|
Behavior Research Associates |
|||
|
OAKLAND ARTISTS SURVEY REPORT by Gini Graham Scott, Ph.D.
Questionnaires Used in the Analysis Some Additional Considerations in Analyzing the Data Characteristics of the Artists Participating in the Survey From Making Art to Sales and Promotion Achieving Success and Recognition Defining Their Artist Community and Ways of Participating and Gaining Recognition Sources of Support and Needs for Additional Assistance Differences in Characteristics Differences in Goals and Interests Differences in Becoming an Artist Differences in Income and Income Sources Differences in Making, Selling, and Promoting Art Differences in Defining Their Artist Community Differences in Sources of Support Differences based on Ethnicity The Relationship between Income and Other Factors
Recommendations for further research EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Oakland Artists Survey was conducted in June 2002 to explore the goals and needs which artists have and their strategies for achieving success. It also looked at differences between artists based on such factors as gender, ethnicity, and income level. The study was conducted through a survey of 74 artist members of Pro Arts, a non-profit educational organization based in Oakland, California with about 1000 members. These were all artists who had participated in Open Studios, Pro Arts largest annual event, featuring 497 artists in 2002. The results of the study show these main points: · The majority of the respondents were predominantly female artists, 40 and older, from European backgrounds, and quite well educated. Most of these artists had been artists for at least 10 or more years; slightly over half for 20 or more years. This artist profile is quite different than that of artists in Oakland as a whole, since it under-represents artists who are male, under 40, and from the ethnic groups which make up about 60% of Oakland. However, this profile reflects the overall make-up of Pro Arts, which is seeking to expand through outreach to these under-represented groups. · The artists are involved in making a wide variety of types of art, and many engage in making multiple types of art. They also change the focus of their art over their course of their careers, from year to year, and from day to day. But certain types of art are most important to the artists generally, most notably painting, followed by mixed-media. Fewer are involved in sculpture, photography, or metal work. · The goals of visibility, recognition, and sales are of about equal importance to the artists as a whole, though different artists place different priorities on their goals. Many artists indicated other goals of importance, including spiritual or personal growth, creating good work and further developing their skill, being able to influence and impact others with their art, and becoming part of a community of artists. · Slightly over half of the artists viewed themselves as emerging or new artists, and most of the others characterized themselves as being mid-career, although the vast majority of the artists had spent over 20 years as an artist. A possible reason for these self-descriptions is the difficulty many artists experienced in gaining visibility and recognition in a very crowded, competitive field. · A majority of artists made the decision to become an artist early on – often as a child, teenager, or just after graduating from high school or college. Most of the others decided in their 20s and 30s, though a substantial minority made the commitment in their 40s or older. · The artists gained their skills as an artist through a wide variety of types of training, most commonly through multiple training approaches, including being self-taught, going to art school, being an art major in college, or studying with individual teachers. Especially common was going to art school or majoring in art in college. · Although almost all the artists hoped to make art their primary source of income, only a few do. For most it is only a hope, though a small percentage see art as more a form of personal expression, and don’t seek to make it a primary source of income. · Generally, artists receive a low income return from their art; almost half earned less than $5000, a quarter less than $1000 – and many of these earned nothing. Only a very small percentage (8%) earned $25,000 or more. · Given the difficulties of earning a substantial income from art, most artists, even those with art as their primary source of income, engage in many other types of work. Many engage in related fields, such as doing graphic design or teaching art, though more commonly artists work in non-arts related professions to provide the income to support their art. Such occupations are very varied, from carpentry and construction to working in management, marketing, and as a doctor and psychologist. · The artists vary greatly in their time making art, averaging about 20 hours a week for all artists. However, artists spend much less time on marketing and sales – only about 4 hours a week. But those who spend more time on selling find this generally pays off in sales: they generally make more than those who spend less time on selling. · In promoting their art, the artists consider their participation in Open Studios especially important. The other major promotional activities include reaching out to friends and relatives and looking to client referrals. Next in importance are making contacts with business and work associates and contacting galleries. Though a majority of artists have a Web site or plan to create one, this is not considered a particularly valuable source for sales. · The artists feel the main ingredients needed for success are to do good work, work hard, and have commitment, determination, persistence, and discipline. Additionally, they feel it necessary to get exposure and promote yourself, network and seek support from artists and others, have good luck, and stay upbeat, positive, and true to yourself. · In defining their community, the artists identify most strongly with Oakland and then with the East Bay and San Francisco Bay area. To become part of this community, besides participating in Open Studios and Pro Arts, the artists mostly commonly participated in local shows, developed friendships and networked with other artists, and joined organized groups of artists. · Generally, the artists notice few differences among artists in different parts of Oakland or in other areas of the East Bay, or Bay Area. Mostly they stress the great diversity of styles and individual interests of different artists, though a few noticed some pockets of differences, such as concentrations of ethnic artists with other styles. · For support, the artists turn especially to other artists, followed by individual and Pro Arts. Among the major types of additional assistance and support they most wanted was more money, more sales, more shows, exposure, and gallery representation. · The major differences between female and male artists were these: o The female artists were generally older and working as artists longer – an average of 22 years compared to 17 years for the males. o The female artists tended to have a higher level of education, with more graduate degrees. o The male artists were slightly more likely to do sculpture, photography, and metal work. o The male artists were slightly more likely to see art as an occupation, whereas the female artists were slightly more likely to see it as a form of personal expression. o While a large majority of both male and female artists do not see their art work as a primary source of income, the male artists were slightly more likely than female artists to regard their art in this way. The male artists also spent more time in making their art each week – about 24 versus 17 hours. o Both the male and female artists spent relatively little time selling their art – about 4 hours a week, though a slightly larger percentage of female artists spent no time at all in selling. o In the case of promotion, females are more likely to promote their art to friends and relatives, males are more apt to look to business and work associates. The male artists are also much more likely to have a Web site. · It is difficult to draw any conclusions about differences due to ethnicity, because of the small number of artists of non-European backgrounds in the survey. However, some of the differences include these: o There are some differences in the types of art done in different groups. Painting seems to be especially important for the Asian-American artists; Latino artists appear to have a higher level of interest in mixed media; and the interest in photography is highest for the African-American artists. o European-American artists are somewhat more likely than others to see their involvement in art as an occupation. They also generally do better in both sales and making their art a primary source of income. o The European-American artists rate Open Studios as much more important than the artists of other groups, while the members of other groups give higher ratings to referrals from clients and from friends than European-Americans. · The major relationships between income and other factors are these: o The older artists tend to earn more, in that the artists earning $10,000 a year or more are 40 or older. o The artists earning $25,000 a year or more are more likely to concentrate on painting and photography than other artists, perhaps because painting and photography have a wider sales potential.
o
The artists earning more tend to be more likely to see art
as an occupation, and they spend more time both making and selling their
art. INTRODUCTIONHow do new artists become part of a local community of artists? What do they do to become successful in achieving their goals as an artist? What sources of support do they look to? What types of assistance do they need to help them achieve success? Those questions were used in framing this research to study how new artists become part of the arts community in Oakland. In conducting this study, I worked as a research intern in an applied anthropology M.A. program at Cal State, Hayward, with Pro Arts, a non-profit educational organization based in Oakland, California. Pro Arts has about 1000 artist members, most of them new and emerging artists, who represent a subset of the many new and emerging artists in Oakland. While about two-thirds of their membership is composed of women artists in their 40s and older of European backgrounds, it was not possible to conduct a much broader study of the whole Oakland community of artists – perhaps 5000 or more artists -- during a 2 month internship. Thus, I focused on this subset – and many of their goals, sources of support, and needs of assistance will parallel those of other artists. The results of this study will also be useful for Pro Arts in helping them to better serve the needs of their artist members. The survey was distributed to Oakland artists who participated in the East Bay Open Studios 2002, which is the organization’s largest event, put on annually for 20 years. This year there were 497 artists, about 250 of them with studios in Oakland, and the survey was distributed to the artists when they picked up their work and were asked to fill out a Pro Arts Evaluation Survey to assess the event. These survey results are based on the questionnaires that were turned in by 74 of the Oakland artists – about 30% of the Oakland artists in the event. Most of the artists turned in their questionnaires on the day they picked up their art, and about a dozen others mailed them in over the next two weeks. The analysis includes a breakdown of the artists based on which section of Oakland they are in – North, West, Central, or East Oakland in order to explore any differences in different communities of Oakland. In addition, the analysis looks at three other key factors affecting the artist’s participation in the arts community –gender, ethnicity, and income from art. Although the number of artists from ethnic backgrounds is very small – and some did not answer some of the questions, making the number of respondents even smaller, I included an analysis based on ethnicity, since Pro Arts is especially interested in the responses of these members, due to an interest in outreach to involve more ethnic artists. But any analysis of the breakdowns by ethnicity is only suggestive, because of the low numbers. Additionally, the study explores how the income artists earn from their art is related to the time they spend making and selling their art, their backgrounds, their goals, their sources of support, and their needs for assistance. Besides the statistical analysis, the study draws on the comments the artists made about their goals, perception of the arts community, and their efforts to gain recognition. Since only some of the artists voluntarily responded to these open-ended questions, these responses have been treated as qualitative data, with only some brief descriptive data about the artists making the comments noted, such as the artist’s city and gender.
Finally, the analysis concludes with a
discussion about: 1) how these findings have contributed to developing a
pilot research project based on conducting a small number of in-depth
interviews with both emerging artists to learn about their needs and with
more established full-time or successful Oakland artists to learn how they
have achieved their success; and 2) how these findings might be used to
develop a larger study of the artist community in Oakland or other cities. METHODOLOGYIn designing the study, I originally planned to do a series of in-depth interviews with 20 artists, selecting 4 from each section of Oakland, based on selecting those who were most successful or who engaged in art full-time, after I briefly met with about 125 artists at their Open Studio receptions on June 1-2 and June 8-9. Then, I had planned to use these interviews to help design the questionnaire, which would be distributed to the Pro Arts members in Oakland with the help of Pro Arts. However, after
I developed a preliminary interview guide for these in-depth interviews,
it appeared more feasible to distribute the questionnaires at the same
time that the Pro Arts staff distributed an Evaluation Survey to the
artists participating in Open Studios. Thus, the research design was
changed to turn the preliminary interview guide into the questionnaire,
and then I planned to use these results to guide the in-depth interviews,
though eventually these were scaled back to include interviews with 6
artists – 3 emerging artists, 3 more established, full-time, or successful
ones -- in pilot interviews for a possible future expanded study. This
approach was used given the two-months time frame to conduct the research,
which was refocused on doing an in-depth analysis of Pro Art’s Open
Studios Evaluation and the Oakland Artists Survey. Questionnaires Used in the Analysis Given the change in focus, I turned most of the questions from the interview guide into a series of questions which the artists could answer by checking off their preferences and ranking or rating different activities and sources of support. Additionally, there were some open-ended questions, so the artists could respond freely and raise issues and topics not included in the other questions. These questionnaires, titled: “Additional Questions on Artists in Oakland” were duplicated and attached to the EBOS Evaluation Forms for the Oakland artists. While all of the Oakland artists were asked to complete the survey for Oakland artists along with their EBOS 2002 Evaluation Forms, many artists did not either complete or mail in their forms, and some artists picked up their work late or not at all, so they did not receive any survey forms. Additionally, about 20 Oakland artists who submitted Evaluation Forms did not fill out the survey, and four artists sent in their forms two weeks after the survey analysis was completed, so their surveys could not be included. Ultimately, completed surveys were obtained from 74 artists – a response rate of 30% of the 250 Oakland artists participating in Open Studios. This rate is just slightly below the 38% rate of return for all artists responding to the EBOS evaluation, which is approximately the same rate of return Pro Arts has experienced in its past years of evaluating the Open Studios event.
Thus, while this report describes the
respondents as Oakland artists, these results are based on only the
artists responding to the survey, with an inference that their responses
reflect the views in the total Open Studios population of artists in
Oakland. However, since this is a self-selecting sample – the artists who
picked up their art and voluntarily filled out the survey -- not a random
sampling, it could be affected by this bias. (For example, the artists
filling out the survey could be those who had a better experience at the
Open Studios and so were more willing to fill out the Evaluation and then
complete the survey attached to the Evaluation Form.) The data was analyzed using an Access spread sheet for entering the data. As appropriate, the responses were entered as numerical, text, or yes/no responses. While most of the respondents did not add in comments, the questionnaires of those who did were flagged for a more in-depth analysis. Once the data was entered in Access tables, a series of queries were used to look at the relationship of various factors based on the responses of all artists in Oakland and at the breakdowns based on their studio location in North, West, Central, and East Oakland, gender, ethnicity, and income. The artist’s studio location was identified by the way Pro Arts divided up Oakland into four sections – G (North), H (West), I (Central and Downtown), and K (East Oakland). The four Oakland artists who were included among the artists in Emeryville and Southwest Berkeley (Section F) were grouped with the West Oakland artists.
Finally, the query results were
used to create a series of Excel charts showing these results. Since not
all artists answered all questions, the bases for the responses of some
questions will be less than the total artists in the survey, since the no
answer responses were eliminated, so the results would more clearly show
the differing responses of the artists who did answer. Some Additional Considerations in Analyzing the Data The questionnaire analysis revealed a few problems in questionnaire design and categorizing answers that might have been resolved had there been time to test out the questionnaire with a pilot project. Then, the questions might have been modified or the responded provided with a further explanation for how to respond to the question. In addition, the comments of the artists revealed that a few other categories should have been included in some of the questions, as noted in the discussion of the findings. Here I wanted to briefly mention the problems that came up in the data coding and analysis and how I dealt with them. · In the question about gender, two artists wrote in that they did not considered themselves either male or female, but identified themselves as “transgendered.” While they might have been classified as “male” based on my meetings with them at their studio, I used their self-identifications, and put them in a third gender category. As a result, their responses are included in the study, but they are not included in the comparison of males and females. · The questions asking artist to rank items order of importance (implying that they should use 1 for their most favored item, 2 for their next favored item, and so on) and rate items based on their importance (based on giving ratings from 0-5) were confusing to the artists. These terms should have been clarified and probably it would have been better to use one system – based on the 0-5 ratings – and provide a Likert-type scale of choices, so the artists could check or circle their choice. The comments by the artists also suggested additional categories that should be included in future research on this topic. While some artists correctly made the expected distinctions, many did not or simply checked off or rated one or two of the items that were most important to them. Accordingly, I compensated in the analysis as follows. o Where artists clearly made rankings and ratings as expected, I used their responses as is. o When artists checked off the goals items to be ranked from 1 on down or added additional items, I gave each item checked a “2”, since there were 3 items listed. (Actually, there should have been 4 or 5 items included here, since artists identified a number of additional goals in their comments; the items used in the questionnaire were based on a discussion with Pro Arts members about what they thought were the most important goals of the artists). o When artists checked off items that they were supposed to rate from 0-5 or when they appeared to rank these items instead of using the rating system, I gave each item checked a “3”, since this was the mid-point of the 0-5 rating scale and gave any items not checked a 0. o When artists did not answer a question, I did not enter any data, so their responses would not be included in the results for that question.
Finally, I reviewed the
comments made by some artists to look for common themes and patterns.
However, I did not break these down by location, gender, ethnicity, and
income, because there were too many different responses and too few
artists responding to meaningfully categorize these responses. Also, it
was not meaningful to analyze these responses statistically, since these
were voluntary responses by a small number of artists who choose to
respond. Thus, I have only included used these comments in discussing
the findings, though I have characterized the respondents with a brief
mention of background information about their gender, age, ethnicity,
and/or income, as relevant. The findings are presented in the following sections: · An overview of findings based on the responses of all the artists in the different areas of Oakland, including a discussion of their comments · Differences based on the artist’s gender · Differences based on the artist’s ethnicity
·
The relationship between
income and other factors, such as the artist’s goals and background. MAJOR FINDINGS
The major findings from the Oakland
Artists Survey are these, based on location, gender, ethnicity, and the
artist’s income from art. Characteristics of the Artists Participating in the Survey The participating artists were distributed throughout Oakland in much the same distribution of artists participating in Open Studios, where 48 (19%) from North Oakland (H), 62 (25%) from West Oakland (H), 57 (23%) from Central Oakland (I), and 80 (32%) from West Oakland (K) – a total of 247 Oakland artists. In the survey of 74 artists the comparable figures are 20% from North Oakland, 24% from West Oakland, 19% from Central Oakland, and 36% from East Oakland. (Chart 1). Thus, those responding are broadly representative of the larger Open Studios group. This group is a subset of the larger Oakland community of visual artists, which is a much larger and more diverse group, of about 5000-10,000 artists, depending on how artists are defined or define themselves. It can be hard to know this number precisely, since visual artists term themselves “artists” in many different ways, and they range from full-time or established practitioners to the occasional artist who engages in different art forms on an occasional basis, but still describe him or herself as an artist. Then, too, various groups of non-artists – from academics to journalists to the consumer going to an art gallery or reading about art in the paper – characterize artists in different ways. Plus, some artists change over their lifetime in whether they are practicing art or not. For instance, several artists noted on their questionnaires that they became artists as children, put their art aside for many years, and took it up again later on. Some commented that they went back and forth in practicing as an artist, and now were involved again. Overall, like Pro Arts artists and Open Studios participants as a whole, the respondents were predominantly female artists, 40 and older, from European