C Drew - Street Artist Adventures

The street teaches me things. I talk with people and they give me clues to my next steps. Like today, after my job, I went to my old spot by the Bank at Wacker and State Streets.

This is one of the ten (only six are viable most days) speech sales spots available to Peddler’s License holders, if they qualify for a speech permit, after a review of everything they want to sell by an official in the Department of Business Affairs and Licensing. It becomes even more confusing when more than five people apply for the same spot. The City intends for it to be confusing. The permit you get is only for one month. Every month you must apply again. This is what the City requires of you for your speech rights. You must continuously re-apply for your speech rights. If this system is ever used by more than 30 artists it will quickly become an opportunity for the City to control who gets on the street to sell their speech by the fact that only a few positions exist.

Just for a good laugh read about the lottery system that applies if more than five people seek one of the six good spots available. The City claims this is adequate because the 30-50 possible artists/speech posts (6-10 corners X 5 artists/corner), which the City offers peddlers to sell at in the Loop, are never fully applied for. In fact only two speech peddlers applied in the last year. What the City doesn’t tell you is nobody uses it because the red tape, its limitations due to the chilling effect from the public’s perception that vendors are all illegal and the City’s secrecy about the speech permit. So there appears to be more than enough space because none of the spaces are used.

Few people know the speech permit option exists because the City likes it that way. When I applied I was told that I was one of two that year and not to tell anybody about it. When I told the official that in my capacity as a community arts administrator I should tell everybody, the man said, “Can’t you wait until I retire!”

However, the first reason that the speech permit spots are not viable is that the people who live and work in the Loop are accustomed to viewing an artist selling as suspect. This is because they see the police harassing vendors, with or without a peddlers license. The public doesn’t understand that the First Amendment protects speech even when the speaker is paid. Due to official discouragement, there is no place in the Loop or Chicago, where people are accustomed to seeing artists on the street regularly selling their art. There are no spots where people slow down, look, even stop and browse or talk with an artist at work in an impetuous moment, a spot where the public knows artists are known to congregate, to create and to sell their work. People do not expect to see artists on the street and distrust them when they do. This is an example of a “chilling effect on speech” that lawyers who defend free speech talk about. This is the reason we need to create art scenes which can counteract this negative cultural conditioning.

So, I did not expect much attention when I arrived at my old spot. I had a new screen to print and I wanted to print it in public. I was hoping to get a photo of a policeman or security guard asking me for my ID. I printed my latest “The Curse is Gone” patch for about an hour and a half. This patch refers to the popular belief at Wrigley Field that the Cubs are cursed by a man in the 1940’s whose goat was insulted by ball park officials. This is the 100^th year since the Cubs last won a world series (1908). While I printed, only a few people stopped and took a patch. Several Cubs fans snatched two patches and dashed off happily. Two ladies stopped to ask what I was doing.

I explained screen-printing to them and pointed out the several patches I had available to give away. The outgoing lady of the two asked to have the “Yes we can” patch that says “Change the mind-set that starts mindless war.” She took two of them and pinned one to herself and one to her friends blouse as she told me about her nephew who was just assigned to ship-out to Afghanistan. Then, on a lighter note, seeing her Sox shirt, I offered her a “The Curse is Gone” patch.

“No!” she said with exaggerated offense. “Can’t you see the Sox on my shirt? Are you a Cubs fan?” she asked with a look of reproach.

“No – I’m neutral. I work both ball parks and have fun with all the fans. Baseball brings out a variety of people in Chicago to cheer on their teams. I enjoy the fans and love the work I do. So you don’t want the Cubs curse to end?” I asked laughing.

She replied with laugh also - “No thanks – the Cubs can go another hundred years without winning a World Series, as far as I am concerned.”

“Well then maybe I should come up with a patch for Sox fans.” I suggested.

“You should, of course you should . . .” she said. “Hey, give me one of those Cubs patches. I just remembered somebody I can give it to.” I knew it – she was a bigger fan of baseball at heart.

When they departed she waved and called back, “Remember that Sox patch.”

So it is – I must come up with a patch for the Sox.

The last time I printed here, facing a green traffic control box, located about five feet above the ground on a pole inset a bit from the corner, I noticed someone scrawled, “You are Free,” just after I first began using my speech permit. This was when I carried a peddlers license and had applied for and received a speech permit to sell here several years ago. Today that message is gone. I’m betting whoever put it there thought I was gone too. Ha-ha!

No security guard or police made their presence known to me in this short time. In previous years, it took about 15-20 minutes before I experienced the need to explain myself to a security guard and then a policeman who the guard had called. As you can see, I was not blocking traffic. Because I don’t have a peddlers license and can’t apply for a speech permit, I can’t sell my art. The City is blocking any potential income that would encourage and make it possible for me to print more often in public. The chilling effect of their laws and policies make selling my art overly difficult.

I am largely censored and forced to work at jobs unrelated to my art. Two hours, once or twice a week, is not likely to be very effective at raising an income or spreading my messages. This is the practical effect of the reduced freedom of speech under which artists are forced to live in Chicago. Consider the enjoyable experience these two ladies had in this chance encounter with an artist on the street. Multiply it by the hundreds of artists likely to be active daily in art scenes around Chicago by the thousands of people they would meet day in and day out. This is the cultural effect that is missing from our City on a regular basis. This reflects a lowering of our cultural standard of living, a shrinking of our market place of ideas, and a weakening of our democracy. This is worth fighting for.

So, show some concern for your rights. Review a court case link on the right or read more deeply into my blog. Consider some of the advantages of “freedom” - that word used so quickly by politicians, tyrants, and the defenders of our military-prison-industrial-complex. They have us singing that freedom song without any attempt to understanding its meaning. What is freedom to you? Does money, work, ability to build an audience, the right to your full speech rights including the right to be paid for your speech have anything to do with it? Does your tax money that is used to support the public way include support for your rights in the public way? You are the citizens. You decide.

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:

Got a Permit for That?

Please read this article and send the link on to a friend.

Also, sign our petition on-line at

http://www.art-teez.org/free-speech-movement/expand-creative-chicago-petition.htm

or printout our petition and carry it with you collecting signatures as you travel around. When full, return it to the address on the petition.
http://art-teez.org/free-speech-movement/petition-to-sue-chicago.pdf

You can fight for freedom right here in your own City.

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.

Printing in Wrigleyville

After our Chicago cable TV program, which is weekly on Friday nights at 6pm between July and September this year on channel 21, I stopped at the Addison Red Line stop and put out my blanket across from Wrigley Field to print for the first time my “The Curse is Gone” patch.

My spot was in front of a shuttered Cubs merchandise storefront. The Cubs were scheduled to play the Astros in Houston at 8:40pm our time. It was the beginning of the bar rush on a Friday night. Very few people took a second look. One guy, a Cubs fan by the jersey he wore, told me when I waved one of the first “the Curse is Gone” patches, “I have a hundred of those.”

“Not these!” I said.

It is my humble opinion that this spot is significant legally for two reasons. First, it is just across the street from Wrigley Field. The peddlers’ license municipal code states that there shall be no peddling within 1,000 feet of any sports arena.

Also, the patch could be determined to be ineligible for a speech deferment according to the same code based on the fact that it competes with Cubs merchandise and might be considered to be more commercial than political or artistic. That decision would be made by the City’s Department of Business Affairs and Licensing. The code they would claim to follow is part of the “Speech Permit” section of the peddler’s license. However, the Speech Permit only applies to the ten corners in the loop where speech is permitted in a “prohibited district.” Although Wrigley Field within 1,000 feet is a prohibited district, there is no speech exception for it so this is a pointless discussion. This is what the case of Wienberg v City of Chicago (see links) was about.
Agreements with private property owners or the City accounts for the people selling near the stadium when the Cubs are in town.

Today - nobody cared. Their first drink and how to meet up with their party was much more important. Only one Cubs fan stopped and took a patch with great appreciation before I packed up. Great, I had a pile of patches left to give away in the coming days wherever I could spot a Cubs fan.

