GALLERY GOADS

Is Wanda Coleman advocating that whites engage in the support of African American artists (“Against a Wall,” On the Town, July 30). If whites did decide to offer support based solely on the color of the artists’ skin, would that not be paternalism, or racism of another kind?

Does the mainstream ever support art? Art has historically received support from a small group of the interested and attuned section of the community, and color has not been a factor.

And about Coleman’s use of words: What does the word tremulous mean in reference to the world of African Americans? Is their world quivering, trembling or palpitating, the first meanings according to my dictionary. The secondary meanings: fearful, timid or timorous. Is that what Coleman means? And wafting generally refers to inanimate objects borne along on a breeze or current. Therefore, Coleman truly couldn’t have found herself “wafting through the . . . gallery.”

I am a white woman from a poor family. My family could not collect art. Then women were told that they didn’t need educations in order to cook, clean and serve. I managed to get undergraduate and graduate degrees. I can think and write logically, and I make extensive use of my dictionary, but I am white, and there is no special help in place for me.

Patricia E. Watson

Calabasas

*

I’m delighted that Coleman’s column spotlighted African American artists and my gallery, but I was disappointed that it contained a quote erroneously attributed to me, as well as some ambiguities that could mislead or misinform your readers.

First, words were put into my mouth with the quote, “But on the whole, whites will not buy into the black community.” Not only did I not say that, but I’m not sure what it means. The truth is, about half of my clients are white. While that situation is far from perfect, African American art is gaining greater acceptance by people of all backgrounds.

Second, the statement that, “unfortunately, most blacks can’t afford to support black artists . . . .” is ambiguous. If support means the ability to purchase individual works of art, then the statement is clearly false. Most blacks can afford to purchase African American art, as can most people.

The main obstacle is not money. The problems are lack of exposure for the art and the artists, the preconceived notion that art is the province of the of the wealthy, and the false impression that art created by African Americans is inherently inferior to “mainstream” art. Coleman helps to correct the first and third misconceptions but doesn’t address the second.

Eric Hanks

Santa Monica

*

Coleman’s response: The inference in my statement was that blacks outside the economic mainstream cannot afford to support black artists. That point preceded discussion about Hanks offering “fine art, lots of it at reasonable prices,” and items of “accessible quality.”

When I arrived at the gallery, Hanks was hosting a white patron and one of the artists. During our interview, Hanks said, “Progress has been made, and I do have white patrons” and followed the statement with a large sigh of relief. Then he added, “But on a whole, whites will not buy into the black community.”

Before leaving, I explained to Hanks that I intended to “boil our interview down to its pithy parts.” We shared a hardy laugh about that.