backgrounds, and quite well educated, with some variation in different areas of Oakland. Most respondents have also been artists for many years – at least 10 or more years for the vast majority of artists, and slightly over half have been artists for 20 or more years. This artist profile is quite different than that of artists in Oakland as a whole, since it under-represents the artists who are male, under 40, and particularly from the ethnic groups which make up about 60% of Oakland, though Pro Arts is seeking to reach out to these unrepresented groups. More specifically, the respondents can be characterized thus: · In Oakland as a whole, 71% are females and 26% are males, plus 2 respondents (3%) characterized themselves as “transgendered”. The greatest percent of female artists are clustered in North Oakland (87%) and Central Oakland (92%), with the smallest percentage in West Oakland (47%) – the one area where males are a slightly larger percentage of the responding artists (53%). (Chart 2). · Overall, the vast majority of respondents – 85% -- are 40 and older. The largest age group is from 40-49 (34%), while artists 50 and older comprise 41% of the group. Slightly over 10% are 60 or older. There is quite a bit of variation from area to area in Oakland, though in general, the youngest artists (those under 40) are based in North Oakland (41%), compared to 16-27% in other areas of Oakland. By contrast, the oldest artists (those 50 and older) are concentrated in North and East Oakland (46-47%) compared to (34-36%) in other areas. (Chart 3) · The artists have spent an average of 21 years in the field – 80% have been artists for 10 or more years; 56% for 20 or more years; and 43% for 25 plus years. Only 10% describe themselves as very new to art (from 1-4 years). The artists in North Oakland report the longest number of years as artists (24.3 years), while those in Central Oakland claim the smallest number of years (15.9). (Charts 4 and 5). The more specific percentage variations in different areas are described in Chart 5. · Ethnically, the vast majority of respondents (80%) are white artists from European backgrounds. Only 3-6% of the artists come from each of the ethnic groups – much smaller than the representation of their ethnic groups in Oakland. Though artists of African, Asian, and Latino backgrounds represent about 15-25% each of the ethnic make-up of Oakland, their representation among Pro Arts artists and in the study is much less – there were only 4 African and 4 Latino artists (6% each) and only 3 Asian and 2 Mixed background artists (3% and 5% respectively). While the neighborhood breakdowns in Oakland reflect to some extent the ethnic distinctions in Oakland, many European artists have moved to West and East Oakland because of the lower rents, availability of large warehouse spaces, and increasing costs of rents in San Francisco. As a result, the highest percentage of artists is not only in North Oakland (79%) but in West and East Oakland (84-96%). But otherwise, the ethnic breakdowns do reflect some of the ethnic characteristics of those neighborhoods, with a small percentage of Latino and African artists in North Oakland, Latino and Asian artists in West Oakland, Mixed and African artists in East Oakland, and Asian, Latino, and African artists in Central Oakland. (Chart 6). ·
Mostly, the respondents are a well-educated group, since
almost 90% have a college degree, and 54% have graduate degrees. None of
the artists indicated having only a high school degree. Within Oakland,
the highest percentage of those with graduate degrees is in West and East
Oakland (61-69%), possibly due to the concentration of artists with
European backgrounds. They may be more likely to get higher degrees than
members of other ethnic groups, other than Asians (who are only a very
small number in this study). Those with the lowest level of education are
in Central Oakland: 25% with some college, compared to 9-13% in other
areas. (Chart 7) The artists are involved in making so many different types of art that it is difficult to categorize what different artists do. Making categorization even more difficult is that many artists engage in making multiple types of art, and they change the focus of their art over the course of their careers, from year to year, and even from month to month or day to day. Still, certain types of art are most important to the artists generally, based on their ratings of five major categories of art – painting, sculpture, metal work, photography, and mixed media. In addition, based on the artists’ comments, many artists are involved in printmaking and drawing, and these art forms should have been added to the categories listed. Of the listed categories, painting is far and away the most important (with a 2.8 rating), with mixed media a distant second (a 1.3 rating). Relatively few artists are involved with sculpture (.9), photography (.8), or metal work (.4), though a reason for the low interest in sculpture might be because Pro Arts offers little space for large pieces, and so sculpture is de-emphasized. (Chart 8) There are slight differences in ratings for different types of art in different areas. While painting is rated most highly in all areas, particularly in East Oakland (3.3) sculpture and metal work have a much higher rating in East Oakland, possibly because of the larger studio space available at lower rents for artists in this area. (Chart 8). Apart from these few generalities, what stands out the most about the types of art being done is the difficulty of making any generalities, because the artists do so many different types of art and describe their work in many different ways. For example, here are the many ways that artists doing painting describe what they are doing: - Abstract painting - Figurative - Figurative oil, figurative acrylic - Oil painting - Oil – representational - Painting – political, ethnic - Ritual painting - Representational landscapes - Folk painting - Painted furniture - Photo paintings Many artists also list multiple types and combinations of work, such as in these listings: - Cast paper, beeswax - Drawing, acrylics, collages - Figurative, oil, drawing, printmaking - Mixed media, collage, photo transfers, acrylics - Mixed media, painting, drawing, installations, functional art - Oil paintings, drawings, painted eggs - Oil, pastel, urban-industrial landscapes - Painting, enamel on metal, stained glass - Painting, multimedia, assemblage - Painting, multimedia, collage - Painting, paper, acrylic, photography, film, mixed media, collage - Sculpture, paper mache, found things - Watercolor, digital prints, mixed media - Watercolor, painting, mosaic - Watercolor, pencil, ink, photocopy, transfer In short,
just as art is done for many purposes by different artists and varies
greatly as a form of creative expression, so such differences are
reflected by the Oakland artists surveyed in the extremely varied nature
of their work. Just as the artists vary greatly in their type of work, so do they vary greatly in their goals, interest in art, stage of development, and commitment. In fact, many artists had difficulty putting themselves in the research categories, because they had so many varied perspectives and ways of conceiving of their identity as an artist. In fact, one of the Pro Arts volunteers who helped to distribute the questionnaires expressed this frustration as she took the survey. She paused for a moment in taking to say: “I just think answering all these questions is ridiculous. I always have trouble with surveys because your responses are supposed to fit in little boxes. Well, mine don’t.” Yet even after she expressed this view, she tried her best to fill out the survey, before she helped to give it out to others. Many other artists appeared to have similar difficulties with the restrictions of the survey, so they added comments to create new categories, explain their answer to a question, or object to a particular question. Generally, though, with respect to goals, the artists throughout Oakland and in the different sections were similar in considering the three goals listed on the survey – visibility, recognition, and sales -- of about equal importance. However, different artists placed different priorities on these goals. Some felt visibility or recognition were most important; others identified sales as most important; and some ranked all of the goals of equal importance or thought they were all important. As one artist noted: “They are all important.” (Chart 9) Significantly, in their comments, about a third of the artists noted that other goals besides the three listed were of great importance to them. Had these goals been included on the questionnaire, many other artists might have noted their importance, too. In particular, the artists identified these goals of special importance: - spiritual or personal growth, identified with such terms as “spiritual,” “transcendence,” “transform consciousness,” and “healing self and others”; - creating good work and further developing their skills, identified by comments such as: “improving my art,” “Making strong work,” “making work,” “developing and maturing my work,” “do the finest work I can,” “paint every day,” and “accomplish something memorable;” - being able to influence and impact others with their art, reflected in comments such as: “chance to touch/impact people,” “get people feeling, thinking, talking, looking;” - becoming part of a community of artists, reflected in comments like: “share with the community,” “community,” and “make contacts with other artists;” - achieving a balance of doing their art and making a living doing it, expressed in comments such as: “to make 50% of my living from art”, “to see this as a life style and make art,” and “to do art so some is for sale, some is for awareness;” - gaining day-to-day practical results, such as noted by one beginning artist who said her goal was “to have more work”, while another asked for “repeat customers.” These varied goals were reflected in the artists’ multifaceted interests in art, based on whether they regarded their involvement more of an occupation, vocation, or personal interest. While a third of the artists did identify it as more of an occupation (35%), another third (30%) indicated that it was more of a vocation (30%), and the remaining artists had varying ways of characterizing their interest. Some said it was more personal; others identified a mix of interests; and some passionately noted that they considered art “my life.” (Chart 10) Thus, while about two-thirds of the respondents did choose among the three categories, their comments suggest it is more accurate to see an interest in art as reflecting multiple interests, with different ones more important at different times, as noted in these comments by a number of the artists who had trouble choosing among the three categories or added their own descriptions. - “A life” - “All three – a life expression and a livelihood.” - “My life” - “Occupation – vocation – personal interest” - “Occupation, maybe vocation” - “Vocation – personal – occupation (hope)” - “Vocation, then occupation, then personal” - “My interest is personal and spiritual.”
