Sins of the Past

I believe there are a few interesting parallels we can draw between what is happening in the global financial market, and the current state of the bead scene in Australia. I am mindful not to call it the bead industry, and there is a reason for that. What we currently see in the market globally is a direct result of greed, of a lack of regulation, of a lack of leadership and certainly an absence of ethics. New target audiences for mortgages were identified by financial institutions to ensure value to the share holders, unfortunately, the ethics in decision making did not considers stakeholders such as customers, society and long term vision. These concepts died with the need for more, the desire to jump on the bandwagon of sub prime selling, and lack of leadership in a largely self regulated industry. The great Dr Greenspan had to acknowledge in senate hearings last week that he had relied on common sense of the financial institutions, a somewhat naive position in an environment where common sense was the second casualty of this debacle. The first casualty was that moral fibre that is and must be a prime criterion to decide if a decision is the right thing to do, or the wrong one. There was also a lack of challenging voices, on the edge of reason, asking But Why and not subscribing to the notion that the folks in charge, were the ones with the power.

Where I believe the parallels may be drawn with the bead scene in Austalia is a similar lack of leadership, long term vision, a lack of regulation and standards and doing the Right Thing falling casualty to an intense desire to make dollars. I have been beading for 9 or so years, and have observed a few interesting trends deployed by magazines, show organisers and bead suppliers but also beaders and bead artists. I am passionate about beading, I believe that the bead community plays an important role in innovation, information sharing and keeping the ancient art alive.

There appears to be no code of conduct for publishers and magazines that is derived from a baseline of ethics and integrity. Whilst some magazines are better than others in understanding that artists, suppliers and beaders are important stakeholders, there is a need to give much more thought to intent and execution of intent. If the intent is to make as much money as you can then it is clear that a code of conduct will impede you in that intense desire. If the intent is to be a steward for the art of beading, this needs focus. What have I seen in the last few years:

Magazines that are started up without any expertise in beading, lets be honest about this, one may have experience with selling cars and model planes, but a publisher and editor for a beading magazine needs to have expertise, beading skills, experience and most of all creative passion. Some of the editors are on P plates, and that is okay in the first year, but if this is a consistent observation, there is something that needs to change. Or one ceases to exist.

Artists need to be paid for their projects, a lot of magazines expect you to sign over copyright for IP in contracts that are ill conceived, and at times, make no sense at all. If you pay writers to provide articles, surely, one must pay artists for providing the fuel that keeps your magazine going, or top of mind.

Contributors to magazines are being forced into advertising contracts as a condition of being published and you have to question the ethics of such a condition. Some magazines only publish kits or suppliers projects, this is not creative and not conducive to development of the beading community or the art of beadwork.

Contributors and suppliers are expected to provide goods and services for free on a consistent and continuing basis without any documentation or audit trail. Can you imagine you are a very small business owner, how are you going to support this never ending thirst for goods? How are you going to include it in your BAS or tax statements if there are no audit trails? Who wins out of this?

A creative drought, the same project types and articles appear issue after issue after issue. I am not sure if this is due to the lack of contributors, but if there is no interest from artists to participate, as an editor, one would put strategies in place to improve quality and figure out how to attract top artists and really creative projects right? Why is that not happening? Is the standard we are seeing really the best we can do? I truly hope not. I suspect it is the lack of incentive.

The publishing world is largely self regulated, there are some associations and trade organisations and the codes of conduct they have put in place are largely in regards to advertising. I’ve written several articles both for Australian and international magazines and the lack of respect, compensation and credit from Australian magazines saddens and surprises me. Really, I am sick to death of spending weeks on a project, and not even receiving a thank you or a follow up. I have had enough of being taken for granted, being taken advantage of, or being taken for a ride. That is utter disrespect and I am fed up with it.

R E S P E C T – find out what it means to me. My mother always told me there are a few things you can only loose once – your virginity was included, respect and trust were two other entries on the list of once lost, never regained . Asides from being a basket case, my mother was also very wise in her own special way.

