Guest on October 01, 2010, at 05:21PM – #2

I'm relieved. I never get to do ArtWalk since I work early on Fridays. I had just put in for a vacation including allowing for the ArtWalk in December, so I can finally enjoy it well into the night like everyone else. The day after my vacation was approved, the cancellation was announced. Of course! I've missed out for 3 years, and when I plan to go it's cancelled.

I'm just happy to see that I'll actually get to fully enjoy it ... if it's still on in December.

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 05:23PM – #3

can we please stop referring to it as an "artwalk" when clearly there are less galleries (since its inception) and more food trucks, furniture store and trustfund hipsters infiltrating the streets each month. either the director needs to support the current galleries and bring in more legitimate spaces, or the name needs to be changed to "pubcrawl"

-former "art"walker

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 05:32PM – #5

The only way for the event to get back to being about art is for someone to take control of the art that is allowed to pop-up. If anyone is to take it seriously as an "art walk" the art needs to be curated more tightly and be of a higher quality. Then maybe the gallery owners might come back to the event.

Hire someone with experience in doing art curating, somebody like ex-LACMA curator Howard Fox or retired Pasadena Armory Center for the Arts director, Jay Belloli, not as the overall director of the event, but as the art curator.

If someone who is not taken seriously by the art cognoscenti is allowed to control what is shown in pop ups and temporary spaces then it will continue to be crap and people who collect art will avoid downtown, not just on art walk night but all the time.

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 05:38PM – #6

BTW, the names are just suggestions as the type of person needed. Not specific suggestions or recommendations. I am sure there are lots more here in LA.

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 05:45PM – #7

Or maybe a committee of involved art people, curators, collectors, writers, who meet monthly and pass on artists and exhibition proposals in certain designated locations. Obviously one can't stop what happens on the street but at least there would be some "serious art destinations" for people to intentionally attend.

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 06:10PM – #8

The reduction of Art Walk from an art event to a drinking/party event sounds like what happened to Burning Man. It too had to get sponsored funding and raise its admission fees several hundred percent when it became too popular.So much for a "money-free society".

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 07:50PM – #11

Would love to see better overall and local downtown area(including the local colonies participate) art. Local downtown crafts should have a designated area but retailers that are obviously not local (Hollywood, Venice, ect.) should be shooed away with their chotchkies between their leggs;) or have to pay though the nose for a space! Keep the focus on the [ARTs] Good article:

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 08:41PM – #13

"I see absolutely nothing wrong with a...........drinking event that lets people know how exciting DTLA is."

LOL! Everything is more exciting when you're drunk.

Guest on October 01, 2010, at 09:29PM – #14

I couldn't figure out why Jay Lopez and Bert Green were so adamant about latching onto the Art Walk organization, but the pieces of the puzzle are starting to fall into place. If the group has enough importance to attract $200,000, or even more, I now understand what may have been motivating those two, or certainly Mr. Lopez. At the very least, if he could wrest control of the Art Walk group and make it his own, he was guaranteed a job instead of the unemployment line.

As for Mr. Green, although a tiny bit of his interest may have been altruistic, something else far more motivating to him probably was at the heart of the matter. He too must have sensed there was a bit of money to be taken advantage of in managing the Art Walk. That seems likelier since he was quoted as saying that the non-profit approach to the organization didn't make sense. Therefore, he was implying that some dollars could be squeezed out of the Art Walk operation?

Those two must be quite indignant and resentful, to say the least, about the turn of events one week later. Moreover, what makes them really tick appears to be quite unpleasant. That's because I originally thought they were some of the good people in the story of the Art Walk. Or those who could be always relied upon to lend a helping hand to reviving downtown.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 12:19AM – #16

Jay Lopez is NOT a credible figure anymore, and all should see what a conniving person he is.

On one hand he tried to "uproot" Artwalk to a quarterly weekend event, while at the same time, underhandedly making "plans" for a 'Broadway Arts event' to take place on the SAME second Thursdays of every month! Huh?

Greed is the root of all this.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 12:45AM – #17

The board has done an awful job so far, even without funding they where unmotivated to even reach out in the form of regular public meetings or hitting the pavement and talking to individual stakeholders.