- “My
interest is personal. It’s a healing for the soul.” So how did these artists view their current stage of development and how did they become artists? The majority (53%) saw themselves as emerging artists, with a few noting that they were new artists or that they were unsure if they were still emerging or entering the mid-career stage. Most of the others characterized themselves as mid-career (41%), while a few others described their career more as a process, such as noting that it was a “life-long development” or explaining that they were “re-emerging” or that their art was something they did “forever.” (Chart 11). Yet, even while the majority described themselves as emerging, as a group, the respondents indicated that they had spent many years as artists – 20.6 years as previously noted (Chart 4), while 43% had been at it for 25 years or more (Chart 5) – perhaps reflecting the difficulty of gaining visibility and recognition in a very crowded field. These stages of development vary in different areas of Oakland. The newer artists are concentrated in Central and East Oakland (60-67%), followed by West Oakland (50%). By contrast, about two-thirds of the North Oakland artists (62%) viewed themselves as mid-career. Perhaps a reason for these differences is that many newer artists have gravitated towards the lower rent and warehouse areas of West, Central, and East Oakland, whereas more of the North Oakland artists, working out of their own homes or retail stores, are more established. In turn, these patterns are reflected in the average years the artists have been in the field as described earlier (Chart 4). As previously noted, the North Oakland artists have averaged 24.3 years in the field, compared to 20.6 years in Oakland as a whole. For many artists, the decision to turn to art was made early on – about a quarter (25%) made the decision as a child, and another quarter (28%) made the decision as a teenager or just after graduation from high school or college. Most of the remaining artists decided in their 20s or 30s (28%), though a substantial minority (14%) made the commitment in their 40s or older. And then there were a few who made the commitment at varying times, reflecting their varying career paths in an out of the field, such as one artist who said she made the commitment as a child, but then abandoned it until later. A few others noted how they made the commitment at various times in their lives – as a child, as a college graduate, and then later in life as one noted, or as a child and then later in her 40s. (Chart 12). With some variation, this overall pattern is true throughout Oakland with about half of the artists making the commitment to be an artist as a child, teenager, or after their graduation from school. To acquire their skills as an artist, the respondents reported participating in a wide variety of types of training, and most (about 75%) reported multiple combinations. In general, the types of training listed as choices – being primarily self-taught, going to art school, being an art major in college, or studying with individual teachers -- were about equally popular, engaged in by 36-43% of the artists, with a slight variation from section to section. (Chart 13) For example, a much smaller percentage of North and West Oakland artists were self-taught (27-28%), while the greatest percentage of self-taught artists was in Central Oakland (57%). By contrast, the East Oakland artists were much more likely to turn to individual teachers (52%), while the Central and West Oakland artists were much less likely to do so – only 22-29%. (Chart 13) In addition, a number of artists noted that they gained training by participating in workshops and taking classes, which might have been true for other artists, though they didn’t write this in. A couple of other types of training which a few artists mentioned was learning from one’s family -- noted by one woman who descended from a family of artists, while one man stated that he had worked as an apprentice. Among the
many combinations of approaches, the most common were going to art school
and being an art major in college. Many artists noted a combination of
art school, being a college major or taking classes, and studying with
teachers. Some artists who didn’t go to art school, got their training
through a mix of majoring in art in college and individual teachers. A
few noted different types of work experiences, such as working in
advertising. Others who were primarily self-taught gained their training
from a variety of sources, including attending art school, majoring in art
in college, studying with individual teachers, and taking classes. One man
who was primarily self-taught combined this with working as an apprentice. Although almost all the artists hope to make art their primary source of income or regard it as their primary source now (86%), for the vast majority (66%), this is only a hope for the future. Only 14% of the artist don’t have making art their primary source of income as their goal. (Chart 14). A primary reason for this result, as many artists commented, is that their primary interest in art is for personal reasons (14%), as previously noted (Chart 10). Some of them even viewed creating art as a spiritual quest, so earning a living from their art is not very important to them. But others who do want to make this a primary income source find it a difficult struggle, as is common for many artists generally. While not all artists answered the question about their income, those that did (82% of the artists) paint a bleak picture of the low income return from art. Almost half of the artists earned less than $5000, 28% earned under $1000, and many of these earned no money at all, as noted in their responses on the Open Studios Evaluation Survey. (So a category for “No Income” should be included in the future). Only a quarter of the artists earned over $5000 (26%); and only 8% earned $25,000 or more. (Chart 15). There are some significant differences within Oakland, too, in that the artists in East Oakland were much more likely than artists in other areas to see art as both their primary source of income and goal (96% versus 86% for Oakland as a whole). These artists are also more likely to report higher earnings. About 16% of the East Oakland artists reported they earned $25,000 or more compared to 0-7% elsewhere in Oakland, and 28% earned $10,000 or more versus 7-9% elsewhere. Perhaps a reason for this difference is because many of the artists who have moved to East Oakland are more focused on being artists as a professional goal. (Chart 15). Yet, given the difficulties of earning a substantial income from art, most artists, even those with art as their primary source of income, report engaging in many other types of work. A great many are in related fields, such as doing graphic design or teaching art at various levels from teaching children and middle school to teaching in college or an art school. Some of the other arts-related occupations mentioned include: - art modeling - artisan in a foundry - draw storyboards - create faux finishes for homes and businesses - graphics editor - interior design - MFT/art therapist - museum preparation - work in an gallery - art gallery coordinator A few report being retired from arts related careers, such as being a retired art teacher. More commonly, though, the artists indicated they work in non-arts related professions provide income to support their art. Among the many different occupations mentioned were: - carpentry/construction - co-manage a bookstore - data entry - gardening - investment manager’s assistant - work in a law office - librarian - make-up, hairstylist - management - market research - medical doctor - non-profit work, putting on special events - performance - plumbing contractor - programming - psychologist - public defender - math tutor - self-employed financial consultant - sell vintage jewelry - yoga teacher Several artists noted that they have multiple types of work, such as one woman who engaged in massage, healing, decorating and trade shows; a second, who combined care giving and teaching with graphic arts work; and a third who taught and had a private income. Three married women gained support from their husband’s income, plus one used her savings, too. In short,
just as the artists have multiple career paths to become artists, along
with multiple interests, goals, and types of training, so they have
multiple ways to supplement any income from art. They have both
art-related and non-related occupations, and some have other sources of
income, from supportive husbands to savings and private funds. From Making Art to Sales and Promotion How much time do artists spend on their art compared to selling and promoting it, and what are their major ways of doing this marketing and promotion? In general, artists spend relatively little time in the business or marketing of art, despite the importance of these activities to gain the visibility, recognition, and sales most artists want, along with making art their primary source of income. A key reason for this limited business activity, reflected in the artists comments and interviews, is that they don’t like the business side of the art business. They like making their art, not marketing and promoting themselves. This lack of interest in the business of art is reflected in the fact that artists spend about 4 times as many hours making art (19.3 hours on average) versus selling it (5.1). In percentage terms, they spend nearly 80% of their time making art; only 20% selling it. (Chart 16). This distinction is particularly great in East Oakland, where artists spend about 5 times as much time making art (24.4) as selling it (4.5 hours). However, there is a great variation among individual artists in how they spend their time making and selling art, reflecting the great variation in their commitment, interest, and goals. As Chart 16a indicates, about a quarter of the artists (24%) average 1-9 hours a week making their art, while most of the rest average 10-19 hours (30%) or 20-29 hours (30%). Only a relatively small percentage (16%) devote 30 or more hours to creating their art work. But this is just an overall average. As many artists noted, the time they spend on making their art varies greatly from week to week and month to month. For some, this is because they are fitting in their art work between other activities. For others, this variation is because they do their art when they feel inspired to do something. Thus, it is hard to pin down averages. These times spent making art vary for different sections of Oakland, with the East Oakland artists spending the most time (65% spend 20 or more hours a week) whereas the artists in North and Central Oakland spend the least time – 74-75% spend less than 20 hours a week compared to 53% in West Oakland, and 35% in East Oakland. (Chart 16a) In terms of sales, the great majority of artists – 67% -- spend less than 5 hours a week on selling their art, and 10% report spending no time at all. Only a third of the artists (33%) spend 5 hours or more, and only 12% devote 10 or more hours to this task. (Chart 16b). While there is great variation in the different areas of Oakland in how much time artists spend on sales, perhaps the most notable difference is that a much higher percentage in North Oakland spend no time at all in selling their art – 23%, compared to 4-13% in the rest of Oakland. When it comes to what they do for promotion, the artists mainly use a few key strategies. As might be expected, since the respondents all participated in Open Studios, the artists generally rated this participation as a very important strategy, giving this their highest rating (2.9). This rating was especially high in North and East Oakland (3.1-3.3), and it was lowest in West Oakland (1.9), though still the highest rating there. (Chart 17). The other major promotional sources included reaching out to friends and relatives (2.2) followed by client referrals. Additionally, the artists found their contacts with business and work associates and contacting galleries next in importance (1.1-1.4 ratings). Much less important was putting on shows in local retail establishments, such as coffee shops, contacting collectors, or going to networking events. Least useful were placing newspaper ads, sending out press releases, or contacting radio or TV. (Chart 17) Some artists also noted a few other promotional strategies they used, which might be included on future questionnaires to determine their importance to artists generally. Among the other strategies mentioned were: - art school referrals - participating in or attending other shows and exhibits, including juried shows - contacting art consultants - contacting dealers and agents - sending slides and promotional packets to galleries - contacting museums - participating in festivals and street fairs - developing and contacting people on their mailing list - using the Internet for contacts and promotion - creating a Web site How valuable was having a Web site? In the East Bay Open Studios Evaluation[1], most artists reported that they didn’t get any sales through their Web site, and those who had a Web site said they got relatively little value for promotion or sales from it or weren’t sure. Only a half-dozen artists firm stated that their Web site had been valuable in generating sales or promotion for them. By contrast, most of those who had sites and commented on the value of their site felt it contributed little to sales or weren’t sure, though a few said it was “good for marketing”, a “good tool,” “very helpful,” and it “makes my portfolio available worldwide 24-7.” But more commonly, the artists made comments like these: “I had one for 2 ½ years, but with no results.” “It wasn’t of much value. It was hard to find.” “Not too much (value).” “Not very (valuable).” “People see it, but I don’t get any sales.” “It’s too soon to tell.” “I had 500+ hits, but few sales.” “It’s not valuable for sales, but a quick reference for those who are interested.” Yet, while
the value of a Web site for promoting and selling art might be uncertain,
the majority of the respondents in the Oakland Artist Survey have a site
(41%) or plan to create one within 6 months (21%) – almost a third of the
artists. Only 38% have no Web site and no plans to create one. (Chart
18). In general, the artists are more likely to have a Web site or plan
to create one in North and Central Oakland (71-75%), whereas the artists
in West and East Oakland are the most likely not to have a Web site or to
have no plans to create one (41-49%). Perhaps a reason is that the West
and East Oakland artists have lower incomes and don’t want the expense of
creating and maintaining a Web site, particularly when its value is often
uncertain. Achieving Success and Recognition These efforts to market, promote, and sell their work is part of the goal most artists have for achieving visibility, recognition, and sales. The process also makes them feel a part of the community of artists and gain satisfaction for doing the work, which are both important goals for many artists. When asked more specifically about what was needed for success, the artists suggested a variety of strategies. While a few wondered about the meaning of success – “Define successful?” said one, “What is success,” said another -- most viewed success in terms of gaining visibility/recognition and sales. They offered these key suggestions, which they stated in various ways. Many made several suggestions. Among the most common suggestions were these: - Do good work! Again and again, artists stated this, often using the same or similar words: “Do the work…Do the best work possible, get it out…Make good art…Make great art…Create wonderful art…Make art, think it’s great.” - Work hard. Here artists emphasized the need to put time and effort into producing art, with statements like: “Tireless work…Keep working…Good work and energy… Continuous effort.” Repeatedly artists used the phrase “Hard work” or “Work hard.” - Commitment, determination, persistence, and discipline. Again and again, many artists used these words, singly or in combination. “Have commitment, persistence…Have determination, time, and commitment…Have discipline and commitment…Do good work with determination…You need perseverance and discipline…Never give up…Have tenacity, combined with inspiration, time and luck.” For a few artist, such qualities were necessary to overcome fears and doubts, such as one artist who said: “Go to your studio each day, and overcome your feelings of isolation and doubt.” - Get exposure and promote yourself. Here artists highlighted the marketing/sales side of the business. Although fewer artists made these suggestions, most who did spoke of promotion generally, though a few had specific recommendations. Some typical general comments were: “Hustle…Market yourself well…Have marketing and business acumen…Do promotion….Get visibility…Be committed to the whole business of art, not just the creative side…Make great art, then spend time promoting it…Besides creating wonderful art, engage in aggressive sales…Create art, then get exposure.” Some of the specific suggestions about how to do promotion were: “Keep in the public eye, talk about yourself and your work, do mailings…Enter shows, network, contact buyers…Find your market…Find a local dealer who believe in and promotes your work…Show in a variety of local exhibits…Get free representation…Promote yourself or hire a promoter…” - Network and seek support from artists and others. Fewer artists offered these suggestions, but those who did usually made the suggestion to network or seek support in combination with other recommendations. They made comments such as: “Do good work and make good connections…”Do good work and network”…”Put the art first, handle the business, and join the art community”…”Work hard and connect with other artists”…”Seek out family support and focus”…”Have determination and community”…and simply: “Network.” - Good luck. A few artists pointed up the need for good fortune, too, such as one who said: “Get lucky,” and another who pointed out: “Have a small ambition, luck, and contacts in the art world.” A third commented: “You need hustle, pretty work, luck, being frugal, and supportive relationships.”
