In mid-March, responses to the rapidly escalating COVID-19 pandemic forced, as with many aspects of society, the indefinite closure of progressive art studios. During this time, studios hustled to adapt, inventing diverse methods in order to sustain their organizations. In doing so they encountered various challenges and questions, some of which are novel and temporary, while others are pre-existing and overlooked. Unsurprisingly, this has prompted studios to examine the nature and sustainability of their respective organizations, often leading to unexpected outcomes. Just as these programs began to adjust to this strange new existence, some are now navigating the radical challenges that accompany a slow reopening process amid collective anxiety and uncertainty about the future.
As progressive art studios closed in the interest of quarantine and social distancing, ambitious and innovative ways to remain connected remotely have been developed - from calling artists daily to delivering necessary art supplies to implementing online programming - an intuitive solution inspired by the underlying core values of these creative communities, which also emerged independently yet almost identically across the country. Many studios have been using Zoom conferencing to create platforms for community building and the sharing of ideas through group discussions, more formal art talks and workshops, dance parties, but also just to focus on art-making together. Stand out virtual programming has included Friday Free For All at Summertime, *Arts of Life’s Virtual Studio Visits and guest curator talks, The Collage Party 5 and Stuck at Home Series at Creative Growth, and NIAD’s Thirsty Thursdays.
The putative aspiration (and, in fact, statutory expectation) of day programs is to provide not just a custodial role, but one both enriching and supportive. This follows from the principle that requiring support outside the home doesn’t minimize the value of an individual’s time. One of the end goals of the movement to integrated, community-based services is to elevate the quality of services from what could be considered sufficient for those who have nowhere else to go, to good enough to attract and maintain participation of those who are actively choosing to join.
For the first time in years (or decades), artists have not been able to maintain practices at their respective progressive art studios in person, but instead adapt to available space at home. The steady attendance of artists in online programming conveys an important concept of choice and integration; they aren’t attending because it’s mandatory, expected, or follows a schedule - rather, expectations and routines are totally upended. They’re actively choosing to participate (many every day, for hours at a time) because they identify as artists and value time spent with their studio community. In many cases, remote involvement from artists who were previously attending in person part-time increased and not surprisingly, many artists remain as dedicated and prolific as always while at home.
It should be noted that the success of online programming is a testament to the value of these programs. This outcome is difficult to recognize at times from within while longing for things to return to normal in these communities. We miss each other and the creative energy of our studios as they previously existed, wandering between workspaces and encountering one fascinating project after another - Raquel Albarran pinching clay meatball toes at LAND, William Tyler methodically recording events and memories at Creative Growth, Marlon Mullen’s daily studio rituals at NIAD, or the late Helen Rae’s prolific and robust reimagining of fashion editorials at Tierra del Sol.
An important insight encountered during these circumstances that can be learned from is the divide between those who love these studios and the broader culture that remains unaware of their value. During the first few weeks of shelter in place, staff established systems for reaching out by phone to artists in their homes and delivering art materials. While navigating communication barriers, studio staff found that the disconnect between how an artist is understood in the studio and how they’re recognized in their own homes and communities was often quite stark.
Studio closures have also further exposed areas undermining their long-term sustainability, especially for those largely dependent on state funding. In a conversation several years ago with former Creativity Explored Executive Director Amy Taub, she explained that in order to meet the state’s expectations of so-called community integration, the studio couldn’t function as it currently does, but would instead need to pursue a radically different model of facilitating studio practices out in the community. When characterizing the process of attempting this in trying to figure out what “works” she pushed back however, saying “This is what works,” and an ideal model would sustain as much of the current studio structure as possible, while also implementing alternative approaches under shifting policies.
As studios currently rebuild, it’s crucial to embrace the opportunity to reinvent. An ability to pool disability support services and studio resources, in combination with the benefits of being able to be a part of a creative community, should in some way be maintained moving forward. But also, this heightened involvement with and awareness of artists’ home lives has created the opportunity to support artists’ independence and self-advocacy for basic access to art materials and technology - computers, the internet, cell phones, and even land-lines - while disrupting the distinction between how an artist identifies in the studio and how they’re perceived in their own homes and communities.
*Disparate Minds co-founders Andreana Donahue and Tim Ortiz are currently the Art Manager and Community Resources Coordinator at Arts of Life’s Chicago studio.