Printable View
The Freep reports that the Banksy Mural owned by 555 Gallery may be sold at
auction next month. The gallery may use the funds to acquire and then turn the building at 2941 East Warren into and art space. I recall reading that building was a cigar factory designed by Albert Kahn. Is that correct? That stretch of East Warren is quite bleak and the neighborhoods around it now have a small population. Can an art space help to revitalize such a location?
No matter what they say, what they do, what building they want to save, the bottom line is they are thieves. They also lied about their intentions from day one.
The money should go the Packard plant.
Right. this is some greasy shit. Art parasites
It would be a waste of a building such as the former Atlas Furniture Building on Gratiot near the Corner of Russell
The building that Gallery 555 wishes to acquire is located at 2941 East Warren near the intersection of Warren and Mitchell. I wonder if it was a former cigar factory?
I don't have the answer but it was certainly in the cigar factory neighborhood. Working Detroit lists the nearby 5031 Grandy as the former Mazer-Cressman Cigar factory, now a City of Detroit Human Services office. It was part of the 1937 cigar plant sitdowns. Also cited in that sitdown is the Webster-Eisenholer Cigar factory at 5545 Grandy, now part of the urban prairie.
Nice of these suburban thieves to "give something back" to the poor city they decided to steal from with the proceeds gained from their totally entitled assholishness.
A few thoughts:
The stated intention of 555 is to work on their neighborhood arts programs. That's a noble intention. But how does owning a building on the east side square with the southwest Detroit location? Are they committed to the neighborhood they're in? If so, why did they buy the other building? It's the sort of thing that diminishes their claims of "neighborhood arts programs" when you get the sense they'd be happy to move to another location if the funding came together.
Also, I don't think they knew what they were getting into. It was a local photographer who rallied them to the task of acquiring the artwork. Nobody ever talks about that guy. But it seems clear he was the first one with dollar signs in his eyes.
I think that the Banksy has been a lead weight around the organization. They knew they could sell it, and I'm guessing that plays into the way they haven't aggressively sought funding or grants. I'm not saying they did that to claim poverty and find a rationale for selling it, but when you have a gold mine socked away, maybe the board thinks the organization doesn't need to raise those funds.
Last time I checked, none of their board members lived in the city. So how invested is the neighborhood in the group?
I'm not saying they're terrible people, but when you put all this stuff together, you just find it very hard to take them seriously.
In my most cynical imaginings, I predict the group will take the money from the sale, pour it into the building on the east side, and leave the "neighborhood" flat. That would be a nice scam: Nonprofit arts organization as real estate speculation entity.
But don't say bad things about them. They're doing it all for their "neighborhood arts program," in some neighborhood, somewhere, at some point. Or so they claim.
I heard that the 555 Gallery location in the old police precinct station on Vernor ergo SW was closed or ended. It came in response to my saying I had to get by there for a visit.
Any truth to that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
Won't be the first time they did something like that. Remember their old location on Grand River and Warren? Before they left they completely trashed the place. Never seen an art gallery move around so much like the 666 gallery.
I heard that story too. But I also heard that the owner watched them do work on the space and hoped to reap the benefit of their improvements, so, like a person who knows his house is going to be taken by the bank, they ripped out the improvements they made. Is that unreasonable or untrue? Maybe. But I might give them the benefit of the doubt on that one. Landlord-tenant disputes can be mighty complicated.Quote:
Originally Posted by warsaw7
If a tenant makes fixed improvements to real estate he is renting, that becomes property of the landlord unless there was an agreement to the contrary when the improvement is made.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
I believe it. And yet it does happen. Anyway, the 555 people don't seem to have been prosecuted. I actually spoke with the property manager of the building where it happened, and he didn't seem to think it was a big deal. They moved on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermod