“If the new law on the professional status of the artist does not come with more public money, this law will turn against us, against the visual arts. The Regroupement des centers d’artistes autogérés du Québec (RCAAQ) and the Peer group for independent research and experimental arts (REPAIRE) have each expressed their concerns regarding the steps taken by the Regroupement des artistes in Visual Arts of Quebec (RAAV) under the new law. Counterpoints.
“We feel in the tone that we suddenly become the adversaries of the RAAV and the artists; that it could force us to adopt a posture of employers, as if we were bosses or employers — which is not the case,” worries Catherine Bodmer, executive director of the RCAAQ, which has 70 members and represents 90% of artist-run centers in Quebec.
Centers that are “not just broadcasters, continues the director. We are places of production, research, meeting, sharing of tools. Our mandates are varied: we offer artist residencies, creative contexts. We offer a participatory environment, close to artistic communities. Our boards of directors are very often made up of artists”.
The concern comes from the announcement of RAAV’s intentions, now that it can negotiate on behalf of artists with broadcasters. “We believe in the domino effect,” explained Lise Létourneau, member of the board of directors of RAAV, two weeks ago. Duty. We attack the biggest, the museums, and when we have passed the first two or three, we think that it will tumble. »
“Afterwards, we will look at the centers for artists. We are targeting the big establishments, so that it pulls the conditions [de travail des artistes] by the top. It was then clear to RAAV that the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, for example, would have to pay more than an artist-run centre.
Artist centers are not reassured by this nuance. Some of them are also members of REPAIRE, the Independent Arts Peers Group, which also has, among its 300 members, individual artists and 80 organizations of all kinds and all disciplines, united by their idea that the artist must hold “all artistic and editorial power over his work, from its conception to its final iteration”.
“We must clarify the position that REPAIRE can occupy in this new law, and a priori, it is not obvious because it contradicts our very nature, and the nature of what our members do”, explains Gilles Arteau. , Member of the Board of Directors.
“Are artist-run centres, independent companies, artist collectives that produce themselves and sometimes invite other artists now considered to be presenters within the meaning of the law? This is an important question. »
artists everywhere
“We are worried about the difficulties that could arise if we reduce them to their role of broadcaster, when they do not only do that and they also support creation and production”, continues Mr. Arteau. , who is also the curator of Phos, the Matane event devoted to images.
Fear ? Finding yourself in an artist versus artist-distributor situation. And also that the RAAV wants to negotiate with artist-run centers in the same way as it will with museums. “The levy of sums, percentages or contributions on the contracts produced by the artists’ centers would increase the bureaucratic burden much, much too much”, believes Catherine Bodmer.
Small structures, says Mme Bodmer, are already undermined by the administrative part of the work, which is the flip side of public funding. “We must not increase this share further, especially at present, where the question of human resources [et des pénuries de personnel] is crucial. »
“The system already works very well in the visual arts”, thinks Mme Bodmer, who also practices, in photography and installations. “A “floor” of minimum conditions already exists, practices were standardized in 2015, and we have since had standard contracts, a statement of best practices, and pricing schedules. »
These scales were established with the Canadian Artists Front (CARFAC) and provide, among other things, that an artist who has a solo exhibition in an artist center receives a minimum fee of $2,200.
An ecosystem more complex than the law
“We would like the RAAV to recognize the particular nature of our group and that of the artist-run centres”, continues the administrator of REPAIRE. “If the RAAV considers us to be a kind of museum, that starts the discussion very badly. We do not have this collection and distribution mandate. Why put us next to museums as distributors with whom it is a priority to negotiate? asks Mr. Arteau.
The latter goes further, and believes that RAAV alone cannot represent all artistic practices in the visual arts and all their diversity. “REPAIRE would probably seek recognition as an arts organization for its own area of representation. There could, in the visual arts, be more than one representative organization”, which the law does not seem to allow.
“It is not because the law does not recognize reality in all its complexity that this reality does not exist”, slice Mr. Arteau.
“There is still important work to be done to qualify this law, reflects for his part Mr.me Bodmer, to better adapt it to the reality of the field of visual and contemporary arts, quite different from the music or entertainment industry. »
“Too eager to pass the law at the very end of her mandate, the minister at the time unfortunately did not take the time to do substantive work. By merging the two previous laws, everything is put in the same pot, without distinction. »
” Let’s talk together ! rather proposes Catherine Bodmer, addressing the RAAV. “It’s not because there is a new law that we have to start operating differently from what we were doing, which worked very well for our ecosystem. »