Is Skills Development in the Cultural Sector a Joke?

An Opinion

The issue of skills development in the cultural and creative sector is quite close to my heart. More so, when having had my tenure in a variety of learnerships and internships geared at up-skilling me for the job market which transforms with every new technological innovation that hits the shelves. As a filmmaker and writer who is also concerned about politics and science, I often remember how I once my dream was to become an astrophysicist. That dream was derailed by adolescent ambition spawned out of exposure to media that gratified glamour as opposed to hard labour, and sadly, the scientific fraternity might have been deprived of a young African Spherical Astronomy Physicist.

To return to the matter at hand, the skills set I selected during my higher education stages is now impacting direly on my objectives of becoming  an active member of the country’s economy, for it appears that this sector does not make money.

We commonly hear phrases like "creative economy," "creative class," and "cultural economy" when policy makers allude to this sector of the economy.

Economic developers, business and municipal leaders are using these terms of reference when gauging types of jobs and industries, including the sectors of visual, performing, and literary arts, as well as applied fields like architecture, graphic design, and marketing and the skills pool related to these sectors and their economic impact. But integration of the visions of the creative community and business leaders seems to be an aspect that is lacking, considering the disproportionate benefits gained through activities of the arts and culture sector in relation to the economic vitality of the practitioners of arts. The incessant debates about the value of art has ushered in what Tiffany Jenkins calls ‘the rise of a non-judgemental age in the arts world’, and the sentiments ploughed by this age means a great deal for the ‘valuation’ of arts in general. And by valuation, I am not implying a commodification of art or any cultural knowledge productions methods, but simply ask that art be economically valued and placed within the discourses of the knowledge economy.

In a country famous for its creative minds dying as paupers, I am now faced with questions of the measurability of my present art as a format of knowledge production which should be compensated within parameters of legislated standards. But are there such standards? And when the DAC proclaims my sector of practice as ‘The golden Economy’, does this mean monetary rewards are in sight for the inexhaustible works of authors, filmmakers, artists and craft practitioners who are the backbone of the cultural and creative industries?

There is now a noticeable boom of arts and culture businesses, ranging from Art galleries, dealers, auctioneers and independent cinemas, it would follow that a clear synergy arises between the corporate sector, theatre practitioners and other performers. Yet there hasn’t been a formal study to articulate the economic value of the arts business and their complementary roles and functions within the country’s gross domestic product. Drawing upon international literature, the sector is sometimes referred to as the “creative economy” which often has a greater emphasis on creative digital content. There can also be some debate as to the extent sports and recreation should be considered as part of the sector.  

But ultimately, the sector should be defined by using three broad dimensions of product, occupation and industries.

Undeniably, concentration of arts and culture employment seems to be around four cities and the proportion is skewed when compared to rural regions which could well constitute a small percentage of arts and culture employment.

When legislation ordained the creation of community art centres for instance, it never put forward impact analysis systems essential for monitoring the economic viability of the skills developed at such centres.

The sustainable functioning of such community arts centres depended on a clear vision of the state’s role in cultural and creative skills development, with coherent cultural policies at sub-national level, effective intergovernmental cooperation, an increased partnership between the state and corporate sector (art sales market), and the diversification of community arts services

At this point in our democracy we see graduates inundating community arts centres due to lack of formal employment in sector categories.

Art organizations and graduate practitioners are seeing opportunities for participation in artistic and cultural activities from a merely vocational and educational point of view, as opposed to income generation strategic approaches.

Why don’t therefore the arts pay?

Is cultural skills development a mere brain-drain where unemployed graduates (who have “the scares” scientific, medical and technical skills) find a second choice and refuge as opposed to facing destitution of unemployment?

Arts and Culture employment in South Africa seems distributed across the specific categories (digital media, film, art and theatre), and how this compares to the national distribution of arts and culture employment in these group requires a detailed industry specific break-down.

Robust growth has been witnessed for the past decade occurring in the Advertising Services, Design industry, Film and Video, and Performing Arts segments, but why are we not seeing formal employment which yields visible revenue for art practitioners?

After a decade it seems that few of the CAC’s objectives have been achieved. What was planned as a leading cultural redress and democratization exercise has largely fallen apart, while at the same time state control over funding undermined the sustainability of the corporate intervention in the arts and cultural centres which would monetise activities.

There is however, a growing gastronomical entrepreneurial energy brewing among entrepreneurs in their 20s and 30s (who often have a strong sense of community and creativity) to ideas of opening restaurants, bars, pubs, specialty shops, butcheries, coffee shops.

These businesses require and thrive on artistic aesthetic which in turn creates economic revenue. But can we say the artists are benefiting adequately? These venture are well and sundry only if they will exhibit tangible impact on the economic conditions of art practitioners, and this bring us back to the issue of ‘the value of art’ which is a fundamental topic for discourse on the dynamics of the ‘golden economy’.

Perhaps the issue speaks to a simple analogy where Brett Murray’s The Spear could well be worth R120 000 (whether before or after the defacing and considering that P-Diddy bought another artwork from the series at R150 000), or where crafts made by Venda women in a cultural village aren’t price-tagged at the range of beaded necklaces on David Tlale’s models.

And what are the standards and ways used by society to assess these various artworks? Does the work of an under-resourced, self-taught township artist lack the required ‘high art’ elements pertaining to decorative value which more often attach commercial worth to the piece?

I mean art preferences cannot simply reflect one’s social position. Or do they? Do they determine how society values art?

The valuation of art in present economics though undoubtedly based on class preferences cannot be discussed from this superficial vantage point by the art community, business and government – I think.

M. Christine Dwyer (senior vice president, RMC Research Corporation) produced research findings that surmised the urgency as fundament to “the recognition of a community's arts and culture assets (and the marketing of them) as an important element of economic development”.

She further alluded that “economic development is enhanced by concentrating creativity through both physical density and human capital. By locating firms, artists, and cultural facilities together, a multiplier effect can result”.

Planners can make deliberate connections between the arts and culture sector and other sectors, such as tourism and manufacturing, to improve economic outcomes by capitalizing on local assets.

She further concludes that ‘The economic development field has changed in the last decade from one that primarily emphasized location and firm-based approaches to one that more overtly acknowledges the development of human capital. Human capital refers to the sets of skills, knowledge, and value contributed by a population and has become a recognized asset as firms choose where to locate (and cities choose what to advertise and develop and whom to recruit) and entrepreneurs develop economic activity.’