Printing on State Street

Construction sites are willing to allow youthful artists associated with a connected non-profit like Gallery 37, a non-city agency created by Daley with his wife controlling the board, to display temporarily on their plywood street walls. This token to art appreciation does not count much. The artists can not benefit but the construction company gains the credit for a beautiful face to their ugly backyard.

Meanwhile, artists trying to survive can’t represent themselves in the Loop on a day to day basis. The City’s propaganda as friendly to artists is a sham.

This day I lay down my blanket in front of Channel 7 (ABC) on State Street, Chicago’s main drag in the Loop, just to the right of the towering video display shown above.

The evening rush hour was beginning and I printed without much interruption. It appears that the City has alerted its police to leave me alone. In previous years, when I had a peddler’s license I would have been investigated quickly in this same spot.

Once I had built up a pile of prints, a group of three or four African Americans stopped to admire my work. We talked and they introduced themselves. “Have you heard of Fred Hampton?” one lady asked me. I said I had. “This is Fred Hampton Jr.” The lady speaking was known as Queen Sister. They respected my effort to fight for free speech and found my methods interesting. “Have you ever considered coming to the south side,” Queen Sister asked. I said I would be happy to, if invited. She gave me an invitation to an event they were producing at the 63rd St. Park House.

Not long after this, two ladies, engaged me and Gina pictured below took enough interest to help out by handing out my patches to passersby as I printed. This type of spirit is the energy that fuels social change. As long as she helped, I remained.

Once she left, after helping for a solid half hour out of her day, I packed up and headed home satisfied. I had printed for about two hours without a single policeman asking for my peddlers license. Thank you Gina. Your spirit is the spirit of change. You inspire me to do more.

Unfinished - check back to see the changes)
This dull stretch across from Harold Washington College on Lake Street has room for 10-20 vendors taking up the space that I do, and certainly, 7-10 art vendors would make this strip lively and fun. That would be my measure of the way community art raises a people’s standard of living. We do it by inserting fun, different, inspirational and intellectually challenging art into the public life. But only where allowed. But only if licensed. But not near big money. But not if aldermen object. But… But…

In this sterile spot a cafe is allowed to take up half the public sidewalk for a non-speech related private business. While I - the public - am not allowed to sell my First Amendment protected speech in a sixth of the width of the sidewalk and a twentieth of the public space used by the cafe. The City argues in court without a smile that my rights must be restricted because my activity does block traffic and causes a public safety hazard.
Over the ages tyrants and tyrannical governments have found many ways to discourage open market places for ideas. Our technological society has stressed the monopolistic methods of broadcast TV (until recently with the Internet). Computers and the growth of the Internet have diverted attention away from age-old street art activity.

In many places of this nation art has not been treated any differently than non-speech protected products like candles or umbrellas. In the large cities municipal codes cut through artists speech rights like a hot knife through butter. In Chicago, in the shadows, Daley, with the City Council in tow, gutted our street rights in the name of urban development through the peddlers license requirement they passed in 1994.

They treated us as if we had no First Amendment protected right to sell our expressive art - as if our rights were really privileges to be granted by the city as it likes - like a liquor license. There is a big difference legally between a right and a privilege in our courts. Speech is different in our nation or it should be. But only if people care enough to fight for their rights.
This Chicago policy has helped to produce a sterile, generic city where the local artists are unseen in public. We must take back our rights and our streets, for Chicago’s sake as well as our own.

Breaking out the small screens

My challenge is to be mobile. It is to be able to set-up fast and to breakdown fast to move on to the next spot. There is a lot of territory to cover in the loop to explore all the small rectangles or even triangles of space where an artist, like myself, is able to display and print without hindering the traffic flow at all. I can fit into a 2 foot by 3 foot rectangle and smaller if required. So, I made the smallest frame that would hold a patch image to avoid carrying more than my leather bag and still being able to setup to print with all my bells and whistles like fliers, press releases, pins and startup patches ready.

I took the Purple Line downtown. At the “Library” stop I stepped to the street looking for a good location. I seek out places where other First Amendment protected activity is going on. Wherever the free newspaper and magazine boxes are located is a great place for me to locate. In fact – the times that the City has gone to court with the publishers of these publications are a valuable resource of case law for us to examine as we develop our case for artist scenes in Chicago.