-
Stay upbeat, positive, and true to yourself. Finally, a few artists
suggested different qualities artists should have to stay on track, such
as “be authentic, prolific…Be focused. Do quality art with integrity…Be
loving, curious, positive.” Defining Their Artist Community and Ways of Participating and Gaining Recognition The artists were also asked how they defined their community, participated in it, and gained recognition from it. The artists most strongly identified with Oakland (a 2.5 rating) and then with the East Bay and the San Francisco Bay Area (2.1 and 2 respectively). They did not generally identify with Alameda County (.9) or more broadly with Northern California (1) or California (.6). (Chart 19). Despite some variation from section to section, these identifications were generally shared by the artists in different areas of Oakland, with one exception. The artists in West Oakland, closest to San Francisco, identified most strongly with the San Francisco Bay area as a whole (2.4), even more so than with Oakland (2.1). The artists did a number of things to become a part of the arts community, as indicated in their comments. A great many mentioned participating in Open Studios and Pro Arts, which might be expected, since the artists in the survey were all Open Studios participants, and those who filed out the questionnaire were most likely to be supportive of Open Studios and Pro Arts. About a third of the artists who made comments (20 out of 54) noted their Open Studios or Pro Arts participation, and several artists noted they volunteered, too. Some of the other activities frequently mentioned were these: - Participate in local shows, reflected in comments such as: “Shows in the local area, attending local art functions…Show…Entering and going to local art shows.” - Contact or network with other artists, reflected in comments like: “Cultivating individual friendships…Hang out with creative friends…Making contacts, doing things together…Meeting artists through work, friends, and openings…Network with other artists…Friends with many artists; we offer each other mutual support.” - Join organized groups of artists, and here some of the groups the artists mentioned, besides Pro Arts, included TAOLB (The Art of Living Black), the Kala Institute, and City Arts in San Francisco. One artist noted that she was just beginning to join organized artists, while another said she had joined a critique group and a painting group. A third stated that she had become part of an artist support group and participated in a group show. Some of the other ways the artists joined the community were these: - Becoming an advocate for art education in the schools - Being an art model - Going to art discussions, breakfasts, and workshops - Offering an apprenticeship to new artists - Donating art - Attending workshops - Going to art school - Showing at museums - Teaching classes - Writing about art In short, the artists participated in a variety of ways in the arts community, which echoes their multiple career paths, multiple styles, and varying degrees of involvement. As one artist expressed this great variety, “I participate in different stuff.” Another commented that she became part of the community by “speaking to more people.” Another said: “I stay in touch,” and another suggested that the way to become part of the community is to “make art and be a good person.” About half of the artists also noted varying ways that the community helped them in gaining recognition. Besides being active in Pro Arts, many artists participated in local gallery shows, including café shows, group shows, and juried shows. Some found sharing information and resources with other artists helpful, or found that getting support from other artists was an aid to motivation. Some found the interest of friends and family another way to gain recognition. However, when asked about differences among artists in different areas of Oakland, such as in their styles or type of work, most of the artists noticed few differences. Rather, they stressed the diversity of styles for individuals in all areas, which reflects the way individual artists pursue many different paths, art forms, and styles. In fact, many artists found the question hard to answer, resisted the idea of distinguishing styles, or responded with question marks, and most artists didn’t answer this question. Some typical comments were: “It all seems diverse.” “I don’t know whether it is geographical or person to person variation.” “Don’t know.” “No (differences) – only differences in what gets press, exposure.” “I believe stylistic concerns are an artifact of non-linear industrial manufacturing mentality. I believe content and subject to be more important than packaging facilitating consumption.” “I tend to see art schools’ styles rather than regions.” “It’s all wide open and compartmentalized, diverse, all over the place.” “My limited exposure has been in the Latino art community (of Oakland). The art is very eclectic.” “No comment.” “Couldn’t say.” “I am not sure.” “There are so many different kinds of artists everywhere. I don’t feel that the area they come from can be said to be a major influence, although there is some.” “Pluralism reigns. We don’t like no push-pin art.” “I think it’s primarily related to individual differences rather than geographic areas.” Only a small number of artists pointed to some differences characterizing Oakland, the East Bay, the Bay Area, Northern California, or California, as reflected in these comments: Referring to Oakland: “Some ethnically influenced communities.” “Not as strong as the City.” (referring to San Francisco) Referring to the East Bay: “More variety.” “Pockets of African-American figurative.” Referring to the Bay Area compared to other parts of California: “I think the Bay Area and Oakland as a whole has a funk, free form sensibility that is great and should be encouraged.” “I see many sub-communities. I’m not sure how they distribute geographically. Ceramics is big in the Bay Area, especially in Davis. There’s a metal working community around the Crucible in Berkeley. Landscape is big here. There’s another world of graphic artists, animators, and makers of special effects and props, which I presume centers in San Francisco, but also in Marin and the East Bay, due to the local movie industry.” “I feel not informed enough to say. I’ve heard from others that the East Bay artists tend to be more adventurous than those in the Highway 680 corridor who paint flowers and landscapes.” “More of us than anywhere else.” Referring to Northern California compared to Southern California: “More landscapes, more naturalistic work.” “More serious here.” “More commitment” “More landscape.” “This is the notable difference – more media-based, more photo-based, more slick in Southern California.” Referring to California compared to the U.S. “Much brighter – less content oriented.” “More landscape and still life painting, less contemporary art, except for the avant garde.” “Probably more color, pop influence, less restrained, sophisticated compared to East.” “Definitely an emphasis on artists.”
“More nature based.” Sources of Support and Needs for Additional Assistance Finally, the artists were asked about their major sources of support and what additional assistance or support they wanted. Generally, the artists found their strongest support from other artists (2.8), followed by individual teachers and Pro Arts (1.6 each). They found the support of other arts groups less important (.7), and least important was going to workshops and seminars or gaining help from the government (a rating of only .2-.4). (Chart 20). These overall patterns were characteristic of Oakland as a whole, despite some variation from section to section, with one notable standout. Pro Arts got its highest ratings in North Oakland (2.1) and East Oakland (1.7), with a lower than average rating in West Oakland (1.4) and Central Oakland (1.0). When asked what other arts groups they turned to for support, those mentioned were: - Art Ship - Art Span - Berkeley Arts Center - Laney College - California Society of Printmakers - Pacific Rim Sculptors - Richmond Art Center - SNOVA - Somar - Artist Equity - No Limits - Taking the Leap - Women in the Arts - TAOLB (The Art of Living Black) A few artists gained help from a critique group, friends and relatives, and non-artist friends. Though only a few artists noted workshops and seminars as a source of support, some of those who did noted that they found these workshops helpful: - Monotype workshop - Printmaking - Various art classes - Business for artists - Cal Lawyer for the Arts business workshops - Taxes for artists - Taking the Leap program Though few artists turned to government programs, some of the artists who did noted that they benefited from student loans and a cultural funding program in Oakland. One artist, for example, noted that she got a degree in statistics through a government-sponsored student loan program, while another noted that she found the California Arts Council and Oakland’s cultural funding program helpful. What kind of additional assistance and support would the artists most like to get? About half of the artists made comments. Mostly commonly, they asked for more money, more sales, and more exposure and shows, including themed shows that highlighted their style of work. Some asked for more support from galleries and the Oakland Museum. Some stated they wanted support from other artists and more guidance in how to expand beyond Oakland. A few wanted more motivation to promote and market their work, though some who mentioned motivation felt it should be self-generated. Many mentioned a combination of needs. More specifically, some of the artist’s comments on these themes were the following: - More Money “Money” “$” “Financial. To pay an assistant. There’s so much to do other than the making of my jewelry.” “To show and have a consistent income from my art work” “Grant money” “A patron!” “More money available for grants for women artists without the tag of ‘women’ art work.” - More Sales “Sales would be a positive, but my work is non-commercial.” - More Shows and Exposure “The opportunity to expose my work in Pro arts and/or in other galleries.” “More places to show work.” “More exhibition opportunities” “More places to show more – more people interested in helping to promote the work of contemporary living, not famous, artists.” “More local showings and competitions” “Abstract painting/spiritual art type theme shows” “More exposure to people passionate about collecting art” “More shows.” (2 artists) “Art shows – outside festivals.” “Have a bi-annual show of Bay Area artists sponsored by the Oakland Museum.” “Notification of other shows and grants and residencies that would be open to artists at my level (emerging).” “Help promoting my Web site, curators to visit my studio.” “Nationally/internationally recognized juried competitions” “Exhibits, publicity.” - Obtaining Gallery Representation “Gallery representation” (2 artists) “Major gallery representation.” “Gallery exhibitions and collectors.” “On the fly gallery spaces – cooperative.” “Set up a system for getting into galleries.” “Local dealers of integrity” - More Support from Other Artists “Support groups from artists for emotional support. I will do all the rest.” “To be part of a group of like-minded artists.” “I would like to see Pro Arts open to a greater variety of styles. It’s very predictable right now.” - More Programs “Other shows, grants, and seminars through Pro Arts” “Learning how to expand outside of the Bay Area/East Bay. I’m over-exposed locally.” “More interaction, more workshops.” “Right now I just need to keep at it. I need support in the sense of feedback and workshops or information on workshops on how to keep improving my media and exploring other media.” - More Motivation “Mainly I think it is up to myself to get motivated to get slides of my work made and market myself more” “I think it is a personal endeavor.” “I think I need to work on my head more. It’s a little hard to make this shift in thinking and identity.” In short, the
artists seek various kinds of support to meet their major goals of
achieving recognition, visibility, sales, and feeling connected with other
artists who are part of the arts community. The most commonly mentioned
sources of support revolve around getting more gallery representation and
other types of exposure for their work and gaining more money to continue
supporting their work and make a living doing what they love. In turn,
the support of other artists and the training programs provided by Pro
Arts and other sources helps them in gaining the needed support, although
as some artists noted, ultimately it comes down to themselves to provide
the continued motivation to keep going.
What about gender
differences? Do female and male artists differ in their goals, type of
art, participation in the arts community, or in other ways? While male
artists make up only a small percentage of the Pro Arts membership – about
a quarter of the membership and Open Studio participants in Open Studio,[2]
what other differences might there be? For purposes of this analysis, I
excluded two males who identified themselves as being “transgendered,” to
honor their self-identification. Differences in Characteristics One major difference between female and male artists is their location in Oakland. As previously noted in the discussion of artist in the different sections of Oakland, the female artists are much more strongly represented in North Oakland and Central Oakland, where they comprise 87-92% of the artists. By contrast, the male artists are much more concentrated in West Oakland (53%) and then East Oakland (27%). (Chart 2) Perhaps a key reason for this difference is that many of the West and East Oakland artists are more likely to be in warehouses and industrial locations and be younger artists setting up studios in these areas to pursue art as a career goal, which is more characteristic of male artists. By contrast, in North and Central Oakland, many more artists are working out of their homes, often as a personal calling, which is more characteristic of female artists. Another key difference is age, since the female artists are generally older. While about half the female artists are 50 and older (48%), slightly less than a quarter of the male artists are in this age group (23%). Conversely, a higher percentage of males are under 40 – 33% versus only 23% of the female artists. (Chart 21). These age differences are reflected in differences in the length of time females and males have been artists. While the females have been artists an average of 22 years, the males average only 17 years. (Chart 22). The major reason for this difference is that a much larger percentage of females have been artists for 20 or more years – 62% of them, compared to only 44% of the males. A larger percentage of males are also new artists – 26% of them active for less than 10 years compared to 17% of the women. (Chart 23). In terms of ethnicity, there are virtually no differences. Among both females and males, 80-83% are of European backgrounds, and the percentage from other ethnic groups – African, Asian, Latino, and Mixed is very small – 0-7% for each group. (Chart 24). But females and
males differ greatly in their educational background in that the females
generally are a much more educated group. While about the same percentage
in both groups have college degrees – 31-40% for the females and males
respectively – among the females, 62% have graduate degrees, compared to
only 33% of the males – almost double the percentage of males.
Conversely, only a very small percentage of women report only having some
college – 7% -- compared to 27% of the males. (Chart 25). Females and males differ in their type of art, too, though these differences are slight. However, a more extensive listing of different types of art might uncover more differences, since the questionnaire only asked the artists to rate the importance of 6 different types of art, while the artists’ comments indicate many additional types of art which are important to them, most notably printmaking. Both females
and males were similar in rating painting of the highest importance (2.6
and 2.8 respectively) and in their ratings of the importance of mixed
media (1.1 each). But male artists were slightly more likely to do
sculpture (1.1 versus .8) and much more likely to do photography (1.2
versus .6) and metal work (1.2 versus .4). (Chart 26) In turn, these
differences reflect the way males are more generally drawn to more
physical forms of art, as well as work generally, involving strength, such
as sculpture and metal work, or to technical work (such as photography). Differences in Goals and Interests There are few differences between females and males in terms of goals, however. For both, the ratings of the three major goals – visibility, recognition, and sales -- are of about equal importance. (Chart 27). However, female
and male artists differ in their interest in art as an occupation,
vocation, or personal interest. A much higher percentage of males (50%)
think of their art as an occupation (50% compared to 30% of the females);
whereas female artists are more likely to think of their art in personal
terms (15% versus 6% of the males); view it as their life (9% versus 6%);
or have a mix of interests (15% versus 11%). (Chart 28). In turn, these
differences reflect the way males are traditionally raised to be the
producer and provider, and so are more likely to think of art in
occupational terms; whereas women are more apt to be encouraged to express
their emotions and feelings, and so are more apt to see their art in
personal or in “my whole life” terms. Differences in Becoming an Artist When it comes to their stage of artistic development, there are relatively few differences between female and male artists – about half (51-56%) describe themselves as emerging or new artists, and most of the rest identify themselves as being mid-career (42-44%). (Chart 29). However, the female artists were somewhat more likely to make their commitment later in life, reflecting the fact that the female artists are older as a group than the male artist. As Chart 30 indicates, a slightly higher percentage of the male artists determined to become an artist as a child, teenager, or after graduation from high school or college (67% compared to 47% of the women), whereas a higher percentage of women made the decision to pursue art in their 20s or 30s or older – 46% versus 33% of the males. Also, some of the women described how they made a series of changing commitments, such as deciding to become an artist as a child or teenager, then putting art aside for family reasons, and taking it up again in late life (6%), whereas none of the men reported this pattern of back and forth commitments. (Chart 30) There were also
some differences in the type of training they received. While about a
third of both female and male artists were self-taught (33-35%), the
female artists were more likely to seek formal training, especially from
individual teachers. Whereas 39% of the male artists went to art school
or majored in art in college, 46-48% of the females did, and only 28% of
the male artists studied with teachers compared to 42% of the females.
