Facing The Lack of Diversity in Photography and The Arts

Damaso

Photojournalist
Local time
11:54 PM
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
2,379
A topic that's near and dear to my heart...

"To provide some context for the PhotoPlus Expo panel discussion on “(Mis)representation: The Underrepresentation of Non-Whites and Women in the Arts,” moderator Charles Guice, an independent photo dealer, noted some statistics about the changing demographics of the United States. According to recent census data, whites in the US will no longer make up the majority of the country within a few years. Yet, he noted, whites still make up 91 percent of all museum goers, and white artists are represented in 91 percent of all museum and gallery exhibitions. “If the arts are to remain relevant who’s responsible for changing the status quo?” he asked. Guice asked his panel to look both at how women and artists of color are underrepresented in the arts, and what needs to change. His panelists were Manjari Sharma, a photographer born and raised in Mumbai and now based in Brooklyn; John Edwin Mason, a writer on photography and associate chair of history at the University of Virginia; Rocio Aranda-Alvarado, curator at El Museo del Barrio in New York; and Miriam Romais, executive director of En Foco, a non-profit devoted to supporting US-based photographers of Latino, African, Asian and Native-American descent and the editor of Nueva Luz, the photographic journal produced by En Foco."

http://pdnpulse.com/2012/10/ppe-2012-facing-lack-of-diversity-in-photography-and-the-arts.html
 
We faced the same statistical accounting of women and non-whites in engineering. I was sentitive to this, as being always involved in engineering education and ended my working life as a college instructor.
Statistically, engineering (at least in the USA in the 1960 - 2000 era) was not a culturally diverse profession.

But this was not due to overt or covert prejudices by engineers or hiring companies. It was simply that (at the time) you could not encourage anyone but white males to study technology in school, and plod on to get a college degree. This is a societal issue at its roots, and is not a result of talented, qualified people being excluded from a profession by people in the profession.

I don't have any numbers here, but in the last decade, during my teaching, I did see a nice increase of (what's the correct word here?) diverse students studying technology in college.

Statistics are just that - numbers. A statistical skew doesn't always indicate a "problem".
 
It's also the white male who mostly buys art, be it photography or any other art thing. This simple fact is in my opinion the single biggest reason for the current underrepresentation of the non male, non white people in the art world. As soon as more minorities or soon to be majorities are better represented in the board rooms and 1% this unfairness will stop. Most art is bought as investment not for art or because someone likes the work.

Btw. Thanks for the link

Dominik
 
There was a time, during the early part of the time frame that you indicated, that minorities and women were simply not admitted to some universities and colleges to study engineering or anything else for that matter. It was indeed a societal issue which manifested itself as a professional issue as is the lack of diversity in the arts and of course the media. We within these professions must do what we can to encourage a diversity that reflects our society...

But this was not due to overt or covert prejudices by engineers or hiring companies. It was simply that (at the time) you could not encourage anyone but white males to study technology in school, and plod on to get a college degree. This is a societal issue at its roots, and is not a result of talented, qualified people being excluded from a profession by people in the profession.

I don't have any numbers here, but in the last decade, during my teaching, I did see a nice increase of (what's the correct word here?) diverse students studying technology in college.

Statistics are just that - numbers. A statistical skew doesn't always indicate a "problem".
 
i am thinking western europe would have the same numbers. it's all about the renaissance, the western europe colonization of the western hemisphere. nothing more. as the upper middle class diversifies, the numbers will change. this will take a long time. one cannot beat art into the heads of kids. any high school art teacher will tell you that. you can make art available. that's it. a few kids will get it. if the kids' parents then nurture this appreciation, a few of the few will grow a life-long interest.
 
There was a time, during the early part of the time frame that you indicated, that minorities and women were simply not admitted to some universities and colleges to study engineering or anything else for that matter. It was indeed a societal issue which manifested itself as a professional issue as is the lack of diversity in the arts and of course the media. We within these professions must do what we can to encourage a diversity that reflects our society...

+1
Unfortunately the problem doesn't stop at the educational stage. Minorities are less likely to be employed and are less likely to get access to the art/gallery/museum world.

Recently read a poll that 51% of the American hold anti-black views, 4 years ago it was only 48%. Also just remember the controversy about Yahoo's new CEO a pregnant female. I have to admit that US numbers and views regarding minorities and non males can be transfered directly to most european countries.🙁

I also agree that the people within these professions have to counteract this trend and that we have to encourage diversity.
 
There was a time, during the early part of the time frame that you indicated, that minorities and women were simply not admitted to some universities and colleges to study engineering or anything else for that matter. It was indeed a societal issue which manifested itself as a professional issue as is the lack of diversity in the arts and of course the media. We within these professions must do what we can to encourage a diversity that reflects our society...

Absolutely.
Along with other engineering friends, I volunteered in urban elementary, junior high and high schools to "reach down" and get girls and non-white students into technology.
That was a very difficult challenge, because of the social pressure on girls to be (these are my words) "pretty and never smarter than boys" and the pressure on poor, non-white boys to enter "masculine, manual labor" professions.
I was involved in that for years, and at the grade school level, I never saw any progress in that problem.
Very very hard societal nut to crack.

