Master of Arts Thesis
Euroculture
Home University: Jagiellonian University Krakow, Poland Host University: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The NetherlandsJune 2010
CROSSING BORDERS FOR CULTURE
MA Programme Euroculture Declaration
I, Katharina Okulski hereby declare that this thesis, entitled “CROSSING BORDERS FOR CULTURE Artist Mobility in Europe and Artist-in-Residence Programs”, submitted as partial requirement for the MA Programme Euroculture, is my own original work and expressed in my own words. Any use made within it of works of other authors in any form (e.g. ideas, figures, texts, tables, etc.) are properly acknowledged in the text as well as in the list of References.
I hereby also acknowledge that I was informed about the regulations pertaining to the assessment of the MA thesis Euroculture and about the general completion rules for the Master of Arts Programme Euroculture.
Signed: _______________________________________
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In the first place, I would like to thank my family and Dominik-Alexis who believed in me and supported me in every possible way. Many thanks, as well, to Veronika Ratzenböck through whom I became acquainted with the subject. I am grateful for her input and her help in finding literature.
Furthermore, I want to thank my coordinators Krzysztof Kowalski and Pascal Gielen for their great cooperation and supervision.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION__________________________________________________6 2 METHODOLOGY__________________________________________________9 3 LITERATURE____________________________________________________11 4 ARTIST MOBILITY_______________________________________________13
4.1 Terms in relation to artist mobility ... 13
4.2 Short history of artist mobility ... 19
4.3 Sociological aspects of mobility... 21
4.4 Overview of the current situation of artist mobility in Europe... 25
4.4.1 Supporters and Programs ... 25
4.4.2 Situation of artist mobility in Western-, Central- and Eastern Europe... 29
4.5 Assets and drawbacks of artist mobility ... 33
5 ARTIST-IN-RESIDENCE___________________________________________40 5.1 The term... 40
5.2 Short history of artist-in-residence... 41
5.3 Current situation of artist-in-residence ... 46
6 ANALYSIS_______________________________________________________51 6.1 Summary and evaluation of the interviews/questionnaires with artists and people in charge of artist-in-residence programs in Vienna, Berlin and Warsaw.. 51
1 INTRODUCTION
“Every culture must be open to the universal and yet solidly anchored, in other words to have both wings and roots.” 1
In the last ten to fifteen years mobility in the cultural sector in Europe has extremely increased and become more and more popular. Along with this trend the amount of artist residencies, which facilitate the mobility process, has risen. Artists are moving abroad for a certain period of time in order to create in a new environment, interact with other cultures and exchange artistic ideas. They are able to do so through specific artist mobility programs and funds.
These components make the mobility of artists one of the most important tools of European Integration on a cultural level. With the passing of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, the unrestricted mobility of persons, goods and services in the European Union had been established. Since then, the fostering of mobility in the culture sector has become even more important, especially during the enlargement of the European Union, which provides artists with an even broader access to new cultures. The mobility of cultural professionals is a strategic objective on the European agenda for Culture 2007 and on the work plan for Culture 2008-2010.
On EU level, not only is artist mobility a very current issue, but it is also of primary importance on the political and cultural agendas of the Member States, be it on national, regional or municipal level. Cultural policy makers are recently very strongly involved in the development of the artist mobility funding programs, because mobility is viewed as an important component for cultural cooperation, cultural diversity, intercultural competence and dialogue. It is also often used as a strategic tool in international relations, cultural diplomacy and development programs. Dragan Klaic, a renowned advocate for mobility in the cultural sector, gives a succinct statement on the importance of artist mobility:
“ (...) in order to stimulate creativity and innovation, to spread good practices, and diversify the experience of the public, artists need to travel, cross borders, discuss, experiment and collaborate among themselves and confront new audiences. But if we look at European integration as a political project initiated
in order to ensure peace and security on the continent, artistic mobility is again a worthy instrument to combat ignorance and prejudice, surpass stereotypes, and strengthen the intercultural competence of citizen.” (HOUBANOVA 58)
Not only institutions and governments profit from this cultural exchange, for it is mainly the artists who can benefit a lot from these opportunities. Behind the decision of travelling abroad stands the hope and wish of the cultural professional that international exposure will further his career and enable him to set up a network of new contacts. Artists expect to find a cosmopolitan environment which provides them with new experiences and creative stimuli and where they can further their knowledge and exchange artistic ideas and opinions with local artists. The thought of a new and unknown audience that provides critical comments on an artist’s work, can also contribute to his/her desire to work abroad.
The thesis shall examine both, the point of view of the artists and the perspective of the people in charge of artist residencies. This task will be carried out with the help of interviews conducted with both sides.
The topic is introduced with a short history and explanation of the current situation on artist mobility as well as artist residencies. It will also be pointed out that the artist mobility flow in Europe is still oriented westwards, which brings an exploration of differences in Western, Central and Eastern Europe. Not only are there still more artists coming from the East to the West than the other way around, but also the inherent obstacles and hindrances are still higher. Looking at these developments, one should keep in mind that nowadays mobility is being dependent on means of funding and is therefore controllable.Foremost on the European level, there is a lot that can and should be done in order to ensure an equal level and equal possibilities for mobile participants from all parts of Europe.
Furthermore, a few sociological aspects on mobility in general will be mentioned and the analysis of the material, including the interviews, will be presented. The thesis focuses solely on artist mobility in Europe involving European artists, as the inclusion of artists from all over the world would take the range of the master thesis too far afield.
2 METHODOLOGY
The thesis will focus on mobile artists in the field of visual arts. The research question is centred on the relationship between mobile fine artists with their stay in an artist residency and the institutions which are in charge of these residency programs. Overall, the importance and the role of artist residencies in the range of artist mobility shall be examined.
Besides the research and the collection of literature on this subject that were performed in Poland, Austria, the Netherlands as well as in Germany, interviews were conducted in three chosen cities (Vienna, Warsaw and Berlin) with artists who had spent their time at the chosen residencies as well as with people in charge of these atelier programs. In Vienna, the selection came to the artist-in-residence programs of the MuseumsQuartier as well as the program of KulturKontakt Austria (which is mainly in charge of the co-ordination of mobility programs for artists with a focus on Central and Eastern Europe). In Warsaw the artist-in-residence program of the Ujazdowski Castle- Center for Contemporary Art was the target institution. In Berlin the interviews were performed with the Berliner Künstlerprogramm of the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienstes DAAD as well as the artist-in-residence program of the Künstlerhaus Bethanien.
