Young artists are often advised against paying to be considered for opportunities, yet they encounter a world where such fees are the norm. From $10 to $40, these charges are justified as necessary for covering administrative costs or filtering out less serious applicants. However, these fees serve as financial barriers rather than indicators of merit, measuring artists’ means rather than their talent. The practice undermines ideals of access and equity within the art community.
Application fees are a subtle form of class discrimination, shifting the financial burden from institutions to individuals. Artists, accustomed to accepting small financial losses, often end up internalizing the costs of access. Some fees are merely annoying, while others are exploitative, as illustrated by a gallery that promised to refund fees for unselected artists but ensured everyone was selected, creating a revenue stream disguised as inclusivity.
Most fee-based systems claim fees are unavoidable due to administrative costs, yet few institutions provide transparency about the usage of these funds. The notion that fees deter unserious applicants is flawed, as the ability to risk rejection is more about financial capability than seriousness. Entry fees reduce participation, primarily along financial lines, and do not enhance the quality of submissions.
Some organizations, like the Skowhegan School of Painting & Sculpture, attempt innovative fee structures, such as sliding deadlines, but these can inadvertently favor those with stable resources. Elizabeth Freeman’s concept of
