Do you get paid for that? and other stupid questions

This is going to be a short post because...well I don't get paid for this.

COULD be the attitude I take if I only ever did things for the money. Of course if I only did things for the money I'd just turn up to my job and not much else. I'd never have studied much, had many hobbies, done anyone a favour.

Reccently I've been busy with a number of things outside my 'Day Job' and when I retrun, or when I mention to friends or relatives what I've been 'busy' with I inevitably get asked:

"Do you get paid for that."

A couple of times I've for example, been quite excited to get readings of my plays done, and performed. Instead of just being either supportive or even impressed (hey I've got a writer's ego would it KILL someone to be impressed for once?) I get asked:

"Do you get money for that?"

Well, no. And at this stage I'm just grateful nobody is charging me for the hours of their life they won't get back reherasing them or listening to them.

Or, I'll talk about reviewing a play. Same thing:

"Do you get paid for that?"

Or writing an academic piece for a book:

"Do you get paid for that?"

Or attending a conference:

"Do you get paid for that?"

Firstly it's kind of insulting. The idea that the thing only has value if there's a transaction of money involved. There's also this unspoken idea that 'well it can't be any good then' if you aren't paid for it. Or that somehow you're a fool for doing it.

Now on one hand I'm a huge advocate for getting paid for work. I loathe that the arts and academia are two particularly explotiative areas of work. But there are levels at which I'm happy to give my time for free. To the small theatre companies who wouldn't get by without volunteers helping out. Sure, have whatever time I can give. To the theatre that receives millions in Arts Council money and charges £60 a ticket, but recently switched it's front of house staff to volunteers: No you do not deserve these people's time for free. In terms of academia I have more of an issue. Because the unpaid labour is not divided equally. There are those in permenant jobs for whom the unpaid labour of writing articles, attending conferences etc is 'covered' by their wage. I know (before they scream at me) that academics go above and beyond. BUT in a full academic post, research is part of the job role. For those not employed in academia it's an additional element on top of a full time (and the rest) week. It's complicated. All of it. We should all be able to be at least not out of pocket for our work. But also we shouldn't have our work reduced to a simple hourly rate.

The thing that really irks me is this: why is my work only valued in terms of monetary gain?

It is incredibly reductive to me to view a person's creative, or even academic work is such reductive terms as how much money they make from it. I didn't start reviewing shows to make money. I started to help me keep developing my understanding and engagement with an art form I love. I didn't do a PhD because I thought 'hey this will make me rich' I did it because I wanted to continue to learn. And for the love of my subject. And because I had something to contribute. I write plays because I have something to say. Even if that something is just a terrible joke about Danny Dyer.

I write plays in the same way I wrote fanfic as a teenager: because I love to write and I enjoy it. Perhaps next time a colleauge or a friend or whoever asks why I do something if I don't get paid I should answer "The same reason I made Mulder and Scully screw on the photocopier when I was 15, because it's fun" (this obviously I entierly made up for this purpose. Obviously. Cough).

I can count the times on one hand someone has followed up my answer of 'A play reading' or 'a book chapter' etc with 'Oh what's it about then?' or similar instead of  'Do you get paid for that?' and isn't that sad? Obviously within my arty/academic circles people ask. But in the more casual aquaintance world, pay is the tip of everyone's tongue. Isn't that sad? that people can't see beyond the financial transaction. And the answer to the pay question is boring. The asnwer to what it's about is far more interesting.

Example from my last play reading:

Did you get paid?
No.

End of conversation.

Oh really, what's it about?
Time travel, and AIDS. And there's a really filthy joke about Paul Hollywood.

I know what conversation I'd prefer to be having.


The point as well being, we're terribly British about money in other ways. Most of us would never ask a colleauge what the make for example. Then why is it ok to outright ask how much my 'creative' work is worth? and why is that worth only financial.

To take a different approach. I did some teaching this year, that was paid actually. Out of that teaching 3 people have told me how much the sessions meant to them or how much they learned. Yes I made some money that day, and yes I've got bills to pay. But in 10 years I won't remember the figure I earned that day (before tax) I'll remember what those people said to me. And hopefully they'll remember me.

We work for money. And we do creative things in the hope they'll one day be a career. Maybe. But the value of these things shouldn't be so reductive. And frankly it's the least interesting part. We who do all this for free, pursue passions. We're excited and interested and yes a bit nerdy about it all. But we also have reasons for doing it. Look at the above description, although I'm being a bit flippant, this play means something to me. And hopefully it will eventually to other people too.

So next time someone tells you about a really cool project they're excited about, ask them about the project. Not about how much it pays. It'll be a far more interesting conversation. And you might learn something.