The current Executive Director of MacDowell, one of the most prestigious art residencies in the US, recently wrote, “A true artists residency will offer you free lodging and even a small stipend. The one I run offers three free meals a day prepared by a chef and his team and private studio space to write. We also (if you need it) reimburse your travel costs to get to our campus. This should be standard for true residencies. If they need you to pay tuition or lodging, reconsider going and look for ones that offer more or full support.”
This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this line of thinking. Brainard Carey, who on his YouTube video said, “generally, you don’t want the residencies that don’t have funding.” Carey has said much on this topic, along those lines.
Now, mind you, MacDowell has an endowment of over $34 million dollars, charges an application fee of $30, and turns down over 3,600 artists each year. Those unaccepted artists are basically helping to underwrite the few who are accepted.
Yaddo is another legendary residency in the US. They charge a $35 application fee, receive over 4,000 applications a year, and fill about 275 spots. Besides raising over $140,000 annually from those applications, they also have a $38 million endowment.
This same story holds for other elite or prestigious residencies. In short, it helps that an organization has an endowment. If not, they at least need the funds to dedicate to fundraising in order not charge, or even compensate artists.
I have some reservations about this philosophy: “Real residencies shouldn’t have a cost.” For one, the reality is that very few artists get to attend those residencies, fostering a vicious cycle in which the successful become even more successful.
It’s also pretty apparent that with those application fees, there is a cost, only it’s being distributed among all the applicants, not unlike a raffle or state lottery program.
That philosophy stigmatizes the experiences of tens of thousands of artists who self-fund their residency experience. There is no reason for anyone to feel that they are less of an artist simply because the system hasn’t supported their endeavors.
Now, I realize that there are a lot of unscrupulous residencies out there, some no better than an Airbnb for artists. And then there are those programs in which, yes, the artists subsidize the real costs of their residency, but in doing so, help support a legitimate non-profit that brings value not only to the artists but also to the community.
At ArteSumapaz, we successfully secured a substantial grant, enabling us to underwrite the residencies of 13 Colombian women artists. It’s a key strategy to continue the program. Thus, the fees that artists pay actually help other artists who would not have the ability to have that same experience.
An artist-paid residency program also creates an environment that fosters greater diversity among artists from across the spectrum of the creative journey. We’ve had artists who were on their way to university in the Fall, as well as artists who’d been teaching at a university for over 35 years.
We believe that a residency can be a life-transformative experience that can inform your creative journey for decades to come. And while it would be wonderful if there were more support for the artist life out there, we don’t think it’s ideal to wait for that. Oh, and by the way, the three meals a day thing; we’ve got that, too.
What do you think? Share your comments below!
(first published https://ricdragon.substack.com/p/why-its-ok-to-pay-for-your-artist)
ES 
EN