The Dole, "the other arts council"

wendell borton

Before the welfare state, the options for artists were: have rich relatives, find a wealthy patron or starve in a garret. After the welfare state those who might never have had the option to create could do so while on the dole.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2012/0804/1224321418501.html

Different take on the "dole" debate. Without it there would have been no harry potter, punk rock or tommy tiernan.:eek:

frag420

So the dole is responsible for Harry Potter and Tommy Teirnan??

Disgusting abuse!!

Boombastic

Don't they get tax breaks aswell? If you don't earn enough money to support yourself as an artist you need to do it as a hobby and get a real job to pay the bills.

FatherLen

this is a paper thin argument about the plus points on the dole.

the dole doesn't even need defending. it is a necessary part of the economy and the problem people have is the people that abuse the right and become lazy dole scroungers.

spank_inferno

wendell borton wrote: »

Without it there would have been no tommy tiernan.:eek:

A pox upon the welfare state!

seamus

Boombastic wrote: »

Don't they get tax breaks aswell?

Not really, it's dependent on what they're selling. Most workings artists avail of little or no tax exemption. The exemption only applies to sale of works - paintings, CDs, etc.

Actors and musicians, for example, still have to pay tax at full whack for their performances.

If you don't earn enough money to support yourself as an artist you need to do it as a hobby and get a real job to pay the bills.

Well yes and no. I have no specific problem with an artist who gets intermittent paid work signing onto the dole in downtime.
If they were to have a permanent job, be that full time or part time, then their ability to take on artistic work is hampered (you can't go on a tour starting tomorrow when you're scheduled in work for the next month), the knock-on effect then overall being cultural deprivation.
There's also a fair argument that an artist taking unpaid work (which is very common) and using the dole to support him/herself is working their way towards becoming self-sufficient. An unpaid internship if you will. Which should be encouraged.

Naturally however there needs to be a cut-off point at which someone says, "You know what, I'm just not good/lucky enough at this to make a career out of it" and go to do something else rather than taking the dole till they're 60 and still an aspiring artist.

Boombastic

seamus wrote: »

...................................
There's also a fair argument that an artist taking unpaid work (which is very common) and using the dole to support him/herself is working their way towards becoming self-sufficient. An unpaid internship if you will. Which should be encouraged.

...............

Nope, if you are not available to work and looking for work you are not entitled to the dole, artist or not


Job seekers allowance/benefit

and we're most artists over time poor?

Boombastic

The first €40,000 per annum of profits or gains earned by writers, composers, visual artists and sculptors from the sale of their work is exempt from income tax in Ireland in certain circumstances.

The scheme provides that the Revenue Commissioners can make determinations in respect of artistic works in the following categories only:

a book or other writing
a play
a musical composition
a painting or other like picture
a sculpture

seamus

Boombastic wrote: »

Nope, if you are not available to work and looking for work you are not entitled to the dole, artist or not

But they are looking for work. Paid work in their field.

and we're most artists over time poor?

Most of the biggest (painting) artists before the 20th century were funded by patrons, but otherwise yes their backgrounds were either painfully poor, or came from wealthy families.

Boombastic

seamus wrote: »

But they are looking for work. Paid work in their field.
................

Not exactly. They have to create the work themselves by creating 'masterpieces'. Why are they not treated like all the other self employed people?

seamus

Boombastic wrote: »

Not exactly. They have to create the work themselves by creating 'masterpieces'.

Not necessarily. Art has literally thousands of different forms. Plenty of working painters get their money from commissioned works rather than stuff of the top of their head.
The vast majority of artists in all disciplines spend their time chasing paid or commissioned work. They don't spend their time sitting in an attic conversion musing over their next masterpiece.

Why are they not treated like all the other self employed people?

What makes you think they're not?
The €40k exemption is relatively small and applies to very limited subsection of artistic income. It was originally introduced to encourage working writers to locate themselves in Ireland so we could boast about our cultural broadness. It helps to a certain degree, but in any case it costs the exchequer very little.

Boombastic

seamus wrote: »

Not necessarily. Art has literally thousands of different forms. Plenty of working painters get their money from commissioned works rather than stuff of the top of their head.
The vast majority of artists in all disciplines spend their time chasing paid or commissioned work. They don't spend their time sitting in an attic conversion musing over their next masterpiece.

What makes you think they're not?
The €40k exemption is relatively small and applies to very limited subsection of artistic income. It was originally introduced to encourage working writers to locate themselves in Ireland so we could boast about our cultural broadness. It helps to a certain degree, but in any case it costs the exchequer very little.