I passed a lady shaking a cup and a man selling Streetwise newspapers. Both these groups, pan-handlers and Streetwise salespersons had won their speech rights in the Loop through court action. These cases should be part of our future research. They point our way to freedom.

Once I printed at an out-of-the-way spot next to magazine boxes where a particularly aggressive pan-handler irritated the public by standing on the corner directly in the flow of traffic as it stepped from the street. Even though I was giving my art away, I was the person the cop who passed threatened. That day my camera’s light sensing chip gave out. It was two months before I could afford another camera and again document my activities.

The money the City charges us for a license to sell our speech is a tax and a burden that many citizens, like myself, cannot afford without losing my speech rights for a period of time. When I had a peddlers license, it expired because I didn’t have the money in my hand for it. I went three months before trying to renew it. When I did - they wanted me to pay for the three months I went with out a peddlers license. It is an unjust barrier to speech in my humble opinion.

I selected another spot next to magazine boxes in front of the Adams Street entrance to De Paul University. It only took me seven minutes to set-up before I began printing. This was the first time I used a small screen and the first time to print one of my new series entitled “Yes We Can.” So far I have six “Yes We Can” designs. The public seemed largely indifferent on this day. I printed without much contact with the passersby until an elderly lady stopped by to talk and to ask about the technique I was using.

I told her about screen-printing, about our free screen print workshop for artists and I gave her a patch. It was the “Yes We Can – change the mindset that starts mindless wars” patch. She liked that patch and began to tell me about her daughter who was very creative. She should come to our workshop , I told her. Then I explained why I was giving my patch art away free. I said I was not free to sell my patches because the City of Chicago misused their need to control traffic to pass a peddlers license law that prevents me from selling my speech (art) at this location. “My proof,” I told her, “is that we are not inhibiting traffic at this moment. Do you see a traffic problem?” She shook her head smiling at the obvious evidence.

A second lady watching from across the sidewalk stepped closer with curiosity. I offered her a patch. She accepted it and examined it with an intelligent eye for detail. “This is free?” she asked. When I told her it was she said that I would be rewarded three times over for my work. “You are doing God’s work,” she said. The three of us talked and I explained to her that our goal to create art scenes where artists from all of Chicago’s communities could sell their work and survive by this. Art scenes where musicians and poets and visual artists, performing artists and culture creators could meet the public and all could build an audience. She agreed that all Chicago would be the benefit of this art activity.

My enthusiasm infected her and she let out that she had just received her diploma today from DePaul in Sociology. “I am 52,” she bragged. “And I am very happy to have achieved this goal of mine.”

“Ahh, so you understand the importance of art scenes to the social structure of Chicago, as an economic engine and as a quality of life enhancement,” I noted. She nodded modestly. Our conversation ended after a while but not before she repeated for a last time that I would be rewarded three times over for doing “God’s work.” I thanked each of them for showing interest while others had rushed by unseeing.

When they had gone I piled up the patches I had printed and passed out half of them to passersby. Most people brushed by without looking. As usual, however, those who accepted them did not throw them on the ground within my sight. This is the difference between my patches and most of the literature passed out downtown. Watch those who accept ad-literature. A few moments later many realize they do not want to carry it around all day and many drop them by the way. My work and my looks do polarize people. This is good because when I meet someone – even just to hand them a patch – they are primed to think about what I have handed them. They do and few throw my patches down. They take them home and tell someone about where they got it. I have no idea how many of my patches are being used. They are each like a bottle with a note on it being thrown into the sea that is humanity.

I packed up when the last patch left my hand to some accepting person. Maybe there are better places to proclaim artists’ rights then in front of a business school, I thought. My path took me to Wabash Avenue. Several blocks north I found a spot out of traffic by a corner next to a lamp post and a trash can. I was visible to a flow of people walking e-west and north-south yet out of their paths. After a while of printing a college age man stopped by to ask what I was doing. I gave him my speech. He admitted that he really just wanted directions to an all-night coffee house where he could cozy up until 2am. Then he would meet a friend of his who was working an evening shift downtown. He had come down from Grand Rapids Michigan for work-related training and stayed on to attend a wedding of friend. We got to talking and he started to give me advice of what I should do to get media attention.