(Chart 31). The female artists may possibly be more likely to take
classes and workshops, since when asked about other types of training,
several female artists noted such participation, whereas none of the male
artists did. By contrast, several of the male artists mentioned work
experiences and apprenticeships. But to determine if these are real
differences, not just do to differences in making a few comments, such
differences in training need to be explored further through a survey
question. Differences in Income and Income Sources In terms of income, the males and females showed relatively little difference in their goals or source of income, in that for large majority – 71-72% art was not their primary source of income, though it was a goal (Chart 32), and the vast majority – 84-86% -- earned less than $10,000 yearly from their art. (Chart 33). But there was a
slight difference in regarding art as a primary or other source of
income. The male artists were more likely to look on art as their primary
source of income (28% versus 19% of the female artists), while 10% of the
female artists and none of the male artists had no interest in making art
their primary source of income. (Charts 32 and
33). In turn, this
difference reflects the greater career and occupational orientation of
male artists compared to female artists, whereas the female artists were
more likely to think of art as a personal form of self-expression, even a
spiritual one. Differences in Making, Selling, and Promoting Art Perhaps because of a slightly greater career orientation versus personal orientation for the male compared to the female artists, the male artists spent slightly more time making their art each week – about 24 versus 17 hours, though both spent about the same amount of time – 5 hour – selling it. (Chart 34) These averages are reflected in the breakdown in hours spent a week making or selling art. While the female artists were more likely to report spending less than 20 hours a week on their art (60% versus 36% of the males), 35% of the males reported spending 30 or more hours, compared to 9% of the women. (Chart 34a). When it comes to selling art, by contrast, there is only minor variation between the females and males in the number of hours spent selling art, though one notable difference stands out. A larger percentage of female artists spent no time at all selling their art (13% versus 6% of the males). Perhaps this difference is because some female artists regard art as more of a form of personal self-expression, so they are less interested in putting time into selling their work. Still, many women are committed to making sales; about a third of both the males and females (33-37%) spend about 5 or more hours a week selling their art. (Chart 34b). In the case of promotion, there are some notable similarities and differences. Both females and males similarly find Open Studios of the greatest importance among the various ways they promote their art (with 3 and 2.4 ratings respectively). And both place equally high importance on client referrals (1.6-1.7 ratings), while they both find networking events of equally lesser importance (.6-.8). Both rarely or never use newspaper ads, press releases, or turn to radio or TV (0-.2 ratings). (Chart 35). But one difference is that female artists are more likely to promote their art to friends and relatives (2.4 compared to 1.8 ratings), while male artists are more apt to look to business and work associates (1.5 compared to 1.0 ratings). This distinction reflects the traditional patterns of women having closer family connections, whereas men are more likely to emphasize work ties. Another difference is that males place a greater importance on promoting their work to galleries than females (1.9 versus 1.2) and collectors (1.2 versus .5), which might help them in working their way up the career ladder in the art world. By contrast, female artist are more likely to turn to local retail establishments, including coffee shops (.6 versus .2), than male artists, a choice which provides local exposure but may have less clout in moving them up the career ladder. (Chart 35). Another major
difference is in having a Web site. The male artists are far more likely
to have a site now (61% versus 31%). Though many female artists do plan
to create a Web site within the next 6 months (29%), a larger percentage
of females have no Web site and no immediate plans to create one (40%
versus 33%). (Chart 36) In turn, this difference may reflect the way in
which males generally have been more quick to embrace the Internet and
technology and have a slightly greater career orientation. Differences in Defining Their Artist Community In defining
their artist community, both the males and females rate Oakland as having
the highest importance (2.6 ratings for both), as might be expected since
they are based in Oakland. But the female artists are more likely to
consider the surrounding areas more important than the male artists,
especially the East Bay and San Francisco Bay Area, which they rate almost
as highly as Oakland (2.4 and 2.2 ratings respectively), whereas the males
give these only 1.4-1.8 ratings). The female artists also feel more of a
connection with Alameda County as a whole (1.1) whereas it barely
registers for the male artists (.2). However, both are similar in giving
their lowest ratings to Northern California and California – ratings from
.6 to 1.0. (Chart 37). Differences in Sources of Support Finally, when it comes to seeking sources of support, both males and females are similar in placing the greatest priority on looking to other artists (2.8-3.2 ratings), and then seeking support from individual teachers and Pro Arts (1.5-1.8 ratings). They both place little importance on the government or workshops and seminars (0-.5). (Chart 38) One major
difference is that the female artists place a higher importance on other
arts groups (.9) whereas these are much less important to the male artists
(.2). Perhaps a reason for this difference is because women are more
likely to join organized groups, just as they are more likely to enroll in
more formal types of training, such as going to art school or majoring in
art in college, whereas males are more apt to work more independently. Differences based on Ethnicity Are there any differences between artists based on ethnicity? Do artists differ depending on whether they come from European-American, African-American, Asian-American, Latino, or Mixed backgrounds? Identifying such differences would be especially interesting in light of the diversity in Oakland, where the non-European population is approximately 60%. Unfortunately, though, since about 80% of the Oakland artists in the survey are from European-American backgrounds, and many artists didn’t answer the ethnicity question, there are extremely small numbers of artists in these categories – only 4 African-Americans, 3 Asian Americans, 4 Latinos, and 2 of Mixed backgrounds. Thus, it is difficult to draw any conclusions about these differences, since percentages can vary widely based on a single response. However, since Pro Arts is particularly interested in learning about ethnic differences in Oakland, because of an interest in reaching out to these groups, I have included a discussion of possible major differences. These have to be considered very preliminary findings, however. A more extensive survey with a larger group is necessary to more clearly indicate any differences. The following represents a brief summary of possible differences. I have excluded those of Mixed backgrounds, since this group is only made up of two artists. - There don’t appear to be any significant differences in the average years as an artist. The average for all groups is between 20-25 years. (Charts 39 and 40). - There don’t appear to be any significant gender differences. The vast majority of artists in all ethnic groups are females – from 70-75% of artists of African, European, and Latino backgrounds, to 100% among the Asian Americans. (Chart 41). - In terms of age, Latinos have the youngest artists – about 50% under 40, compared to 0-33% of the other groups. (Chart 42). - Educationally, it is even more difficult to describe differences, since many artists didn’t answer this question. About the most that can be said is the Latino and Asian groups report the highest percentage of artists with graduate degrees (67-100%), while the African and European artists show the highest percentage of artists with only some college (25% and 13% respectively.) (Chart 43). - There appear to be some differences in the types of art done by members of different ethnic groups. (Chart 44) These differences are the following: § While painting is especially important for the Asian-American artists (3.7), and also rated of much higher importance by European-American and Latino artists (2.8 and 3.3 ratings), the African-American artists have a lower level of interest in that (1.5). § There is no interest in sculpture for the Asian Americans and just a moderate level for the other groups (.9-1.5 ratings). § There is no interest in metal work for the African-Americans and Asians and only a low level of interest for the others (.4-.7). § There is a much higher level of interest in mixed media for the Latino artists (3.0) compared to 1.2-2 ratings for the other groups. § The interest in photography is highest for the African-American artists (1.6), moderate for the European and Latino artists (.7-.8), and zero for the Asian-American artists. - The goals of the artists in the different groups seem to be about the same, fairly evenly divided between visibility, recognition, and sales, though recognition and sales are relatively more important than visibility for the Asian-American artists (here a lower number indicates a higher ranking), as shown in Chart 45. - As for interest, the European-American artists are somewhat more likely than the others to see their involvement in art as an occupation, while the African-American, Asian, and Latino artists are somewhat more likely to define their art work as a vocation. The Latino and Asian artists are more likely than the others to express their interest in personal terms, while some of the African-American and European-American artists pursue art for a mix of interests. (Chart 46). - The major differences in their stage of development is that all of the African-American artists see themselves as emerging or new artists, while only about a third to a half of the other artists view themselves in this category. The Asian-American artists are more likely than the others to view themselves as mid-career. (Chart 47). - As for when they made the commitment to being an artist, the Latino-American artists were more likely than others to make that commitment as a child, while the Asian-American artists were more likely to make this commitment in the 20s and 30s, though one made this as a child. The African-Americans and Europeans generally made this commitment to become an artist later than the others, though some made it as a child. (Chart 48). - To obtain training, the African-American artists were most likely to be self-taught (75% compared to 0-36% of the other artists). The Asian-American and Latino artists were most likely to attend art school (67-75%); the European-American artists less so (45%); and the African-American artists least of all (25%). The Latino artists were least likely to be art majors in college (only 25% compared to 43-67% for the others). About a third to a half of artists in each of the groups got their training from individual teachers. (Chart 49). - When it comes to income, the European-American artists generally do better in both sales and making their art a primary source of income, as shown by the following: § While 23% of the European-American artists describe their art as a primary source of income, none of the African-American, Asian-American, or Latino artists do, although a higher percentage describe this as their goal. While none of the Asian-American or Latino artists consider art neither a primary source of income nor a goal, a small percentage of the African-American and European-Americans do, perhaps because they see art as more of a form of personal expression rather than a source of income. (Chart 50). § Only the European-American artists report making sales of $5000 or more. While 35% are in this income category, with 20% earning $10,000 or more and 11% in the $25,000 and up category, no artists from the other ethnic groups earn this much. Among these groups, the African-American and Latino artists report the lowest income – 40-67% claim earnings of under $1000 a year. (Chart 51). - The groups show some differences, too, in the amount of time spent making and selling art. The European- and Asian-Americans spend the most time making it, averaging 21-22 hours a week, compared to only 11-12 hours for the African-American and Latino artists, perhaps because their low income from art means they have to spend more time working at other jobs. Another differences is that while all groups spend relatively little time selling art – from 2-6 hours, the European-American artists who make the most spend the most time selling – 5.8 hours, compared to 2-3.2 hours for the other groups. (Chart 52). - There appear to be differences in the major ways artists from different ethnic groups promote their art, notably these (Chart 53): § European-American artists rate Open Studios as much more important to them than the artists of other ethnic groups (3.0 versus 1.7-2.5), which might be expected, since the vast majority of artists participating in Open Studios and Pro Arts are European-Americans. § The members of the other groups give generally higher ratings to referrals from clients and from friends and relatives do than European-Americans. § The Latino artists are more likely than members of the other groups to rate the shows with local retailers, collectors, and networking events as more important. § As for galleries, Asian Americans find these especially important (3.3), European-Americans and Latinos of somewhat less importance (1.4-2), and African-Americans much less so (.8). § The Latino artists consider newspaper ads and press releases of much greater importance than the other groups -- .8-1.0 versus 0-.2 ratings for the other groups. - When it comes to having a Web site, the African-American artists are more likely to have one (75% versus 0-40% for the other groups), while the artists from the other groups are more likely to have no Web site and no plans to create one soon (33-50% compared to none of the African-Americans. (Chart 54). - In the case of community identifications, the African-Americans appear to have the strongest identification with Oakland and the East Bay compared to the other groups (4.0 and 3.5 ratings respectively), whereas the other groups have somewhat lower ratings for Oakland and the East Bay. The Latino and African artist have relatively stronger identifications with Northern California and California as a whole compared to the other artists. All of the groups, however, give similar middle-range ratings to the San Francisco Bay Area as a whole. (Chart 55). - As for seeking types of support, these are the major differences. (Chart 56). § All of the artists of different ethnicities look especially to other artists, giving them the highest ratings, though Asian-American and Latino artists are especially interested in the support of other artists. § The African-American artists are more like to look to individual teachers, while the highest ratings for Pro Arts are from European-American and Latino artists. § The support of other arts groups is relatively more important for Asian-American artists. § The African-American artists rate their support from the government much more highly than any of the other groups – a 1.2 rating compared to 0-.2 for the members of other groups.