To be fair they didn't have any money so I hope they do a better job, I'm hopeful they will. The poster who said its essential they get a legit art professional involved is absolutely right the artwalk has nooooo cred in the art world. A seasoned and charismatic art world insider with some connections could create programming that can attract art press, other informed art programming and additional funding. It wouldn't hurt if that person has some fund raising ability as well. I think that might be a tall order so DONT SKIMP OUT and try to save money on some one who is not top notch. It will only end up costing you in every way including financially.

Good luck! The whole city at this point will be watching. Its exciting dont screw it up.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 02:27AM – #18

I think its off base to try and charaterize Bert Green motivation as

"He too must have sensed there was a bit of money to be taken advantage of in managing the Art Walk."

Bert Green started the art walk and turned it over to a board, he also resigned from the board. If potential money was his only motivation he could have just kept control from the beginning. This board and the personnel have some real problems not just money but lack of art knowledge and overall lack of vision. These concerns where and are legit.

Galleries are opened by people because they have a passion and knowledge for art. Most struggle their entire existence. Unlike most other businesses most gallerists know going in its one of they worst ways to try and "get rich"

I think Bert Green would like to see the artwalk serve the purpose of a more focused art community downtown AND help his own gallery prosper. Nothing wrong with that. I cant say he's made the best choices at times but as far as I can tell it doesn't have much to do with thinking he's going to get rich of a artwalk "hijack" I think that's BS.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 06:23AM – #19

David Klappholtz--while Jay Lopez was the "director" of the art walk, I don't think he was ever a member of the board of directors, just there person "running" it. So, if they fired him as director, I doubt they added him to the board of directors.

I too agree with the need to add an art professional to bring in quality art. If this doesn't happen then a second smaller weekend event might be the best way to deal with a "gallery walk", while keeping the 2nd Thursday a downtown party. Who runs this second event might be up for discussion, maybe it's the galleries themselves.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 07:13AM – #20

Yeah this sounds nice, but only time will tell...who amongst these real estate developers will use this as a publicity stunt and who will actually put up the $$$ - Vanessa Acuna

http://bgfa.blogspot.com/2010/10/current-controversy-surrounding.html

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 07:30AM – #21

Definitely, no more cronyism. This is a real opportunity to take L.A. to new heights in the art world. L.A. has amazing artists! This will, with the right leader, turn into an event the world will envy. It will create tourism. The hotels, restaurants, museums and people of quality will want to come to experience the art world in L.A. This will bring new optimism to the economy. This will also bring needed inspiration to the film and television industries that this area thrives on. The artists generate creativity altruistically.Yeah they pretty much give it away. So the least this city could do is support them. Not with good old boys. But with someone at the helm that really knows art, is not political in the old boys sense, is honest with good intentions and capabilities to organize and focus on art. Please create a forum for people to throw their hat into the ring from the art world. Please do not make a backroom deal to get the director. Please make the board transparent. Please make the minutes from the board meeting public too. Thank you Biz leaders for making this wise decision for your community. I hope you do not let us down.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 07:51AM – #22

The Board needs to get different blood. An architectural firm should be represented, a well known gallerist (not a promoter, a real gallery person), a journalist, perhaps a critic like Peter Frank or Matt Gleason. A reputable accounting firm or Deloitte and Touche to handle the finances, the director from MOCA or LACMA or someone from their board, a professional grant writer for the arts.

Most of all seasoned art people with deep roots as a leader in the biz of the gallery/art world. The biggest problem has been the people on the board and that have been leading us were not really rooted in the art community. They had personal agendas and ties to biz that had nothing to do with fine art. This is what you get if that is what you focus on. Please change up the board. We do not need politicians we need seasoned professionals that have focused on art as job 1.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 07:59AM – #23

If potential money was his only motivation he could have just kept control from the beginning.