“Ahh, the media in this town do not want to support street artists rights against their status-quo partners,” I claimed, issuing an overly broad judgment.

He jumped on that claiming I needed to be more creative and create the kind of excitement that the media loves. That made sense to me so I conceded the point and parried with another. “There are organizations that should be helping to represent artists on this issue that are dragging their feet and I believe it is because they get funds and favors from the City.“ He did not argue the point. He argued the proof of the point.

“How do you prove intent?” he asked. Again, he had me. We talked for forty-five minutes while I printed patches. When I explained I had a 7:00 appointment with a member of the press who would be speaking at a meeting hosted by the Open University of the Left, we parted ways. Before we did, he signed our petition. Thanks man.

The day was sunny and I found myself free. So, I decided to visit the Loop to print patches and give them away. ”Where to print?” I pondered. Should I test the Merchandise Mart spot again to find out if my Artropolis treatment is consistent or some other spot? My reasons for giving my art away can be found in previous posts.

Columbia College has its Manifest Urban Arts Festival this Friday (5/16/08). Maybe I’ll print there to build support among their student body for artists speech rights, I thought. Co-workers who attend Columbia at my part-time photo gig encouraged me to be around Columbia for Manifest. Columbia College became my destination.

When I arrived I saw the sun was shining on the street before Columbia where students came outside to relax, smoke cigarettes and talk. The mail box and a postal storage box in front of the entrance created a shadow just large enough to protect my printing from the sun which dries the ink in the screen forcing frequent cleanups making printing difficult. Ink cakes up in the screen and a layer of drying ink coats the screen surface. Then, letters fill in and do not print. Rubbing the bottom with a damp cloth may loosen the ink up and allow you to print more. Continuous quick printing shaded from the sun is the best solution. Interrupting the printing to talk promises difficulties.

No sooner then I setup, a security guard came out to ask if I was with the “College.”

“Definitely not!” I told her. She asked if I was selling something.  I asked back why she wanted to know this before explaining that I was giving away patches. In retrospect, I should have emphasized I intended to give my patches away. This might have set a different tone. I also should have displayed my “free patches” sign at all times to make my intentions very clear.

I added red ink on top and blue ink on the bottom of the design and then splashed a dab of yellow on the blue. Another dab of yellow was placed in the lower corner away from the design. This yellow ink I intended to use to wipe splashes of yellow with a strip of card stock wherever needed to keep the print colors alive as I pulled the squeegee. It occurred to me that I should have gotten a photo of the security guard. I took out my camera to be ready. Sure enough, she came back out to ask if I had a permit to give away my patches.

As I picked up my camera, I framed my answer in my mind. It was my intention to say to her that the City does not require a permit to give art away. At the first sight of the camera before I could make my statement she changed the subject to what was I taking pictures of. When I said I was documenting my art activities she fled for the door allowing me only the image of her back. This was best as it is the system I wish to expose and not the individual employees who deliver its repressive message.

I began printing as fast as I could inviting passersby to take a free patch. I expected a policeman to be showing up soon and wanted to establish clearly my activity. Several people did pick up a patch. I saw him coming before he reached me. He was a big strong man in the same college security uniform as the lady. He began gently. Speaking softly, leaning toward me to smile. “What are you doing?” he asked.

“I’m giving away patches,” I said simply. His first question made sense to me. The next confused me. He wanted to know if I were taking photos around out front of the College. “Why do you want to know? Is there some law that says I can’t document my art activities on the public way?” I asked.

We repeated ourselves this way twice more. Then he got on his phone to ask the first officer to tell him what rule I was supposed to be breaking. When I continued talking he barked, “Shut Up!”

This convinced me to focus on printing while he sought legal support from the first officer over the phone. “…I’m not s’posed to be doing this…” he muttered under his breath while he waited for her to explain what law I was violating. As the tension eased up a student poked his head the other side of the officer and asked if he could have a patch.

