Author: Edited by Caitlin Strokosch
One of the greatest strengths of the field of artists’ communities is the diversity of approaches to providing support to artists in the creation of new work. Indeed, while the Alliance’s original membership of eighteen artists’ communities shared many of the same characteristics, the more than 200 current members represent as many different models as there are types of artists. It is this variety that allows for the support of all artists, at different points in their process and in all manners of creative work. What unites artists’ communities is, at their core, the common belief in the creative process and trust in the artist. While residency programs vary in how they nurture the creative process, the fundamental intention of all artists’ communities is to provide artists with a supportive environment for experimentation and innovation that is process, rather than product, focused.
The exchange of ideas is also at the heart of any artists’ community. Most residency programs bring a number of creative individuals together in a setting that encourages conversation, collaboration, and sharing of perspectives. Even those programs that serve only one resident artist at a time generally offer interaction with a broader community as a core part of the experience. Whether working side-by-side with other artists or in an isolated, private studio, opportunities for fellowship and active engagement are key components of any artists’ residency. Artist workspaces are one model of residency: they offer shared studio space that encourages engagement between artists and often emphasize a particular art form and its associated facilities, equipment, materials, and technical assistance. Artist workspace residencies can be a practical response to the logistical needs specific to an art form, such as sculpture, printmaking, glass arts, and digital media. Like all residencies, they support artists in the creation of new work in a variety of ways, which may include financial support, room and board, professional development, production assistance, exhibition, and more.
Some 30% of artists’ communities follow this collective, interactive workspace model, and another 20% provide a combination of private and shared studios for artists. At McColl Center for Visual Art in Charlotte, North Carolina, for example, artists-in-residence are provided with a private studio space, in addition to extensive shared workspace—including a media lab; machine, metal and woodshop; dark room; printmaking studio; ceramic studio; and blacksmith shop. Through the workspace, as well as in its programming, the organization emphasizes interaction among artists and between artists and the local community.
Artists who seek out workspace residencies may prefer working within a collaborative environment or may simply work in a medium that requires access to facilities, equipment and technical expertise not readily available in a private studio setting. For the residency programs and the artists alike, the issue is often one of balance—between technical exploration and creative reflection, and between solitude and interaction with others.
For artist Penny Dell, who was in residence in January 2003 at Women’s Studio Workshop and in February 2004 at Vermont Studio Center, “both had the intended result, which was that I focused on my work and generated a wonderful harvest of new prints for exhibition as well as many new directions to explore in the future. At both residencies I was impacted by the work of fellow residents and developed some wonderful new friendships.” While Women’s Studio Workshop offers shared workspace, it was there that she found greater solitude, compared to Vermont Studio Center, which offers private studio space to some fifty artists-in-residence each month. “The Women’s Studio Workshop was quieter and more introspective. There was interaction with the terrific community—as much as I wanted. There was as much guidance and interest as I wanted and also respect for working time and few interruptions.” Penny found both residencies to be beneficial, and that each allowed her ample time to work without distraction. “By helping me focus on my art ideas, both residencies helped me to significantly fastforward the embodiment of these ideas.”
At Kala Art Institute, a workspace residency in Berkeley, California, “It’s all about nurturing the creative spark and helping artists produce the work they want to create,” says founder and director Archana Horsting. Kala operates out of the former Heinz Ketchup factory and has large, shared workspaces in printmaking, digital media, electronic media, and photography, as well as an exhibition gallery. While Kala was envisioned as a collaborative style of residency, the founders recognize the value of more solitary residencies as well. “I wouldn’t have one without the other,” says Archana. “Residencies are one of the very best ways to support living artists, and having many kinds of residencies is essential to the ecology of supporting living artists. We have more in common than we have differences.”
Kala’s establishment as a workspace residency was both practical and philosophical. “We didn’t have a land grant or enough funding to purchase a lot of property, so a big, rural retreat just wasn’t an option. It was a question of priorities, too —what we think we can do best that artists can’t do elsewhere, like having access to large-scale printing equipment…. We would have liked to give artists-in-residence private studios, too, if there was funding and space” says Archana, “but individual quiet time and isolation still happen here.”
Kala’s priorities also include being an ongoing resource to the artists who come there, rather than simply a one-time experience. This means making the facility available for studio rentals, providing equipment that can be checked out short-term, and having a well-established exhibition program. Indeed, two-thirds of Kala’s renting artists are former artists-in-residence who remain connected to Kala for the facilities and technical support, as well as the community.
Archana has found that printmaking brings together lots of different kinds of artists. “Many artists from different media focus on works on paper at some point in their career or creative process. And now that our program has expanded beyond more traditional printmaking equipment, to include digital and electronic media especially, there’s too much happening for any one person to know everything. Having staff to provide technical assistance is really important, and all our staff are artists in order to focus on the artists’ needs, help determine equipment upgrades, etc.”
Suzanne Fetscher, president and executive director of McColl Center for Visual Art, describes how their program combines isolation and interaction. “We are an urban model, which is not just about our geography, but our philosophy as well. We connect artists from around the world with local artists and the local community, and we expect everyone to interact with the community.” McColl Center provides communal workspace, technical support, and significant stipends to their artists-in-residence. In addition, each artist-in-residence is given a private studio and an individual apartment off-site so that there are ample opportunities for solitude.
Though McColl Center encourages interaction and requires artists to participate in weekly open studios, “We are housed in a 30,000-square-foot building, so even if everyone is working, they are not on top of each other.” McColl Center used to have group dinners among the artists-in-residence; however, the artists felt this was too forced, and preferred to have the option of being by themselves in their apartments, working in the studios, or gathering together informally —something they end up doing voluntarily.
While providing both shared and private workspace makes McColl Center a sort of hybrid residency program, it is not uncommon in the field. What sets McColl Center —and others, such as Anderson Ranch Arts Center and the Sundance Institute—apart is its state-of-the art facilities. “Having access to equipment artists can experiment with is so important here,” says Suzanne. “Almost every artist-in-residence explores new media while they are here, like a ceramicist learning to weld, because of the workspace access and technical assistance we provide.” This creates a greater expectation and responsibility to maintain up-to-date equipment and facilities; funds from McColl Center’s endowment are primarily use to reinvest in the facility.
Managing artists’ expectations is an important part of all residency programs, especially for those where there is greater interaction between other artists or the local community. The collective workspace is not for everyone. Kala has found that most artists self-select the place that best suits them, and they make it clear up-front that there is a high level of interaction at Kala. At McColl Center, most of the artists attracted to the residency are at a point in their careers where they are craving such interaction; often they are mid-career artists who have spent years working in a more isolated environment. “We’re very direct in our pre-residency interviews regarding expectations of interaction with other artists. This program is about intellectual and creative exchange. If they are interested in isolation, McColl is not the place for them, and we encourage them to look elsewhere.”
Finding peers who understand the complexities of running such programs is a great challenge for these directors. Says Archana, “The Alliance is important, because no other organization focuses on process. It takes a very complicated infrastructure to support creation—from equipment to garbage collection to hazardous waste issues—and it’s hard enough to find peers who understand the program, budget, facilities needs, etc., let alone the importance of supporting creation in the first place.”
The Alliance has seen tremendous growth in both workspace residencies as well as other residency models. In the last twenty-five years the number of artists’ communities in the U.S. has increased by nearly 400%. The expansion of the field in sheer numbers as well as variety of approaches affirms the belief that no two artists work in exactly the same way nor desire the same level of interaction. Any one-size-fits-all philosophy falls short of addressing the complex needs of today’s artists, and leading a field that is committed to serving all artists in a wealth of ways is the greatest honor—and challenge—of the Alliance.
One way the Alliance is evolving to better serve its members is by identifying and building affinity groups among specific residency models, including those connected to museums, residencies for international artists, workspace residencies, and urban artists’ communities. The peer network within the Alliance is rich in its collective information-sharing and common values, yet opportunities abound for smaller consortia with unique concerns to come together. The Alliance also provides a strong collective voice, engaging the field as a whole to address the challenges that affect all artists’ communities. “I am so grateful to the Alliance for providing an association with my peers. And building these smaller consortia under the larger umbrella of the Alliance is very helpful,” says Archana. “The problems of running our kind of programs can be distinct, but within this larger field, they are analogous problems. In a field as small and misunderstood as artists’ residencies, we have to all work to get a bigger pie, not argue over the crumbs.”