Self-employed people can't draw the dole when work is slack

seamus

Boombastic wrote: »

Self-employed people can't draw the dole when work is slack

They can when it dries up completely.

super_furry

wendell borton wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2012/0804/1224321418501.html

Different take on the "dole" debate. Without it there would have been no harry potter, punk rock or tommy tiernan.:eek:

Good to see. If we're funding it though, we should get a return of investment like all good investors.

So that'll be about a tenner from Tommy Tiernan because he's drunk the rest.

CreepingDeath

NewsLink wrote:

Before the welfare state, the options for artists were: have rich relatives, find a wealthy patron or starve in a garret. After the welfare state those who might never have had the option to create could do so while on the dole.

Yeah, piss artists.

Snowie

Jesus folks chill there any that many jobs out there... FAS course are 4 years out of date... So rejection letters get a bit much.. Why not become creative paint draw design what ever at least it's making people's life a little more colourful and if they do well and make money from it more power to them...

Boombastic

Snowie wrote: »

Jesus folks chill there any that many jobs out there... FAS course are 4 years out of date... So rejection letters get a bit much.. Why not become creative paint draw design what ever at least it's making people's life a little more colourful and if they do well and make money from it more power to them...

Sure we'll all become artists. I can paint a picture and draw squares and circles and other modern art, where do I sign up?

Snowie

Boombastic wrote: »

Snowie wrote: »

Jesus folks chill there any that many jobs out there... FAS course are 4 years out of date... So rejection letters get a bit much.. Why not become creative paint draw design what ever at least it's making people's life a little more colourful and if they do well and make money from it more power to them...

Sure we'll all become artists. I can paint a picture and draw squares and circles and other modern art, where do I sign up?

If that's what you want go right ahead... IMO it's none of my buisness wtf any one does with there money...

Peetrik

I'd imagine the same goes for a lot of our top athletes. To compete at an international level they need to train full time, they didn't get good enough to qualify for sponsorship and endorsement packages just training after they finished their shift in Tesco, they were most likely on the dole.

Boombastic

Snowie wrote: »

If that's what you want go right ahead... IMO it's none of my buisness wtf any one does with there money...

What money?

EdanHewittt

Yeah there is a serious Hardy Bucks vibe going on in Ireland now up and down the country, except most of these people are not "Artists" in the conventional sense of painting pictures, or making music. It is more like:

Caffeinated Internet addicts spending 6-hour sessions on Tumblr smoking hand-rolled tobacco every 20 minutes listening to Squarepusher with the bass turned down, conversing wildly on Boards.ie

And Twitter-heads with their finger on the pulse writing Python scripts designed to take down corporate websites.

The technical, Internet generation, make the bulk of our coveted "artists". They speak code, not Baudrillard. They speak memes, not "jokes"

Correct me if I'm right, but isn't Berlin, and Belgium also full of types like this?

You know that chick in Girl with the Dragon tattoo. She receives welfare from the state so she can attain lulz on The Internets and stuff?

I think the writer of this film was addressing this very real phenomenon of people who are just "living" in the proper sense, instead of trying to attain U2-Hood or some nirvana-like state of fulfillment with money, status, and "success".

Lollers

If you can draw the dole, are you not automatically an artist ?.

UCDVet

wendell borton wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2012/0804/1224321418501.html

Different take on the "dole" debate. Without it there would have been no harry potter, punk rock or tommy tiernan.:eek:

It's a bad argument, IMHO.

If our society decides we value those types of things; it would be FAR more effective to pay skilled and qualified people to work on them. Not blindly handing out dole payments for the exceedingly rare chance someone might decide to do something creative.

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Modern art is shite. Debate.

The only time I'd agree with funding art would be for something like the Sistine Chapel or the Mona-fucking-Lisa.

Boombastic

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

Modern art is shite. Debate.

The only time I'd agree with funding art would be for something like the Sistine Chapel or the Mona-fucking-Lisa.

Agreed, no debate necessary.


or the moaning-fcuking-lisa as it would be called if it was Irish:D

Lapin

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

Modern art is shite. Debate.

The only time I'd agree with funding art would be for something like the Sistine Chapel or the Mona-fucking-Lisa.

Were Michaelangelo and Da Vinci on the dole too ?

Casillas

A lot of film-makers, actors, photographers, writers, musicians - etc. have started out on the dole.

Right now - with so few jobs around, some people are trying to discover new talents and work on developing them.

This isn't to replace full-time employment - when jobs return the majority will work again.

This is about people trying to keep their minds active whilst unemployed, which is a good thing honestly.

If some of these people manage to make a living, from what starts as a hobby whilst unemployed, great!

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Lapin wrote: »

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

Modern art is shite. Debate.

