Posted
by Joel Mathis
November 27, 2006 at 8:54 a.m.
A tiny part of the problem
My money has not been in the same location as my mouth.![][1]The talkin' part of me, in this instance, has spent the last few years proclaiming the glory of Lawrence, reveling in the creativity that sometimes seems, like the Kansas River, to run inexorably through our community.Indeed, in the last couple of months, I have:¢ Purchased the book "[Kansas Murals][2]" written by two local artists, Lora Jost and Dave Lowenstein.¢ Attended the premiere of a movie musical, "[Air][3]," which was produced by local filmmakers - and whose songs were written by a friend of mine, Steve Unruh.¢ Attended the "[silver shamiversary][4]" production of EMU Theatre plays in the basement of the Lawrence Arts Center.¢ And, of course, have been to Mass Street to hear other friends play in their respective bands. What I haven't done, though, is purchase a single piece of art made in Lawrence.That wouldn't bear mentioning, perhaps, except that many of Lawrence's artists appear to be in full-blown crisis mode over the closing of [Fields][5] and [Olive][6] galleries. They're wondering where in town it will be possible to mount shows - and, yes, make a buck or two for their efforts.And while a lot of the discussion has focused on infrastructure and institutions - maybe it's time to find a deep-pocketed benefactor - I can't help but wonder if I'm a tiny part of the problem.Perhaps it has been because art always seems so plentiful here; there's always something new on the wall of coffee shops, hair salons and bars. I've been meaning, for a few years now, to start a collection of Lawrence art.Only I've never gotten around to it.Now an artist friend tells me his colleagues are grumbling that maybe it's time to pull up stakes, move somewhere people spend enough on art to keep a private gallery open.I hope that doesn't happen. Lawrence would be immeasurably poorer without its artists and their art.This sounds like eating vegetables, I know, something to do because it's good for you. Except that there's real joy to be found in the work - just off the top of my head - of paintings of [Aaron Marable][7], the twisted whatnots of [Wayne Propst][8], [Loewenstein][9]'s murals and the work of many more talented Lawrencians.Maybe there's a deep-pocketed benefactor out there. It's not me, certainly - but it still seems like it's time to put my money where my mouth is. [1]: http://media.lawrence.com/img/photos/... [2]: http://www.lawrence.com/blogs/art/2006/sep/18/mural_book/ [3]: http://www.lawrence.com/news/2005/jan... [4]: http://www.lawrence.com/events/2006/nov/18/17151/ [5]: http://www.lawrence.com/places/fields... [6]: http://www.lawrence.com/places/the_ol... [7]: http://www.lawrence.com/news/2006/oct... [8]: http://www.lawrence.com/search/?q=Wayne+Propst&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=Search [9]: http://www.lawrence.com/news/2004/nov...
Comments
Lawrence.com does not necessarily agree with comments posted below - responsibility lies with the relevant user alone. Read our full policy.
Feents (Caterina Benalcazar) says…
I am really sad to see the Olive close. Unbeknownst to many, they were always willing to set up layaway plans for any art purchase I made, with little to no dead line. Thanks to them I have several pieces I would never have bought if priced at more "high-falutin'" gallery prices. Inexpensive and friendly with a layaway plan....I hope that whatever gallery eventually opens to try and take its place is as willing to accomodate the budget of a broke-ass art appreciator like me.
Which brings me to my original point: Never fear. Lawrence is and always will be choc-a-bloc with creative people. There will be more galleries. They will come and go with the students, but worrying that the art scene is dead is a tad alarmist. Just keep this in mind: next time you see something you want to buy, explore alternate options (layaway!) to make it work.
leslie (Leslie vonHolten) says…
Indeed, the art scene is not dead. I also don't think our current crisis makes it necessary for artists to leave town--Even if we had a thriving art gallery scene, they would still need to market in Kansas City, Chicago, and beyond.
Anyway, at least we know you received some local art as a wedding gift! :-)
ladylaw (Terry Bush) says…
Here's the thing about artists.... Those who create for a living may be realitive rare, but the urge to create will bug the true artists for life. Meaning that while making an actual living at doing art is hard indeed, most artists will continue to "dabble" a bit simply because they can't stop themselves. I should know. While I chickened out of actually trying to live from what my hands make, I still produce enough paintings (now on silk) to keep the skill from going totally dormant forever.
For those who do make a stab at living off their art, they have to become market savy in the extreme. But, being creative by nature, artists very often come up with solutions that are "outside the box."
As for some suggestions: There are some "regular" businesses that have (in the past) put up exhibitions for a month or two (e.g. Paradise Cafe). Whose to say that such an arrangement can't be sold to some new business owners? And co-ops are something that lots of Lawrencians like/use for other things, so it's not out of the question that a few like-minded artists can't team up to find a space/place/way to market their wares. And finally, the internet is fast becoming one quick/good/easy way to sell everything, including art works.
