STARA - 14.11.2015, Blaðsíða 49

S
T
A
R
A

V
o
l 5
. issu
e
3
. 2
0
15
49
That sounds like a reasonable ex-
planation. If nurses are overworked
and underpaid, health care will
suffer—not because the nurses are
incompetent but because they move
away. Or they find more lucrative
jobs. The whole healthcare system
is undermined.
In Iceland, art is even worse paid
than art criticism. Why are the mu-
seums full of good art then? Per-
haps because artists don‘t measure
their time in billable hours. They
are artists; they don’t look back. Or
because museums thrive on excep-
tions. But, as the saying goes, it is
the exception that proves the rule.
And if artists are not paid, as a rule,
the whole discipline suffers.
There is not much of an art market
in Iceland, but that does not mean
that art is outside the market. The
conservatives may be right that
the quality of the Poetic Edda is
not measured by the poets’ hourly
pay. But they are very naïve if
they think art is some kind of a
freak occurrence, free of economic
principles—free of economic needs.
Think of the downturn in Icelandic
art after the 2008 banking crash.
Not only were the museums re-
duced to bare bones, artists moved
away and artist-run spaces closed
down. The semblance of art market
all but disappeared. Bill Clinton‘s
memorable rebuke comes to mind,
“It’s the economy, stupid.”
What I am trying to get at is that it
is not just a question of justice that
artists be paid for their work. It is
a question of creating a healthy,
thriving working environment.
Artists’ works and artists’ pay have
to be made a real part of the econo-
my. The health of the whole system
depends on it. It is not enough that
the Reykjavik Art Museum pay art-
ists for exhibiting. One institution
should not be turned into an excep-
tion to prove the rule that artists,
in general, work for free. Paying
artists has to become a standard
procedure, throughout. And that is
why I admire the SIM initiative to
get all the museums to the table to
create a framework in common for
discussions with the state, the city
and all the town governments.
When I became the director of the
Reykjavik Art Museum in 2005,
the museum was already paying
artists a stipend for large installa-
tions. It was not a large sum and
it was not consistent for all work.
But it was an acknowledgement of
a need. Whatever increases there
were in the stipend over the next
few years were brought to a halt
by the collapse of the Icelandic
banks. Despite the myth of magi-
cal recovery, the financial crisis is
far from over. But the timing of the
discussion that SIM has put in mo-
tion is driven by necessity. Artists
and art organizations have to join
in the discussion raging throughout
Icelandic society about wages and
equitable distribution of resources.
The danger that the museums face
at this point is not a prolonged
struggle, but permanent downsiz-
ing. And the danger that artists face
is that in that downsizing, their
economic needs are permanently
pushed aside. Therefore, art-
ists and art museums have to join
forces in a common call upon the
owners of the museums to make it
their common ambition to create a
healthy, thriving working environ-
ment for the arts.
“Artists’ works and artists’ pay have to
be made a real part of the economy. The
health of the whole system depends on it.”