years, sales have resulted in
payback of the advance.
I respect those who won’t contribute to anything
unless they are financially remunerated for it. But my own way of thinking is
to support small, outsider presses who don’t receive money either. Money often
means accepting conditions. For government grants for example, you have to have
steering committees, regular meetings, insurance and final reports, and you
have to adhere to very specific rules about such things as Canadian content, to
name one example.
I suspect that if everyone insisted that they only contribute
to publications able to offer financial compensation, a lot of micropresses
and online publications wouldn’t be able to exist. This means that readers and
appreciators of art would be exposed only to government-sanctioned art. I don’t
see this as a good thing. I see what these micropresses do as being part of a
long tradition of outsider art.
The other option, the kickstarter/indigogo campaigns
are an alternative, but also require administrative work and focus on things
other than the publication of the art and working with the contributors. I
think this is a completely valid way of raising money, but I’m unwilling to
spend that kind of time. My micropress is a two-person operation and that’s the
way it has to stay in order to do what we do without complicated board meetings
and consensus building exercises.
So I will continue to ask you to contribute for free
and if you don’t want to, I will understand if you respectfully decline. I will continue to share remunerative
opportunities on social media to help you find ways to share your work and be
financially compensated. I won't criticize outsider art and micropresses for not asking for money. I'd be a hypocrite.
No comments:
Post a Comment