Back • Return Home
Independent Creatives United
[This is based on a thread from The Web-Raft. Many thanks to portfiend and blog47177 for the awesome questions and comments. Other than the wording of the questions and the direct quotations, this is all my own personal interpretations. It is just something to contemplate, not suggestions of what to do.]
Contents
• General Plan
• Question #1: "As an artist, how does one move away from platforms such as Twitter and not Die in the process?"
• Question #2: "As a friend of an artist, how can I help my artist friends survive?"
• Question #3: "As a mutual aid collective of artists, what do we do if all of our resources combined isn't enough to keep us afloat?"
General Plan
Most of my life I have been surrounded by creatives of some kind (e.g.: artists, musicians, writers, etc.), and have partaken in those activities in both a "professional" and "hobbyist" sense myself. Some of the most supportive people have been other creatives, probably because they understand the effort that goes into the process of creation. However, unless we were hired by a large company or had the good fortune to attract some regular patrons, few of us were able to make a sustainable living off of those activities alone, even when constantly making things to sell and "self-promoting". Many of us made sacrifices simply because we love doing it and sharing it with others.
Unfortunately, people often get cornered into compromising their vision and their values for the sake of survival. How do we change that? I think two things must be done simultaneously and in parallel:
1. Building Mutual Aid Support Networks On The "Outside"
The diversity and synergy that has developed within the "Yesterweb" (and the "Web Revival" movement as a whole) is very important.
Print on demand, online audio distribution, and self-publishing frequently serve a function that is similar to that of a self-hosted website: an attempt to escape the confines of the "corporate". The same is true for things like indie game development.
All of these fields / interests could be connected together into a cooperative system where they are mutually supportive. For example, notice that video games are interactive experiences filled with art, music, and writing united by programming. And much of it uses technology that should follow principles like Free Software and Permacomputing.
To quote the Summary:
Like a chain reaction, marketing activity would trigger more marketing activity up to a point where artists would buy labor from web developers within the community to work on their websites.
I find it interesting that something like that was starting to form within the Yesterweb Discord. Rather than emulating the "corporate" by trying to profit off of one another, this has the potential to develop into a system whereby people can realistically transition out of that type of thinking without having to struggle to survive in the process. I will attempt to explain:
Most "corporate culture" is rigidly hierarchical, with a relatively small "elite" that "manage" a huge number of "worker roles". The thing that makes a union powerful is that, when the majority of people within those "worker roles" are on the same page, they can redirect the operation of the "company" as a whole. This is because that small "elite" is literally incapable of doing all of that work alone. We don't need "leaders". We need self-responsibility on part of every individual that is directed towards collective harmony.
Rather than use the power that comes from organization to try to "bargain" for safer working environments, fair distribution of effort and resources, and so on, it could be used to collapse the hierarchy completely by voluntarily reorganizing under a different structure that is more likely to provide those necessities, one that we build ourselves.
All of the "intellectual property" (including the step-by-step processes by which it is made!) should be "owned" by everyone who helped to create it. And further, we need direct collaboration between "creatives" and "audiences" until they are both one and the same. Maybe we could accomplish this with a cooperatively-owned crowdfunding platform (something like Comradery) crossed with a peer-to-peer network to share everything that we create, which includes guides on how to DIY all of it.
The use of "money" (and all of the manipulations and abuses associated with its accumulation) will start to fall away the more that each is self-sufficient and connected together by mutual aid.
2. Creatively Transforming The Systems From The "Inside"
All of this is a peaceful process. Nothing has to be destroyed, only wholly transformed. It can be done towards everyone's benefit as well. For example:
I had once watched a documentary called Second Opinion: The Lie of America's War on Cancer about the cover-up of a potential cancer cure. Some of the people who worked within that organization defected by making an anonymous zine with art and stories about what was being hidden from the public.
There are probably many, many organizations that would benefit from having such a zine. This type of literature can help connect people by providing a space for them to share their common concerns, brainstorm methods for their resolution, and share information that they can then apply together towards the constructive transformation of their environment. It could even be interactive like the Yesterweb Zine.
Some time ago, I was working on an article about video game addiction and workplace abuse. There are many people working within game development that are being abused terribly, and games are being made with manipulative techniques used to hold people's attention captive.
These issues highlight the necessity of projects like those mentioned above. The making of video games can also be so much more than simply "entertainment" because the attainment of useful knowledge and skills can be "gamified".
Question #1: "As an artist, how does one move away from platforms such as Twitter and not Die in the process?"
In the video Quit Social Media, Cal Newport tries to address three common objections that people give for leaving social media, including "How will I find work?" / "I need social media for work.". It is a great ~13 minute introduction to someone unfamiliar with this topic, but it does not describe any specific actions to take.
An artist named Julia Bausenhardt has also recommended his work when she described her experience of quitting social media. She brings up a lot of good points, but three in particular really stand out to me. To paraphrase:
1. Social media affects attention span, undermining our ability to concentrate, which makes it harder to focus on doing art.
