Gavin Stairs on thu 1 jul 99
I haven't counted them up, and the discussion is continuing on list, so I
thought I'd just dump this out to the list as a first summary of the
discussion.
The executive summary:
A number of people are expressing interest, and more that a few are
offering to work on it. A significant number of people wouldn't touch it
with a barge pole. Some would even be actively agin' it.
There were several additions to my list of useful activities:
1a. Certify show promoters who meet guild defined standards for fair
treatment of potters (with respect to jury fees, booth fees, policing out
the buy-sell, etc.)
2a. Carry out or sponsor research in ceramic technology that has direct
applicability to studio potters.
3a. Define standards of craftsmenship and marketing ethics for its members
(a sticky one I realize--gets into things like functional glazes that
really are functional, accurately disclosing how a product is made, etc.)
4a. Provide a concerted nation'wide voice on financial issues affecting
craftspeople: such as jury fees, booth fees, etc.
5a. Provide an educational arm that goes beyond the orgazniation.....to
educate the public, from childhood on, on the value of buying crafts.
6a. A program to help potters just getting a studio together. Maybe some
sort of mentoring.
7a. Educating the public that ceramic artists are just that, ARTISTS! I am
sick to death of hearing "joe blow's mug is $1 cheaper than yours". Never
in a million years would they approach a watercolourist and say "joe blow's
8X10 is $10 cheaper than yours". Sheesh!
There were suggestions that similar organizations already exit, but only
one of them was named. That is clearly worth investigating (see below in
the messages).
There were several references to NCECA, one by an organizing member of that
body. Clearly we should explore that avenue as well.
I'm going to be out of town for about 10 days, so I'm unlikely to get
anything more about this done before I get back. I'll be monitoring the
list, though. If enough people feel that this is worth pursuing, I would
guess that the next step would be to attempt to form a working group, and
to parcel out some tasks. Some have already offered, and when I get back,
I'll be in touch with them. If anyone wants to proceed before then, please
feel free.
Gavin
What follows are most of the recent messages, several of which were sent to
me privately, but a number have appeared on the list as well.
****************************************************************************
**************
Susan Fox Hirschmann started it all: "Shall we form a union?"
From Stuart in response to Susan Fox Hirschmann:
Some form of group action might alert show organizers, gallery owners,
magazine editors, etc.,to issues about which many potters feel discontent.
But a labor union? Remember that in order to have power, labor unions have
a bottomline requirement: they have *exclusive bargaining rights* for
their members.
This means, for example, that the potters union, not you, would establish
the price of your mugs and bowls, and would prohibit you from attending
that great Florida fair that you have finally been juried into or from
selling your work at your favorite gallery if the union (not you) decides
to boycott them.
Beyond that, independent studio potters--in contrast to, say, those
employed in a ceramics factory--are part of management, not labor. We
aren't employed by anyone and we may have employees of our own, e.g. studio
assistants. Our relationship to our galleries and fairs is comparable to
the relationship of, say, a clothing manufacturer to a department store:
they provide our retail outlets. If all workers in a clothing factory
insist on minumum wages for their labor, that's salary negotiation. If all
clothing factories insist on setting the price for a men's white dress
shirt, that's price fixing, and in the USA is illegal.
From Susan Fox Hirschmann in response to Stuart, on list:
Just because we would have a union, to bargain for our rights, does not
mean it would control prices, nor fix prices. You don't believe now, that
the doctors, even if they have a union, are gonna to permit a union to
control and determine their fees----if ever there was an independent group,
as far as pricing their services, it is the doctors. If you control the
prices that everyone recieves for individiual goods, then you are in
violation of anti-trust laws. Being married to a lawyer, i am well aware
of this. So what i am speaking of here......is a group that will make
known our needs for change, particularly in the fee system of shows, and
anything else that we, as a unified voice could speak for we who are making
our living as craftspeople. Price controls do not belong here. nor would
they ever be considered part of the discussion. (even professional sports
have their own unions, but gosh knows how much the individual players earn,
and that sure is individual and based not just on skill, but how much
"balls" they have to get astronomical wages! so how about it , other clay
arters out there, how do you feel about some sort of union? (i am sure a
lively discussion will ensue!)
From Gavin Stairs, on list in response to Stuart and Susan:
Recent responses to this thread (thanks Stuart and Susan) have been of the
"what's the use" and "they're un-American" variety. I feel that a better
idea of what is possible might be had from, say, the Actors Equity, or the
Guild of Motion Picture Arts, etc. How about the International Guild of
Studio Ceramists? The objectives would be to: promote the ceramic arts;
provide group insurance and other benefits of concerted buying power;
promote and better the education of studio artists and craftspeople in both
technique and esthetics; provide guidance in pricing and business practice;
provide contract forms for such common transactions as sale of works,
consignment of works, participation in shows and fairs; provide information
on the best known practice for the production of safe, functional ware;
assist in testing of glazes and other safety issues; sponsor and operate
annual meetings and shows (perhaps in conjunction with NCECA); canvass and
forward the common interests of the membership. What have I left out?
This is an international list, with members from (I'm guessing) USA about
70%, Canada 10%, Australia 5%, Britain 5%, rest of Europe, Americas, Asia,
Oceana, Middle East and Africa maybe 10%. This being the case, the
predominant membership is likely to be North American, and of that mostly
US. So it is reasonable to expect the US to take the lead, and for the
thing to be centred there. I would advocate keeping it international
since: influences in ceramics are world wide; some non-american practices
deserve emulation (as in education); we could more easily address
cross-border issues; some of the more interesting problems occur in
non-american settings. Just for openers, you understand. However,
national boundaries still impose limits, and some issues will be peculiar
to individual countries; some countries already have a similar guild
(Britain, Australia?). So I expect the initial organization to be
predominantly US and Canadian, with some national flavour inside the tent.
Lets form a develpment committee, and see what comes of it. People willing
to serve on such a committee (for the moment by e-mail), form a line on the
left. Or the right, suit yourself. People willing to join such an
organization at a nominal fee, form a line right up the middle.
All those in favour say aye: Aye!
Then I said:
I think this union or guild is a good idea. My previous post didn't really
do anything substantive to forward it, though. So I'd like to survey the
list: what issues do you think such a body should address? Here's my list
from the previous post as a start. Add your own ideas. Please reply to me
directly, and I'll summarize for the list.
International Guild of Studio Ceramists objectives: Which of these and
other issues are of concern to you, and would be an incentive for you to
join an organization that addressed them?
1 Promote the ceramic arts;
2 Provide group insurance and other benefits of concerted buying power;
3 Promote and better the education of studio artists and craftspeople in
both technique and esthetics;
4 Provide guidance in pricing and business practice;
5 Provide contract forms for such common transactions as sale of works,
consignment of works, participation in shows and fairs;
6 Provide information on the best known practice for the production of
safe, functional ware; assist in testing of glazes and other safety issues;
7 Sponsor and operate annual meetings and shows (perhaps in conjunction
with NCECA);
8 Canvass and forward the common interests of the membership.
9 What have I left out? Add your own concerns.
From John Hesselberth:
1. Certify show promoters who meet guild defined standards for fair
treatment of potters (with respect to jury fees, booth fees, policing out
the buy-sell, etc.)
2. Carry out or sponsor research in ceramic technology that has direct
applicability to studio potters.
3. Define standards of craftsmenship and marketing ethics for its members
(a sticky one I realize--gets into things like functional glazes that
really are functional, accurately disclosing how a product is made, etc.)
From Susan Fox Hirschmann:
10. Provide a concerted nation'wide voice on financial issues affecting
craftspeople: such as jury fees, booth fees, etc.
11. Provide an educational arm that goes beyond the orgazniation.....to
educate the public, from childhood on, on the value of buying crafts.
I am sure i will think of more as time progesses.
From Cheryl Litman:
Sounds good although the insurance/business part is the biggest interest I
have at the moment.
From Stephen L. Baird:
Seems to be an interesting line of thought. I would be interested in a
program to help potters just getting a studio together. Maybe some sort of
mentor like situation. With technology like "this" at our fingertips
what's not possible.
From Kevin A. Hluch:
What would make this organization any different than NCECA? ...
From Marla Harris:
My initial thoughts on your idea: I like it, and can see the virtues in
starting an entity of this type.
Are you familiar with The Small Studio Alliance? (Now recently defunct.)
Many of the same concepts were promoted by the Alliance, one major
difference being *hands-on production* only and the limitation of just two
principals in the member studio. Once again, the idea was great. But it
wasn't successful for a number of reasons. Understaffed and underfunded
are the primary reasons I attribute to it's demise.
I served as membership coordinator for TSSA and could give assistance with
organizational plans and mailings. Sign me up for whatever I might be able
to contribute. Besides just the computer, I can offer scanner, copier and
fax usage.
I hope you're overwhelmed with positive responses to this! BTW, many
Clayart regulars were TSSA members, so I feel the interest will be there
for your idea.
From Morgan Britt:
I'll help.
From Reg Wearley in response to Berry Silverman on the list:
I will use your response to this union thing to toss in my two-bits worth,
and that is this: In my opinion there are two main considerations. First
of all the successful and accomplished potters would not join such a
group-they don't have to. Second, those in the union would probably lose
the appeal they now have to a very large group of customers-those who enjoy
owning or giving something that represents a certain 'spirit' or 'way of
life' and or a certain 'artistic talent' that a potter represents. A union
tends to make all its members "equal" and I for one would hate to try to
make some of the things I make be "equal" to the works that the good
potters make! I think that to successfully unionize would be the
equivalent to winning a battle but losing the war.
