ArtsHub spoke to more than a dozen professional artists. They all found the idea that the industry was a meritocracy was laughable.
In this article:
Married to meritocracy
At the beginning of 2024, ArtsHub published one of its most controversial and popular posts. Why is the art world still married to meritocracy? by Amplify Collective writer, Marisa Georgiou, examined three artists’ frustrating relationships with meritocracy.
Georgiou’s resounding thesis was that the meritocratic approach to arts funding and awards was not only imaginary, but also outright damaging the sector’s health. “While the meritocratic approach is not unique to our industry,” she wrote, “the structures underpinning it are uniquely ad hoc, precarious and opaque, without the minimum conditions that protect other workers.”
“The overall dynamic of our sector is that most people can’t afford to sustain a practice in it,” said writer Jinghua Qian.
A lack of equal opportunities destroys meritocracy
Like many other industries, the arts are beset by systematic prejudices that mean a lack of equal opportunities. Creative Australia’s 2021 ‘Towards Equity‘ report found that many of the communities that were the most engaged with Australia’s arts and culture were also underrepresented, under-resourced or under-compensated for their work.
Evidence consistently demonstrates that regional artists predictably struggle for equal opportunities. “Postcode matters,” one regional artist with decades of experience tells ArtsHub. “There is a semblance of meritocracy built around the system, but it is inherently unequal and advantages those who are already most advantaged (and vice versa, of course).”
“I don’t think it’s specific to the arts industry,” says another established multidisciplinary artist. “Structural white supremacy is in the DNA of all of Australia’s cultural institutions and beyond. The racism, disadvantage and discrimination it causes remain prevalent both inside the arts and across the whole of society. The notion of a meritocracy remains void.”
In recent years, many cultural institutions have made a concerted effort to amend errors of the past and present a more diverse program. This correction further complicates the available opportunities, as one established performer of Anglo heritage tells ArtsHub. “Belonging to someone in the dominant cultural/social/racial group whose stories are being told [definite plays a part],” she says. Other factors included “nepotism, quid pro quo, privilege, trends and the support of a partner with a steady income”.
Emerging artists are learning the industry isn’t a meritocracy
Several emerging artists ArtsHub talked to said they have been rudely awakened to the industry’s complexities in the first few years of their career.
“The arts and creative industries often claim to be meritocratic, but the reality is more complex,” says an artist in their final years of study. “While talent and hard work are important, factors like access to resources, networks and social capital can significantly influence success.”
“The community gets very cliquey,” adds another emerging artist. “There’s a feeling of the same people working with the same people over and over.” Nevertheless, they add that there are “opportunities for merit to shine through” in independent companies.
An independent, emerging producer agrees with this central point. “Where the divide of social class and privilege is less significant, such as in smaller not-for-profit community organisations … meritocracy at least has a higher likelihood of existing,” they tell ArtsHub. “Though, once you start ‘expanding’ into the world of ‘professional’ opportunity, the possibility of a meritocracy is negligible.”
Definitions of success complicate meritocracy
For some of the experienced artists who talked with ArtsHub, notions of the industry as ‘meritocratic’ were dismissed long ago. Instead, a more dynamic definition of personal success has allowed them to find their sense of validation.
“I’m a former principal ballet dancer,” says one artist, “and to get to that point, I had to work extremely hard to overcome many barriers – family from low socioeconomic status, race, not having the ‘ideal’ body for classical dance, to name a few. I witnessed others rise to the top thanks to many factors that helped them not have to work as hard to achieve their position.
“Are the arts a meritocracy? Based on my experience, I would say ‘no’. Like anything in life, I think many factors play a role. But are you addressing the arts as the pure act of being an artist or achieving career success as an artist, based on traditional views of success?”
Another professional musician expands on this theme. “I see many incredible artists redefining what success looks like for them and finding meaning in their work beyond chasing the traditional markers of success,” they say.
“I suppose it depends on what the artist receives merit for,” adds a popular vocal coach. “Skill? Fame? Social media followers? Fits the bill of the flavour of the month?”
Notions of meritocracy raise questions of value, and for any artist trying to make money from their practice, conversations about value are complex, an established playwright tells ArtsHub.
Questions of value
“Historically, art that is considered valuable by the dominant culture doesn’t always reflect its impact and legacy. And if popular appeal is the measure of success in the arts, should cinema be defined by the financial takings of Marvel films? I don’t think it can be a meritocracy, because there is no way to measure the value of art, which may in turn make it difficult to argue for its importance,” says the playwright.
Reformations to the funding and valuing of art quickly become philosophically gigantic and logistically impractical. Some artists who spoke to ArtsHub suggested the industry won’t be able to change until Australian society radically reorganises itself.
Georgiou’s original article discussed the possibilities of a state-subsidised basic income and access to entitlements for working artists. Ireland is working a pilot program, and several cities in the US offer similar support.
For the time being, while ArtsHub could find no working artist who suggested the industry was a meritocracy, those who were particularly outraged were most offended by a false veneer of a meritocratic process. This has only built resentment in some parts of the community, hampering the creative process and output quality.