The choice of the three cities stems from the following: firstly, to narrow down the field of research on three capitals. Secondly, to choose capital cities where contemporary art has various backgrounds. On the one hand, there is Vienna with a long classical artistic tradition, and on the other hand, Berlin stands for the hot spot of contemporary art, and as a city of new potential and possibilities, where a lot of foreigners dwell to find inspiration. Warsaw completes the diverse triangle as the city where contemporary art is flourishing and trying to overcome the stereotype of its communistic past.
share experiences and evaluations on this subject, but also makes it more lively and understandable.
As my background comes from art history, the thesis shall work on artistic, cultural, and sociological grounds, all of which is reflected in the chosen bibliography.
3 LITERATURE
The thesis is based on the latest publications, such as Andrea Glauser’s Verordnete Entgrenzung in which she gives an overview on the history and basic knowledge about artist residencies and mentions some interesting case studies on the artists positions that take part in residency programs. However her focus lies mainly on the situation in Switzerland.
Another eminent overview publication is Dragan Klaic’s Mobility of Imagination which deals with international cultural cooperation and how it can create an integrated European cultural space. It provides the expert as well as the layman audience with practical advice as well as best practice on European cultural cross border cooperation and can therefore be used as a practical handbook on artist mobility.
A very enlightening article for my thesis was Walther Müller-Jentsch’s Künstler und Künstlergruppen in which he gives a sociological perspective on the history of the formation, organization as well as the status of artists throughout history. This historical development, where patronage played an important role, paved the way for artists mobility programs nowadays. Therefore this article was important as a background information for the chapter dealing with artist-in-residence programs. As there is no overall publication on the history of artist-in-residence programs or mobile artists in general which dates further back in time, it was rather difficult to deal with the historical establishment of this phenomenon. Only a few articles (such as the be # 16, the magazine of the Künstlerhaus Bethanien) dealt with the phenomenon of the history of artist residencies. Therefore the aim is to reconstruct the historical information with the help of publications on art sponsoring throughout history (such as LANDENSPERGER, WARNKE, DISCHINGER-HOCH, HERMSEN, OTTERBECK) which mention the existence of wandering and travelling artists. For the history and description of the phenomenon of mobility, the thesis refers to literature coming from the fields of sociology (e.g. BOLTANSKI, KELLER, GIELEN) as there was no publication from the culture and arts field to be found.
recommendations for the future and have mostly been commissioned by European Union institutions.
During the research, I was able to notice the political importance on a national level, e.g. on the Austrian political agenda, where an interministerial working group on artist mobility had been established. Further interesting, is the increase of conferences and workshops organized on the subjects of mobility and artist residencies, such as the conference on artist residencies entitled re-tooling residencies in Warsaw in November 2009 which I was able to attend and from where I gained my basic knowledge in the field of artist residencies.
For the analytical part, the thesis refers to publications and information from the homepages of institutions, as well as exhibition catalogues and artist homepages. In total, thirteen interviews had been conducted, from which three had been done at a face-to-face meeting with the interviewee, two with the means of a Skype interview and eight in a written form which had been answered by E-Mail. The interview with Elisabeth Hajek had been negated by her, as she advised me to refer to the publication of the artist-in-residence program of the MuseumsQuartier.
4 ARTIST MOBILITY
This chapter will explore the phenomenon of artist mobility on historical and sociological grounds. Important terms in relation to artist mobility shall also be examined. Furthermore, the contemporary situation of artist mobility in Europe with its programs and supporters will be presented. The chapter will be completed by elaborating on assets and drawbacks connected to artist mobility.
4.1 Terms in relation to artist mobility
In order to understand the phenomenon of artist mobility, terms relating to it or to be used in connection to it should be examined first. The following key words shall be discussed in a theoretical manner: (new) nomadism, mobility, (artistic) migration and cultural exchange.
Nomadism: According to Horst Gerhard Haberl (20, 21) the word stems from the greek terms nomas which means “pasturage seeker” and nomos which means “confined territory”. These terms, in a connection to each other, could exemplify a person looking for a terrain where he is in his right place, through borders which had been allocated. For Horst Gerhard Haberl, a nomad is a name which had been given by settled people to wanderers. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1374) nomadism is described as:
“Way of life of people who do not live continually in the same place but move cyclically or periodically. It is based on temporary centres whose stability
depends on the available food supply and the technology for exploiting it. Tinker or trader nomads, such as the Roma (Gypsies) and the Irish and Scottish
Travellers, are associated with a larger society but maintain their mobile way of life. Nomadism declined in the 20th century as urban centres expanded and governments sought to regulate or eliminate it”.
nomadism. A new term has been created for contemporary times, but first it is important to examine what nomadism meant in the past:
The myth of nomadism has been surrounding people since their very existence and it can be traced back in holy scriptures as well as works of philosophers, scholars and artists. Mobile forms of work have always existed, but they were mainly restricted to specialists or minorities, such as: the nobility, missionaries, pilgrims, scholars, artists, craftsmen or trades people. For the occidental population a solid place in a community was the most important, therefore mobile people with a foreign knowledge and wisdom were looked upon rather suspiciously (ENGLISCH 31).
This historic perspective on nomadism shows that nomads have always been strongly contradicted with settled people. Those two ways of living opposed and tried to act against each other. However, Gundula Englisch (28) perceives them not only as opponents but also as partners, as they exemplify the two complementary strategies of evolution: mobility and rootedness as well as departure and persistency. On the one hand, the migratory movements of tribes and individuals have led to the cultural and geographical exploration of our world, through which our mental horizon had been enlarged and nurtured. On the other hand a settled way of living ensured us amongst others with the reproduction of people. The previously dominant way of living - to be settled - has gradually been overtaken by the new way of nomadism, which explored a fundamental change during industrialization and further developed strongly by means of globalization, digitalization and individualization. Since then, not only privileged people can utilize the means of moving.
New Nomadism: is also called urban nomadism and signifies the prevalent change of ones domicile. Sigurd Bergmann (144) sees it as a sort of existential nomadism, where people experience life without having a permanent residence and roots. The comparison between conventional nomads and new nomads refers mainly to the difference of the simple life of the traditional nomads, as opposed to the highly technologized, cosmopolitan way of modern living that new nomads are leading (ENGLISCH 15).