§
The European-Americans consider workshops and seminars more
important than those in the other groups. The Relationship between Income and Other Factors Finally, what’s the relationship between the artists’ earnings from art and other factors, such as length of time as an artist, the time devoted to making and selling art, promotional activities, and how they see their community? While many artists didn’t answer this question, those that did showed these differences. - There is no clear and consistent relationship between income and years as an artist, since there is a great variation in the number of years as an artist by income group. This ranges from a low of 16.3 years for those averaging $5000-9999 to 28.7 years for those in the $10,000-24,999 category, while those earning under $1000 average 25 years and those over $25,000 20 years. (Chart 57). This lack of a consistent relationship may be because artists engage in art for many different goals, and income is only one of them. This variation by years in the field is illustrated on Chart 58. - There is a relationship between age and income, in that the artists earning $10,000 a year or more are all 40 and older, while there is a wide variation in age groups among artists earning less than $10,000. (Chart 59). - The artists in all income groups have a high level of education – at least two-thirds or more having a college degree or graduate education. However, the artists earning the least amount of money – under $5000 – have the highest level of education – 0-11% of them have only some college, compared to 20-33% of artists earning more. (Chart 60). Perhaps a reason for the high educational level of the low-income artists is that this group includes younger artists who have gotten more education compared to the older artists, who are earning more but have had less formal education. - Those earning $25,000 or more are much more likely than artists earning less to concentrate on painting (3.6 versus 1.1-3.0 ratings for other artists) and secondarily on photography (2.0 versus .2 to 1.2 ratings). (Chart 61). Perhaps a reason for this may be that painting and photography have a wider sales potential. Otherwise, there is a great deal of variation in ratings from group to group. - When it comes to goals, the artists show relatively little difference based on income level. They all consider the three goals of visibility, recognition, and sales of relatively equal importance. (Chart 62) - The artists earning $5000 or more are much more likely to see art as an occupation than other artists (40-60% compared to 23-33%). None of the other $5000 plus artists viewed their art only as a personal interest. Instead, they described it as a mix of occupational, vocational, and personal interests or more broadly as “my life,” as two women earning over $25,000 put it. By contrast, a third of those earning under $1000 (35%) and 11% of those earning $1000-4999 considered art mainly a personal interest. (Chart 63). - In characterizing their stage of development, the artists earning under $1000 are most likely to consider themselves emerging or new artists (67% to 43-54% of the other artists), as might be expected for artists just beginning their career. But surprisingly, 50% of the artists earning $10,000 or more – and even $25,000 or more -- regard themselves as emerging artists, too. (Chart 64). - In considering whether art is their primary source of income or goal, 100% of the artists earning $25,000 or more say it is. By contrast, for the large majority of the other artists, it is not a primary income source but a goal – 71-86% of the artists feel this way. However, a substantial minority of those earning less than $5000 view art as neither their primary source of income or goal (24% of those earning under $1000; 14% of those earning $1000-4999), perhaps because they are involved in art for more personal, non-commercial reasons. (Chart 65). - There is a generally clear and consistent relationship between spending more time making and selling art and making more money. Whereas the artists earning under $5000 spend 14-17 hours making art, the artists earning $5000 or more average 25-27 hours doing this. The artists earning under $5000 also spend much less time selling their art – from 2-4 hours, and those earning under $1000 spend the least time – about 2 hours a week. By contrast, the artists earning $5000 or more, including those earning $25,000 or more -- average between 5-7 hours weekly. (Chart 66). - The breakdown in hours per week highlight the differences in time spent by the lower and higher income artists. The artists earning $5000 or more are much more likely than lower income artists to spend 20 or more hours making their art – 60-100% of these artists do, compared to 30-34% of the under $5000 artists. And when it comes to spending 30 or more hours, the artists earning the most, spend the most time. Only 7% of those earning less than $1000 put in this much time, compared to $25% of the $10,000-24,999 artists and 40% of those earning $25,000 or more. Conversely, those earning under $5000 are much more likely to spend only 1-9 hours a week on their art – 40% of those earning under $1000 spent this little time compared to 26% of those earning $1000-4999, and none of the $25,000 plus artists. (Chart 66a). - The breakdown on hours per week involved in sales show a similar pattern with the higher income artists putting in more time. The artists earning $5000 and up are more likely to spend 10 or more hours selling their art (14-25%) than lower income artists (0-7%), and none of the artists earning under $1000 puts in 10 or more hours. At the other extreme, none of the $5000 and up artists spend no time selling, while 7-29% of the under $5000 artists are in this category. The under $1000 artists are most likely to put no time into sales – 29%, but that may reflect their interest in doing art for personal expression, so they aren’t interested in sales. (Chart 66b) In any case, these figures show that the time and effort put into selling is reflected in higher sales. The higher income artists put more time into selling their work – and that can be a key factor contributing to higher sales. - When it comes to promoting their art, there is a great deal of variation among the artists in different income groups, though none place much importance on newspaper ads, press releases, or seeking radio and TV coverage. The few major distinctions that appear related to income level are these (Chart 67): § While all of the artists, regardless of income, give Open Studios a high rating in importance to them, rating it highest or among the highest categories in importance, artists earning $1000 or more rate it more highly than those earning less than $1000. § Those earning $1000 or less tend to give generally lower ratings for any type of publicity, perhaps because they do less promotion, which is reflected in their low earnings. § While the artists earning $5000 or more don’t consider shows by retailers, including coffee shops, of much importance (reflected in 0 ratings), the artists earning less than $5000 rate them of at least some importance (.5-.8 ratings), though of less importance than other promotional strategies. - There seems to be little relationship between having a Web site or not and income, as shown by Chart 68. Perhaps this is because artists generally, as reflected in their comments in the Open Studios Evaluation Report,[3] do not find that their Web sites contribute much to sales or they are uncertain about its contribution. Then, too, the Web sites may be used for other purposes than generating income, most notably contributing to recognition and visibility. - There seems to be little relationship between income and how the artists view their community, since the ratings generally show wide variation from group to group and no consistent pattern. The one major exception is that the artists earning $25,000 or more a year have the strongest connection with Oakland – a rating of 4 versus 2.2-2.5 ratings among other groups. But then, with only 5 artists in this group, this high rating could easily be inflated by one or two especially exuberant artists. (Chart 69). - There is great variation the types of support the artists consider most important. In all of the groups, the highest ratings go to other artists, individual teachers, and Pro Arts, and the artists are least interested in looking to the government or taking workshops and seminars for help. Perhaps the most notable differences are these (Chart 70): § The artists earning $25,000 or more are especially likely to seek support from other artists – 3.5 ratings, compared to 1.6-2.8 ratings by other artists. § The artists earning $10,000 or more are somewhat more likely to look to Pro Arts for support – 2.2-2.8 ratings compared to 1.4-1.7 for the other groups.
§
The artists earning $25,000 or more tend to think of
workshops as more important than other artists – a rating of 1.0 compared
to 0-.6 for the other artists. Recommendations for further researchThe results of this research show a variety of differences between artists with different backgrounds who have different needs and strategies for achieving success. These findings in turn suggest possibilities for future research. Among these possibilities are: 1. An in-depth ethnographic study based on learning more about the needs of emerging artists and how the strategies for success of more established and successful artists can help them. 2. An expanded survey with a broader population of artists in Oakland, the East Bay, or other cities to learn more about how artists from different backgrounds or doing different types of work become part of the arts community. This survey could also look more closely at the needs of different types of artists, how well these needs are being met, and what else might be done to meet these needs. 3. A series of interviews with successful artists about how they have become successful and have promoted their work that could be developed into books, Power Point presentations, and instructional videos and films. These materials could then be used to show the strategies of these successful artists to other artists, especially those just emerging and seeking help from more experienced artists. Additionally, these interviews might be developed into books, Power Point presentations, and documentary videos and films to appeal to a popular audience interested in learning about what successful artists do and how they achieved their success. 4. A combination of survey and ethnographic research to learn more about the needs of artists in different ethnic and other groups to provide information for writing grants and developing local initiatives to obtain more community support and funding for artistic activity. |
|||
|
Home
|
|||
