As LACE Shifts Course, Rifts Grow Wider

“Artists Mourn the Death of a Great Space” screams the headline of a press release issued by a group of 10 performance artists and critics who claim that Los Angeles Contemporary Exhibitions, a nonprofit center for edgy contemporary art in Hollywood, has abandoned its mission and no longer serves their interests.

Nonsense, leaders of the embattled institution say. LACE isn’t dead; it is doing what is necessary to dig itself out of a grave and get a new life that will benefit artists.

Established in 1978 as an artist-run exhibition and performance space, LACE now has more businessmen than artists on its board of directors, as the critics charge. Furthermore, the new director, Irene Tsatsos, was hired to pursue her curatorial vision rather than facilitate programs planned by video, performance and exhibition committees, as in the past.

But the old system hadn’t worked for a long time, said board president Gary Mezzatesta, who contends that the only way to save LACE was to change it.

Life at LACE has never been tranquil. The multidisciplinary art center flourished during the 1980s, thanks to public funding and a participatory spirit. But even during its heyday, the climate that created an exciting forum for experimental art also fostered heated dissension.

In the 1990s, public funding for the arts diminished drastically. LACE struggled for survival under a series of directors as its budget plummeted from $900,000 to $225,000 and debts piled up. The organization rallied enough support to move from a derelict section of downtown Los Angeles to a slightly less scruffy area of Hollywood in 1994, but it never regained its niche in the art community or the sense of scrappy urgency that characterized its glory days.

Now LACE is operating in the black with a budget of $350,000 under a new administrative structure. But just as the institution is emerging with a leaner profile and a sharper focus--designed for a brighter, fiscally sound future, LACE supporters say--some artists are voicing strong objections to changes effected by the board and Tsatsos, who was appointed last October.

Several artists have sent letters of complaint to Mezzatesta and local news media. The press release recounts “the downfall of LACE as an artists’ space” and poses questions about the changes.

At issue is the board’s decision, early in 1997, to suspend LACE’s bylaws stipulating that 51% of the board members must be artists and to hire a director-curator who would take over duties previously carried out by artists and program coordinators.

Mezzatesta said in a telephone interview that it became increasingly difficult to enlist artists as board members as LACE’s troubles mounted, and that the only reason the organization had survived is that a few other people rose to the challenge.

Artist Jacki Apple, who helped to draft the press release, contends that artists resigned from the board or declined to serve because they didn’t approve of the organization’s new direction. However, Mezzatesta said that most of those are now expressing concern did not offer to help when LACE was in trouble.

Art collector and philanthropist Peter Norton, who does not serve on the board, agreed. Responding to the press release in an e-mail message to Apple and “any interested parties,” Norton stated: “As much as you may regret that LACE is now being led predominantly by business people, rather than by artists, responsibility for the decline of LACE in the past rests squarely on the shoulders of the community of artists that LACE was created to serve. Simply put, the community of artists was unwilling or unable to do the heavy lifting necessary to keep LACE thriving in its old mold. If LACE declined and nearly failed, it is because the artists’ community failed LACE.”

The controversy heated up following a benefit on July 30, organized by Deborah Oliver, to which many performance artists donated their services. Some of the artists say their contributions were not appreciated and they resent helping an organization that has abandoned them. Oliver said she approached the project with enthusiasm but later felt she had been deceived about LACE’s commitment to performance art.

“LACE is no longer an artists’ space,” Apple said. “It’s become very corporate. Fine, OK, if that’s what you are. But don’t claim to be radical and community-based. You shouldn’t raise money on the basis of the organization’s history. Don’t exploit the artists.”

The $20-ticket event netted $2,500, which will be used for video equipment for LACE’s programs, Tsatsos said.

A concern frequently expressed in the letters is that LACE has stopped presenting performance art. Tsatsos said that perception is untrue, while acknowledging that the new program will be different.

Performance art has been woven into the fabric of much adventurous contemporary art by influential artists including Bruce Nauman, Cindy Sherman and Mike Kelley. Tsatsos said that some of the most interesting new work combines disciplines or crosses borders, so it no longer makes sense to adhere to strict categories.

“I want to help artists realize their vision,” she said, noting that LACE will provide assistance for artists to produce new work, rather than simply present art that already exists. And those projects could take a variety of forms. “If an artist wants to publish a book, I want to find a way to make that happen,” she said.

Several Los Angeles-based artists concur with her curatorial philosophy. “I like to see a mix of programs,” said John Baldessari, an internationally renowned conceptualist who was involved with LACE at its inception. “I think you have to give Irene a chance and judge the quality of the program. Since she has been there, the visibility of LACE has increased. Now it’s a place you want to go to; in the past you didn’t want to go there because it looked like it was dying. It’s better to have necessary modifications than to have it die.”

Artist Pae White, who became a member of the board two years ago, said she joined precisely because she knew LACE was on the move. “Any institution that is halfway interesting does change,” she said. “LACE isn’t about history.”

Everyone seems to agree that LACE is not what it once was, but while some artists view that situation as a death to be mourned, others see encouraging vital signs.

“It seems to be headed in a viable direction,” said Stephen Prina, a prominent artist and musician. “I think Irene has some very sound ideas. It’s time for LACE to reinvent and revitalize itself.”