“Yes! Yes, take one!” I urged him. In a moment a small arch of students asking for patches conversing amongst each other collected around me. Then, I heard a familiar voice. It was an art instructor I knew from the College with some of his students saying goodbye to each other for the summer. By this time the security guard had disappeared not waiting for any more guidance from his coworker. I take my hat off to him. He acted well. The rest of my stay went very well. Another instructor listening to my conversation urged me to return Friday for Manifest - the school year ending art exposition of Columbia College. I promised her I would and did. I received an excellent reception by students who understood the value art scenes in Chicago could have to emerging artists.

Thanks to all who came by and talked or let me talk. Those who signed our petition – thank you. A volunteer will call you or email you for our summer and fall petition drive. Wear your Free Speech Artists’ Movement patches. Speakout about our right to sell art on the streets and in the parks of our nation. Help make Chicago more friendly to artists.

Artropolis is Chicago’s celebration of art, antiques and culture in late April every year. Ten foot by ten foot stalls are rented to artists for four days for $1,500. Galleries and high flying artists mingle with antique dealers and wealthy patrons while the public is invited to buy $100 tickets to view it all.

Artropolis 2008 for me is the first step in a study of Loop sites as potential sales sites for artists who have fought for and won their full speech rights. The fact that we do not yet have our full speech rights to sell our art/speech means I will have to give my art away to play. The spot I occupied, by the Kedzie/Wells corner door, is the best spot available around the Merchandise Mart. It has the traffic from the El stop, from two streets and the Mart traffic flowing past. High above me in the Mart at Artropolis art is being sold for thousands of dollars per work. Surprise, this choice spot on the street is open to me without competition because I am the only artist who is willing to give away my art this day. In legal terms - this is called the “chilling effect” that Chicago’s laws have on use of our full speech rights.

This space could easily handle 5-10 artists. The entire area for blocks around should be designated an arts district. Artists should be encouraged to find spots on the surrounding streets to add to an open air arts market. This would not destroy the business climate of the Mart. It would increase it by making it the center of a fine arts street district more friendly and attractive to tourists and the public thus increasing the wealth for all. This is an aspect of what wise urban planners mean when they talk about the power of the arts to boost economic activity. But it can not happen if you strangle the hen that lays the golden egg – if you ban artists from the street.

The weather was pleasant Friday 4/25/08 after a morning rain storm passed. I did not have a blanket to spread out because I arrived expecting to be printing inside in comfort with a steady flow of people curious about my prints and eager to know more about artists speech rights. That did not work out, so I volunteered to do the same thing I did last year, sit outside and print patches. But last year I was only around for a short while on Friday evening. This year I decided to make a larger impact.

I figured to set-up, print some patches, pass some patches and then pack-up to head home. I wanted to grab a blanket, and what I needed to set-up outside in comfort. Then, I planned to return for the evening rush.

I had four screens with eight designs packed with blank patch material into two plastic Aldi’s grocery bags. My leather bag had the other supplies I needed to print. I designed my worksite using the least space possible and found plenty of room on a single concrete slab to operate. My jacket became my seat. My patches sat on the Aldi’s bag that had held two screens. I started to print. I printed lots of “Free Speech Artists Movement” patches and then a pile of “More Art – Less War” patches.

My summer plan is to print in various locations and to document the traffic flow as I do so. Also, I am testing that I have my speech right to give away my art and to collect donations for our non-profit arts group, Uptown Multi-Cultural Art Center, that is supporting the Free Speech Artists’ Movement. The City insists in court that the reason for its tough Peddlers License law that prohibits peddling in so many districts around Chicago is due to the City’s need to control use of the public way to allow foot traffic to proceed. But they routinely allow non-profit organizations to collect donations in public. Each time I am allowed to give away my art in a location that the City says it must prohibit artists from selling at due to traffic considerations, I disprove their claim. This blog will publish my photographs from those spots and show the traffic to illustrate my point.

It is not only for the legal issues that I want to do this. I am literally using the screen printed art to create this Free Speech Artists’ Movement. While printing in public and passing out free patches I am finding supporters and gaining contact information for volunteers who can help build a movement. This is grass-roots arts activism. You are free to help out (e-mail:umcac@art-teez.org with free-speech in the subject line and contact info in the body).