2. It takes a lot of time and effort to build up a social media presence, with no guarantee of any kind of return. That time and effort might be better spent on art itself (i.e.: honing one's craft, creating more pieces, etc.).
3. By constantly posting material to our "feed" in order to try to stay relevant, we are actually giving away a lot of our work for free. However, the platform is structured in such a way that most people will only shallowly engage with that "content", if they can even find it among the flurry of activity.
In other words, most artists are probably getting much less (or the exact opposite!) of what they think they are from social media. Why continue then? I think there are several contributing factors. Let's go through a couple of them...
• Factor #1: Addiction
People's attention is sold as a "product". Therefore, a lot of social media is designed to be "persuasive" in some manner, if not outright manipulative.
There are a ton of different tactics that are used (e.g.: "rage-baiting" algorithms, pages with "infinite scrolling", "deceptive patterns" built into buttons and menus, etc.).
To quote portfiend:
...the dependence on major platforms like twitter is to the point where these creatives are even willing to bat for the continued success of these platforms. some more desperate creatives will deny the toxic aspects of these platforms as well.
Engagement with social media can quite literally become a behavioral addiction, so would that type of response be a form of "addiction denial"? How can we start to change those mental habits?
First, it is helpful to "detox". Then, once we have some mental-emotional clarity, we can more carefully choose how we approach the situation.
• Factor #2: Lock-In
Nearly everyone has integrated social media into their lives to some extent. It can be hard to separate from it if doing so requires some type of technical understanding and/or one feels that they are leaving too much behind (e.g.: a collection of personal posts built up over time, a method of contacting family and friends, etc.). Is this a "sunk-cost fallacy" or "escalation of commitment"?
We can help others to migrate out of them (e.g.: by demonstrating how to backup their data, build their own websites, etc.), and we can brainstorm examples of how to use the "platforms" differently. For example, I see many people who build a personal webpage that is little more than a directory of links to all of their social media accounts, but that situation can be inverted. To continue our example, an artist can make their personal website into their portfolio / gallery and then make every social media account lead back to it.
...Addiction and lock-in are two of the most significant factors in my opinion, but there are others. I will cover another important one below. But first, how do we survive financially as creatives? That question is harder to answer, especially as we find ourselves amidst an economic system that seems to be getting progressively more "broken".
In general, looking around at the precious few artists that I know of who manage to live entirely off of their art, hardly any of their physical art sales come from social media but from people that they have met in person. In other words, those social media accounts are just a way to keep in contact with existing relationships, not necessarily a means of attracting new ones. Likewise, most of them do not rely on one "revenue stream" alone, but all of their "side hustles" / "gig work" are related to their art in some way, rather than art being a "hobby" done outside of their "job".
To analyze some of their approaches more in-depth:
+ One gains the majority of their work through a small handful of wealthy patrons, but their field is relatively niche and they have the equipment to do it. The pieces are large and take weeks at a time. They met those patrons through a large network of friends that was developed through promotional work (i.e.: contacting the media to promote local art markets and music events, and constantly interacting with a lot of people face-to-face). They are literally never online.
+ One gains the majority of their work through commissions, but almost all of them are from personal connections or previous customers met through their teaching of art lessons (both one-on-one and in groups). They are highly skilled and incredibly fast at producing art. They usually do multiple commissions simultaneously and have a lot of the "business aspects" already carefully planned out (e.g.: strict guidelines for pricing that scale with materials used / time taken / size of piece / amount of detail, clear contracts that people must agree to before they start projects in order to minimize the number of revisions, and consistent schedules that help them to get it all done within reasonable timeframes).
+ One gains the majority of their work through artist organizations run by the local government. Those organizations put them into contact with various galleries, businesses, offices, etc. that need art of various sizes and types. They are periodically awarded grants to do murals, sculptures, and the like.
+ One gains the majority of their work by constantly traveling to conventions both far and wide, selling fan art of things that are probably already recognizable to many people. They also regularly sell pieces out of a local shop, and those pieces are themed with the other items that the shop tends to sell.
+ One gains the majority of their work through a larger company which acts as a "middle man", handing them a series of graphic design projects from many smaller companies.
...I should mention that none of these people live lavishly and many have partners who also work, so finances are shared. Further, almost all of them would be considered "independent contractors" / "freelance". They have no "worker benefits" whatsoever and they are forced to pay "self-employment taxes".
Crowdfunding is nice because it could lead to a certain amount of stability, but it seems like it is often used in combination with other aspects. For example, many "YouTubers" crowdfund in addition to selling merchandise, attempting to gain sponsorships, etc. Although some also resort to some level of dishonestly and/or manipulation (e.g.: using "clickbait", fostering "parasocial relationships", etc.).
Therefore, I only see crowdfunding as a "stepping stone" towards helping each other gain independence, not the end "goal". This leads me to the next question...
Question #2: "As a friend of an artist, how can I help my artist friends survive?"
It is always good to be considerate of each other's needs and help one another to meet them whenever possible. Artists are no different in that regard. If we do not have physical resources to share because we are also struggling, then we can at least freely share the helpful information that we come across.
