Since I am continuing this course without the bureaucratic break from the institute that I need to take to pay, I do not yet have access to this video, but I asked Chat GPT to formulate the main conclusions and findings described in the book Resilience is Futile (2019).
The book Resilience is Futile (2019), published by Corridor 8 and YVAN (Yorkshire & Humber Visual Arts Network), explores the concept of resilience in the arts, particularly focusing on the challenges faced by artists and arts professionals in today's socio-political and economic climate. Here are the key ideas and most important conclusions from the publication:
1. Challenging the Concept of Resilience:
The book critiques the idea of resilience, often celebrated as a personal quality in the face of adversity. It argues that resilience has become a burden on individuals, especially artists, who are expected to adapt endlessly to structural inequalities, precariousness, and diminishing resources without meaningful systemic support.
2. Economic Pressures on Artists:
A recurring theme is the financial instability that artists face, which is exacerbated by austerity measures, budget cuts, and the shrinking availability of public funding for the arts. The demand for artists to remain resilient in the face of these economic challenges often pushes them to the limits of endurance, leading to burnout.
3. Resilience as a Neoliberal Concept:
The book argues that the idea of resilience has been co-opted by neoliberal ideologies, placing the responsibility of coping with structural issues—such as funding cuts and precarious employment—on individuals rather than addressing the systemic issues themselves. This shifts the focus away from necessary systemic change and towards individual endurance and adaptability.
4. Mental Health and Well-being:
The pressure to remain resilient often takes a toll on artists' mental health. The book emphasizes the importance of recognizing and addressing the mental health challenges artists face due to financial instability, social isolation, and the pressure to constantly reinvent themselves to remain competitive in the art world.
5. Precarity in the Arts:
The publication highlights the precarious working conditions many artists endure, such as unstable income, lack of job security, and the reliance on unpaid or underpaid labor. These conditions are not sustainable, and the expectation that artists will "resiliently" navigate these realities without support is seen as deeply problematic.
6. Collective Action and Solidarity:
Rather than relying on individual resilience, the book advocates for collective action and solidarity among artists and arts organizations. By working together and building supportive networks, artists can challenge the systems that perpetuate inequality and precarity, creating a more sustainable environment for artistic practice.
7. Rethinking Support Structures:
The authors call for a rethinking of the current support structures in the arts. This includes lobbying for better funding models, ensuring fair pay for artists, and creating more accessible opportunities for marginalized voices. The goal is to move away from a reliance on personal resilience and towards building more equitable and sustainable infrastructures.
8. Cultural and Institutional Responsibility:
The book also examines the role of cultural institutions in perpetuating the narrative of resilience. It suggests that institutions must take greater responsibility for the well-being of artists by providing more support and resources, rather than expecting them to cope with challenges on their own.
Conclusion:
Resilience is Futile critiques the glorification of resilience in the art world and argues that it places an unfair burden on artists to navigate systemic inequalities on their own. The book calls for a shift away from individual adaptability and endurance and towards collective action, fairer funding structures, and institutional responsibility. By challenging the narrative of resilience, the authors advocate for a more just and sustainable arts sector where artists are not expected to simply endure, but to thrive with proper support.
I believe that everything that doesn't kill us makes us stronger. I apologise, perhaps these are echoes of my culture. From early childhood to this day I have always had to work and study hard. Till now it is not easy. At some point, yes, there was "not clinical" but depression and despair, but I only worked even more and reflected on my activities and tried to become better, smarter, and happier.
Modern society is developing along the path of inclusion, tolerance and support for the weak, and this, I believe, is correct. At the same time, in pursuit of the still unclear principles of “inclusion” and “support for the weak,” sometimes society is going too far and is taking very weird paths. So here, condemning the artist's Resilience, it's like not letting a baby crawl on the floor or put his hands in his mouth - such a child will not develop his own, natural immunity.
I believe that an artist not only should, but simply needs to go through this and be reborn, find his own path, establish himself - an artist must form his artistic immunity. If a young talent is given too much help and all the opportunities, it will be a product of society. Since the environment that feeds, in most cases, will not provoke the artist to search for something new, to want to change something. Here I want to make a reservation that support and art institutions are good and necessary, but in moderation. They and we, artists, must realize this!
Therefore, Resilience is not only not Futile, it is absolutely necessary for everyone who walks the difficult path of art.
Comments