I've been meaning to come back to this. I'm sorry that it has taken me awhile...
Those are some very insightful observations and questions
portfiend . I also like your approach of finding actionable steps towards the realization of theoretical ideals. That is very important. Constructive knowledge must be applied.
I will separate each question into its own section in an attempt to unpack some of it, but the answers overlap. Again, these are not necessarily suggestions, just some explorations. Other people's experiences might differ. Let's dialogue about it!
Question #1as an artist: how does one move away from platforms such as Twitter and not Die in the process?
Thank you
blog47177 for mentioning Cal Newport. In
his Quit Social Media video, he tries to address three common objections that people give for leaving social media, the second of which is essentially what we are talking about here (i.e.: "How will I find work?" / "I need social media for work."). It is a great ~13 minute introduction to someone unfamiliar with this topic, but it does not describe any specific actions to take.
An artist named Julia Bausenhardt has also recommended his work when she described
her experience of quitting social media. She brings up a lot of good points, but three in particular really stand out to me. To paraphrase:
1. Social media affects attention span, undermining our ability to concentrate, which makes it harder to focus on doing art.
2. It takes a lot of time and effort to build up a social media presence, with no guarantee of any kind of return. That time and effort might be better spent on art itself (i.e.: honing one's craft, creating more pieces, etc.).
3. By constantly posting material to our "feed" in order to try to stay relevant, we are actually giving away a lot of our work for free. However, the platform is structured in such a way that most people will only shallowly engage with that "content", if they can even find it among the flurry of activity.
In other words, most artists are probably getting much less (or the exact opposite!) of what they think they are from social media. Why continue then? I think there are several contributing factors. Let's go through a couple of them...
* Factor #1: Addiction
People's attention is sold as a "product". Therefore, a lot of social media is designed to be "
persuasive" in some manner, if not
outright manipulative.
There are a ton of different tactics that are used (e.g.: "
rage-baiting" algorithms, pages with "
infinite scrolling", "
deceptive patterns" built into buttons and menus, etc.).
As you pointed out in your previous post:
...the dependence on major platforms like twitter is to the point where these creatives are even willing to bat for the continued success of these platforms. some more desperate creatives will deny the toxic aspects of these platforms as well.
Engagement with social media can quite literally become a
behavioral addiction, so would that type of response be a form of "
addiction denial"? How can we start to
change those mental habits?
First, it is helpful to "
detox". Then, once we have some mental-emotional clarity, we can more carefully choose how we approach the situation.
* Factor #2: Lock-In
Nearly everyone has integrated social media into their lives to some extent. It can be hard to separate from it if doing so requires some type of technical understanding and/or one feels that they are leaving too much behind (e.g.: a collection of personal posts built up over time, a method of contacting family and friends, etc.). Is this a
"sunk-cost fallacy" or "escalation of commitment"?
We can help others to migrate out of them (e.g.: by demonstrating how to backup their data, build their own websites, etc.), and we can brainstorm examples of how to use the "platforms" differently. For example, I see many people who build a personal webpage that is little more than a directory of links to all of their social media accounts, but that situation can be inverted. To continue our example, an artist can make their personal website into their portfolio / gallery and then make every social media account lead back to it.
...Addiction and lock-in are two of the most significant factors in my opinion, but there are others. I will cover another important one below. But first, how do we survive financially as creatives? That question is harder to answer, especially as we find ourselves amidst an economic system that seems to be getting progressively more "broken".
In general, looking around at the precious few artists that I know of who manage to live entirely off of their art, hardly any of their physical art sales come from social media but from people that they have met in person. In other words, those social media accounts are just a way to keep in contact with existing relationships, not necessarily a means of attracting new ones. Likewise, most of them do not rely on one "revenue stream" alone, but all of their "side hustles" / "gig work" are related to their art in some way, rather than art being a "hobby" done outside of their "job".
To analyze some of their approaches more in-depth:
+ One gains the majority of their work through a small handful of wealthy patrons, but their field is relatively niche and they have the equipment to do it. The pieces are large and take weeks at a time. They met those patrons through a large network of friends that was developed through promotional work (i.e.: contacting the media to promote local art markets and music events, and constantly interacting with a lot of people face-to-face). They are literally never online.
+ One gains the majority of their work through commissions, but almost all of them are from personal connections or previous customers met through their teaching of art lessons (both one-on-one and in groups). They are highly skilled and incredibly fast at producing art. They usually do multiple commissions simultaneously and have a lot of the "business aspects" already carefully planned out (e.g.: strict guidelines for pricing that scale with materials used / time taken / size of piece / amount of detail, clear contracts that people must agree to before they start projects in order to minimize the number of revisions, and consistent schedules that help them to get it all done within reasonable timeframes).
+ One gains the majority of their work through artist organizations run by the local government. Those organizations put them into contact with various galleries, businesses, offices, etc. that need art of various sizes and types. They are periodically awarded grants to do murals, sculptures, and the like.
+ One gains the majority of their work by constantly traveling to conventions both far and wide, selling fan art of things that are probably already recognizable to many people. They also regularly sell pieces out of a local shop, and those pieces are themed with the other items that the shop tends to sell.
+ One gains the majority of their work through a larger company which acts as a "middle man", handing them a series of graphic design projects from many smaller companies.
...I should mention that none of these people live lavishly and many have partners who also work, so finances are shared. Further, almost all of them would be considered "independent contractors" / "freelance". They have no "worker benefits" whatsoever and they are forced to pay "self-employment taxes".
