My main proposition
- Artists are flexiworkers from necessity rather than conviction.
- Therefore they are not or not yet a model of the flexiworker of the future.

First some facts
These stem from recent Austrian research. The outcomes differ little from those of earlier Dutch research. Therefore it is likely that these figures broadly apply to most European countries.
1. Nowadays the typical artist is a multiple jobholder. Circa 75% of all artists have second jobs, both art related and not art related.
2. Half of the artists has to handle discontinuities in their work as artists. For around 17% these are so unpredictable that they cannot plan their activities.
3. The typical artist is poor. Two third of all artists earn less than 8100 euro p.a. from their work as artist.
4. The 75 percent of the artists having second jobs earn more per hour in their second jobs than in the arts. Income from second jobs considerably raises the overall income of artist from work, both work in the arts and second jobs. Nevertheless artists are still poor. Half of all artists earns less than 12.400 euro p.a. from work and one third less than 8.400 euro from work.
5. Taken into account all income one third of the artists lives at or below the poverty line as defined by the European Community. For the whole population this is 12% and for professionals with a comparable level of education it is much lower.
6. Artists have been exceptionally poor already for decades.
7. On average artists’ parents are well-educated and well–to-do; more so than the parents of other professionals with a similar level of previous education.

More propositions
Why are artists poor? Some answers that overlap and sometimes contradict:
a. Because there are many artists (but not necessarily too many).
b. Because the arts are special and therefore work in the arts is exceptionally attractive.
c. Because the typical artist is willing to work in the arts for money-incomes that are much lower than in comparable professions.
d. Because the typical artist gets more non-monetary rewards out of his work in the arts than other professionals get out of their work.
e. Because artists keep themselves poor.
f. Because artists are artists.

In the present context the answer ‘artists keep themselves poor’ is important.
I. If artists would work more hours in their second jobs they would not have to be poor. Moreover, most of them would still have considerable time left for working as an artist.
II. However, the typical artist minimizes on his better paid non-art jobs and therefore remains poor. If, irrespective of its source, more money comes in, the artist reduces the number of hours he works in his non art job(s). (And/or he will buy equipment, take master classes etc.) If less money comes in he increases the number of hours worked in non-art jobs.
III. Therefore the typical artist is a flexiworker par excellence. But also a flexiworker of the minimizing type. One profession comes first; the others are no ends but means to be able to work as artist.
IV. If sufficient money comes in artists will start to work full time in the arts and stop being flexiworkers.
V. Therefore artists are flexiworkers from necessity rather than conviction.
VI. The same reasoning applies to the choice of hours worked on one’s own art work and art work that brings more income per hour, but is not experienced as ‘one’s own’ art, ‘autonomous’ art ‘true’ or ‘real’ art. The typical artist minimizes on the non-true art work in order to have as much time as possible for making true art.

a. All these propositions are formulated in a too extreme a way. Typical artists always compromise; older artists more so than young artists.
b. However, the fact that the typical artist is poor proves that the propositions are largely true.
c. It also proves that the arts are still very special and extremely attractive. The romanticism surrounding the arts is still strong
d. However, minority groups of artists exist for whom these propositions do not apply to or apply to in a lesser degree
e. There is a growing group of artists who can be said to hold a portfolio of art, art related and/or not art related jobs. The satisfaction the other job(s) bring is such that they would not want to work full time as an artist, even if this were financially possible. This group could be a model for the happy-go-lucky flexiworker of the future.
f. However, many of these artists, myself not excluded, occasionally experience feelings of guilt for not spending as much hours as possible working in the arts, for not being dedicated enough. Such is still the power of the romantic, ‘sacred’ arts.

A few ‘bonus’ propositions
- Given the relatively high social background of the average artist the typical artist is good in organizing his jobs and handling money. Their artistsÂ’ habitus adds to this. This is true even though people and especially artists believe the opposite. Generally artists are good cultural entrepreneurs and skilful multiple jobholders and flexiworkers.
- As cultural entrepreneurs artists do not care much where their income comes from: from the market or from the government, partners, philanthropists etc, as long as it enables them directly or indirectly to do their own thing.
- Both market income and government income can be not more than a means for being able to spend time on the making of ‘true’ art; however, because artists generally believe that governments sooner buy their own thing than consumers in the market, the distinction between the two still matters for most artists.
- Because artists are flexiworkers of the minimizing type subsidies aimed at relieving poverty in the arts do not raise the average income and only lead to more poor artists.
- Many artists can afford to be poor because (a) as noted they keep themselves poor by minimizing on second jobs and (b) because, thanks to relatively well-to-do parents, for them the art profession is less risky than it appears to be. In the back of their minds many artists know that when everything would go wrong they can fall back on family members and other people in their social circle.
- Therefore, (average) artists are privileged and not to be pitied.