Wish I knew what the solution is.


EDIT: I will say that the students who really did learn from our after-hours sessions all had very good, motivating parents (and apparently decent home life). There was a definite correlation between how much the student "go into" technology and what their parents were like. On the other hand, you could tell which kids lived in horrid situations, and nothing we did ever made up for that. Some situations were so bad I still get furious about it. Sorry . . . you got me remembering this stuff. . .
 
our very rural high school happens to have a superb art teacher. a large majority of our kids come from near poverty level and/or blue collar homes. 98 percent of our kids are white. their home situations make them as much a "minority" as any racial minority when it comes to the arts. our art teacher remains hugely frustrated by the lack of parental support/encouragement. but the few kids who DO show a continuing interest (most of whom will never to college) make it all worthwhile.
 
our very rural high school happens to have a superb art teacher. a large majority of our kids come from near poverty level and/or blue collar homes. 98 percent of our kids are white. their home situations make them as much a "minority" as any racial minority when it comes to the arts. our art teacher remains hugely frustrated by the lack of parental support/encouragement. but the few kids who DO show a continuing interest (most of whom will never to college) make it all worthwhile.

Paul, that is a good observation. I get tired of people pushing the claim that whites, especially white men, are evil monsters keeping minorities and women down. The fact is that 90% of white men have NO power, NO wealth, NO advantages, NO anything.

I was the 7th person in my family's history to graduate from high school. Yes, kids, you read that right. Only 6 people in my family's history graduated from HIGH SCHOOL before I did. I'm one of those 'evil' white males, yet I am not rich, I am not influential or powerful, and I have had A LOT of doors slammed in my face as I've tried to make a living as a photographer and artist because (yes, people have actually said this to me) I am overeducated white trash.

Class, not race or gender, is the primary obstacle people face in trying to get into the arts today.
 
Chris thank you for saying this you're absolutely right

White poors often have it a lot harder than minority poors because the anti discrimination laws are working against them. White no matter what class = majority and therefore anti discrimination laws are working against them.

Futhermore the art world is a very incestious world big name galleries usually take you only after you receive a referal from another gallerist or a big name client. During my days at art school 90% percent of the students came from money.

I also still believe that women are faced with more difficulties than men when trying to enter the art world.

Dominik
 
Another viewpoint:

Before you can even begin to consider a career in 'the arts', or even a career in which you do what you want to do, rather than a job to bring in the money, you have to come from (a) a rich society; (b) a segment of that society that is confident enough to take a punt; (c) a school that can accommodate the dreams of its less conventional pupils.

I was OK on (b) but as for (b) both my grandmothers had lost their husbands in World War Two (Russian convoys and Crete) and had therefore struggled hard: they wanted to see me (the first of my generation, with in due course a younger brother and quite a few younger cousins) 'make something of myself' or 'work in the professions'. As for (c), don't mention it. Plymouth College and Mannamead School was basically teaching us how to run either the British Empire or the family business (assuming the two were distinguishable). Until I was in my 20s I didn't fully appreciate that it was my life, to live as I thought best: hence my law degree. Hence also my brother the accountant (and banker, and CFO) and my cousin the colonel.

Historically, minorities have struggled to 'get ahead', and barring rebellious genius (Terry Donovan, Brian Duffy, David Bailey are notable examples) or pure luck, photography has rarely been a reliable way to 'get ahead'. Many, many successful photographers have been rich kids. To begin with, their parents encourage them in their dreams (or do not discourage them too much), and then they can afford to support them when they're not earning much.

Today, there are more and more women in photography, especially 'fine art' photography. And guess what? Quite a lot of them come from well-to-do bourgeois families. The only non-white fine art photographer I know is supported by his boyfriend. And so forth. Your family (or at least, cultural group) needs to have 'made it' before you can contemplate hazardous ways of earning a living in an affluent society. This is true even if they disown you and even if you, personally, aren't affluent. It's a question of world-picture.

EDIT: Most of which comes close to what Chris was saying.

Cheers,

R.
 
You cannot push on a rope. What I mean, is, you cannot force someone to love something. The important element, is to make sure, that culture and education are widely available. The race differentiator is simply linked to different cultural background and income availability, income availability being probably slightly more important. In case of women, I think it has more to do with the way their brain works - their spatial perception is different.
 
One can not legislate who has talent, who does not, who has the resources to practice the art and who not.

The founding principal of this country is to promote equal opportunity , not equal success.
People are free to make their own choices and there are tons of scholarships and grants to help the financially disadvantaged. It is up to the individual to qualify, apply himself, and become a success .

My family has doctors who had relatives who worked to put them through med school, people to borrowed money to start business that ultimately became successful. Others who went to school and entered the corporate world. In one case, my grandfathers sisters husband moved from Chicago to California in the middle of the depression to take a job as a draftsman for Lockheed aircraft. He worked at Lockheed by day, bought stocks by night. He was worth millions of dollars later on.

