AMS Review reposted this
PhD Candidate at Hanken School of Economics | Arts Marketing, Museums & Business | Journalist
“Pop!” is the sound of a champagne cork flying off when you receive the link to your first-ever academic publication. First, about the article that I co-authored with Julia Fehrer and Kaj Storbacka. 🏛️ In a nutshell, when you say “market”, cultural actors are most likely to get an eye twitch as there is a long tradition in the field to discard economic considerations as contaminating. 💵 It does not help that the actors from outside the field also translate the market logic mainly through pure economic exchange. (Hello, mayor of Auckland, who compared the profit of the art gallery against the one of the corner dairy). 🛑 What comes out of this tension is conflicting or passive coexistence with the market, which brings cultural organisations absolutely nowhere. 🌏 At the same time, there are emerging examples that demonstrate how the tensions between the market logic and the logic of the cultural field can be generative rather than restricting. The market logic is not monolithic, and the cultural field is complex enough to be a convening space where cultural and market values converge. 👉 We suggest taking a reflexive look at the marketization of the arts as a process that can be adaptively managed and offer a framework of generative coexistence, a field-level phenomenon that encourages a more systemic view on the interplay of cultural legacy models and market practices. Next, the Oscar “thank you” speech: ❤️ My biggest thank you is to my co-authors. You know how much I appreciate your guidance and support. Not to mention that our Zoom discussions were epic. Here is to many more to come! ❤️ Then, the anonymous reviewers. As a Doctoral researcher, I have been intensely following the Steven King’s-like stories about the reviewing process. But our reviewers were classic “gardeners”, genuinely invested into the paper from the very beginning and open to our theoretical and methodological choices. In fact, having long dialogues in the response letters (three rounds, over 25 pages each time) was one of the highlights of the whole process. ❤️ Big thank you to the AMS Review Editorial team! It sounds like a long process, from October 2023 to March 2025, but it was incredibly efficient and smooth. Great first experience. ❤️ Many people supported my thinking along the way, but I want to mention Suvi Nenonen and Rod Brodie as they were really there for me at that prehistoric stage when I was not yet sure what is “problematising” or “domain theory”. Finally, champagne it is! This article is Open Access, here is the link: https://lnkd.in/dW8eEZfd