The box of pyrotechnic chemicals turned out to be a customer’s computer equipment, wrongly delivered. The chemicals took another 2 weeks.
More hopeful, got some flames, but still problems: The flames blow out easily, and don’t progress quickly enough.
This needs serious development time, which I don’t have. Next step: apply for a grant, allowing me to take time away from the computer work without getting into debt, or folding the business.
A few phone calls to the Arts Council point me to “Grants for the Arts”. Am reminded quickly that the funding culture has changed radically in the last decade.
In 1991 I perseveringly read the Arts Council policy document, and was gratified that multi-artform and experimental work featured as priorities, leading to a 20k grant in 1998. In 2000 I laboured through another dense ACE document and found that policy had swung to prioritising quality and high-performing individuals. Then the kids arrived and it all went dark for a decade.
Anyhow, I find “Quality” still tops the agenda. This is difficult: objective “quality” is something I’ve never focussed on. But in the application form, I must convince ACE of the quality of my work, and I don’t have a good starting point for this.
Paul Ackerley, (ACE South East combined arts) was very helpful, citing “quality of the idea”, “quality of the research”, “relevance”, “connection to wider contemporary practice”, “membership of a (more a less formal) peer group”, etc. The kinds of things that get discussed at length on these blogs.
My first reaction is: of course my work is quality … This is all about “Artistic Integrity”, stuff that’s all second nature: Of course my work is relevant, otherwise I wouldn’t do it. Of course I regularly discuss my work with my friendship group, that’s one of the joys of it! Of course I’m connected to wider contemporary practice (though I could be more connected), I couldn’t practice in a cultural vacuum. Of course I research my work thoroughly … I find work based on ignorance really annoying, I don’t want others to react to my work that way. Of course it’s a good idea, otherwise it wouldn’t be inspiring.
Surely artists aren’t doing irrelevant self-obsessed work without research, friends, gallery visits or reading AN or other magazines never thinking of their audience? ACE certainly think they are. But there must be many more people like myself who have taken it all so much for granted, for so long, that “That’s what being an artist is all about” that we seldom bring it to consciousness.
My second reaction is “Oh ye gods, how on earth do I go about demonstrating this in the required 2500 word grant proposal?”. In this blog alone I’ve written half that amount discussing the finer points of “Relevance” (and reaching conclusions that might not please ACE).
There are also problems with my peer group. Some artist friends I rarely see, but we discuss our work intensely in the few hours we spend together each year. Others I see every week, but we seldom discuss our work.
Should I include “Da” (first syllable of DaDa), refugee from the Exploding Galaxy (1960s artists’ commune), occasional member of the Incredible String Band, who spent years homeless by choice but whose extraordinary constitution keeps him alive and doing despite everything? Should I present as that radical?
Should I include Psychedelic Harry whose (possibly drug-induced) paranoia renders communication impossible for months at a time, and whose practice is frequently interrupted by spells in the Warneford Hospital? Is it good to be seen as that mad?
Should I include my collaborators in other art forms, musicians, poets, dancers? Should I include specialists in my subject areas of interest – psychologists, religious studies experts, environmentalists, anthropologists? If I include everyone and their expertise, the list alone will come to 2500 words.
I’ve hacked the application, rehashed it, précis’d it, hacked it again, finally given up with a mish-mash of 4000 words, hoping that more information is better than less. When I’d finished it had grown from a simple pyrotechnic development project to a 10 grand research, development and production proposal. But it is a true reflection of my artistic vision, an expression of integrity … Contrary to my usual cynicism I still hope that integrity (and the enthusiasm and inspiration that comes with it) carries weight when making applications.
6 weeks for a decision, I’ll post it here.