The other area I think we can improve significantly is the bead shows. Shows in the US are well run, both for suppliers, exhibitors, competitions and teachers. Websites and advertising are professional, teachers are recognised as huge magnets for visitors. There are consistent contracts, there is quality that permeates through everything. And again, I suspect it is because a lot of the shows were started by beaders and have a certain level of maturity. I am not saying it is ideal, but there is quality, tangible high standards and professionalism. I have been to a few shows in Australia over the years, and I have taught at a few shows. It is not that difficult to think about standards and exceed them, all it takes is vision and intent. As my mother also said, the devil is in the detail. Communication is paramount, as are policies and the ability for vision to ensure that your show keeps on thriving. Deals with hotels, cross promotion with other crafts, policies around wholesale, policies around teachers awards, advertising that reaches your audience, professional websites, a venue that is central and easy to reach. None of this is rocket science. Is it easy for me to say this – well, I used to do this for a living once upon a time. Not creative shows, but conferences, trade shows and training for an environmental studies organisation in Europe.

I am aware of economic influences, I suspect we all are, but that does not change the need for a solid foundation. The businesses who remain, and thrive, are those with a plan, those with a core, a foundation that is sound and based on policies, integrity and standards. Ask any successful enterprise.

I do not enter into competitions anymore. Not only do I find it difficult to understand how there can be a nice, better, best declaration on artwork (which needs to be seen separate from craftsmanship and skill in technical execution) but if I make the choice to spend creative effort, emotion and funds on a competition piece, I would like that piece to be assessed with an element of open disclosure. I don’t want to see “artists” in a juried competition who are friends of the editor, I want to decide to enter based on the level of expertise in the jury, respected artists who are recognised in their field, and I want that jury to be known up front. I want to see a process, pieces without names being assessed on creative and technical merit, not by who made it. It should not matter whom one has pissed off, whom one is friends or foe with, and what is popular or fits into the sponsor’s frame of reference - it is the piece and the creative skill of the artist that should be at the focus. Many people are so disappointed and almost hurt by competitions and how they are managed. Pieces disappear, are damaged beyond repair, are returned worn, communications from the organisers are sporadic and not well thought through. If I did that where I work, I would be out of a job in no time. There needs to be a recognition of the investment in a competition piece, and unless that changes, don’t expect to see any of my work appear in competitions or juried shows. And yes, I do speak from experience.

I have also noticed that bead community members who ask genuine questions are subject to character assassination and backstabbing. I know it is one of those mythical things in creative circles and the air kissing crowd where gossip, backhanding and unethical sneaky tactics appear to be almost accepted if not expected. Not so much, dude, not acceptable, immature and childish. This is particularly valid when beaders are making choices to copy. I’ve seen works in magazines and in competitions that I recognised from other sources. A competition piece that was a copy of a piece that won Bead Dreams. A tutorial that creates a piece that is a mirror image of an image on the net. I am not saying we don’t all get inspired by what we see, but there is a fine line. There is also a duty of care with the magazines, competition organisers and shows and yet again, it comes back to knowing your community. If you keep up to date on what is going on overseas, you recognise the work as someone else’s.

I wanted to write this for a while, I’ve had a rotten experience with a publishing firm that has an attitude that what they are doing is okay. Heck, a lot of corporations believe that if you manage to keep what you do just above the law it is all acceptable. Ethics, what is that? Respect, what is that? I worked for a company that had us ask ourselves a few questions – Would you want this to happen to your sister, mother? Would you want to see this in the papers? Is it morally above board? If it happened to you, would you feel bad? That should drive decisions and actions, not the almighty dollar. And that is where the comparison with the global market crisis comes from. And the lesson that it will all collapse if it is not based on ethics.

In my opening paragraph, I displayed a reluctance to call it the bead industry. An industry suggests a machine, some sort of distant entity that one has no power over, a creature that imposes its will without any recourse. I do not see this as a valid position, we are a community, each with a role to play and a contribution to make. And in that sense, I believe we do this to eachother. And following from that thought, we can stop doing this to eachother and strengthen the community to the point where it can learn from the Sins of the Past and move on to a brighter future.

For everyone, not just a few who know how to play the system.

Let me make it clear that I ain’t perfect, I am no angel or a righteous zealot. I’ve thought about this a lot, spoken to peers, explored different sides of the coin. So maybe what I think has something to offer. Reject it at will. But this is a blog and as such, I can put my feet on the table.