STARA - 16.04.2015, Side 51

S
T
A
R
A

n
o
.3
1.T
B
L
2
0
15
51
A few years ago a large debate went on in Sweden
about if and how artists should be paid for lend-
ing their works to public institutions, and if and
how they should be paid for the work of putting
together an exhibition. After much pressure from
artists and a great deal of preparation, a contract,
the so-called MU contract*, was signed in 2009
by the state and the association of Swedish artists,
designers, industrial designers, photographers, and
graphic designers. The purpose of the contract is to
ensure that state institutions pay artists a minimum
fee for displaying art work belonging to them and
to set a standard for payment for the preparation
work. All state institutions have to abide by the
contract, but other institutions that receive public
funding are also advised to follow it.
As the director of Ystads Konstmuseum I proposed
to the Ystad government that funding for the mu-
seum be increased in order to follow the objective
of the contract (Since Ystads Konstmuseum is not
a state institution, it is not bound by the contract).
The museum received half of the money it asked for
in 2011, which meant that I as director could pay
the minimum fee to almost all artists who displayed
their works at the Ystads konstmuseum.
However, payments to artists have an effect on the
museum’s program. One consequence is that exhi-
bitions are far fewer in number and stay open much
longer. It is also more expensive to stage group
exhibitions with many artists, so they have been cut
down. We used to have many small private exhibi-
tions with young artists, but unfortunately we have
had to reduce their number as well. Cutting down
on exhibitions has resulted in less attendance.
The MU contract still has both advantages and
disadvantages, but in order to effect change we have
to make sacrifices. The big picture is in fact simple:
If we cannot afford to pay artists, we cannot afford
to exhibit their works.
Since I first asked for an additional allocation of
funds four years ago in order to pay artists for their
work the attitude has changed. I no longer have to
explain to politicians why artists should be paid for
working with us. The discourse is now at another
level. Artists are more decisive in their demands
and we directors can refer to the contract when we
demand increased funding for the museums.
On the other hand it is clear that we still have a
long way to go. Many public institutions have not
received an additional allocation of funds and do
not abide by the MU contract. Ystads Konstmuseum
still only pays the minimum exhibition fee, like
many other institutions.
Despite this we have taken an important step for-
ward and one thing is clear: Without artists, there
will be no art!
* MU (Medverkans och Utstäl lningsersät tning)
The MU contrac t s t ipulates a minimum fee which cannot be a l te red . The contrac t inc ludes a tar i f f where the fee i s ca lcu lated
w ith regard to the s i ze o f the inst i tut ion , the durat ion of the exhibit ion and how many ar t i s t s par t i c ipate . The minimum fee
however, i s a lways uncondit ional .
The contrac t a l so s tates that pay ments should be made for preparat ions , such as meet ings , openings , instal l ing of works ,
and for produc ing new work . A copy of the contrac t f ramework can be found at ht tp : / /w w w.kultur radet . s e /D ocuments /Ny-
heter /2014/MU_eng.pdf
“The purpose of the contract is to
ensure that state institutions pay
artists a minimum fee for display-
ing art work belonging to them
and to set a standard for payment
for the preparation work. “