Pascal Gielen (41) deals in his publication The Murmuring of the Artistic Multitude among other concepts, with the Deleuzian discourse on nomadism2 in the field of arts. He examines the Deuleuzian characteristics of nomadism on contemporary art establishments such as the Biennials, which appear to be moving networks in the contemporary art world.
Comparing the terms (new) nomadism with artist mobility, the main difference is that nomads do not necessarily have a permanent domicile in a specific country, because they are constantly looking for the right place to stay. Whereas mobile artists leave their home country for a certain period of time in order to return to their home country one day. Of course some artists may also decide to stay in their new country on a longer scale, however it is not the intention of mobility programs to make artists leave their home countries forever. Artist mobility tends to be more a passage on a journey from which one brings back home the newly gained experiences. The aim of mobile artists is to travel, to work abroad and to be in movement, but not necessarily to find a place to stay.
The movement of a nomad is also not the same as that of a migrant (BERGMANN 157). Migration exemplifies a forced reaction whereas nomadism can be seen as an opportunistic way of living. According to Paolo Virno’s notion of opportunism in the field of immaterial labour in post-Fordism3, which was examined and compared to the art world by Pascal Gielen (24), immaterial workers (Pascal Gielen mentions artists in these regards) are able to adapt and work in any situation, because they know how to turn it to their advantage. In these regards contemporary nomads adapt to their environment by trying to get out the best they can.
Mobility: The urge for moving freely is deeply rooted in mankind. Not only freedom of movement in geographical space is important, but also the mental, emotional and social mobility is decisive as well as the urge of seeking new experiences. Mobility should open a new horizon, enlarge possibilities and bring personal development. The routes on which people travel and goods are being transported are defined by Michael Gleich (11) as cultural vectors that exchange immaterial goods such as art or literature.
2 Deleuze and Guattari describe nomadism in their publication A thousand plateaus from 1980, as a
movement where people do not necessarily have to move in order to travel, but can journey while staying at one place. These nomads are trying to free themselves from codes and norms of a capitalistic society.
3 Post Fordism signifies a system of economic production since the late 20th century, which is based on
Nowadays mobile people are driven by free will. In the past, mobility was mainly a male topic, but due to the change of times a lot of women participate equally in mobility. In a knowledge-based society, the most important factors are to establish and expand a network and exchange the know-how across borders, which makes mobility a decisive prerequisite of our times.
The definition of the term mobility in the Encyclopaedia Britannica4 means the movement of individuals, families, or groups. It can either define a change in position of his/her profession (horizontal mobility) or a change in social position (vertical mobility). A further definition of social mobility defines different forms of mobility. Social mobility takes place in the range of changes in education, prestige in the job or higher income. Short range mobility takes place more often than long term mobility. Both definitions are not very detailed and there is no specification of genre-related mobility, such as the artist mobility.
One should keep in mind that mobility with the movement of people, goods and symbolic meanings is strongly connected to globalization, which has intensified the interactivity of production and distribution of goods, images, ideas, art, styles and habits around the world (KLAIC 148).
An interesting aspect that Johanna Keller (10) expresses is the positive connotation the word mobility has received in the recent years, whereas the word migration is still being looked at as a societal problem, which can cause cultural conflicts in the receiving society.
Bertan Selim’s article Who is Afraid of Mobility (15), was one of the few that contained a real definition of the term artistic mobility:
“Artistic mobility stands for the ability to move freely and easily across boundaries to gain inspiration and stimulate innovative creative connections. (…) It encompasses all societal movements, from migration on a temporary basis to residencies; from migration on more permanent or long-term basis to tourist travels, working trips, and even commuting. Mobility, like language, can generate understanding and recognition. It is the common ground to create dialogue.”
One can say that artistic mobility is therefore a specification of the mobility term for the professional field of artists and cultural professionals, that are travelling abroad for a
specific time (between a few weeks up until one year, or longer if the cultural professional decides to stay), in order to exchange ideas and gain inspiration.
Andrew McCoshan and Nick McAteer (A 21) defined mobility in relations to art for their questionnaire in the Information systems to support the mobility of artists study in the following way:
“Mobility takes place when an individual travels outside their country of residence in order to perform, learn, create, cooperate and exchange for professional or training purposes. While certain forms of mobility are ‘stand alone’, in that they are based on an individual initiative (such as residency schemes), others are intrinsically connected to the mobility of works and performances, therefore involving a different set of economic actors.”
The latter definition not only points out that artists are leaving their country of residence, but it also distinguishes between self-initiated mobility and strongly work- related mobility (e.g. travelling exhibitions).
However there is still a lack of a broad or official definition of this term, which most probably relates to the problem that there is not even a unified European definition on who is considered as an artist. This lack of definitions has unfortunately created many legal and financial difficulties which will be encountered in the chapter on assets and drawbacks of mobility later on.
Bertan Selim (15) positions migration and mobility on the same political level, because they both redefine the structures of European societies. This redefinition of structures is reflected by cultural and social diversity.
A more differentiated definition of migration is shown in the following:
Migration: Migration can be internal (people moving from rural areas to urban centres) or international, voluntary (in search of a better life) or forced (e.g. expulsion during a war) (ENCYLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA 1255). This rather sober explanation of the term is better explained by Gundula Englisch (39), who defines migration as a passive migratory movement, or a forced escape, that had been evoked by external circumstances. It means an escape from unsatisfying or even life threatening circumstances. On the other side mobility is a driving force to shape ones personal life, which demands an active input from ourselves. This shows the main difference between migration and mobility - mobility as an action and migration as a reaction.
second world war. After the fall of the iron curtain, there has been a continuous flow of migrants from the East to the West and, since the 1950s, so called “guest workers” have been coming from Southern Europe (such as former Yugoslavia) to Central and Western Europe (GEISEN 50, 51).
Artistic migration: Migration in connection to arts is called artistic migration. Migration has had a profound effect on art, because migrants tend to express their feelings of regret, hopelessness or anticipation in visual terms. There are also visible elements of memory and nostalgia for their homeland in the art that they produce in their new environment. These elements often go along with new creative energy evoked by the change of location, where migrants most of the time interact with the local visual culture, which in a further step leads to a diversity of artistic traditions and tastes. Throughout history, migration has been a positive stimulus for crossing cultures over borders in various art forms. (CROSSING CULTURES CONFERENCE Invitation letter)
The difference between artist mobility and artistic migration is that the latter is mostly undertaken due to other reasons than free will and without official financial support.
Cultural exchange: Students, artists, and other cultural professionals undertake exchanges between two countries in order to promote mutual understanding. It represents the most rudimentary form of international cultural cooperation, which started off after the second world war and is still being practiced nowadays. As examples, travelling exhibitions, as well as the exchange of theatre companies can be mentioned. It is usually rather simple to arrange a cultural exchange as it is the travelling party that covers the travel, and the hosting party that covers the costs of the stay. It is further upheld in the range of bilateral agreements on cultural cooperation that are signed with foreign governments. The primary goal of cultural exchange is to enhance the national prestige abroad (KLAIC 51,52).
4.2 Short history of artist mobility
Over the centuries, war and migration have been transmitting cultural influence and exchange, more by force and colonialism than by cooperation. People were travelling great distances throughout history and changed the material as well as the spiritual culture of many places from far away. In the Middle Ages, travel was primarily connected to pilgrimage, whereas modern travel is organized mainly around tourism and working abroad (BERGMANN 7).
The cultural movements of the Renaissance, the Baroque, the Enlightenment and Romanticism aimed at overcoming the boundaries of state, region, language and culture by linking creative metropoles in Europe. The Renaissance shaped a sense of common European culture, which had been reinforced during the Enlightenment and was further spread during the French Revolution and the Romantic movement. Prominent cultural cities of the Renaissance attracted foreigners and at the same time individual artists (Italian, Dutch or Flemish painters) worked across borders where they gained Europe wide fame. They further received invitations from aristocratic patrons from afar. Also, craftsmen and writers travelled through Europe in order to learn new skills, gain inspiration and to find customers and patrons.
In the 17th and 18th century, cultural institutions such as libraries, museums and
galleries, opera houses and concert halls have been established through the support of rulers, aristocrats and later governments which served the public benefit as well as their own. Some of these institutions established international cooperation, received and presented foreign visitors through which they gained international reputation and were able to set significant European standards. These institutions encouraged international mobility among cultural professionals and fostered their appreciation abroad (KLAIC 11, 12).
governments. Artists travelled for commercial purpose, for inspiration, artistic exchange and international cultural contacts, but often also because they were forced to migration. Emigration and exile in the 19th and 20th century brought artists of different backgrounds closer together. They inspired each other, exchanged ideas, sometimes they exhibited or performed together, going as far as creating groups for their artistic profession. Some European cities played a leading role as meeting points for artists: throughout the 19th and 20th century, London and Paris were undoubtedly the leading
artist drawing cities. At the turn of the century, up until the first world war, Munich and Vienna played a decisive role. The hotspots of the 1920s were Berlin and Prague, then Amsterdam overtook as the artistic centre in the 1930s (KLAIC 13).
The outbreak of the second world war forced many European artists to emigrate and lead to an international mobilization of artists and intellectuals. Many artists continued their artistic engagement beyond borders and some even continued their creative producing in the underground. The emigration of famous artists brought a shifting of new art centres during the second world war (such as New York becoming the new artistic hot spot overseas).
In Europe the fall of the iron curtain, the enlargement of the European Union along with the factors of digitalization, globalization as well as the development of cheap airlines, all lead to a new culture of artistic mobility.
Culture slowly started to detach itself from its locality and historicity, and people, ideas and material goods have been deracinated and are floating around time and space (BERGMANN 145).
During the last fifteen years, mobility has gradually become one of the key elements of cultural policies in Europe, which brought along a certain dynamic. The mobility of artists and cultural professionals with their willingness for moving is increasingly seen as a prerequisite for their artistic career. Artist mobility happens in accordance with the general assumption that mobility and flexibility are the credo of our knowledge and information based society, which brings personal as well as professional success (ENGLISCH 9).
some politicians, mobility was initially linked too close to migration, a situation which enforced independent cultural institutions as well as individual artists to take up the relevance of this issue and to lobby on national and EU level (SELIM 15). These actions were fruitful and mobility was understood as an important creative, social and political tool. Mobility turned into a political affair, which had been reflected in the European enlargement in 2004 and in the European Commissions promotion of labour mobility in Europe which, in 2006, celebrated the Year of Labour Mobility in Europe. At the same time, some EU Member States showed a certain uneasiness in facing problems of migration, unemployment and identity (SELIM 15). Though mobility today still has to cope with significant problems concerning the bureaucratic level, it has become a significant tool in international cultural exchange and relations, that is when it is managed in a well structured manner.
A more detailed outline of mobility and the European Union will follow in chapter 4.4. and ahistorical overview on the development of artist residencies will be given in chapter 5 of this thesis.
4.3 Sociological aspects of mobility
In order to get a better hold of the phenomenon of artist mobility, a few sociological aspects in regards to mobility in general will be pointed out. The information in this chapter is decisive as a background knowledge for a further analysis (especially for the interviews).
Mobility is a fundamental human right as stated in the Declaration of Human Rights5, which makes it an essential tool for human
cross-cultural and social interactions (BERGMANN 143). Mobility has also been important in the development of the European Union, foremost because visible borders have vanished and people are free to decide where they want to live and work. Never before have people crossed borders and established international networks to such an extent as we are experiencing it today. Old and conventional structures were overcome and the world has been interconnected (ENGLISCH 12).
Sigurd Bergmann (23) in his Ethnics of Mobilities notices that, due to technical achievements, it has become easier and faster for us to travel, but at the same time the
5 Article Twelve of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes three different kinds of
freedom of movement: (1) Liberty of movement and freedom to choose residence; (2) Freedom to leave any country, including one’s own; and (3) the right to enter one’s own country (UDHR
choice of destination has become more complicated and much more dependent on evaluations of places. People planning to go abroad tend to weigh various components before making a final decision on where they want to go. In these matters, Sigurd Bergmann (23) points out the relevant notion that feeling at home “must include the motion of leaving a place and returning to it”. This statement can be an essential reference for artist residencies in terms of creating a comfortable atmosphere for the artists.