Down the way close to the corner of Kedzie and Wells stood a tall square puppet shack attached to a custom built bike frame. Inside the tiny shack a puppeteer pulled the strings. The puppets danced to blues tunes and tourists were invited to give dollar bills to the puppets who entertained passersby. I enjoyed the music and the company.

My pile of prints grew as I printed. As I reached to add yellow ink, I noticed the security person for the Mart watching me as I worked.

This is a common pattern. First a security guard is seen observing me. Then, not long later a policeman shows up to run me off.

About 10 minutes later the policeman showed up. “What are you doing here? He asked.

“I’m giving away art!” I exclaimed proudly.

“What makes you think you can do this here?” he asked.

“I feel like I have my full free speech rights today,” I answered with confidence.

“Well, you can’t do that here. You will have to leave.”

I could feel the anger welling up in me. He had no right under the law to run me off yet he appeared to be intent on doing just that. “What is the statue that states I can not give away my art on this street in Chicago?”

“Itinerant Merchant code?” he said unsure as if surprised I did not back down or get belligerent. “I don’t know. I am calling in to find that out.” He held his phone to his ear. After a tense minute the officer looked down at me and said, “You can continue.” before walking off.

“Thank you.” I said as he left. It was not a shallow thank you. I meant it. He had done his job. I had just taken a step forward in this summer’s plan. I had established my right to be on the street, if only to give my art away. I had also established my right to accept donations for the Uptown Multi-Cultural Art Center while giving away my art. With that established for this moment in time, I was happy to pack-up to head home to prepare to print and organize outside for the rest of the weekend.

After eating and grabbing a blanket to layout my things on and another to sit on I returned by 5:00 to continue where I had left off. I had patches already printed, so I started off by passing out patches before printing more.

To those who stopped to take a “More Art – Less War” patch, I handed a Free Speech Artists’ Movement patch with a 10-30 second pitch on artists rights to sell on the street. “Do you know artists don’t have their full speech rights in Chicago?” I might ask. If they looked interested I gave more detail mentioning the court cases the City has already lost relating to our speech rights to sell First Amendment protected expressions. If they showed great interest I invited them to sign our petition explaining that it was for organizing and not a formal petition and not only for registered voters. I stayed around until a thunderstorm soaked me forcing me to pack-up for the night around 8:00pm.

Saturday I arrived before noon. Artropolis was in full swing. After setting out my blanket, patches, pins and signs inviting the public to take a free patch, I decided to start out passing to Artropolis bound persons fliers and the patches I had printed Friday evening. No sooner did I start to pass than I noticed a rivulet of water coursing through the expansion gaps in the side walk right up to and under my blanket. At first I was inclined to ignore it but then I realized it was enough to soak a large portion of my blanket if I did not act immediately. A quick glance following the water led to the guilty party. A crew giving away free bottles of Coke had pored their excess water out on the sidewalk up stream from me. I tossed aside just what I needed to to pull the blanket out of the way of the moving water. Then, I let them know there was a community they had to respect today. Their response was to move down to be closer to the Mart door and more of a distraction just across from me. They were paid employees and only hung around for about two hours.

When I was out of patches, I put my squeegee to work printing more patches. Now that the Mart’s security personnel had learned they could not call the police to remove me, I was not bothered again all weekend. I determined to return some time in the future to test and see if I was being treated with special kindness because Artropolis was in town. It is possible that those making decisions did not want to be embarrassed by squashing a free art give-away during their event. After all, I was, by my existence on that corner, helping to promote Artropolis. I fit their designs this weekend. Oh – and I was legally within my rights under City law, as well.

The weather had turned colder. The wind was strong but I was used to printing in a wind. Nickolas from the Finch Gallery brought me food and relieved me. The Finch Gallery and Nickolas deserve a big thanks and a shout out for inviting me to join in reacting to Artropolis and its excesses by printing my patches and talking about Free Speech in Chicago. His support made it possible to pull a long shift on Friday and Saturday. On Saturday it actually warmed up as the day went on. But when Nickolas relieved me, I was in deep need of a warm-up and a restroom break.

