Artists Migrations SD, LA, SF, NYC (seeking a better life as an artist)
My response to two different posts on Voice of San Diego.
The following is directed to Patric Stillman's "The Struggle For San Diego Artists Is Real, But Worth It". His response to John Raymond Mireles "Why I left San Diego's Art Scene Behind".
I was really surprised at the level of honesty in John Raymond Mireles article. Much of which is rarely said (publicly at least). The idea that he cared enough to write about it in such depth is hardly “dropping the mic”. Rather, a fond farewell.
Since our return to San Diego from LA, there seems to be substantially less opportunity than when we moved in 2004. This is quite the opposite of Patric Stillman’s response to the piece. We have noticed a complete transformation in terms of new developments. Which seems to have had no affect at all in strengthening the sustainability of the art community. More so, having pushed it way aside along with the homeless, as well as, those unable to pay over $2000 a month for a studio or 1 bedroom apt. Making way for countless more restaurants and sports bars. Catering to tourism and sports culture alone. This was all planned gentrification by the city of San Diego, and reflects its narrow, short- sighted priorities. They literally dangled false opportunities of affordable spaces and funding for the arts in places such as Liberty Station, East Village, North Park, and now, Barrio Logan. Apparently NASCO has a contract that will bring in hundreds of new employees that they hope to house at higher rental prices in the area. There is an IDEA district in the works that intends on attracting the Silicon Valley types. That ideally would be a good thing. As rents are already near that of the Mission district in SF. Aside from the idea of “IDEAS” and the promise of arts opportunities, I see nothing more than contemporary architecture, and some ply- wood painted ideas on a construction fence. That probably involved some kind of art contest of sorts with fees and the promise of exposure. I’m sure the development is well intended but without a strong tech industry, community support for the arts, and an almost non-existent art market, the lure is probably going to fall short of NYC, LA, or SF. Regardless of the uniqueness of our flowers or how we view them.
For a flower to bloom it needs soil and water. It needs to be nurtured. San Diego has no shortage of great artists and has the potential for an actual vibrant art community. However, if one only sees the “positive”, nothing changes. This was the problem I left in 2004. It worked for a select few and neglected the many. You would see the same artists time and time again in what scarce venues that existed. As if there were only a hundred or so artists in the entire city. The marketing for art is minimal at best, and almost always incestuous. Never really plugging in to the global art community.
In a challenging conservative environment, marketing for art should be of the highest priority. Especially for those institutions funded almost entirely with tax dollars. The city is starving for culture but, like many of the artists here, have very little access to it. The bigger community has no investment and is limited to their local guilds and coffee shops.
One of the important ingredients in a culture that hopes to grow is inclusion. For the artists and the community. We experienced this both in Los Angeles and San Francisco. A city that is inclusive beyond our comfortable circles of craft beer and wine drinking friends. A more expansive and welcoming environment fosters creative and philanthropic contribution, as well as, promotes new ideas and artists. Ultimately, scrapping petty competition, hierarchy, unnecessary rules, and regulations. It sets its own terms and content despite the circumstances. Leading the way for the kind of sustainable cultural economy that John Raymond Mireles sought out in NYC. This is the ecosystem that would wake the sleeping giant that is San Diego.
The following is directed to Patric Stillman's "The Struggle For San Diego Artists Is Real, But Worth It". His response to John Raymond Mireles "Why I left San Diego's Art Scene Behind".
I was really surprised at the level of honesty in John Raymond Mireles article. Much of which is rarely said (publicly at least). The idea that he cared enough to write about it in such depth is hardly “dropping the mic”. Rather, a fond farewell.
Since our return to San Diego from LA, there seems to be substantially less opportunity than when we moved in 2004. This is quite the opposite of Patric Stillman’s response to the piece. We have noticed a complete transformation in terms of new developments. Which seems to have had no affect at all in strengthening the sustainability of the art community. More so, having pushed it way aside along with the homeless, as well as, those unable to pay over $2000 a month for a studio or 1 bedroom apt. Making way for countless more restaurants and sports bars. Catering to tourism and sports culture alone. This was all planned gentrification by the city of San Diego, and reflects its narrow, short- sighted priorities. They literally dangled false opportunities of affordable spaces and funding for the arts in places such as Liberty Station, East Village, North Park, and now, Barrio Logan. Apparently NASCO has a contract that will bring in hundreds of new employees that they hope to house at higher rental prices in the area. There is an IDEA district in the works that intends on attracting the Silicon Valley types. That ideally would be a good thing. As rents are already near that of the Mission district in SF. Aside from the idea of “IDEAS” and the promise of arts opportunities, I see nothing more than contemporary architecture, and some ply- wood painted ideas on a construction fence. That probably involved some kind of art contest of sorts with fees and the promise of exposure. I’m sure the development is well intended but without a strong tech industry, community support for the arts, and an almost non-existent art market, the lure is probably going to fall short of NYC, LA, or SF. Regardless of the uniqueness of our flowers or how we view them.
For a flower to bloom it needs soil and water. It needs to be nurtured. San Diego has no shortage of great artists and has the potential for an actual vibrant art community. However, if one only sees the “positive”, nothing changes. This was the problem I left in 2004. It worked for a select few and neglected the many. You would see the same artists time and time again in what scarce venues that existed. As if there were only a hundred or so artists in the entire city. The marketing for art is minimal at best, and almost always incestuous. Never really plugging in to the global art community.
In a challenging conservative environment, marketing for art should be of the highest priority. Especially for those institutions funded almost entirely with tax dollars. The city is starving for culture but, like many of the artists here, have very little access to it. The bigger community has no investment and is limited to their local guilds and coffee shops.
One of the important ingredients in a culture that hopes to grow is inclusion. For the artists and the community. We experienced this both in Los Angeles and San Francisco. A city that is inclusive beyond our comfortable circles of craft beer and wine drinking friends. A more expansive and welcoming environment fosters creative and philanthropic contribution, as well as, promotes new ideas and artists. Ultimately, scrapping petty competition, hierarchy, unnecessary rules, and regulations. It sets its own terms and content despite the circumstances. Leading the way for the kind of sustainable cultural economy that John Raymond Mireles sought out in NYC. This is the ecosystem that would wake the sleeping giant that is San Diego.
Comments
Post a Comment