So make it happen. It is up to you, not someone else to boost you up.
 
In the past, say five years - I've seen a truly astonishing increase in talented female illustrators. I think largely it's simply a matter of more women actually being interested in illustration, more than anything else at all that accounts for this. But even that didn't come out of nowhere. In comics for instance, prior to the 1990s, there wasn't much out there aimed at women readers, there weren't many female artists, there wasn't really anything to get girls hyped up - excited for comics or illustration. After companies began to import Japanese comics, many of which were aimed at a female audience as well as created by female artists there was a huge growth of interest amongst females in comics. Now that generation has matured and is starting to produce work in their own right - much of it of outstanding quality. I would say that today more than half of my favorite artists are female, although very few of them work professionally. But I think (and hope) that will change in the coming years.

That being said, it is obviously fallacious to suggest something like because 51% of the population is female, that 51% of all good art must be made by females, and if 51% isn't then the world must be terribly unfair and under-representing them.
 
One can not legislate who has talent, who does not, who has the resources to practice the art and who not.

The founding principal of this country is to promote equal opportunity , not equal success.
People are free to make their own choices and there are tons of scholarships and grants to help the financially disadvantaged. It is up to the individual to qualify, apply himself, and become a success .

My family has doctors who had relatives who worked to put them through med school, people to borrowed money to start business that ultimately became successful. Others who went to school and entered the corporate world. In one case, my grandfathers sisters husband moved from Chicago to California in the middle of the depression to take a job as a draftsman for Lockheed aircraft. He worked at Lockheed by day, bought stocks by night. He was worth millions of dollars later on.

So make it happen. It is up to you, not someone else to boost you up.

I am sorry. I try not to be too offensive in my commentary, but what you said is rubbish. Totally utterly . . . it's so bad that "it's not even wrong" ! !

Under the law, there is "equal opportunity". In reality, in society, the concept of "equal opportunity" does not exist equally for everyone in our (USA) society.


EDIT: spend some time teaching or assisting in a very poor public school. Then come back and tell me that every little kid in that school has the same living environment and social opportunities that you and I had. Not even close to being correct on that.
 
One can not legislate who has talent, who does not, who has the resources to practice the art and who not.

The founding principal of this country is to promote equal opportunity , not equal success.
People are free to make their own choices and there are tons of scholarships and grants to help the financially disadvantaged. It is up to the individual to qualify, apply himself, and become a success .

My family has doctors who had relatives who worked to put them through med school, people to borrowed money to start business that ultimately became successful. Others who went to school and entered the corporate world. In one case, my grandfathers sisters husband moved from Chicago to California in the middle of the depression to take a job as a draftsman for Lockheed aircraft. He worked at Lockheed by day, bought stocks by night. He was worth millions of dollars later on.

So make it happen. It is up to you, not someone else to boost you up.
The details of what you say are highly disputable -- I might well go so far as to agree with daveleo, having taught in inner-city schools -- but even so, the broad thrust of your statement echoes what I said. If you have nothing, and come from a family that has nothing, then money-grubbing is a far more attractive option than a speculative career in the arts.

Cheers,

R.
 
I find this very very interesting. I really think it's mainly to do with cultural background, and class. The thing is though, it's entirely within the realms of possibility - even likely that the white male is just more likely to pursue these things. I feel like there's a fine line between encouraging social minorities and giving them more rights than the majority group.. A good example of which was the recent South African Airways cadets application ordeal - LINK - Which I personally find absolutely disgusting (from an airline who once had a reputation for producing some of the best pilots in the world).
 
Here in Hong Kong we have good museums but not great museums for a world class city. The typical Chinese has zero interest in such subject matter and prefer shopping. When I travel alone to Berlin, Amsterdam, Paris, New York I spend nearly my entire time in museums but my wife will not go near them (that is why I travel alone). When I go to museums in Asia they are usually not very impressive and also pretty emptied of locals. In Asia a good art exhibit is going to IKEA and then have a discussion about the sofas over a Swedish meatball lunch afterwards. I guess people in this part of the world did not grow up with such priorities.
 
There was a time, during the early part of the time frame that you indicated, that minorities and women were simply not admitted to some universities and colleges to study engineering or anything else for that matter. It was indeed a societal issue which manifested itself as a professional issue as is the lack of diversity in the arts and of course the media. We within these professions must do what we can to encourage a diversity that reflects our society...

When and where I went to university (USA/Oregon 1960) there was really no 'not admitted' policies. There also was 'no leg up' policy either, so mostly women suffered as the old stereotypes were in place: a women was a teacher, nurse, lab tech or the worst going to college for an MRS. degree. Minorities other than women really could study anything they wanted, they suffered from families or communities not really encouraging them to go on to higher education.

Today, I see some similarities except for women now have lack of social pressure to do whatever they want. But some minority groups still do not value education.
 
Back
Top Bottom