A friend I met at a workshop teaching media skills asked when we spoke if I had been upstairs to Artropolis yet. “I can’t afford a $100 for a ticket to go up there,” I answered. She had an extra ticket that she was not going to use which she gave me. She introduced me to her friend and they both signed my petition. Her friend, it turned out, worked for the Tribune. That’s why I do these things I thought when I saw this.

Three ladies I judged to be in their forties, stopped by to admire my patches and they overheard my conversation as I explained to an artist signing my petition how our intent to create art scenes was actually beneficial to the City by many measures. They were laughing with me as I said “…we’ll have to drag the City kicking and screaming to cultural sanity and an artist friendly stance…”

One of the three ladies chimed in, “I would think that Mayor Daley would support that. He is very supportive of the arts. He supported Gallery 37, and the Cows exhibit, and ….” she went on listing several other overly well publicized examples of Mayor Daley’s support for the established arts.

“Well, actually,” I responded, “Daley and his captive City Council passed the present law in 1994 that is violating our free speech rights at the moment. He has centralized community arts funding by establishing, though his wife’s non-profit, Gallery 37 and After School Matters, both of which have sucked up most of the support previously available to small arts non-profits leaving those small arts groups no choice but to ask Daley’s wifes big non-profit for a grant. These are administered in a political fashion when they feel so inclined. Daley announced when running after the death of Harold Washington that he would follow the ‘Washington Agenda.’ His first cultural policy act was to throw in the trash “The Chicago Cultural Plan” that embodied the community arts agenda of the Washington Administration. Daley is the problem not the solution,” I concluded. “However, if you have contacts with Daley or his Administration and you set up a meeting for me with the Mayor – I will be happy to ask him, face to face, to change Chicago to make it friendly to artists. You have my contact info on the patch – just e-mail me.” I added laughing.

They admitted this was news to them before continuing on there way. No one in the media has ever dared criticize Daley for his arts policy. No one has asked grass-roots artists. No organization supports grass-roots artists which is not accepting City money with all its political strings attached except the Uptown Multi-Cultural Art Center. I stayed until 8:30 pm. I must have had fifty conversations and gave away hundreds of patches and fliers.

Sunday was more of the same. I could not stay long on Sunday. I had to run back to meet artists attending our free Screen Print Workshop for Artists at 3:00. On Monday I visited the show during the last few hours. It was enormous and I only visited a fourth of the booths to pass out my Free Speech Artists’ Movement literature before a security person charged down the aisle demanding to know if I was an exhibiting artist. He insisted I walk to the nearest elevator immediately. Artropolis was over for another 361 days.

22

I printed for the first time the “Free Speech Artists Movement” patch which emphasizes that there are zero open air art scenes in Chicago. Despite initial nervousness by host and building management - to their credit - they allowed me to continue. I was able to speak briefly after a panel discussed the talk and achieved a wide distribution of patches to a cross-section of Illinois arts administrators.

The topic was as follows:

“What roles do arts organizations play in making our cities and regions more livable, competitive and sustainable places?” The featured speaker was Carol Coletta, president and CEO of CEOs for Cities, and host and producer of the nationally syndicated public radio show Smart City. The title of her talk was “The Creative City.”

In brief she said that if Chicago wishes to compete with other cities worldwide it must emphasis its distinctive character. This fit into our argument for encouraging Chicago’s artists to be seen and heard from on its streets. Only with a lively open-air arts presence will the character of Chicago’s diversity be on display for visitors and the public to see.

Naturally, when I spoke about the few opportunities for artists on Chicago’s streets and the missing first rung of grass-roots opportunities latter for artists in Chicago, the initial knee jerk reaction was to deny this fact.

Yet, after the talk my beautiful patches were accepted by all but two or three people. One man even put his arm on my shoulder and recommended my words to panelist Tony Jones, President of the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. This was a great session, I thought.

However, it was the young person who approached me afterward representing CYMP, the Chicago Coalition of Youth Media Partners, who was the most important person for me to meet at this event. I believe it is artists near the street and the creative voices of the youth are who will lead Chicago to become more friendly to artists. They need to know it is their right - their First Amendment right to do so.