My initial article and critique was not designed to dwell on the negative, instead it was meant to challenge us all to think about the art contest within a larger social context. Doing so is not a negative, rather an opportunity to push ourselves to think about these issues and the long-term implications they have on this community.

Art and other forms of creative expression can always have the power to give us a sense of peace and wonderment. My mother was in a movie about women in Nazi concentration camps who had the opportunity to prolong their lives if they possessed the ability to play a musical instrument. The music that was played for the Nazi camp officials and their guests no doubt gave men who were in charge of mass extermination a sense of joy or an appreciation of the beauty that comes from classical music. However, looking at the larger context reminds us that this beautiful music was for genocidal murderers. Now, in no way am I comparing the DeVos family to the Nazis. The example was merely to illustrate a point about the importance of looking at the social, political and economic context in which art and creativity is often expressed.

Anyone can look at the churches and other buildings that are part of Rome or the Vatican and many other European cities and be amazed at the beauty, the detail and the craft of the artists who were commissioned to create those works of art. Again, the larger context forces me to come to terms with the fact that much of the gold and silver used in churches throughout Europe was imported from Latin America and mined by indigenous populations for several hundred years after the European conquest of the Americas.

Gandhi once said there was no beauty in the finest linens made in Europe if they caused poverty in India. One of the points I was making in the original article was the economic impact that the art contest could have on the downtown of Grand Rapids. Gentrification may “improve the quality of life for those involved and those around them,” as you say, which was exactly my point. Those who will benefit from this gentrification are those who already are economically privileged and whatever gentrification will come out of it will mostly fatten the wallets of those who live better than most of us. Ask people in Heartside if their being displaced or brutalize by the police, so that gentrification may occur without any resistance, feeling that this art contest is of benefit to them.

The last point I want to make on this matter is that the more we ignore the larger context in which wealthy and privileged sectors of society operate, especially when they engage in philanthropic acts, the more difficult it will be to challenge them when they blatantly exploit and abuse working class sectors of society. A great resource that explores this issue is a book published by the group INCITE! entitled, “The Revolution Will Not Be Funded.”

So I look at it this way, because I believe in the positive effects of “good”. Despite there obviously being hidden agendas in the Devos contest. Just the fact that more art is being created and displayed, is also going to have an enormous positive effect in “non business” ways in the community. People are talking about this that do not know of the Devos family – who know nothing of Amway – who don’t even know the art is part of a contest with a cash prize. All they know is – “Wow – that is so cool – let’s stop !” Or “How did they do that – I want to learn to do that”….and they bring their children, who then become inspired to create art of their own ….not for money …but from the pure joy of seeing something that thrilled them.

I should know,as I took my niece to see this piece yesterday. And she grabbed my camera and started taking pictures, and her joy and the decisions she started making as she formed her shots, became art all on it’s own. She is in 2nd grade and knows nothing of political agendas – thank God.

“What do you paint when you paint a wall?”
Said John D.’s grandson Nelson.
“Do you paint just anything there at all?
Will there be any doves, or a tree in fall?
Or a hunting scene, like an English hall?”

“I paint what I see,” said Rivera.

“What are the colors you use when you paint?”
Said John D.’s grandson, Nelson.
“Do you use any red in the beard of a saint?
If you do is it terribly red, or faint?
Do you use any blue?
Is it Prussian?”

“I paint what I paint,” said Rivera.

“Whose is that head I see on my wall?”
Said John D.’s grandson Nelson.
“Is it anyone’s head whom we know, at all?
A Rensselaer, or a Saltonstall?
Is it Franklin D.? Is it Mordaunt Hall?
Or is it the head of a Russian?”

“I paint what I think,” said Rivera.
“I paint what I paint, I paint what I see,
I paint what I think,” said Rivera,
“And the thing that is dearest in life to me
In a bourgeois hall is integrity;
However…
I’ll take out a couple of people drinkin’
And put in a picture of Abraham Lincoln,
I could even give you McCormick’s reaper
And still not make my art much cheaper.
But the head of Lenin has got to stay
Or my friends will give me the bird today–
The bird, the bird, forever.”

“It’s not good taste in a man like me,”
Said John D.’s grandson Nelson,
“To question an artist’s integrity
Or mention a practical thing like a fee,
But I know what I like to a large degree
Though art I hate to hamper;
For twenty-one thousand conservative bucks
You painted a radical. I say shucks,
I never could rent the offices.
For this, as you know, is a public hall
And people want doves or a tree in fall,
And though your art I dislike to hamper,
I owe a little to God and Gramper,
And after all,
It’s MY wall.”

“We’ll see if it is,” said Rivera.

One thing I’ve been thinking about since the announcement is Diego Rivera’s standoff with Rockefeller. So many artists build a foundation for their work with their political and social beliefs. How many of them will be automatically excluded from this “contest” because, like Rivera, they speak their own truth and understanding in their art? Truths that, like Rockefeller, the DeVos family will attempt to censor with a checkbook…