A Published Theory of Arts Entrepreneurship

By: Dr. Jason C. White*

Arguably, both success and failure in arts entrepreneurship does not depend upon one’s own ability to employ themselves, or create a business. Given that the academic field of arts entrepreneurship is still emerging, it is not surprising that arts entrepreneurship theory is underdeveloped. While a theory of arts entrepreneurship could help answer the recurring question (i.e., What is arts entrepreneurship?), without a theory supported by evidence, what arts entrepreneurship “is” may be based on individual subjectivity, discipline-based bias, and untested assumptions. To address this gap in both the arts and entrepreneurship literature, I recently published a theory of arts entrepreneurship as organizational attack in the 2019 Winter Issue of Artivate: a journal of entrepreneurship in the arts. 

Summary of the Theory

The central argument of the theory is that through coordinated organizational attacks on the social structure and sacred aesthetic beliefs of an Art World (hereafter defined as a network of people who cooperate to produce a particular artform using conventions), arts entrepreneurs change established conventions in the Art World, which results in revolutionary changes to both the Art World and the work of art (or what art does to or for others) in society. 

Two Examples

For example, the realist movement in 1830 was not organized by one singular artist, but rather a group of French painters who sought to attack the sacred aesthetic beliefs of official art academies. At the time, most members in the Western visual Art World valued and prioritized art subjects that included religion, history, mythology, and portraits appealing to the rich. By recruiting like-minded painters and encouraging relevant painters such as Gustave Courbet, Rosa Bonheur, and Jean Baptiste-Camille Corot to paint in a certain way for a certain purpose, a group of French painters were able to successfully change the conventional way of painting, which led to the birth of the realist movement in 1830. 

Additionally, consider the birth of Hip Hop music and the interrelated socio-cultural movement in the late 1970’s. As Khaire (2017) notes, at the beginning of Hip Hop’s emergence, “Some listeners questioned its very categorization as music” (Khaire 2017, chapter 1, section 9, para 3). However, through public discourse about Hip Hop generated by emerging Hip Hop artists and music intermediaries, knowledge about the work of Hip Hop spread, participation in the Hip Hop movement increased, and evaluation criteria for Hip Hop music was socially constructed (Khaire 2017). 

Attack Patterns

So how does this happen? In theory, motivated in part by a desire to move away from one or more established conventions in an Art World, arts entrepreneurs develop a call to action which functions as a value proposition. The purpose of this call to action is to get enough members of an Art World to participate in desired changes to either the social structure or sacred aesthetic beliefs of that Art World. Based on Howard Becker’s (2008) observations, and on my own case study research, the referenced attacks seem to be “organized” and coordinated by way of the linked practices of arts criticism, art curatorship, arts patronage, and arts scholarship; or may be presented in the tangible written discourse of manifestos, critical essays, aesthetic or philosophical reformulations, or revisionist histories. In theory, this discourse functions as a key strategy because it creates opportunities for the introduction, elaboration and defense of the call to action (i.e. the value proposition). Notably, when organized outside of the Art World, this discourse can also lead the public to question prior beliefs about conventions within an Art World, which can result in external support for the call to action. 

Success and Failure

 While not all organizational attacks in Art Worlds are successful, success is achieved when the attack either results in changes to established conventions that are accepted by the relevant Art World majority or, when the attack results in the birth of a whole new Art World.

However as McKnight & Plumber (2015) note, “participation in social innovation efforts requires consensus building, which can be time consuming and frustrating” (p.52). In addition, social innovation “requires significant dedication from core members of a steering committee, and many efforts fail because the individuals are unwilling or unable to invest the time and energy needed for success” (p.52). Also, despite potential social benefits of the attack, or the attack being perceived as beneficial to some Art World members, participation in the attack is still not certain, because revolutionary changes can be perceived as inconvenient or disruptive to normal pattern(s) of cooperation. In such cases, arts entrepreneurs may receive disinterest from those who are resistant to change, and/or direct challenges from those who hold power and authority in the Art World. 

Importantly, in cases of success, the work of art in society will change, because the conventions previously used to produce art will change. Given the seemingly vital role of discourse in this particular form of arts entrepreneurship, the ability to generate and facilitate discourse is perhaps one defining skill of the arts entrepreneur; considering the necessity of discourse in facilitating revolutionary change(s) in Art Worlds. 

 To read the entire article, please visit the Artivate website.

Works Cited

Becker, Howard S. (2008) Art Worlds, 25th Anniversary Edition. Oakland, CA. University of California Press.

Khaire, M. (2017). Culture and Commerce: The value of entrepreneurship in creative industries (Kindle). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

McKnight, J. S., & Plummer, J. M. (2015). Community Organizing: Theory and Practice (Kindle). New York, NY: Pearson.

*Dr. Jason C. White

Dr. Jason C. White is an Assistant Professor of Arts Management and Arts Entrepreneurship at College of Charleston, where he works with students to address arts management issues, co-develop solutions to common challenges, and organize new opportunities in arts and related entertainment fields. Dr. White is a published author in Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts, Journal of Arts Entrepreneurship Education, JAMLS (Journal of Arts Management, Law and Society), Innovative Higher Education, and Arts Education Policy Review. In addition, White is a founding member of the Society for Arts Entrepreneurship Education (SAEE). Artistically, Dr. White is best known as the playwright, co-actor and co-director of the multi-award nominated and NAACP award winning educational play, See The Dance: The History of American Minstrelsy. Prior to receiving his PhD in Arts Administration, Education and Policy from The Ohio State University, White earned a BFA in Acting from The California Institute of the Arts, and attended The University of Akron; obtaining both a Master of Arts (MA) degree in Arts Administration, and a Master in Education (M.Ed.) specializing in Assessment and Evaluation. 

Please feel free to contact with questions, or inquire about speaking engagements at: whitejc1@cofc.edu