Other important criteria that people tend to take into consideration before engaging in mobility, are:
Weighing their social obligations, like familial ties or work obligations. How attached are they to their families and surrounding, does work allow them to go abroad? Will they loose their support structure at home once they go abroad? (GEISEN 10). Mobility indicates a complete change of ones social environment, which can include the loss of one’s social network, one’s home social security, health, or school system (KRIEGER, FERNANDEZ 3).
Age as well as one’s professional establishment are strongly connected to ones willingness of going abroad. Young and unestablished professionals seem to be more willing of changing places, than older, career wise successful people. The period of time people are willing to or can afford to spend abroad as well as economical factors such as more money or a better quality of employment can sometimes be relevant incentives for making a decision.
Language is often decisive in choosing one’s destination. People are either willing to learn a new language, improve their language skills or rely on their already existing knowledge of languages. Sometimes even the question of one’s identity or one’s sense of belonging can play an important role for deciding to go or not to go to a certain destination. Discovering one’s roots may inspire artists in their work abroad. Some people may have reservations going to certain countries due to mental or attitudinal constraints (which can touch upon religious or moral issues). A wish for a better local environment and the choice of place are of great relevance, as we have already seen in Sigurd Bergmann’s statement of feeling at home. Sigurd Bergmann (172) seems to put a lot of importance on the notion of places:
These criteria can have important impacts on the direction of mobility flows in Europe, which unfortunately have not been considered in evaluation of mobility flows so far. In the report from the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions seminary on worker mobility in 2006, one can find an interesting statement that describes the difference in choice of mobility between the EU 15 countries and the New Member States. In the EU 15 countries the choice is much more related to leisure and retirement, than it is the case in the New Member States, where the connection has mainly economical reasons. This shows that the national background can also influence one’s choice for mobility.
One thing is clear in any case: people do not choose their destination for working abroad by accident, they tend instead to weigh certain factors beforehand.
Especially important for artists might be the following criterion: is the place inspiring enough? Luc Boltanski and Laurent Thévenot deal with the subject of inspiration extensively in their publication De la justification: les économies de la grandeur, in which they discuss in a chapter about the world of inspiration. According to the authors, one can only find true inspiration by means of enlightenment, a source of energy that comes from outside but that is being perceived as something from the inner self. This inspirational-world functions without rules, money, hierarchy, laws or other such criteria. The inspired person takes distance from casual and daily things and exchanges it for the original, mysterious or invisible. This inspiration quickly turns into the wish of being creative. According to the authors, these qualities of inspirational creativity are usually being ascribed to artists, writers, women or children (BOLTANSKI, THÉVENOT 222-223). It would be interesting to know why the authors pointed out these qualities explicitly to women, as creativity is usually not reduced to gender.
something that artist residencies are trying to offer, by providing artists with possibilities in a new surrounding, taking care of bureaucratic business for them, giving them a place to live and letting them focus solely on their artistic work. In one sentence, artist residencies are trying to enable the artists to encounter inspiration.
Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello deal, in their publication Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme, with the mobility aspect in terms of professional opportunity. Among contemporary job prerequisites, they mention in the publication, some can also be ascribed to artists: flexible working hours, project orientated working, network-like organizational structures, self-management, importance of creativity, innovation and permanent change, independence as well as willingness for mobility (BOLTANSKI, CHIAPELLO 213-226). Mobility according to Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello can also provide people with social capital, that they get from their network. This network offers them the possibility to get involved in new projects over and over again (BOLTANSKI, CHIAPELLO 100-146).
Pascal Gielen (195) examined the artists position in relation to the importance of networks and the result is that, both career-oriented artists, as well as artists who create mainly for art’s sake, demand a professional network in order to achieve their goals.
An interesting aspect that Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello further mention is the asymmetry between mobile and immobile people. In order to be successful and renowned, one has to be in motion and to constantly make new contacts (BOLTANSKI, CHIAPELLO 416). This pressure for building success through mobility causes fear of exclusion and discrimination for the immobile.
This asymmetry is also interesting in regards to artist mobility, especially in relation to artist residencies. Artist residencies as political instruments, are not only interesting for mobile artists, as the principle demands an artistic exchange from foreign artists. Immobile artists, on the other hand side, are confronted with the fear that they might lack behind and will not be able to gain an equal international prestige or success. This opposition between mobile and immobile artists, will be a subject and further discussed in the analyzing chapter.
include civil society in the act of mobility and to question how foreigners can be absorbed in the social structures of a country. In order to guarantee full success on the social level, mobility should be well structured and the financial instruments should enable the transmission of intercultural competencies to the community, through artistic collaboration (SELIM 15).
4.4 Overview of the current situation of artist mobility in Europe
4.4.1 Supporters and Programs
With the passing of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, the unrestricted mobility of persons, goods and services in the European Union had been established. Artists, who belong to a particularly mobile occupational group, had been officially mentioned during the European Year of Workers Mobility in 2006 when the European Parliament declared that mobility should become a natural element in professional European career plans6. Since then, the fostering of mobility in the culture sector has grown even more important, especially during the enlargement of the European Union. The cultural scene has transformed into an extremely competitive arena, regarding the support and programs for travelling artists, as well as international artistic partnerships and collaborations. The importance of mobility for cultural professionals is reflected on the European agenda for culture since 2000, where it became a strategic objective. The same strategy had also been reinforced in the elaboration of the Culture program 2007-2013.
Further important steps, in supporting artist mobility on European level, according to the Mobility Matters study, are the High Level Expert Forum on Mobility that was set up by the European Commission as well as the Working Group on Improving the Conditions for the Mobility of Artists and other Professionals in the Culture Field, which was assembled by the EU Culture ministers in the Education, Youth and Culture Council in Brussels in March 2008, in the range of the open method of coordination7. Furthermore, the current and future EU Presidencies put the mobility of cultural professionals on their agenda (WIESAND Mobility Matters 2).
6 For further information see: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/06/1723&for
March 2009, 14:36
7 Open method of coordination: is an inter-governmental instrument of the Lisbon strategy that is based
Three considerable European examples can be added to the important supporting instruments for artist mobility:
Firstly, there are three civil society platforms (Platform on Access to Culture, platform on Cultural Industries and the platform for Intercultural Europe) which have been set up in 2008 by the European Commission with the aim of providing close communication with the cultural sector.