And finally, Joel, if you are personally interested in helping out, why not see if the Lawrence Journal World or its owners would sponsor a web site devoted to the sale and promotion of locally created art work and/or provide some actual building space for ever-changing exhibitions of works for sale?
Joel (Joel Mathis) says…
Feents: Color my face red. If I'd known about the layaway plan, my life would've changed awhile back. Perhaps if I'd asked...
That said: I don't think the art scene is dead, or even dying. But I think it feels challenged right now, and the discussions I've been privy to have challenged me to live up to my own ideals in this area.
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
Art.
Ok, here's the thing. I may be alone on this, but I don't normally see art as something to buy to adorn my house. The art that I like to see is art that speaks to me in some way. And since I'm such an asshole, the speaking usually has some sort of edge to it. Think of the children and all. So I don't visit galleries because I'm not going to buy anything so what's the point?
The one piece I own gets relegated to be out of general view. It does not match the couch.
So I can see how it's possible to have a town full of people who love and appreciate art, yet money doesn't necessarily change hands.
Also, its hard to justify supporting someone else's art when you can't afford to do your own, as much as you would like to (do both).
Joel (Joel Mathis) says…
Dotdot: I don't have your combination of ugly couch and dark spirit, so it's easier for me. ; )
To be fair, the median household income in this town is something like $20,000 below the state average. So there might not be as many dollars to change hands, overall.
And while I don't have tons of disposable income -- otherwise you'd see me jetting off to Europe every vacation -- I do get to set some priorities for the disposable income that I have. I simply haven't made art the priority I've intended to. That's my own choice; but I suspect a lot of people around town are in a similar place.
MLFeiden (anonymous) says…
I have been following the "Lawrence Art Scene" discussion, in this and other forums, with interest. I have been kicking around some thoughts (that may, or may not, hold water) but I seem to have exceeded the character limit. I don't know if this will work but I have posted them here: www.thekonzapress.com/art_scene.htm
ladylaw (Terry Bush) says…
Good idea ML. I think a co-op would work real well, if the people working on it could/would work together well and stick it out over time. That is usually "the rub." It can be hard for like minded folks to actually do more then simply talk about such endeavors, let alone commit and keep committing the joint projects!
But its been done elsewhere. I recently visited Madrid New Mexico. Now that is a town where artists have taken over everything!
I wish that along with art technique and art history, the arts study programs would teach lots of classes on such things as marketing and contracts etc. Perhaps they do now. But when I was getting my Fine Arts degree (long long ago) that type of topic was not on the syllabus!! It might help artists to have a firmer grasp on such concepts, before they have to learn things the hard way!
thetomdotdot (anonymous) says…
What better use for the masonic temple.
I'll throw another brick on the road to hell and say gosh if I had the money I would contribute it to the cause.
Its the thought and all.
alm77 (anonymous) says…
Lay-a-way?!?!? Brilliant. That seriously would've changed everything for us, had I known. We only have 5 pieces in our entire house; three prints, one painting done by a friend in lieu of rent she owed us and one heirloom wood inlay that is amazing.
Does the T-shirt I bought from Kristen Ferrell count as supporting the arts? I love that shirt. And I think Kristen has done what it takes to "make it" as an artist. She has her work shown all over the country, has a great website and has made it all accessible and affordable by putting it on shirts, dishes, etc. She's not just creative, she's business savvy. More Lawrence artists need to follow her lead.
So why didn't the Olive advertise this lay-a-way? Broke people love lay-a-way. It probably would've helped them out had they had a restocking fee if the piece didn't get picked up or paid on within a certain amount of time.
Is it really too late to save the Olive?
moveforward (anonymous) says…
Good thoughts from MLF. As idealistic as we want to be Art is a business and needs to be run actively. Waiting around for the groovy scene to just "happen" is like believeing in the tooth fairy.
A concerted effort is going to be needed to make it happen. When I was on the Arts comission years ago lots of ideas were being generated and people put effort into it.
Frankly, outside of a few old masters doing the same old thing (and KU faulty that show nationally) the art I see in Lawrence is pretty poor. I am guy that can find maybe 3 things I like at the Plaza Art Fair... a couple in KC on a first friday, but loved what Olive put up. Art that challenged my sense of aesthetic, made me curious and even inspred. Art that does not fit the norm. Part of this is because of the school. Hard as it is to say about Alma mater... it has gone significantly downhill (judgeing by the student shows).
People in Lawrence do buy art. People from KC and other areas (even on game day) will come to Lawrence and buy art. But it has to be good and it has to be shown. There are no getto type neighborhoods for the galleries to find cheap rent - so it must be more business like - as distasteful as that might seem.
MLFeiden (anonymous) says…
Terry: I was in Madrid this summer and will check it out again over Christmas. Maybe we could take over Topeka... Oh... I forgot, Topeka is taking over Lawrence...
Move Forward: I can't think of the Lawrence "art scene" without including faculty past and present. Too bad their work is not better represented locally...
People also come to Lawrence on game day and buy bad art. And I am forever grateful!
godjilla (Jill Ensley) says…
I've always wondered about that building next to the Riverfront Mall, across from the Journal-World. If I were staying in Lawrence, I'd look into it. hint hint.
It's tricky, how to fund art without looking like a corporate lackey.
I saw a postcard yesterday advertising a new show at the H & R Block Artspace in K.C. It was the most horrid thing I've seen in a long time. Not only was it the "H & R Block Artspace" but the postcard looked like it was designed by accountants.
No offense to accountants, my Dad is one.
Fritz (anonymous) says…
I want to do whatever I want, however I feel it should be done, and all of you should pay me enough to make a living from doing it.
And people wonder why it's hard to make it as an artist.
Why is it that writers, musicians and filmmakers understand that you have to meet your audience at a recognizable point and engage them before you can ask them to come with you down the lanes of some personal unmapped city, but not visual artists? Maybe it a lousy deal that art is not appreciated/recognized/supported solely because you created it, but that is how things work in our lowest common denominator society, and it is why Thomas Kincaid is rich.
As for the coop/collective gallery, they are in the juggling chainsaws while running a marathon level of difficulty. My wife started one up (and ran it for a few years) for the Lawrence Art Guild about ten years ago, in the old Riverfront Mall. Crazy hard job. Trying to get artists to commit to time to work or help organize shows was a constant battle. People always think these things run themselves.
But at the end of the day, we are still in a small Midwestern town, with no large population centers (not Chicago large, at least), and no steady stream of rich tourists coming to admire the view/skiing/waves. It's going to be damn hard to sell art here. As for those who talk about decamping for the brighter lights of some more "art-friendly" city, it probably is the best thing to do if you really are trying to make a living at art. Remember, the traditional cycle in these parts for the arts is that anything that develops organically and that is new and challenging is shunned if not stamped out altogether. Then, after it gains the coastal high society's imprimatur, it is welcomed back in an appropriately scrubbed and sanitized form with big parking lots and well-manicured landscaping. (i.e. the history of Jazz in Kansas City)
That being said, I love people watching at Henry's. It would be a shame if those strangely uniform "I'm an Individual" artsy-types all left town.
leslie (Leslie vonHolten) says…
Jill, the building you speak of is indeed very cool, very empty, and very much owned by the Simons family, of Journal-World and Lawrence.com. If we can convince Dolph et al. to help us with the finances (i.e. give us the space and then some), we would have our space AND patronage AND media connections rolled into one.
(Joel, you could greatly redeem yourself here. Start dropping some hints around the newsroom!)
As for Artspace, I think it's fab. Talk about someone who supports the local art scene--John Bloch (Block) is crazy rich and uses it for good. Though I haven't seen this postcard yet...
(And speaking of, Local Artists: If you have not driven yourself to Artspace and introduced yourself to Raechell Smith, well, do it NOW.)
Joel (Joel Mathis) says…
Jill, Leslie: I don't think I have the kind of pull necessary to have the old Reuters building set aside as an art gallery. In fact, I'm sure I don't. I'm sorry.
Fritz: I think you make a pretty good point - not everybody who makes art is going to be able to make a living from it, even if they're talented. And there are, it's fair to say, some people who maybe aren't as talented who nonetheless feel some entitlement to make said living.
That said: Art is something I value. Lawrence art is something I value, both for the sake of the art and the sake of Lawrence. But my current investment -- wedding gifts notwithstanding -- stands somewhere in the neighborhood of $0. I'm even in deficit, if you count the value of the wine I've sipped at openings. So I think it's time my investment represents something closer to my values and prioroties than it currently does.
Fritz (anonymous) says…
I may not be able to type this message, because I spit my drink all over my keyboard when I read the comment about Dolph being the town's art sugar daddy. Funniest single line I've read in months. Only thing less likely is that his next two editorials will be "Why the SLT will not reduce traffic on 23rd St." and "Building a new Wal-Mart is bad for Lawrence"
lori (anonymous) says…
I'm looking around, and I actually have quite a bit of original art on my walls; but alot of it is by friends and was given as gifts. The pieces that I dhave paid fo I obtained either at the Lawrence Arts Center annual auction (for less that $100), The Painted Lady, an awesome piece that I love love love at St John's Rummage (It's kitchy, but it's the one that more people have asked about than any other, interestingly enough), and one piece that I commissioned (if that word can be used for items way under $100) from a fresh out of high school local artist whose work is great and I knew she would do something funky for us.
