The Work of Art: Value in Creative Careers

The Work of Art: Value in Creative Careers. Alison Gerber. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2017.

In The Work of Art, Gerber shows how the “occupation turn” in the visual art world created confusion and tension over the value of art and the meaning of being an artist. Beginning in the 1960s, the professionalization of artists started and eventually became normalized in the 1980s where artists no longer thought of themselves of “making” things but of “doing” things. Making art was now called “artmaking” where being an artist was to be an “art worker,” a type of job, rather than a spiritual or aesthetic vocation. Started in Canada, artists fought for better copyright provisions, reproduction and exhibition royalties, and compensation for preparation costs. Instead of speaking the language of craft and skill, artists talked in terms of the “work” and “service” they provided to universities, museums, and galleries as “full-time, working artists.”

This occupational turn in the art world has paradoxically opened it to a broader and more diverse group of practitioners: some artists see art in monetary terms while others view it as a sort of credential; and there are those who love making art for its own sake. The professionalization of artists had produced different, acceptable values in which artists can believe. To make sense of this, Gerber offers a typology of how artists value their practice: pecuniary, credentialing, vocation, and relational accounts.

The pecuniary account is to view art as a type of investment and return with regards to making art: its monetary value, the time required, and the type of art created. Credentialing is acquiring the education (e.g., MFA) and/or expertise (e.g., commercial experience) to provide legitimacy for one’s work. It also includes what Gerber calls temperament which essentially is the motivation, discipline, and drive to find work and network in the art world. Unlike the pecuniary account, credentialing has a longer time horizon for the return on investment and the calculations are qualitative rather than quantitative; however, the two approaches to art are similar in that they fit with the rationalization and professionalization of today’s art world.

The other two accounts are vocational and relational. The first is the artist enjoys the practice of art for its own reward; the second is that artistic practice is for the benefit of the artist, audience, citizen, and society as a whole. Those artists who view their work as vocational value the autonomy of their practice and care more about the challenge of making art than its result or public reception. The relational account is to nurture and develop collaborative relationships with other artists with little hope of economic return. The artist wants to create a community where both the artist and others can share their practices in the creation of art.

Gerber’s study suggests that most artists view themselves in the pecuniary or credentialing account, although those artists who subscribe to the vocational and relational perspectives are aware of the market. However, these artists resist commensuration, where multiple parties come to an agreed value, in the art world. As seen from her stories, most artists balance these multiple accounts in their work, with the pecuniary and vocational account being the most common, and the pecuniary, credentialing, and relational have little overlap.

One way of bringing the pecuniary and vocational accounts together is for artists to detach themselves from the art market (the price of art) and instead focus on the costs of material and other occupations to support their vocation as an artist. These artists earn less money than they potentially could because they are less concerned about the art market than practicing their vocation. Unlike the economists, price is not a sign of value but a symbol of incoherence in the art world with value not equating price.

The book concludes with how artists recognize the need to present themselves in public and how their image can sometimes undermine the type of art or project they want to do. Although Gerber provides two interesting case studies, it would have been helpful to her to connect them to her typology of pecuniary, credentialing, vocation, and relational. For instance, if an artist’s reputation is primarily vocational, would he or she reject a lucrative, commercial project because it would harm his or her reputation? Or could the artist discover some way to enhance it?

However, this is a minor criticism of an extremely well-thought out and researched book. For those who are interested in the practice of art, the art world, and how artists see themselves, The Work of Art provides a fascinating account with its innovative approach. Revealing that artists ultimately lead “decommensurated lives,” where they coexist with different and competing values, The Work of Art illuminates how artists make sense of this in their careers and own lives. A wonderful and insightful read not only for artists but for all people who are trying to navigate the values of the market and what it means to be human.

Print