• Factor #3: Lack of Education
A lot of people are not aware of how various companies are structured in order to take advantage of them. An interesting book on this topic, and one that is especially relevant to musicians and writers, is Chokepoint Capitalism: How Big Tech and Big Content Captured Creative Labor Markets and How We'll Win Them Back by Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow. To give a quick personal summary:
The authors describe how companies can create what they call "Anti-Competitive Flywheels", business and legal maneuvers that build upon themselves in a way that allows them to quickly become "monopolies". A "monopoly" is when a single company dominates an entire industry. They are supposed to be broken up through "antitrust law", but a lot of businesses try to find ways around it. One way is by getting rid of competitors through a "horizontal monopoly", buying them out and either integrating them into their business model or shutting them down (e.g.: when Facebook bought the companies WhatsApp and Instagram). Another way is through a "vertical monopoly", keeping competitors from entering an industry by controlling the entire supply chain (e.g.: Amazon is an online marketplace for people to sell their own items, but also sells and delivers items themselves).
The authors also describe how companies can create what they call a "Chokepoint", making themselves the intermediary between artists and their audiences so that they can take advantage of both. For example, if an author's book sales come predominantly through Amazon because they are the largest "platform" that they do business through, then they may be forced to conform to policies that undermine their profits because they may seem to have no other option if they want to keep selling books at all. The technical term for it is a "monopsony", when a buyer can dictate what a seller does. The market is not "free". It is controlled.
Unfortunately, there isn't much in the book that is directly applicable to visual artists, but hopefully it is apparent how that last pattern applies to this situation. The problem is systemic.
Question #3: "As a mutual aid collective of artists, what do we do if all of our resources combined isn't enough to keep us afloat?"
Gaining some level of self-sufficiency can be difficult sometimes. It may require one to take control of their own healthcare, make food stretch, find new sources of food/medicine, make tools from scrap, and so on.
Some of the most basic pieces of information can be truly priceless, yet are often taken for granted. For example, if you are "homeless", knowing where to find a drinking fountain, a public restroom, or a safe place to sleep is imperative. We must thoroughly get to know our surroundings and the resources available to us (e.g.: free clinics, food banks, etc.). Different types of environments have their own "survivalist" knowledge. Is the area rural, urban, or a mix?
Our power is multiplied when we work together. Much like how individual rights are balanced by collective responsibilities, self-sufficiency is expanded through mutual aid.
A really good book on the topic is Mutual Aid: Building Solidarity During This Crisis (and the Next) by Dean Spade. The first part gives some commentary on the sociopolitical contexts in which mutual aid networks might appear (e.g.: when attempting to meet the needs of a neighborhood when the infrastructure is failing due to corruption, natural disasters, war, etc.). The second part breaks down the organization of groups into a set of practical skills that are clearly presented as a series of tables, questions, and lists of guidelines. The biological underpinnings of cooperation and reciprocity can be found elsewhere (e.g.: Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin).
Sprout Distro has some free zines within their Organization section that look promising (particularly Build Those Collectives! and Organizing Social Spaces as if Social Relations Matter). There are also some that give communication techniques that can help facilitate group organizing, such as...
+ Consensus: A Brief Introductory Guide
+ Shared Path, Shared Goal
+ Collective Process: Overcoming Power
I also have a page on building communities and some things to look out for when joining one.
Ultimately, I think a lot of it comes down to a change in our hearts and minds. To quote portfiend again:
it'll be worthwhile to analyze the culture of independent creatives; something i notice with my art friends is that all of the art they post publicly tends to be transactional. someone paid money to commission this art, or someone is selling an "adoptable" (a character design), or even if they're not involving money - art is created for "art trades", art made with someone else in mind is "gift art". in the last two examples, the art is also a way for artists to get their work in front of the eyes of a different artist's following; there's still a Transaction taking place.
Even when people are not explicitly thinking in terms of "profiting" at the expense of another in some way, it is so habitual that many find it hard to see past it. Transitioning from a system based on debt and scarcity into one of abundance will require moving from thinking that is transactional and focused upon hoarding into a mindset that is founded upon mutual gifting and regifting:
[Image from The Self-Organizing Moneyless Economy by Ben Seattle]
In my opinion, this will be accompanied by many interrelated changes within society:
Abundance will further increase when we cease to create the conditions of "artificial scarcity" through "planned obsolescence" and other behaviors motivated by short-sighted greed. For example, surpluses (like those within food production and product manufacture), will be used instead of completely wasted. Since money itself is a debt, its use will also fall away. Some might generally refer to it as "Non-Monetary Economics" (or "NME").
Equality will further increase with abundance because people will no longer try to insert themselves between other people and the resources around them, or try to get others to work "for" them in order to accumulate money. Repetitive work can be automated, and people can sustainably meet each other's needs through voluntary collaboration on meaningful projects for everything else. Inversely, violence will decrease as we are no longer alienated from one another.
Thank you for reading!