The only time I'd agree with funding art would be for something like the Sistine Chapel or the Mona-fucking-Lisa.

Were Michaelangelo and Da Vinci on the dole too ?

They were funded by a few Italian states afaik.

Turpentine

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

Modern art is shite. Debate.

The only time I'd agree with funding art would be for something like the Sistine Chapel or the Mona-fucking-Lisa.

Moronic post.

There's obviously no debate to be had, you just don't like what little art you know. I doubt there's much that'd change that considering the only examples you give of art that you like are 500-years-old.

Naomi00

EdanHewittt wrote: »

Yeah there is a serious Hardy Bucks vibe going on in Ireland now up and down the country, except most of these people are not "Artists" in the conventional sense of painting pictures, or making music. It is more like:

Caffeinated Internet addicts spending 6-hour sessions on Tumblr smoking hand-rolled tobacco every 20 minutes listening to Squarepusher with the bass turned down, conversing wildly on Boards.ie

And Twitter-heads with their finger on the pulse writing Python scripts designed to take down corporate websites.

The technical, Internet generation, make the bulk of our coveted "artists". They speak code, not Baudrillard. They speak memes, not "jokes"

Correct me if I'm right, but isn't Berlin, and Belgium also full of types like this?

You know that chick in Girl with the Dragon tattoo. She receives welfare from the state so she can attain lulz on The Internets and stuff?

I think the writer of this film was addressing this very real phenomenon of people who are just "living" in the proper sense, instead of trying to attain U2-Hood or some nirvana-like state of fulfillment with money, status, and "success".

...da fuq?

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Turpentine wrote: »

Moronic post.

There's obviously no debate to be had, you just don't like what little art you know. I doubt there's much that'd change that considering the only examples you give of art that you like are 500-years-old.

So would you consider the likes of Damien Hirst as being an artist worth funding by a state funded arts council?

Art has gone down the drain in the last hundred years, accept it. Much contemporary art takes the phrase "art is subjective" entirely out of proportion to the point where 99.9% of the population can't interpret it or relate to it whatsoever.

The remainder of the population who think they can interpret it or relate to it, or bullshit to make themselves look deep and cool amongst their hipster friends, find some pathetic sense of supiority in the fact that they're somehow "in the know" and can appreciate "originality".

Contemporary art, simply put, is a vicious cycle of bullshit.

Surely, if you want the state to fund art, you're not going to fund something that 99.9% of the population wouldn't be able to relate to or interpret and that only a small, supposedly enlightened and deep, elite class of people living in some fantasy world can. Basically, that's akin to state funded snobbery and doesn't contribute whatsoever to public appreciation of art.

I shall leave you with this (NSFW):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9lmvX00TLY

Chorcai

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Sure a student's work on semiotics represents the whole contemporary art world... :rolleyes:

Anyone can pick out a ****é example and call awhole genre of interest ****é, for example Pat Kenny is ****é so all radio presenters are ****é and should be taken off the air.

I think of better examples of contemporary artists, such as Michael Borremans, Christopher Orr, Paulina Olowska, Marcin Maciejowski and Alexander Tinei all are painters.

Boombastic

Chorcai wrote: »

...........................

I think of better examples of contemporary artists, such as Michael Borremans, Christopher Orr, Paulina Olowska, Marcin Maciejowski and Alexander Tinei all are painters.

Belgium, Polish, Polish?, Hungarian


Any names of those who are living in Ireland, who made it big while claiming the dole?

Chorcai

Boombastic wrote: »

Belgium, Polish, Polish?, Hungarian


Any names of those who are living in Ireland, who made it big while claiming the dole?

No, my reply was to SPR who thinks that all contemporary art is crap today. Off the top of my head I can't think of any.

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Chorcai wrote: »

Sure a student's work on semiotics represents the whole contemporary art world... :rolleyes:

If you look at a majority of the contemporary "art" that coming out of the likes of NCAD (yes, state funded third level) then I think it is a fair example. Oh and I have been to a few contemporary "art" galleries in Dublin and it's all the same old tripe - too deep for any regular person to understand, unworthy of state funding.

belinda502

I know a few actors and most of them find it impossible to get paid work; they do 'fringe' or 'profit-share' - basically they get a share of the profits if the show makes money which doesn't seem to happen much. More and more production companies seems to offer the 'fringe' scenario which basically means no money for working which I think in the UK anyway is illegal under the Wage Acts but actors are so desperate to build up their cv's they'll do it anyway so the cycle continues. In Ireland if they do profit share or unpaid work they can't tell the Dole office because it isn't counted as work because it's not paid. Equity from what I have heard appears to be pretty toothless in getting actors paid.