So what has been his motivation in all this? I ask mainly because he is the one person who hasn't said much or actually anything -- at least initiated by himself and from his own keyboard -- during this entire controversy. I wouldn't be as suspicious of him if he never posted here before, or posted more than very brief, vague comments. So if his concerns are legitimate, why hasn't he expressed them here in a very forthright manner? In other words, his becoming incognito regarding this matter since last Friday is similar to the behavior of someone who is both embarrassed or ashamed and has something to conceal.

By contrast, he did comment about the disappearance of Ed Rosenthal, so it's not like he has been unaware of new topics added to Blogdowntown.com over the past 8 days. As far as I'm concerned, that doesn't past the smell test.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 08:20AM – #24

http://bgfa.blogspot.com/2010/10/current-controversy-surrounding.html

Okay, so on his own web site he does verify my suspicion that he's strongly rooting against the Art Walk and expressing an almost willful desire to see the non-profit group managing it disbanded. He seems to be alarmed that the area will become (or is becoming) too gentrified and mainstream and, from an economic standpoint, will therefore push him out of the picture.

So his concern is an example of a personal financial stake being at the heart of what motivates most people. There's nothing wrong with that as long as it doesn't also corrupt the ethics and honesty of a person. But when someone wants to sabotage a part of the community that is otherwise important and truly helpful for others, that's moving very close to an excessive amount of self-interest. Sort of like what happened with Julie Rico and The Must.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 08:37AM – #25

The Art Walk Board needs to disband completely as it is rife with personal vendettas and their incompetence at securing funding for such a popular event shows their true committed and even lack of backbone in owning-up to their decisions. The local business community, only with the threat of ending the walk, have pledged their commitment. The businesses that benefitted the most felt no obligation when asked beforehand for financial support; they were also key in the slippery slide; and are now seen as the heros;)

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 09:48AM – #26

Someone tell Romy Shy to stop leasing retail space in Barry Shy's Spring Street buildings to lame businesses like psychics and hookah/smoke shops. I thought that's what Hollywood Blvd was for.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 10:23AM – #27

Here's what Bert Green posted about Artwalk on his blog:

"On Friday, September 24, a press release was issued by the director of the Downtown Art Walk, Jay Lopez, announcing that the event would go on temporary hiatus, and resume in January as a quarterly event. Despite the obvious controversies surrounding this, and the blatant falsehoods promoted by those who have no access to the facts, the reality is that the Second Thursday Downtown Art Walk has become fundamentally unsustainable in its current form.

In 2009 a non profit corporation was formed to manage the Downtown Art Walk, shortly after I stepped down from managing it. At the time, the new Art Walk Director, Richard Schave, felt that this was the best course of action, considering the Art Walk event's need for funding and the enormous growth it had experienced. A Board of Directors was created, and it was registered as a California Benefit Corporation, with the intention of eventually registering it as a "501c3" Federal tax exempt entity.

Due to Schave's mismanagement of the event, Schave and his wife Kim Cooper were fired by the Board that they formed in November 2009, and a new director, Jay Lopez, was hired in December 2009. However, since its founding in mid 2009, this nonprofit corporation has proven unable to raise any funds to pay the director, or for the ongoing community impacts of the event. All of the impact costs had fallen on the Historic Downtown Business Improvement District (HD BID) and the LAPD, and began to rise substantially to more than $5,000 per month in 2010 as attendance rose beyond 20,000 visitors. The Downtown Art Walk Board was unwilling to use even the minimal funds they had available to pay for any of these impacts, in full or in part, after receiving a bill from the HD BID.

The Downtown Art Walk in recent years has served to drive away art lovers, who were the initial visitors, to be replaced by bar visitors and food trucks. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with that, but most of the bar and restaurant owners, who became the primary profiteers from this change, cried poverty when asked to sponsor the event and pay for the impacts. The benefits flowed to them, and the burdens were carried by others.

The Board claims that Lopez did not have the authority to issue any change to the Downtown Art Walk's structure, but despite their total inability to provide a competent financial structure for the Downtown Art Walk, this same Board now claims that Lopez has been removed from his position and that the event will go on in October. They do not explain who will manage the event, how its bills will be paid, and who will be responsible for keeping it secure; or, most importantly, even acknowledge publicly the structural failure of the event itself. This Board has always been totally hands off since day one, so why the sudden interest in controlling a failed event? Most of the active Board members do not even attend the Art Walk or have any real stake in the community. In fact, this very Board had, just weeks before, decided to explore its own disbanding, acknowledging privately that the Downtown Art Walk was unmanageable.

There is a common perception in the US in recent decades that those cities which get cleaned up and turned around by artists and the creative community usually end up with the artists being forced out after creating an improved environment. The actions of the Downtown Art Walk Board, headed by a Century City corporate lawyer, and recent "crisis management" offers by some in the business community to take financial control of the event, are perfect examples of how this process of evicting the artists takes place. The business community lays claim to the creations of the artistic community, because they are making money from it, and push the artists out of the picture.

But in Downtown Los Angeles, the creative community will not let this occur. The action by Jay Lopez to reposition the Downtown Art Walk as a quarterly, weekend event is supported by the gallery owners, who started this event and for whom it was created to serve, and by the majority of locals who have any stake in the event, with the glaring exception of the business owners who profit from it and have consistently refused to pay for it. I speak to a lot of people on a daily basis in the community and I have yet to hear anyone who has not told me that they think it is a good thing to stop the runaway train that the Thursday event has become.

The nonprofit Board does not control the Downtown Art Walk brand. It is chartered as the "Downtown Los Angeles Art Walk", not the "Downtown Art Walk". While this may seem a trivial thing, it is significant because the new Downtown Art Walk will move on, change form, and succeed. The old event will not.

It is certainly possible that the business community will figure out some way to manage and pay for an event that might replace the Second Thursday Downtown Art Walk, and cause it to continue to exist as a bar crawl or other nightlife-based affair, but it will have nothing to do with art and the art community downtown will suffer if such pretensions to being about art are upheld.

Downtown Los Angeles has changed, mostly for the better in recent years, and the original purpose and vision of the Downtown Art Walk has been fulfilled. People are no longer afraid to come to Downtown Los Angeles, as they once were. But adapting to changes can be hard, and this adjustment may be tough for some. But for the artistic community in Downtown Los Angeles, this is a question of survival, and survive we will."

Bert Green

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 11:08AM – #28

Another suggestion for who to coordinate/curate/whatever you want to call it/ the art for art walk. Get Loraine Molina who use to own Bank Gallery/LM Projects. She lives downtown, knows a lot of artists/collectors and has credibility in the LA art world to help attract people to art walk to give the event back it's art cache.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 11:09AM – #29

sorry typo. used to own not use to own.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 12:25PM – #30

I certainly loved Banks program and Lorraine has had the sense to completely disassociate herself with the mess that is the art walk, probably because its not an event becoming of knowledgeable, high quality programming.

She hasn't demonstrated the political savvy though, and doesn't have the ideal pull in the art world, although she would be light years better than anything they've had in the past. As the director you also need political skill sets and an extremely thick skin. The new director will need to reach into the community and build bridges while walking a tightrope between various parties expectations. Ideally they would have to be a willing communicator who is able to create an open dialogue while remaining true to their vision. And then there's the board do they really even know what good programming is. Would love to see involved though maybe as a curator

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 12:33PM – #31

if the "artists" couldnt contol/organize thier growing event---and the local business people CAN....whats the problem?

let the artists do another thing DT...there is room for everyone.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 12:34PM – #32

I don't think anyone was suggestion Lorraine as the director just to be the person with the art knowledge to make it an art event. A separate politically oriented director makes sense. It also may be smart to separate the organizing of the overall event/fund raising, etc. from coordinating the art.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 12:45PM – #33

The comparison of Julie Rico and Bert Green is anemic to say the least Guest 6. The Must matter was between private business owners. From what I have read there were real breaches and numerous disagreements between the parties. This led to their parting of the ways.

The Must was not owned by the public.

The Artwalk is owned by the public. By hundreds of businesses, thousands of workers and artists and the people that attended this very public event. Bert tried to dismantle it for his own gain.

The motivations behind what happened at the Must between two private business people may never be known by us. As Sue Laris quite intelligently wrote in her Editor Letter in the best paper in downtown LA the DOWNTOWN NEWS. There are literally over 2000 ways to say, "the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry."

