The Red Line train stopped for me at State and Lake Streets. I walked south to Randolph Street, then east to the Chicago Cultural Center. On Randolph I saw a blue folding chair and next to it a small stand with the Sun-Times and Tribune newspapers displayed for sale. An elderly salesperson sells the expressions of corporations and not his own. This activity has First Amendment protection by Chicago’s municipal code. I – a citizen for whom the First Amendment was written - do not have the same speech rights in Chicago.
Today I will visit the Chicago Cultural Center – home of the Chicago Department of Cultural Affairs (DCA), a major player in defining Chicago cultural policy to attend the Chicago Cultural Network. The DCA organizes this networking luncheon for non-profit art agency personnel. The DCA under Mayor Washington, developed the Chicago Cultural Plan and under Mayor Daley threw out the Chicago Cultural Plan. They literally threw it out. A DCA employee told me that the word came around for everyone to collect all the copies of The Chicago Cultural Plan in their offices and to put them in the big box by the receptionist’s desk. At the end of the day the box was trashed. I have posted my copy of the Chicago Cultural Plan for you to decide for yourself its value.
Http://www.art-teez.org/cul_plan.htm
The Chicago Cultural Plan was a revolutionary document. It pointed the way to participatory cultural democracy for Chicago. First, plan developers invited Chicagoans to offer suggestions on how the City could better support arts and culture using its many departments and great leverage. Something like 6,000 people replied with ideas. The committee, dominated by qualified professionals in arts administration, then narrowed the suggestions down to 103 and published their report. The most interesting concept contained in the document is the process of polling the public, summarizing the results, and evaluating the progress of achieving the “Plan’s” suggestions were to re-occur – suggesting a cycle for community input. Wow!
Lunch was in progress when I arrived to pick up my name badge. They are informal. I get to make my own badge. I paid my $10 check for lunch and headed to the food table. My plate loaded, a soda in my hand, I dropped into the first open chair next to a slim elder who is into theater in Chicago. We connected and shared information as I ate. He said, “There used to be vendors of all types who would push carts though the alleys of Chicago selling anything and everything. I wonder how and when that stopped?”
Our host made introductions and invited everyone present to state their name and their organization. A mike passed from hand to hand. The Chicago Community Trust was well represented. The DCA was greatly represented. The usual assortment of non-profit arts groups were represented. On my turn I said, “Chris Drew – Uptown Multi-Cultural Art Center,” and sat down.
The lecture today was delivered by a talented story teller and historian informing us of the history of the dome of the Chicago Cultural Center. It arched high above our heads, elegant and beautiful – newly renovated and just now being presented to the public for the first time. The renovation was very expensive and paid for by tax payers. This Tiffany stained glass dome, made by women designers in the 1890’s originally to let in as much light as possible at a time when electric light bulbs were dim, is priceless today.
The reason given for the Tiffany Dome renovation being a great investment is tourism. Chicago is competing on a world stage with other cities for the attention of the world’s wealthy tourists, for conventions and for the Olympics. The City should maintain its treasures but I think freedom is cheaper and more effective as an attraction for tourists. If the City of Chicago wants to compete with other centers of urban culture in the world it should wisely offer its artists their full speech rights and encourage art scenes to emerge. The cost of this is only the planning and policy corrections. The city’s economy would increase from the increased tourist attraction that Chicago’s artists being seen in public would bring along with the increase in economic activity from the new taxable business activity.
After the speaker concludes, the Cultural Network allows visitors to make announcements. When the mike came my way, I announced that the Free Speech Artists’ Movement intended to organize 1,000 artists to sue the city for our speech rights. “Go to our website and check out the legal cases other artists have won,” I urged them. It was silent and tense until I gave up the mike. I’m the devil in the works.
As the luncheon broke up I passed out my patches by the exit to any who would take one. In these settings most do take them. However a few refused them with gusto. Art divides and tells interesting tales about ourselves and others.
When the guests left, I walked out on Washington street. The perfect spot to print was right in front of me. “We have just seen how the Chicago Cultural Center defends ‘high art’,” I thought.”Lets see how they defend street art.”
On Washington Street, next to the magazine boxes facing the Chicago Cultural Center’s doors, I spread out my blanket. My screens held down the corner in front of where I sat on a computer book for comfort. My ink bottles weighted down my fliers and patches up front.
Promptly, a security person from the Chicago Cultural Center came out to kick me off the street. I had just finished photographing my set-up to show the plentiful area for traffic to walk between my blanket and the Center. He started out with a smile and said, “What’s all this?” I got a photo while standing then slid down to sit on my computer book and shot again from a low angle.
“I’m giving away art.”
“Do you have a permit.” His expression turned to business. “Show me your permit to do that.”
“I don’t need a permit to give art away.” I replied.
This wrinkle left him lost for an answer. He looked like he had never run into someone giving art away before.
He returned up the steps of the Center most likely to get advice on what law he could threaten me with and to call a policeman.
After the security guard split several people from the Cultural Network Luncheon representing the Intuit Gallery came forward and a man asked if I was being hassled. “Yes,” I laughed. “But he doesn’t have a law to arrest me with because I am giving away my art.”
I told the man from the Intuit Gallery that we should be allies reminding him that the artists the Intuit Gallery represents many times depended on their speech rights to sell their art on the street to survive. “Today,” I told him, “none of those artists could do that in Chicago according to our present laws and policies. We are not free!” His partners were tugging at his arm sleeves urging him to go before I got into a long soapbox tirade. So I cut my rap short.
I focused on printing to replace my stock of Free Speech Artists’ Movement patches. I passed out quite a few patches to the Cultural Network people. As I sensed approaching feet I called out “Free hand-printed patches or Free Art,” while continuing to print. A group of youth stopped by and I explained my reason for giving away the patches I handed them. They were very interested. This turned out to be a great spot for interacting with the public. With little effort on my part, people approached me, curious about my work.
I was explaining the aspects of the peddler’s license required for artists to sell their work in public to a man on a bike who stopped to watch me print when the security guard reappeared to hang over me. Looking up at him, I smiled and exclaimed “Isn’t freedom great!”
He frowned searching for some answer but had none. After a minute he asked, “Would you do this on the White House lawn?”
I thought about this. “Why not – it is peaceful and speaks to the American values of freedom and liberty. Why not? It is entirely appropriate.”
“No it isn’t” he disagreed.
“Besides, this is a long way from the White House lawn.” I laughed.
“Not Really” he said disagreeing again.
“This is a public sidewalk.” I stated flatly.
He brightened up, “Oh, so that is what you think – you think this is the public sidewalk!” He said.
With a big smile and a sweep of his hand he pointed across the street. “THAT is the public sidewalk. This is private property.”
“Not really,” I replied ignoring his attempt to bamboozle me. As he headed back into the Cultural Center hoping I would leave for fear of arrest, I slapped the magazine boxes beside me, speaking to the bike rider who was busy pinning my patch to his backpack. “This is on public property and it represents the same activity as mine, speech.” He nodded with a knowing smile. “If it can be here,” I slapped the first box, an AutoTraders magazine display, “ I can be here.” The bike man and I laughed at the guards weak attempt to fool me out of my already limited speech rights. The powers that be downtown do not want me to sell and don’t even want me to give my art away!
When we tried to have a small protest rally at the Daley Center Plaza in 2007 for the Free Speech Artists’ Movement they claimed the same reason for denying me the right to hold a sign. The security guard at the Daley Center Plaza, with the Picasso staring down at him, told me it was private property to the curb. Never mind it is all owned by the City. At the time we applied for access, they lied to us about another group occupying the plaza during our requested time. I showed, few people came, and there was no competing group as the Plaza management had claimed.
In the case of the Chicago Cultural Center, I wisely sat next to other sanctioned First Amendment activity, the row of free Newspapers and Magazine boxes. This way authorities have no way to make a claim that their policy bans First Amendment activity to everyone when those boxes are at my elbow. But that does not mean they will not try.
Once the bike rider left, I printed for another half hour to see if a cop would come, called by the security guard, but none came. So I packed up my pile of fresh prints and headed home. On the way to the El I saw a pan-handler plying his speech rights in the Loop. I support his speech rights, too.
Deanna Isaacs writes a beautiful and helpful article in the Chicago Reader (7/24/08) about the Free Speech Artists’ Movement and my street level screen printing actions. Entitled “Got a Permit for That?” you can read it at this link below:
