Jubilee retraite June 14 2021

Present: Vincent, Justin, Ronny, Julie, Eleni, Jesse Excused: Katleen

Agenda, some points that serve as an agenda/red thread to think about the structural application for VG. -What functions do we apply for? Now we have Development, Production. We should consider adding Reflection, but there are 2 important reasons to consider stopping doing Production. -Who are Jubilees partners and how do we define them? Certain artists (Caveat related for instance, but also Jasper, Jeanne, Lonnie van Brummelen & Siebren de Haan, Pierre Huyghebaert, etc) are particularly close, and could be considered part of Jubilee's second tier of collaborators. How can we make this more visible, formalized, and/or interesting? Certain institutions are particularly important for us, and would be even more so in case we add Reflection as a function, in order to have collaborations where those reflections could meet audiences Artistic networks that we are part of/have initiated: Tracks, Gallait: how do they fit in Jubilee's work and (intended) functions? Other networks: Midsize strategy, PAM, oKo, Brussels artist-run: are these of importance for the dossier? -Jubilee retraite in real life? Nina remains highly enthusiastic about receiving us in Mechelen and cooking for us. Especially from 15 August onwards seems possible.


From 15/9 for VG project applications, Jubilee can no longer apply for its artists' projects. Most probably, we can still manage the budget on behalf of the artists when they

Normally, Jubilee would easily meet the requirement of having 7,5% own income. For the future application, project subsidies will have to go through the artists themselves (they apply in person). If Jubilee manages that subsidy, that still counts as 'own income' in the current Kustendecreet, but it has notyet been confirmed if that would be the case in the ne decree. If not, then that will make it more difficult for Jubilee to meet this requirement. 7,5% still goes for Development and Reflection functions. For Production and Presentation functions, the new Kunstendecreet stipulates 20% own income, although oKo keeps saying that exceptions can be made..

Proposal Ronny: change name Jubilee to "platform for artistic research and reflection" (instead of production). Concentration on development and reflection / finishing. We would still go for 300k. For administration "correct remuneration" of employees and artists is fundamental = an evaluation criterion in the application for structural funding. Applying collective labour agreement is hypocritical because we can never afford to pay for the full time of the work.

Proposal - 1/2 time job for everyone (except Jesse) in order to develop projects and reflect on them. Remark: refelction can not be limited to a singular art project, but needs to be about a wider scope on things... It could be on how to position a work, bring it into the proper discursive context etc. Simply producing a catalogue would be considered 'production'.

Artist / civil servant ? Avoid to make this impression. Apart from individual also include collective projects. Reflection

Organisation is supposed to "accompany" artists as part of the mission of a structurally funded organisation.

To what extent will our application push the government to their own requirements of fair payment?

Production: not really always production - not always through Jubilee More realistic description of what's actually going on: half time remuneration - win/win

Residency= one each/to be accompanied by the one who proposed Working from the office + library + meeting room, using Jubilee's facilities, perhaps also in the broader sense. Communication, networks, perhaps join meeting. Collective or individual dimension of 'guidance': opening up. Mix of autonomous work and collective refection Housing:

We have to be consistent - also the residencies should be based around development or reflection.

In Jan van Eyck, there's a residency for a writer/poet. Needs a residency fee but no production budget. Part of development: applying for money. So we can "accompany" the residents in their grant applications. The residents could be related to the existing projects - individual projects, Caveat/Emptor, Tracks, .... There could also be an open call. We'll need to have a logic/direction behind this.

Julie: paying artists halftime for research and reflection is where it went wrong with Innoviris. We'd need more . On the other hand, we'd need to interiorize more the function of 'reflection' - reflect collectively on each others' practices?

Eleni: also on website, 'development', 'production', 'reflections' should be more clearly present/absent
Justin: reflection on website by including interviews / organising links.

Vincent: reconsidering the organisation in view of the application obliges us to put things black on white to what we've been doing (diagram). At the same time, like Julie says: changing the organisation should be done in a substantial way, not only on the level of communication.
Idea of recompensating us half-time is very difficult to convicne the administration. mission to opening up the structure If they want to play it neoliberal, we should think a little bit like they think: artists as consultants. Accompanying artists.

Eleni: inviting only artists? I'd be interested in inviting both an artist and a sociologist at the same time, for instance. Transversal residency? Ronny: yes, but need to be careful with art funding.

Julie: sense of direction is needed, when inviting other artists into the organisation. We'll need to go further than being friends having been in the same structure for a long time.

Eleni: I don't really believe in "Collective research" because where I have been in this collective research? I mean maybe it's nice to try to place emphasis on what the research is about rather than only labelling it "collective research" Jesse: 'collective' because it's initiated to invite others to be part of the research. Doesn't mean that everyone necessarily needs to be involved. Vincent: 'collective' because it's not authored. Ronny: not anymore in the position of singular decision-making, but inviting others to co-author the work. Multiple levels of decision making.

For VAF, Jubilee can still apply. Julie: For VG, we should define the line between development and production more clearly. Links between individual trajectories and Jubilee's development/reflection.

Vincent: objectify Ronny's idea of asking for artists' development fee, by reflecting on past achiefments. Profile Jubilee, including accompaniment of other artists as

Eleni: how about everyone from their own perspective writes about what they see as 'assemblies of practice'?

Julie's notes:

on what binds practices within jubilee: - long term trajectories ( interesting questions: how to keep focus/ when does a trajectory 'end'/ how to turn it into production, materialisation?) - collaborative ( what does it mean to make a trajectory porous, open, heterogenous yet controled, what is the difference between collective and collaborative and how is it translated in agreement on 'working together' - authorship relations) - discursive (how to open up a trajectory/ make it accessible, level of theory/materiality) - role/place of art in society

on responsabilities important question seems to be 'who is responsable for what?' (content/finance/output) and how this links to the using of terms as 'collective' and/or 'collaborative'

on internal functioning - need for a different way to communicate on artistic trajectories and connection between these and the way an organisation as Jubilee functions and operates (also highlight engagement in the public debate) - need for different methodologies for exchanging and putting into words of methodologies and the transmission of experience in conducting long term artistic research

to develop for the structural dossier: - making visible the reach out/ impact/ network developed - making visible the way individual practices contribute to the functioning of Jubilee and its development as an organisation - giving 'shape' to the 'quality' attained - the term of 'assemblies of practice' could be important in terms of reflection and linking trajectories > how to further fill in this concept? - pay attention to the continuity this way of working possibly offers to development (cfr. Caveat/Emptor has been/is in some ways an environment for artists to continue developing their work without immediately producing, a kind of environment that supports the possibility to exchange and go deeper into research threads in dialogue with peers and other disciplines > for example: collaboration with Katya, Grace, Kobe, working towards Spa for R&K)

! the FC will never agree to pay artists in a part-time position to conduct their own research without having enough insight on how this contributes to supporting development and reflection about the field as a whole, and/or other artists trajectories. Arguments for it could go in the direction of: - exchange with residents - contribution to collective reflection on certain topics affecting the conditions for work e.g. Emptor - how these contribute to the ways development and reflection are supported cfr. 'tools/methodologies/writing' on and for 'collaborative processes', 'how to deal with authorship/property concept', 'participation' (e.g. mapping tool, how to translate support in development as co-production in a sense that is a way towards empowering artists in negotiations on production with third parties, publishing on 'authorship/property' from an interdisciplinary perspective with the artist trajectories as backbone as a means to make these visible as 'knowledge' producing practices) / I think this translates in the way the core artists are engaged in the internal working of Jubilee