How was I to know as I walked back into the concert space at Mulligan’s in Eastown to see one of our most outrageous acts, the PotatoeBabies that in a simple drive a few blocks from my home, I would actually cross many decades to get to this moment in time?
Since moving here in 1981, I have closely watched our city change. For the most part, the change has been for the better.
But as I prepared to watch one of the few remaining local acts from the ?counterculture take the stage, I found myself freefalling through time.
This descent was not just a journey that has affected our city, but many other great urban centers across the country where some of the strongest voices and venues have gone dark.
The history of Grand Rapids' vanishing counterculture can be seen in places like NYC where clubs like Studio 54, Limelight and the Palladium have been repurposed or demolished.
This was never more evident than when I went searching for images from the Palladium, a jewel of a theatre where in the ‘70s, Blondie, Patti Smith and even The Boss performed.
In the ‘80s was, the Palladium was transformed into a hedonistic playground for club kids by the imagination of artists like Jean Michel Basquiat and Keith Haring and under the guiding hands of nightlife architects Ian Schrager and Steve Rubell, who moved downtown after departing their Studio 54 creation. It was later demolished along with the epic-sized art deco mural on the façade of the theatre to become a 12-story residence for NYU students.
Even in Grand Rapids, our old Eastown Theatre went from community film theatre to ‘50s themed club Shout! to its latest incarnation as a church. The beautiful tiled Art Deco exterior is now covered up by the worst possible façade in the city. Hideous bricked up windows and high chain link fences better suited for a warehouse than a place of worship flank the church from different sides.
These transitions in the name of sanitizing a region frequently create vacuums in the culture when playgrounds pop up where artful institutions once stood.
While it is easy to write off the demise of cultural gathering places as the natural byproduct of time, many have begun to question aloud if NYC’s Mayor’s quest to clean up the city (read: to make it more attractive for tourists). What if, instead, they didn’t tread on what made them great in the first place?
Could we be making the very same mistakes? Is it prudent to become all things to all people in the quest for entertainment dollars by creating these safe zones to hurl our money? Is it wise to sacrifice or neglect the driving power of a vibrant counterculture and what it produces?
And what tripped my switch to create such a nostalgic trip down memory lane?
It wasn’t the cheap 1980s beer prices that Mulligan's offers on a regular basis, but the news from more than one artist in our community about the newly opened UICA and how they would be charging $8 per adult admission going forward.
I am often the first one to get on a soapbox and proclaim that our creative class needs to be paid, but the sudden closing of the three-decade history of no admission fees to visit the UICA exhibition space clearly appears to be over.
What the artists had going for them all these years was that they had access -- on their budget -- to contemporary art exhibitions where the most up-to-date topics were often being presented and curated by everyone from fellow artists, educators and art lovers.
Yes, we can argue that new buildings cost money, and I know this is a building that is still in search of funds. But the best thing we had in our town for so long was this pocket space where the counterculture could venture in to view an exhibition.
After decades of artists donating their time and art to help keep the doors open, the very people who have donated art, time and expertise suddenly find themselves on the outside with their faces pressed to the glass.
This sudden change in policy has rocked the local artist community with many turning their backs or resigning from committees.
Yet, it is not my intent to bash UICA for needing to charge an admission fee, because exhibitions and staff are expensive. I do still see a glimmer of hope by getting creative to provide a solution where all would benefit once again.
If I have learned anything over the past couple years, and at the risk of sounding elitist, I think a solution should be found that includes what many other major museums have discovered. That is to offer a free day once a week where the public can venture in to view the exhibitions.
With ArtPrize at our front door, we enter the season of art by asking yet again, “Have we done everything in the off months to better prepare and educate the public about contemporary art?”
I think the answer is that while we have done a good job of trying to expose people to the fringes, the fact is that arts education is a year-round process with greater access to these areas as the goal.
An admission fee might allow some to venture, but I wonder if the loss of free might turn away the very folks we are seeking to bring into the conversation.
ArtPrize is a bold move that demands of us as artists and art lovers equally bold moves in our own lives. It is why I am so passionate about finding a solution.
UICA used to be seen as one of the pillars of counterculture experiences in our city, but if it is walled behind fees turning away folks, then I am afraid we have lost sight of why we started this center 30 years ago.
The solution is not difficult and should probably be based on the model found in other cities’ cultural centers.
It might be as simple as securing an angel donor who underwrites the next years’ admissions for Free Fridays at UICA. Some have even gone to pay-what-you-can-afford days with a suggested admission charge.
It is not as if we are reinventing the wheel, since many other cultural centers have made these types of changes decades ago. All of this has been done before and the road map is there.
A policy that might be especially nice would bring artists to the membership rolls by offering something similar to what is done at the Museum of Contemporary Art in New York. Any artist who brings in a show card featuring his work can purchase a very reduced 2-year membership. The last time I checked it was $20. Total. The museum’s policy assured that local artists were not left outside the gate and could mingle with art lovers and patrons inside.
Few local places have showcased the variety of topics as much as UICA has over the years, from provocative imagery like the photographic prints of Sally Mann to the ground-breaking cinema of films like Shortbus. The inclusion of this level of programming should remind us that the fringe arts still have a home in downtown Grand Rapids.
If we choose to do nothing about a single admission charge, then I fear we will place yet again more barriers where only a select few will be able to afford or enjoy the arts at UICA. And, once more, another piece of our history will be erased.
Sure, I know we will have Rev. Charles for as long as he wants to continue to present his vaudevillian style show, but time is hard on our bodies as we get older and so the people who make up the counterculture will move on. But buildings continue on into the future.
And just as I mentioned earlier, some will be change or evolve with the times and others will repurpose themselves into something completely unfamiliar and unlike what was there before.
The fringe population, while rarely celebrated in their time, truly propels the dialogue of who we are as a region. Is it worth preserving into the future? I think the answer is yes.
Without it, we run the risk of losing the very energy that brought us this far and what will take us even further in the future.
The Future Needs All of Us (to be open to it.)
Tommy Allen
Lifestyle Editor
[email protected]
Click here to continue to this week’s G-Sync events.
Press Releases for upcoming events in the West Michigan area should be sent to
[email protected]. Please include high res jpg images that are at least 500 pixels wide.