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 01:01PM – #34

Guest 6=PR agent for the Must. You will see more brilliant insights by her over the coming months. This is how PR works people.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 04:25PM – #39

The entire real story is now @ the Downtown News. You won't believe what Jay & Bert have to say.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 05:15PM – #40

only a very small percentage of wealthy people are going to go ANYwhere to buy expensive art....the masses dont buy, nor do they nessisarily care about such things. especially not in this economy.

teaming crowds of young people are not ever going to be teaming expensive art buyers. teaming crowds of young people like the IDEA of art DT, but at affordable prices--so there is a fundamental disconnect.

DTLA Artwalk is not going to be ART BASIL......but it dosent need to be that to be a great event.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 05:40PM – #41

i have read the articles on this site about the drama surrounding this Artwalk event and who the players are and one things that strikes me is the ease and quickness with which these board members threw this Lopez guy under the bus. it speaks volumes about thier character. that they would trash someone they themselves only recently had touted seems horrible and disloyal to the extreme. who would want to work with these people?

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 06:11PM – #42

@comment #41 I think you mean Art Basel. And in terms of actual galleries, DTLA isn't even Culver City.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 07:41PM – #43

Ok I'm joining back with Bert Green's camp. I've had it with John Locke.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 07:42PM – #44

guest 13 I'm sure alot of people (not involved in the art world) may have similar questions to answer a couple of them.

"if the "artists" couldnt contol/organize thier growing event---and the local business people CAN....whats the problem?"

The artists or rather galleries where managing the art walk more effectively. it wasn't until the board was formed that the problems reached a critical mass. At the time it seemed that a board was a good thing to help the art walk grow responsibly after the events of the last year some people feel that decision was a mistake. These events may not entirely be the boards fault but some galleries feel it was a more focused event before the board and want to return it to a more focused art event.

"only a very small percentage of wealthy people are going to go ANYwhere to buy expensive art....the masses dont buy, nor do they nessisarily care about such things. especially not in this economy.

teaming crowds of young people are not ever going to be teaming expensive art buyers. teaming crowds of young people like the IDEA of art DT, but at affordable prices--so there is a fundamental disconnect."

That's a misunderstanding of the strategy of an art walk and also of art patrons. A focused art walk creates awareness and an enthusiastic, informed art audience does help sales although the majority of gallery goers never buy art they do help create a buzz. Also the term wealthy people is vague but art collectors are not just wealthy any more than people who buy cars, Ipods, Pradda bags or The latest sneaker are wealthy Incomes starting at 40K buy art if they get the bug and incomes of less than that may also buy smaller pieces or prints and as their income grows so do their purchases. Galleries need to be able to build relationships over time to survive the art walk imo doesn't serve this need or provided any opportunity to see programming of any consequence.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 08:42PM – #45

Guest 6=PR agent for the Must.

And you're not Julie Rico posting anonymously?

Incidentally, I've never patronized The Must and do not know the people who own the place or work there. But I did follow all the comments on this site during The Must's late-night "eviction" from the space next to the now-defunct Weeneez. And I believe Ms. Rico explicitly lied about not having any role in the new restaurant that took its place. As far as I'm concerned, she and Bert Green have both lost whatever integrity they may have had in the first place.

I am not interested in hearing nonsense

And yet you were interested in posting a reference to a former member of the Art Walk group that was so obnoxious and crude, Eric Richardson had to delete it?

that strikes me is the ease and quickness with which these board members threw this Lopez guy under the bus

You're kidding, right? You're giving sympathy to a person who defiantly released a public announcement stating that the Art Walk had been terminated and who unilaterally changed the password to the sponsoring group's website?

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 09:08PM – #46

"that strikes me is the ease and quickness with which these board members threw this Lopez guy under the bus"

You're kidding, right? You're giving sympathy to a person who defiantly released a public announcement stating that the Art Walk had been terminated and who unilaterally changed the password to the sponsoring group's website

um...yes. regardless of who lied/didnt lie--is right or wrong...the board just comes off looking bad..and we are a world class city for gosh sake...im embarassed for us.

it dosent seem like there are adults in charge.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 09:27PM – #47

Guest 6 I am not sure why you keep on bringing up Julie Rico into the blogs. This is not about Julie Rico. But somehow you have a predilection towards bringing her up over and over again. Since you dont know the Must you dont know Julie Rico. She has nothing to lose in your eyes because you have made your decisions based on the information you garnered on this blog. Unfortunately, this is the state of the mass being right now. All blogs = truth. Although, Bert Green has come out and stated his intentions point blank. You have no real information about the situation with the bar except for lies generated by Bert Green and friends. Guest 6 you may want to consider medication if this predilection about talking about people you dont really know continues. It really is an unhealthy state of mind.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 09:30PM – #48

Guest 6 I did want to quote one of Bert Greens twitters here: "If it has been twittered than it can't be a lie." I think this is the school of thought you abide by.

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 10:47PM – #49

no. 27 THANK GOD I'm NOT THE ONLY ONE APPAULED ABOUT THE SHYS RENTING TO A F****** HEAD SHOP AND GYPSY PSYCHIC.. NEXT THEY'll PROBABLY PUT IN A MASSAGE PARLOR WHORE HOUSE..

Guest on October 02, 2010, at 10:53PM – #50

yeah. Why isn't the blog writing about 27 &50 are saying. We need to take a stand about what thir dong to dtla.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 07:41AM – #53

The art walk board was originally chosen by Richard Schave and Kim Cooper who started the non-profit (with the exception of one or maybe two members). It is my understanding that they (and or Jay Lopez) had approached bars, restaurants, etc. in the past and they have not contributed. I think I read somewhere that Tom Gilmore said sometimes it takes fear of loosing something for one to take action and that seems to be the case. BUT, I don't think these funds are actually coming from the business owners but the property owners which in many cases is NOT the same. (It is with Tom Gilmore but many/most other businesses are not owned by the people who own the buildings.)

As for galleries staying open late, many of the regular downtown galleries (not pop-ups or those open one day a month) have already been closing before the unruly crowds arrive as there has been damage and thefts, so if galleries closed when the crowds arrive in October I don't think it's any indication of support of lack thereof of either art walk venture. Most gallery owners I have talked to will support both events if they attract people BUT, if it costs in theft or damage they will NOT stay open.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 07:58AM – #54

The gallery owners were disbanded by Bert Green over a year ago when he started to move towards eliminating the artwalk entirely. They are busy entrepreneurs usually hanging on by a thread. So the artwalk definitely was a big load for these people to handle. However, they all need and want the artwalk to continue. Because at the last meeting this was discussed, Bert wanted to get rid of it of the artwalk. But they all said in unison-NO we want it to continue. Brady Westwater also reported a more recent meeting wherein they all voted for it to continue. The most important thing to keep in mind is that the galleries are dealing with intellectual property often the seed for inspiration for many industries. The artists and the galleries need support. This new support from the property owners is a well deserved gift to the dealers and artists.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 09:31AM – #55

On another thread, Man One and his business/romantic partner Harry wrote in favor of continuing the Thursday artwalks. But of course they are not bothered by the crowds. After all, they sell spray paint to taggers! Why should they worry about crowd control?

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 12:56PM – #56

Bert wanted to get rid of it of the artwalk. But they all said in unison-NO we want it to continue.

Cmon is this a joke? I'm sure they all said IN UNISON "NO we want it to continue." This is just exaggeration intended to inflame. All these posts just go to show you can't have an real discussion on a blog. There have some real concerns, Bert Green has real concerns, the board has real concerns, the residence have real concerns. ALL parties have made mistakes and I think most are commenting without a real knowledge of the facts. Bert has invited anyone to walk into his gallery if they have questions how about some transparency from the Board.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 01:12PM – #57

I want to see the minutes from the Art Walk board meeting.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 01:22PM – #58

Guest 20 ask Bert. He will tell you that all of the dealers in unison said yes we want it to continue. Ask Rex from the digital art gallery. Ask any of the dealers that were at that meeting. Yes in unison they said We want it to continue. After that meeting Bert disbanded everyone. Yes he did.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 04:32PM – #59

There's a question of semantics that maybe needs to be cleared up here.