I agree that crowdfunding is nice because it could lead to a certain amount of stability, but it seems like it is often used in combination with other aspects. For example, many "YouTubers" crowdfund in addition to selling merchandise, attempting to gain sponsorships, etc. Although some also resort to some level of dishonestly and/or manipulation (e.g.: using "
clickbait", fostering "
parasocial relationships", etc.).
Therefore, I only see crowdfunding as a "stepping stone" towards helping each other gain independence, not the end "goal". This leads me to the next question...
Question #2as a friend of an artist: how can i help my artist friends survive?
It is always good to be considerate of each other's needs and help one another to meet them whenever possible. Artists are no different in that regard. If we do not have physical resources to share because we are also struggling, then we can at least freely share the helpful information that we come across.
* Factor #3: Lack of Education
A lot of people are not aware of how various companies are structured in order to take advantage of them. An interesting book on this topic, and one that is especially relevant to musicians and writers, is
Chokepoint Capitalism: How Big Tech and Big Content Captured Creative Labor Markets and How We'll Win Them Back by Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow. To give a quick personal summary:
The authors describe how companies can create what they call "Anti-Competitive Flywheels", business and legal maneuvers that build upon themselves in a way that allows them to quickly become "monopolies". A "monopoly" is when a single company dominates an entire industry. They are supposed to be broken up through "
antitrust law", but a lot of businesses try to find ways around it. One way is by getting rid of competitors through a "horizontal monopoly", buying them out and either integrating them into their business model or shutting them down (e.g.: when Facebook bought the companies WhatsApp and Instagram). Another way is through a "vertical monopoly", keeping competitors from entering an industry by controlling the entire supply chain (e.g.: Amazon is an online marketplace for people to sell their own items, but also sells and delivers items themselves).
The authors also describe how companies can create what they call a "Chokepoint", making themselves the intermediary between artists and their audiences so that they can take advantage of both. For example, if an author's book sales come predominantly through Amazon because they are the largest "platform" that they do business through, then they may be forced to conform to policies that undermine their profits because they may seem to have no other option if they want to keep selling books at all. The technical term for it is a "
monopsony", when a buyer can dictate what a seller does. The market is not "free". It is controlled.
Unfortunately, there isn't much in the book that is directly applicable to visual artists, but hopefully it is apparent how that last pattern applies to this situation. The problem is systemic.
Question #3as a mutual aid collective of artists: what do we do if all of our resources combined isn't enough to keep us afloat?
Gaining some level of self-sufficiency can be difficult sometimes. It may require one to take control of their own
healthcare,
make food stretch,
find new sources of food/medicine,
make tools from scrap, and so on.
Some of the most basic pieces of information can be truly priceless, yet are often taken for granted. For example, if you are "homeless", knowing where to find
a drinking fountain,
a public restroom, or a safe place to sleep is imperative. We must thoroughly get to know our surroundings and the resources available to us (e.g.:
free clinics,
food banks, etc.). Different types of environments have their own "survivalist" knowledge. Is the area rural, urban, or a mix?
Our power is multiplied when we work together. Much like how individual rights are balanced by collective responsibilities, self-sufficiency is expanded through mutual aid.
A really good book on the topic is
Mutual Aid by Dean Spade. The first part gives some commentary on the sociopolitical contexts in which mutual aid networks might appear (e.g.: when attempting to meet the needs of a neighborhood when the infrastructure is failing due to corruption, natural disasters, war, etc.). The second part breaks down the organization of groups into a set of practical skills that are clearly presented as a series of tables, questions, and lists of guidelines. The biological underpinnings of cooperation and reciprocity can be found elsewhere (e.g.:
Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution by Peter Kropotkin).
Sprout Distro has some free zines within their
Organization section that look promising (particularly
Build Those Collectives! and
Organizing Social Spaces as if Social Relations Matter). There are also some that give communication techniques that can help facilitate group organizing (such as
Consensus: A Brief Introductory Guide,
Shared Path, Shared Goal, and
Collective Process). I also have
a page on building communities and some things to look out for when joining one.
Ultimately, I think a lot of it comes down to a change in our hearts and minds. As you point out...
it'll be worthwhile to analyze the culture of independent creatives; something i notice with my art friends is that all of the art they post publicly tends to be transactional. someone paid money to commission this art, or someone is selling an "adoptable" (a character design), or even if they're not involving money - art is created for "art trades", art made with someone else in mind is "gift art". in the last two examples, the art is also a way for artists to get their work in front of the eyes of a different artist's following; there's still a Transaction taking place.
Even when people are not explicitly thinking in terms of "profiting" at the expense of another in some way, it is so habitual that many find it hard to see past it. Transitioning from a system based on debt and scarcity into one of abundance will require moving from thinking that is transactional and focused upon hoarding into a mindset that is founded upon mutual gifting and regifting:
[Image from
Ben Seattle - The Self-Organizing Moneyless Economy]
In my opinion, this will be accompanied by many interrelated changes within society:
Abundance will further increase when we cease to create the conditions of
"artificial scarcity" through
"planned obsolescence" and other behaviors motivated by short-sighted greed. For example, surpluses (like those within
food production and
product manufacture), will be used instead of completely wasted. Since money itself is a debt, its use will also fall away. Some might generally refer to it as
"Non-Monetary Economics" (or "NME").
Equality will further increase with abundance because people will no longer try to
insert themselves between other people and the resources around them, or
try to get others to work "for" them in order to accumulate money. Repetitive work can be automated, and people can sustainably meet each other's needs through voluntary collaboration on meaningful projects for everything else. Inversely, violence will decrease as we are no longer alienated from one another.
...I could endlessly elaborate upon all of this, but I will stop there for now. I hope you are all doing well. Thank you for reading!