INTERVIEW WITH DAN BLASK, PROGRAM COORDINATOR FOR THE MASSACHUSETTS CULTURAL COUNCIL

Greetings all! Recently I was fortunate to interview Dan Blask from the Massachusetts Cultural Council (MCC) who spoke candidly and quite encouragingly about applying for fellowships and grants. Dan coordinates programs for individual artists at the MCC, including grants for filmmakers, composers, and writers of fiction, nonfiction, dramatic writing, and poetry. He also writes for ArtSake, MCC's blog about new art and the creative process. Dan received his MA in Creative Writing (Playwriting) from Boston University and lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts. By the way, although MCC is regional program in Massachusetts, the things he talks about are applicable to many grant programs both here in the US and abroad.

Dan, thanks so much for joining us! I know this is a busy season for you. Anyway, I noticed on your bio that you studied playwriting at Boston University. How do you balance your creative life while working full-time at the MCC as well as writing for ArtSake, the MCC's blog?

A lot of the staff members at MCC are also artists: writers, painters, dancers, musicians. I think the job lends itself to doing creative work, since the hours are, for the most part, consistent, and we’re all exposed to a lot of different ideas and art in all disciplines. But finding that life/work/artwork balance is a big, ongoing, back and forth struggle for almost every artist-with-a-day-job I know. Do you work an arts-related job and risk spending creative energy you should save for your own art? Do you work in an unrelated field and risk not enjoying it or being detached from daily exposure to a field you love? I certainly don’t know. You try different things, I guess. For now, I’m trying this, and I’m enjoying it.

You certainly nailed the classic dilemma of a working artist! And speaking of dealing with that balance and trying to find extra funding, what advice do you have for someone applying for a grant or fellowship for the very first time?

Basically, I advise a sort of zen hyper-focus/total emotional detachment. (Not possible, I know, but a worthy goal.) In other words, focus on exactly what the grant is asking for, and shape your grant application accordingly. Then, after it’s sent, you have to disallow yourself from getting too attached to any one grant or fellowship application. This is really, really hard to do. But you’re doing yourself a disservice if you dwell on, or, even worse, count on, receiving a competitive grant, because while receiving a grant means your work spoke to someone, not receiving a grant doesn’t mean the opposite of that. There are inevitably more artists of excellence than there are grants, fellowships, or slots at a residency. I know not winning a grant feels like it has a deep meaning, about you, about your work. But believe me, all it means is that this group of individuals, on this particular day, went a different direction. So, onward.

As to other thoughts: send your strongest work as your work sample, especially in a grant review like MCC’s Artist Fellowships, where it’s anonymously judged based only on artistic quality and creative ability. If you have any doubts about what is your strongest work, it’s always a good idea to ask the opinion of a trusted associate what work that is. Another viewpoint can be very helpful. And otherwise, my advice would be to prepare yourself but don’t be intimidated. If you need some clarification, don’t hesitate to contact the organization. I know I’d rather hear from an applicant than receive a mishandled application, or worse yet, receive no application at all because the applicant was discouraged.

That's great advice. So what are some things in an application that make someone really stand out from the crowd?

It’s an interesting question. In the Artist Fellowships, there are two rounds of review. The first round is an elimination round of sorts, and standing out in the wrong way – generally, because the craft is weak – can get you eliminated. So you have to make sure the craft is there.

Then, in the second round, the panelists are really drilling down and looking closer. And here, an artistic voice that feels truly unique and fully realized can stand out in the best way, especially when you’re dealing with dozens of applications. As you pointed out, I have a theater background, and in drama we talk about “lean forward” moments, a point in a play where an audience member is so suddenly drawn in that there is almost a physical reaction. That can happen in any discipline. Think of the panelists as people seriously in love with art (which they almost certainly are) rather than bureaucrats (which they probably aren’t). Most of the panelists, despite their fancy-pants titles, are just reg’lar humans who want to be moved by art. So don’t let other considerations overwhelm your work’s ability to transport them.

I always tell people that same thing when I speak about this subject—that panelists are real people who participate in these things out of their love for art. I've been a panelist for competitions before and I'm certainly no bureaucrat! So thanks for mentioning that. On the same note, I know that some of my readers would be curious to know how the MCC picks the judges for the artists fellowship program. Would you mind telling us a little bit about how that process works?

My colleague Kelly Bennett and I divide up the disciplines, then each solicits panelists and (if applicable) first-round readers for the different panels. The panels are anonymously judged, and the range of the work submitted is, aesthetically, very wide. So we have to make sure the panel represents as many aesthetic perspectives as possible and is diverse in every way, including background, geography, and gender, as well as the different perspectives of artists, presenters, critics, etc. We search online, we ask for recommendations, we read trade magazines, we look at other grant and award programs. There is a mixture of in-state and out-of-state panelists, and we work hard to ensure there are no conflicts of interest.

Obviously we want knowledgeable and accomplished panelists, not only for the functional reason that they’re doing a very important job for us – the most important for the purposes of this grant - but also because applicants deserve to know that their work was reviewed by respected voices in their respective fields.

Dan, do you have any encouraging words for readers out there who might be discouraged about the economy and funding for the arts in these hard times? I like to instill optimism in my readers as much as I can!

My broadly optimistic comment would be that artists are uniquely qualified to find creative solutions in troubled times. A perfect example would be your terrific blog, which is, it seems to me, a creative person’s creative solution to the always tricky issue of finding funding and other support as an artist. More specifically, I’d point to the fact that, though our budget is somewhat reduced from last year, the MCC is still giving direct funding to individual Massachusetts artists through our Artist Fellowships Program. We’re accepting applications from Massachusetts artists in the categories of Choreography, Fiction/Creative Nonfiction, and Poetry, through January 25, 2010. Check here for more info: http://www.massculturalcouncil.org/programs/artistfellows.html.

Dan, thanks so much for your time and for your great comments! I'm sure they will be most enlightening to a lot of my readers. And have a great holiday!

Have a great holiday break and stay tuned for more interviews coming up, as well as some new deadlines for residencies and grants. Best wishes, Mirabee