A friend once told me that a “professional artist” is one who declares earnings from art to the income tax authorities. I like that. It describes me.
The word “professional”, however, normally carries other meanings. It suggests a higher-status occupation, and in particular one in which intellectual rather than manual skills are pre-eminent. Here things begin to get a little fuzzy. Artists think, imagine, and do all those things we associate with that crucial idea of creation …. but it isn’t by any means “all in the mind”. We are certainly not unambiguously “workers with the brain” as opposed to “workers with the hand”. I find that painting is physically hard work, as are tasks such as hanging or taking down an exhibition. Without the work of my hands any images I might create in my brain remain a dead letter.
My musings along this line have been prompted by an overheard conversation between two young folk who were comparing notes as students on an MA course in Fine Art. What is that about? Why do they need a higher degree to work in art? When I left school I was faced with the choice of going to art school and getting a certificate or diploma, and going to university and getting a degree. Since then, of course, there has been a general inflation of qualifications in all kinds of occupations (teaching and nursing, for example). These days people seem to expect you to have an MBA in order to open a shop! The trend isn’t confined to art.
Putting on my sociological hat it seems that there might be two forces at work here. The first is competition for jobs. Certification gives one an edge where there is competition for a scarce resource, namely, jobs. The second is a desire to control access to the occupation, insisting upon certain standards of entry. How does that work in the area of art? Most practicing artists are self-employed, so their potential employer isn’t looking for assurance of their fitness. Success in the area depends upon the quality of what you do (and, of course, crucial contacts in the area) but neither of these are secured by a qualification. The state isn’t about to licence qualified artists in order that they can do what they do, iun order to protect the public from quack artists. So what is the incentive to spend £10K in order to gain an MA in Fine Art?
Is the “professionalisation” of art anything more than a clever ploy by the art colleges to create another manufactured need, at a time when further and higher education are under pressure? I do wonder.
Meanwhile, I will continue to call myself a “professional artist”, relying on my certification from HMRC.