Secondly, a pilot project for artist mobility8 was established in 2008 thanks to
the European Parliament which voted on 1,5 Million Euros of the 2008 budget dedicated to the project that supports the mobility of artists with the help of the open method of coordination. In 2008, the EP again voted on 1,5 Million Euros for a continuation of the pilot project. Due to this approval, the European Commission received additional money to foster transnational mobility programs and schemes in the field of culture.
Thirdly, Cultural Contact Points are responsible for the promotion of the EU Culture Programs in each Member State and provide information on networks, funding and contacts. Some of them, the PRACTICS Cultural Mobility Contact Points9, also provide specific information on mobility. So far, they are still pilot mobility contact points in four countries (Belgium, Spain, Wales and the Netherlands) that provide user-friendly information on cultural mobility in the European Union for incoming and outgoing cultural professionals and are funded by the European Commission. Such portals and information points can facilitate the mobility process immensely therefore simplifying the artist’s life.
The number of such Europe-wide programs and supporting means is growing gradually. The European Union, as well as the World Trade Organization, have encouraged the movement of people, as well as goods, across borders (GEISEN 10). Mobility in education, as well as in the field of arts and culture, accounts for a big part of EU-funded programs which include political aims such as promoting European integration.
However, not only on EU level is artist mobility a very current issue, but also on the political and cultural agendas of the Member States (national, regional and municipal level) this issue figures high. This is reflected in the rising number of workshops and
conferences, as well as in the establishment of governmental working groups on mobility (such as the Interministerial Working Group on Mobility in Austria – the IMAG für Künstlermobilität). Cultural policy makers are recently strongly involved in the development of the artist mobility funding programs, because it is being perceived as a necessity for cultural cooperation, cultural diversity, intercultural competence and dialogue.
Furthermore, mobility is often used as a strategic tool in international relations, cultural diplomacy and development programs. Within the cultural sector itself, arts councils, culture agencies, networks, foundations and art organizations have initiated programs of mobility, which are responsive to the needs of artists and place creativity and communication at the centre of the process (STAINES 4).
It should be noted at this point that, in the past the role of national governments regarding the mobility of cultural professionals was mainly aimed at cultural diplomacy10. Nowadays, artist mobility is no longer the monopoly of the Nation State, as Rod Fisher (2) tends to describe it. Government support has taken a backseat in Europe and made room for artist mobility initiatives that are able to exist without the support of national institutions. Non-state actors such as art galleries, dance companies, opera houses, live performance groups or other non-governmental art initiatives strongly support transnational artistic cooperation and are becoming more and more important players in the artistic mobility arena.
Mobile artists and cultural professionals can engage in projects in the following categorization that had been suggested by Judith Staines (35): Mobility programs are offered by national arts councils, culture agencies or other governmental agencies and national cultural institutes, sometimes in the form of bilateral cultural programs. Furthermore, supranational institutions, foundations, initiatives, networks, artist residencies and studio programs offer programs and projects for cultural professionals to participate. This is a very general division which can include both governmental or non-governmental initiatives.
One has to point out that, due to the fact that culture covers various artistic fields such as literature, fine arts, performing arts, film and media, there are different types of
10 The role of artists in cultural diplomacy is reduced to arts and artists being instruments in order to
programs and motivations for each field. The programs make a clear distinction for incoming and outgoing artists. The first category includes foreign cultural professionals who are being received in a specific country by the host program. Outgoing programs support national/resident artists that are going abroad.
In 2008 the ERICarts Institute prepared a detailed list11 of mobility schemes for outgoing and incoming artists, in the range of the Mobility Matters (25, 26) study, which can be summarized as follows:
*Infrastructure support schemes contain artists and writers residency programs as well as guest ateliers.
Scholarships for further training such as training scriptwriters or directors. *Research grants to live and work for a certain time abroad, e.g. for research projects and cultural cooperation.
*Go and see/Come and see exploration grants are travel bursaries to visit exhibitions or performances abroad.
*Event participation schemes offer grants for the participation in international festivals, art exhibitions or book fairs.
Touring schemes for groups enable music or dance ensembles to travel.
*Trans-national networking gives support for the participation of outgoing/incoming artists in trans-national projects.
Project or production grants allow a financing for translations or for a participation in international dance or film co-productions.
*Foreign market exploration grants enable cultural professionals to investigate locations and foreign markets.
Infrastructure support schemes, like artist residencies or guest ateliers, are a very popular concept, for both national governments and state actors. However, non-governmental institutions are taking over this resort. Research grants tend to be sponsored by universities or on non-governmental level. Exploration grants and event participation schemes are more likely to be supported by the state.
These specifications in the programs are only one of the many examples that make us realize how diverse and complex artist mobility and its programs are. Artists have to meet plenty of requirements in order to join a program. This can sometimes result in difficulties when artists are working in an interdisciplinary field.
11 Although the thesis focuses on visual artists, the list was intentionally kept complete. The specific
4.4.2 Situation of artist mobility in Western-, Central- and Eastern Europe
As the field of research touches upon the axis of Western, Central and Eastern Europe12, the situation of the artist mobility in this area will be shortly examined. The countries that had been selected for the interviews (Austria, Germany and Poland) will also be mentioned in this context.
Ritva Mitchell, the President of the Board of Governors of the ERICarts Institute, sums up the current situation of the development of artistic mobility in Europe:
“Most movements are from east to west, from the south to the centre, and from the poles to the centre. The causes are mostly economic, but some are political or purely artistic. There are movements in the opposite directions, too, as a result of a search for new inputs or for cheaper locations (e.g. cinema productions).(…) If you look at Eastern Europe, movement often means a one-way ticket. There should be investment in the cultural life of these countries so that cultural professionals have opportunities to work there. And then mobility would be a clear choice.” (FARINHA 13)
Ritva Mitchell’s observation that there is still a one way oriented artistic movement had been affirmed during my interviews (e.g. by Annemarie Türk, who pointed out this trend and the need for a change in this pattern), but also negated by Ika Sienkiewicz-Nowacka who notices that the trend is starting to change by interested Western artists coming to the East. However the main problem, why still too few Western artists move to the East, is that Western Europe still does not have enough knowledge about the cultural and artistic landscapes of Eastern Europe. The lack of interest of Western artists also refers to the fact that the art market, the gallery scenes and the general distribution of art in the East are not fully developed yet (KOWAR 13). This factum strongly demands for a sustainable development of support-programs as well as a stimulation of an artistic exchange in this geographical direction.