From Robert Briscoe
This is my first time on this forum, I noticed this discussion and thought
I would let you know about an organization formed about four years ago
called NAIA [National Association of Independant Artists]. I [a potter] am
the current chair of the board of directors which is comprised of artists
of all mediums. The purpose of NAIA is to have a collective voice in the
[primarily art fair sector] art marketing part of a lot of our lives. It
is not a union by any discription but a group dedicated to projecting
artists concerns, needs, wants,etc. We share our expertice about art
fairs, audience development, and educate artfair directors and their boards
of directors about us and the particulars about our art forms. Membership
is open to all artists who are working professionally at their art or
craft. We have a web site check it out or email
me . Thanks I will help with any questions I can
about NAIA.
From Ditmar:
A few individuals have mentioned democracy.
The usual, "one person, one vote" dogma.
Democracy ??!!! Give me a break !!!!!! .....BULLSHIT !!!!!!
In other words, a minority of the c. 3,000 Clayart subscribers are
advocating how sales and aesthetics / quality / price / etc. , should
effect potters who've never even HEARD of CLAYART, ......or even CARE
about
CLAYART !!!!!!!!!
Pretty damned arrogant, I'd say. Making the assumption that ALL the
potters in the U.S., and the WORLD want to be represented this way.
It may just be me, but, I REALLY feel that there are more than 3,000
potters / ceramicists in the U.S. ....AND the world, that just may have an
opinion on the DEMOCRACY of this all inclusive union idea.
Just because we're subscribers doesn't make us GOD !!!!!!!!!!!
There are other potters !!!!!!!!
--------------------
Let's look at our own problems, and not blame others for our own lack of
sound negotiating skills and enough "balls" to deal with galleries.
The economy is off. Not much "art" is in the mind's of the plain "Joes"
that are just "squeaking by".
Why in hell buy a locally thrown pot for $ 20, when there's one mass
produced from overseas for $3.95. ???!!!!!
I don't think a union will make stressed and over-budget, craft fair owners
want to get MORE independent potters showing their work !!!!
Push too much and there will be more overseas pottery !!
It's up to us to make our craft worthy.
Teach and elevate the public. ........don't whine.
MY POT IS BETTER BECAUSE..............
......why is it better...... TELL the buyer !
I MADE IT........it is part of me !!!
It has a SOUL !
FEEL IT .
And the potters that DO prefer to remain independent, won't be allowed to
show or sell their wares at venues that have an agreement with the Union /
Guild. So in order to survive they'll be FORCED to join.
Yeah, sounds great to me.....let's go for it !!!
Let's reign in that damned annoying independent spirit and creativity of
these radical artist types.
It's about time saner minds prevailed, and set up a group with guidelines
to follow. There's been WAAAYYY too much independent thought lately. It's
gotta end.
From Pug (Sharon R Pemberton) in response to Ditmar, on the list:
I've been awaitin', by cracky, for someone to tell me what size, color, cone
and atmosphere................ Sheese, what in the world have I been doing
for the past 30 years without that?
From Millie:
Your idea of a an international guild is really a good one. the
objectives that you have provided are very well thought out and
consistent with the threads that we have had on clayart. I would
definitly join this type of group.
From Susan Fox Hirschmann again:
Okay, Gavin, you've got my vote, I think your elucidation of objectives is
extraordinary! You may e-mail me off line, (or keep it here on clayart) to
help you get this thing started.
From Berry Silverman:
It was my understanding that by law self-employed
people cannot form a union -- only employees. Doctors
have just voted to form a union, but most of them are
employees of medical corporations, hospitals, etc. If
my understanding is accurate, who would employ us?
Seems to me one of the things artists most treasure is
working for themselves, not answering to a boss.
From Sam Cuttell, the cat lady:
> 1 Promote the ceramic arts; yes
> 2 Provide group insurance and other benefits of concerted buying power; yes
> 3 Promote and better the education of studio artists and craftspeople in
both technique and esthetics; no
> 4 Provide guidance in pricing and business practice; yes
> 5 Provide contract forms for such common transactions as sale of works,
consignment of works, participation in shows and fairs; yes
> 6 Provide information on the best known practice for the production of
safe, functional ware; assist in testing of glazes and other safety issues;
yes
> 7 Sponsor and operate annual meetings and shows (perhaps in conjunction
with NCECA); why NCECA? How about in January/February when most working
artists have a "breather".
> 8 Canvass and forward the common interests of the membership. yes
> 9 What have I left out? Add your own concerns.
Educating the public that ceramic artists are just that, ARTISTS! I am
sick to death of hearing "joe blow's mug is $1 cheaper than yours". Never
in a million years would they approach a watercolourist and say "joe blow's
8X10 is $10 cheaper than yours". Sheesh!
From Amy Parker:
I think this is a wonderful idea! I'd like to see some kind of "union
label" for food-safe pottery, where you would personally have to have your
clay/glaze combinations tested, not just use a "safe recipe". "IGSC tested
for food safety" or "Meets IGSC standards for food usage", and require that
you purchase said stickers from the proposed IGSC!
Amy in Atlanta, who just saw commercial glazes labeled "NOT FOOD SAFE" for
sale on what was presented as "Mixing Bowls" at a recent craft fair!
End of compendium.
| |
|