I'm thinking I have no art piece that cost me more than $45.
So does that count in supporting the arts? I like what I have on my walls, I like to feel Iike I am supporting local artists; but I suspect that local artist are not looking for supporters like myself. I suspect they are looking for someone who is willing to pay several hundred or several thousand on a single piece. I can't do that.
Since I am a white trasher on this scene with no prior experience or guidance on this issue, I'm throwing this out there to you-all. I buy a piece because I like it. Because I think it will look good on my wall, because it matches my mood, because it is funny, funky, or amazing. I don't buy it to consider it an investment. And, I'm assuming, neither does anyone else buying stuff at the prices I pay. Do the people in this town who actually spend bigger bucks purchase art because they like the individual piece, or is it because it is an investment? So are artists looking for people who like their stuff, or people view it in terms of the idea that it might bring them alot more money in 10 or 50 years?
I'm just wondering, as I have a friend who has managed to make some big bucks, and she only buys stuff as investments. Most of it doesn't even adorn her walls (and she doesn't even had kids to worry about)--she keeps it in a bank. I wonder if the artists care that their work is not being viewed at all--that it is just sitting around until she needs to pay for a nursing home placement for a family member, or buy another house, or pay for a future child to go to college.
So, with these two different types of buyers--obviously if you produce one or two paintings month that sell regularly at the several hundred to several thousand dollar range, you are probably pretty happy--and maybe you don't care so much about whether anyone actually likes or views your stuff. But wouldn't it be at least ALMOST as profitable to make stuff for the working man? Items that can be bought for between 10-250? If I ever buy a card, I buy one of Kendra (Herrick? Hendrick?) because they are so freakin awesome, they are $5, and they are readily purchased at several area businesses. I buy many each year. Does this do her more good than if I purchased a $1000 piece once?
Just wondering.
Joel (Joel Mathis) says…
Lori: I suspect I'll be pretty much in the same pool of lower-end art buyers such as yourself -- but, like yourself, I'll be buying art for its own sake, not as an investment.
And, frankly, I think it takes all kinds.
ladylaw (Terry Bush) says…
Prompted by this line of discussion I did a quick inventory. Much to my surprise I found that I have quite a bit of original art at work and the house. And I only did one of the paintings myself! (And it's by far my least favorite). The other stuff (paintings and ceramics) are gifts from family friends or fellow (Iong past) students. One piece I did purchase (a print) was done by the mother of a friend. My personal favorite is probably the wood and fiber wall hanging by my parents.
So, is it better to honor your muse and starve? Or is it acceptable to the art gods to bend to the will of the masses and produce something that actually sells?
I tend to favor #2, mixed with time left to work on #1 type pieces. As has been hammered already, art of any kind won't keep your kids shod if there is not a public ready and willing (nay eager) to pay money to get your stuff. I believe it was A. Renoir who painted tacky tourist things and wall murals he did not like in order to keep his family fed (one of the reasons he delayed marrying till later was because he wanted to be able to feed himself and his loved ones). I do not think it is selling out to be realistic. Doing what it takes to make a living is a survival skill! If you want to starve in order to prove a point, by all means go ahead. But don't blame other people for not applauding or joining into the fun.
And Joel, surely a HINT isn't the same as asking? One could simply point out this thread to certain persons...sometimes all it takes is for someone to plant a tiny seed. And let others water it! LOL.
Madrid was a great place. I wanted to move there within 2 minutes after arriving! But I might not be hip enough now. Or have enough animals. Every gallery/old-house stuffed with art work seemed to have a menagerie of some type! LOL.
leslie (Leslie vonHolten) says…
Lori: You should, of course, buy art you love. But it's also okay to buy art instead of 401Ks or other investments, if that's the course you want to take. The people I know who buy art as investment also have plenty they love hanging on the walls.
Kookamooka (MJ Browne) says…
Someone once mentioned the Reuter building should be an interactive museum along the lines of a City Museum in St. Louis where people of all ages can interact with art, performing and visual. If it's done right, that would be a HUGE tourist draw and a really creative out of the box way to have galleries. With a benefactor, assitance from KU and Simons and the city, projects designed by Van Go, murals by Lowenstein, weird concrete sculptures sponsored by Penny's, a huge wax chandelier made and donated by the artists at Waxman candles.... that is the way to honor our artists and give birth to the notion that a creative economy can generate income.
The difference between a Lawrence Exploratorium Cafegymatorium 21 Century Museum or Coolness and the Art Center is...this place would be open for spontaneous pleasure and have a great restaurant/event space.
If Simons doesn't do it....The East Lawrence Gentrification Project led by Bo Harris might. (or the Lawrence will get "scooped" once again by Kansas City!)