Although, after the fall of communism, it seemed as if directions would take different turns as Western societies discovered new cultural terrain and started initiating cultural cooperations with the newly emerged non-governmental partners of the East. Since then, the cultural landscape in Central and Eastern Europe has changed rapidly. Up until
12 This division refers to the “Division of Europe’s principal regions by cultural criteria and countries”,
which had been proposed by the Committee on geographical names (StAGN) in 2005:
http://141.74.33.52/stagn/JordanEuropaRegional/tabid/71/Default.aspx 15 March 2009, 14:36.
today the number of outgoing mobile artists is still higher than artists wanting to go to the East. This phenomenon has been approved by the statistics of the artist mobility flows from 200013, which state that, between 1996 and 2000, 70% of artists were travelling to the West, 19% within Central and Eastern Europe and only 4% from the West to the East (HOUBANOVA 59). As a comparison, I would like to point out a few figures on the general worker mobility14 in Europe from 2005, which have been
mentioned in the Report of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working conditions seminary in 2006. In general, Nordic countries have the highest levels of mobility (approximately 40%), followed by Ireland and the United Kingdom (around 30%), Central Europe shows a mobility level of around 20% (an exception here is France, which has a 30% level). The lowest mobility level can be found in Southern European countries with less than 15% and in the former communist Member States with around 10% (KRIEGER, FERNANDEZ 5). The same report offers an estimation on the mobility potential for the next five years in chosen countries of the new Member States (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic), the numbers are as follows: There is a clear distinction between four countries (CZ, HU, SK and SI) that are estimated to have a rather low level of mobility 1-2% in the European Union, as opposed to Poland, where the interest rate in mobility might go up to 7-9% (KRIEGER, FERNANDEZ 10).
The constant shifting of borders after the enlargement of the European Union in 2004 had an expected impact on the artists mobility flow in Europe. Central and Eastern Europe became new poles for artistic migration.
At this point, the example of Poland will be explored. In Poland, fine artists, musicians and (ballet) dancers from Eastern Europe, mainly from the Ukraine and Belarus, were and are currently seeking employment opportunities. At the same time Polish dancers, fine artists and musicians concentrate on seeking opportunities in Western- European countries such as France or Great Britain. Polish actors and writers usually tend to stay in their country, as their language restricts them to their home market (HEISKANEN Profile of Poland). Since May 2004 strong artistic emigration flows went to the UK and Ireland. It has been estimated that in 2006 there were more
13 There is no recent update on the artist mobility flow in Europe available, therefore only the numbers
from 2000 can be considered in this paper.
than 100 000 emigrants from Poland and Lithuania in the UK. It was also noticed that Polish and Lithuanian artists had been moving to better positions in the core EU countries and Switzerland, whereas their places in Poland had been filled with artists from non-EU countries (HEISKANEN 49). This phenomenon is also known under the terms brain-drain, brain-gain15 which contains a shifting of knowledge, or in our case of artistic creation and input, from one country to another, with either filling or emptying gaps.
Talking about brain-drain in connection to artist mobility, Dimitrije Vujadinovic (8) points out that one has to be aware of the fact that the size of a country does matter. He explains this in his report One Way Ticket by giving an example. If a significant number of Russian artists left their home country, it would not be that much of a problem as if a significant number of e.g. Serbian or Macedonian artists left their country. A comparative example would be if a hundred Russian artists moved to France, the impact would not be as significant as if these artists came to Serbia or Macedonia (VUJADINOVIC 8). In the latter case, cultural life would undergo a much more significant change. This shows us, that not only the size of a country and the amount of artists that are moving abroad do matter in terms of either causing problems (drain) or having a positive effect (gain). There are additional important factors such as historical background, contemporary art scene and popularity which should be taken into consideration when evaluating the ‘brain-drain, brain-gain’ effects in culture.
Since the enlargement of the European Union, the number of cross-border cooperations (with a focus on artist residencies and artistic exchange programs) in Central and Eastern Europe has rapidly increased. Danielle Cliche mentions this development along with its reasons in her study Arts and Artists in Europe: New Challenges:
“There has been a recent increase in the number of official trans-regional cooperation networks (altogether over 20), especially in Central and Eastern Europe (…). They are often designed to give smaller countries a stronger voice in the overall European concerto, or to find new terrains for action, (…). While focusing mainly on political, economic and technical cooperation, trans-regional organisations are also developing new cultural exchange programs and meeting
15 Brain-drain, brain-gain: brain-drain signifies a large scale emigration of skilled individuals in search
places for artists e.g. the new Visegrad artist-in-residence program, Baltic Young Artists Biennale etc.” (CLICHE 2).
Andreas Wiesand (National Policies 12) confirms this development of fostering regional and trans-border cooperation in his study from 2007. However, he further points out that even with the programs in existence, there are still not enough co-operational programs of this kind and that artists from Central and Eastern Europe should have more opportunities to travel in between their own regions. He mentions the importance of programs such as the International Visegrad Fund16. Obviously, the
fostering of regional cooperation is a necessity which seems to have been overshadowed by the bigger mobility programs. During the research for this thesis, not many programs where artists would be enabled to travel in between their own regions were to be found.
The situation in Eastern Europe has been described in Andreas Wiesand’s (32) Mobility Matters study. He explains that mobility schemes in Eastern Europe are not developed through the cultural policy of the state but within the various cultural disciplines on different government levels. Mobility in Eastern Europe is still seen as a multilateral or bilateral agreement in the range of international cultural cooperation. Therefore, mainly cultural institutions or non-governmental organisations are the ones that offer scholarships, exchange programs, support for touring groups and for the participation of artists at international events and artists residencies. External sources, such as the EU Culture 2007-2013 program, the UNESCO Aschberg Bursaries for Artists, the STEP Beyond scheme of the European Cultural Foundation or the Gulliver Connect Program of Felix Meritis Amsterdam, are equally important sources of mobility support for artists in Eastern Europe (WIESAND Mobility Matters 32).