Do the galleries want the Second Thursday "walk" to continue? Probably why not.

Is the second Thurday event an "art walk"? No I dont think so.

Is the second Thursday event an event that is helping the reputation of the downtown art community among collectors and professional peers in this city and world wide? Absolutely not

Can the second Thursday event become that thing which will help create legitimacy among collectors, the art press and their peers? This where it gets tricky. I say no the event now which while good for the community has become more about the area as a whole and not about the needs of the art world.

If this event isnt a specifically art based event the galleries would be stupid not to create a focused event that give the art here a recognizable platform.

Sooo if you say do they want the artwalk as it now stands to be the defining character of the area's production and level of quality I doubt it.

But if you say do they want the second Thursday even to continue then yes.

There is also the question of what constitutes a gallery. Is any pop up, store with art on the walls, vendor that sells prints a gallery? No. Some people see that as elitist but in reality inclusion of everything that's anyone wants to call art without calling people out who don't have a focus commitment or knowledge beyond "I like this" hurts the reputation of the area and makes it an unattractive destination for new galleries, collectors, the art press etc.

"Put your best foot forward" its simple the second Thurday "walk" which may be great for the community doesn't do this for the galleries.

Finally the DTAW Board now serves the interest of the walk entity that is beneficial to the community not as an institution (and I use that term loosely) not as an istitution that serves the needs of the art community specifically. The galleries would be crazy not to create an entity that serves them specifically

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 04:37PM – #60

Guest #20, that is the best summary of the past 10 days I have read anywhere. It seems very accurate to me.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 05:14PM – #62

Since you dont know the Must you dont know Julie Rico.

She did post no more than a brief message under this blog entry. She has had many chances to actively rebut comments made about her during the past few months, but, as is the case with Bert Green (at least since last Friday), she has chosen not to do so. However, I will give her some credit if you or any other unsigned contributor that has been defending her are not actually her choosing to post anonymously.

I compare that with Kim Cooper, who, while a bit overbearing, at least has actively joined the debate at blogdowntown on this matter. If she hadn't done that, I'd still have a suspicion that everything she claimed previously about the Art Walk group was false. I'd still assume she (or her husband) foolishly turned down corporate funding to keep Art Walk alive and well. I know I originally believed Bert Green instead of her, and I now realize how wrong that was.

In the meantime, Jay Lopez and Bert Green have always had the ability to set up an alternative Art Walk, separate from the second Thursday of each month. So why haven't they done that? Why have they apparently insisted on forcing themselves and their agenda onto the existing non-profit Art Walk group?

If they're so into the idea of a quarterly weekend event -- which I think could be a nice addition to the downtown scene -- it's time they leave the current Art Walk alone, stop trying to undermine it, and go their own way.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 05:39PM – #63

guest #63 has it in a nutshell. the established gallery folk are promoting a certain type of fine art--for collectors, serious art buffs.

the current Artwalk really dosent bring crowds that are coming to enjoy that type of thing...

there IS a distinction between "fair-art/craft-art"-and fine art.

its all over the place now with the fine art people and the crazy-glue-rhinestone-handmade moccasin people at loggerheads.

putting both together seems sloppy.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 06:37PM – #64

Yes, #63 is right. The current art walk seems counter productive to attracting the kind of potential customers the "serious" galleries need. That doesn't make one good and the other bad, it's just two different things. Well said.

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 06:51PM – #65

I think the key component in the dispute is the name "Down Town Art Walk" That is the name that has become the recognizable brand. Whoever owns that brand name will have an upper hand. Thats why Bert Green stated

The nonprofit Board does not control the Downtown Art Walk brand. It is chartered as the "Downtown Los Angeles Art Walk", not the "Downtown Art Walk".

I'm assuming that this means Bert Green does own the trademark "downtown art walk"? If the second Thursday event continues with the name "art walk" while trying to be an all inclusive community event it will always be perceived by the media and by extension the public as representative as the actual art scene. Again this goes back to creating a legit appearance among collectors, the art press and peers outside of downtown.