Important supporters of artist mobility in Central and Western Europe are public bodies (on the local and regional level), ministries or public agencies, which are responsible for culture and foreign policy as well as independent (private) foundations. In many Western European countries mobility funding is strongly connected to cultural policy priorities such as creative industries or cultural diversity. There is additionally a noticeable growth of non-governmental support for artist mobility. The number of international residencies/studios for foreign artists in Central and Western Europe,
16International Visegrad Fund: is an international organization, that had been established by the V4
either public or private, is recently expanding. Furthermore, there are semi-official agencies in charge of supporting artist mobility that set their focus on regional exchange with their neighbouring countries such as KulturKontakt Austria. The institution is partially financed by the government and sees itself as an acting platform for Central and Eastern Europe which supports cross border cooperation projects with neighbouring countries and beyond. The role of Austria in regards to artist mobility in Europe is to act as a cultural promoter and a platform for artists from the old and new European Union Member States (WIESAND Mobility Matters 28,29).
In Germany, most of the cultural cooperation and mobility projects take place outside public bodies and find their funding through private foundations, sponsors or commercial productions. In comparison to the educational sector in Germany, where mobility is well established, mobility in the cultural scene is still not considered as a priority (WIESAND Profile on Germany). This might have happened due to the fact that the art scene in Germany is already internationally orientated, which appears to be taken for granted by politicians.
In the last ten, fifteen years, artistic and cultural exchanges between Eastern, Central and Western Europe have produced a lot of successful projects and led to the establishment of various cultural co-operational networks. This was important especially for artists from former communistic countries because they were given the opportunity to share their artistic creations with a larger audience and to broaden their artistic horizon through new creative stimuli and input. The concept of cultural identity underwent an important process and faced a new context, through the means of enlarging the national and traditional components, as well as by exploring and incorporating new European cultures. Howsoever, there are still big differences and hindrances for artists coming from the East to Central or Western Europe. These drawbacks shall be discussed in the next chapter.
4.5 Assets and drawbacks of artist mobility
Assets
The possibility of engaging in an artistic exchange across borders is a great asset that allows the artist to encounter other cultures and to experience a wider European dimension (FARINHA 9). Culture can serve as an instrument to help people cross borders, interact and learn from each other. The mobility of professionals in the culture sector enforces not only regional and national but also international cooperation which enhances people’s access to culture. These principles are guaranteed under international and European Union law (CAPIAU 98). In that sense, artist mobility programs in the sphere of culture can be seen as a unifying element that can help overcome frontiers.
Worth mentioning at this point is also the emergence of open mobility programs, which do not focus on specific artistic divisions, but are adapting to the growth of multidisciplinary artists (WIESAND Andreas Mobility Matters 40). This kind of program allows artists from various disciplines that do not fall in a particular category to benefit from the funding of artistic cross-border cooperation.
Mobility in terms of bilateral and multilateral cooperation can help to foster cultural diplomacy, political cooperation, social understanding, long term economic development as well as trade in the cultural sector. Mobility can facilitate the promotion of the cultural image of a country abroad. It can stimulate the personal artistic process as well as the European integration process and it can help to promote cultural diversity by challenging ones viewpoint and by promoting respect and intercultural dialogue. Mobility gives countries equal access to the European discourse and prepares candidate countries for the enlargement of the European Union. In the political context of the European Union (with its enlargement and its relations to third countries), artist mobility opens up new strategies and possibilities for creative exchange that crosses boundaries (on a historical, physical and intellectual level). This is decisive in order to enable intercultural communication (DeVLIEG 1).
Artist mobility can act as creative stimulus for the artist’s creational process by finding inspiration and experience in a new environment, where they can recharge their artistic batteries. As encountered in chapter 4.3., Luc Boltanski and Laurent Thévenot dealt with the subject of the inspirational world where a person can best be creative when he/she takes distance from casual and daily things and turns to the exceptional and the original. A change of place can provide the artist with new realities, fresh viewpoints or new artistic languages and techniques (FARINHA 8). Besides the fact that artists are able to assimilate new input to their work, they can also present it to a new audience. This audience can supply the artists with a fresh feedback based on a different perspective or reception. The local audience and art scene are both able to profit in return from a new inspiration and get to know other contemporary international artistic viewpoints.
Mobility can lead to an increase in the establishment or the development of international artistic careers. This can be accomplished by the artist’s extension of his/her network as well as the enlargement of his/her audience. Joseph Jamar, the Coordinator of the 2006 European Year of Workers Mobility, recognizes mobility as a big asset regarding one’s career development:
“Mobility should be recognised as a lifelong learning experience and rewarded as a career advancement. It can help increase employability and also improve professional and informal skills through contact with other working environments, customs and languages” (FARINHA 11).
Joseph Jamar’s statement is affirmed by the many discussions on flexibility and the willingness for mobility in ones job, which is seen as one of the most important prerequisites for work nowadays. However, one should not forget that not every work field demands mobility. Culture and art however are strongly connected to mobility. Artists tend to aim for international exposure and fame, which they are able to establish and develop through their international network and e.g. exposure in foreign galleries. Mobility programs in these regards may give artists the time and chance to establish contacts, which can help them further their career.
existing European cultural networks that are active in the fields of artist mobility have emerged into important information centres, where information from various countries is gathered and distributed. Yvette Gieles (28) points out an important aspect: networks not only function as information providers, but can be also seen as communities where artists and organisations come together. The web portal On the move offers information on mobility for organizations and artists, whereas Res Artis and Trans Artists, both based in the Netherlands, specialize on information on artist-in-residence programs for individual artists.
When networks and platforms for the mobility of artists are further established, it will be easier for artists and institutions to find their way through the jungle of programs and to build on sustainable artistic projects.
In sharp contrast with the positive effects that artist mobility has to offer stand many drawbacks which still keep artists from participating in mobility programs or complicate the process for the already participating artists. In the following a summary of the most important obstacles for the mobility of cultural professionals will be presented:
Drawbacks
One of the main issues in the discussion on artist mobility is that there is a big lack of empirical research on the subject. Furthermore, important statistics as well as evaluations of the various programs and funding systems are missing. This data could help improve the drawbacks of artist mobility.
The Mobility Matters study by Andreas Wiesand (41) mentions this problem and notices the difficulty to keep track of countries actually hosting cultural professionals (with the exception of residency programs, which most of the time ask for an evaluation and keep trace of their artist visitors).
An overall problem in relation to artist mobility across borders is the lack of a universal definition for the status of an artist. The usage of the term artist has been used in various and ambiguous ways (CAPIAU 7). Other problems occur with the differences between countries in the legal status and the employment conditions of artists. Without a universal definition it is difficult to ensure equal rights and possibilities for artists.