BUT if the Board changes or ultimately looses the name "Downtown Art Walk" they will be loosing the primary thing of value which would be attractive to potential sponsors which is the name.

Either party could rebrand but they would immediately put them at a big disadvantage as to who controls the areas art rep, at least initially.

It will also be tough for the new director if he's given the responsibility to legitimize the areas art rep but the real agenda of the Board AND its new sugar daddy's with their own agenda is an all community even designed to keep the business and property owners happy.

....Its going to be very interesting how this plays out!

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 07:05PM – #66

Jay Lopez give back the website to the people!

Guest on October 03, 2010, at 09:11PM – #67

If Jay and Bert wanted so badly to have a quarterly event, why didn't they just do it without canceling the second Thursday event that all the downtown businesses (and the Art Walk board) wanted? Why go through all this drama, hijack the art walk website, change the passwords on the facebook and twitter accounts and tell everyone it was cancelled when it wasn't? Sounds like they're trying to kill the competition and make their art walk the only art walk. If Jay and Bert really wanted a thriving art scene what's the harm in having two art walks? silly to me. I don't know these two men but I bet they're pretty petty and power hungry individuals.

Guest on October 04, 2010, at 02:06PM – #71

Here is a rhetorical question.

Is credibility within the fine art community important for DTLA now?

I ask because I work near the gallery row area in Culver City. Its true the galleries look modern and interesting, but I have never seen one person inside of any of them. Perhaps this is because they prefer private showings and many of them don’t have see-thru windows and also the economy, but there is a palpapble lack of visible patronage in this credible artisitc gallery area.

Guest on October 04, 2010, at 03:23PM – #72

Does top notch art in an area improve a neigborhood in every way? Definitely You can use culver city, Bergamot Station, Moca just to name a few. It's not so much that there are hordes of people outside galleries that make it attractive to an area. Thats a misunderstanding of how galleries work.

A strong art scene attracts others who have an interest in such things to live or to shop. That attracts businesses, make its more attractive to investors, developers, philanthropists etc, etc etc.

Because of Moca, We know have RED CAT and the Disney theater that makes it more attractive for Eli Broad to build a 100 million museum next door and that will spur further development.

Same thing with Culver City 15 years ago Culver City was a shit hole. Then came the galleries. One thing led to another and now its "CULVER CITY." Its the type of organic development cities love because it makes neighborhoods truly livable as opposed to a giant preplanned development thats don't have enough individuality to make them neighborhoods.

Guest on October 05, 2010, at 02:33PM – #74

Glad to see the event back !!! I live in the Canadian Building at Winston and Main and Own Hunter Security, a Patrol and Uniform Guard Company that has been around for 17 years. I would be happy to supply additional security for the event at a good price to meet and needs or requirements that the city may have with the Event.

Nice work Tom in getting everyone together on this..

Scott Shonts Hunter Security

Guest on October 05, 2010, at 04:06PM – #75

Bert Green should do his quarterly art walks in Lancaster.

Guest on October 05, 2010, at 09:59PM – #76

Peace!

Guest on October 06, 2010, at 01:21PM – #77

Not Lancaster, Fresno or Merced.

Guest on October 06, 2010, at 03:55PM – #78

Check out www.LACANVAS.com it's a new LA lifestyle magazine that we will be distributing our free magazine at the art walk!!!!

Guest on October 06, 2010, at 03:59PM – #79

Awesome site. Edward Sharpe is pretty bad ass, the art section is great too........When can I get a issue?

Guest on October 06, 2010, at 04:13PM – #80

haha Guest 28 you outed yourself a shill for the magazine by pretending to be an anonymous enthusiast. Unfortunately once you post this site automatically assigns you a guest # that your posts will repeat under. its all good though ill still check out the mag.

Guest on October 16, 2010, at 12:06PM – #82

This is the best:

Guest 13: "DTLA Artwalk is not going to be ART BASIL......but it dosent need to be that to be a great event."

Anticipating ART OREGANO and ART LEMONGRASS next.