September 12, 2009

Spirited bidding marks end of Sunny and Chair Tour

Jamie Metz' Happy Tree Frog went for $1,600

The Sunny and Chair Summer '09 Tour officially came to an end Saturday, as the beautifully decorated Adirondack chairs that have been displayed Downtown all summer were auctioned off.

Eighteen of the chairs were sold by voice auction, raising a total of $20,200 for the Downtown Racine Corporation, sponsor of the annual summer art project. The total raised by the 37 chairs sold afterwards via a silent auction was not available.

Sue Horton's Fall Back (and Relax!) sold for $3,100

The chair that brought the most money was Sue Horton's Fall Back (and Relax!) which was bought by its sponsor, her husband, Daniel, for $3,100 after spirited bidding. Horton, who usually paints in acrylics, watercolor and pastels, has prepared entries for a number of previous Downtown art projects, including Racine’s Dog Days of Summer, Cat’n Around Downtown, Bears, Bears & More Bears and Bird is the Word.

Sherri Shaver's 1st prize Peacock Chair bench sold for $2,300

Sherri Shaver's Peacock Chair bench, a stunning glass mosaic that won the $2,000 first prize in this year's competition, sold for $2,300. At right, she receives her prize from Terry Leopold, DRC's director of special events.

Tied for third highest price among the regular chairs were Jamie Metz' Happy Tree Frog and Sherri Shaver's Vincent's Chair; each sold for $1,600.

The large chair displayed at Monument Square all summer -- and the subject of "literally thousands" of pictures, according to DRC executive director Devin Sutherland -- sold for $2,100. It was painted by Doug and Diane Soller.

At the auction, DRC also announced the winner of its Name the Barrel Boys Sixth Street mascots contest. The winner is Sherri Myers Wray, who submitted the names Cautious Clay, Monument Ali and Gorge Foreman. The new name for the barrels themselves is The Three Constructioneers, which was submitted by Cameron Fair.

46 comments:

  1. To the Yuppies of Rich, Radiant Ray-Scene, Enjoy Versailles while you may, because the downtrodden peasants who weren't invited to your arty-tarty money party may wise up and rise up against their oppressors. (This statement is a historian's prediction, not a threat. Right before the French Revolution erupted in 1789, Marie Antoinette doted on lavishly decorated furniture while the common people starved. We know what the peasants did to her...).

    ReplyDelete
  2. This Yuppies vs. Peasants rabble-rousing is stupid. You WERE invited: there was no admission charge and hundreds attended while fewer than 55 people bought a chair.

    The rest of us enjoyed the art, and the auction, bought a beer or a hot dog and ran into friends doing the same.

    No commoners were killed in the making of this event.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear Al, The fact remains that as long as the yuppies and their masters are allowed to blow dough, time and energy on nonsense, darned little will be done to help the impoverished majority of Rat-Scene's residents. Given a choice between charity and art, the elite will opt for the latter every time. My late Mom, who had rich relatives in New York, tried to interest them in helping Doctors Without Borders. Alas, they gave next to zippo to that worthy organization. However, like some corporate porkers on my Dad's side of the clan, they could cut mega-checks to the Spoleto Art Festival in Charleston, S.C. Until we strip art-related donations of tax-deductible status, the privileged classes will do as little as possible for the rest of humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Party on!

    On the bodies of others, if necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon 11:07. Seems t'me, people ought to have the right to give their money and time to whomever they want, without someone else looking down their nose at it. If you want to give to Doctors Without Borders, fine; do so. If someone else prefers to help Spoleto, that's their business.

    Why must everyone be so judgmental about other folks? And for the record, the family so hated by you (or others using your name on this board) is extremely generous to just the kinds of causes you espouse: the poor, the sick, kids, etc. As well as to the arts community (not all artists are elite whatevers, either.)

    Liking art is not the same as being insensitive to others. But it appears that NOT liking art is.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Orbs Corbs, Revolution is the festival of the oppressed. I hope that the poor whom you scorn may not party on over anyone's dead body.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Al, The corporate crime family in question excels at dodging property taxes and exploiting cheap temp labor. The misery of our rank-and-file residents is no accident. From a historian's perspective, I can tell you that heartless oligarchic classes have a nasty way of cherishing exquisite objects while throwing human beings to the economic wolves. Enjoy your art if you must, but don't pretend that aesthetic follies and philanthropy possess equal moral worth.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dear Al, For your information, my Mom had a degree in Art History and I took post-graduate courses in that field at Wayne State University. No, I do not dislike art. What I despise is a certain cash-cadging clan's obsession with art to the detriment of our community's less-fortunate residents. Back in the Dirty Thirties a corporate criminal I'll call "Hip Waxtrash" got a wee bit too chummy with Frank Lloyd Wright and his evil third wife. As a result, "Hip Waxtrash" picked up Mr. and Mrs. Wright's noxious notion that aesthetics trumped ethics in a value system based on beauty instead of duty. Ever since then, this town has had too much art and not enough heart.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I can see why you hide behind anonymity. There's absolutely no reason why aesthetics and ethics can't coexist.

    Maybe you were sleeping through that class at the renowned Wayne State U?

    Feel free to detail your charitable contributions -- I'd love to see where your pocket change has been directed, how many lives you've saved.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Pete and Dustin like to censor people.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Post comments about the "Post" at their favorite competitors site. They can't delete comments they don't agree with on the "other site". LMAO!!! You censor FREAKS!!!

    I agree with my buddy Orbs...You guys suck!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't mean to start a tiff, but isn't something wrong with the picture of the crowd? Was this taken in Hayward or Hurley?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Dear 3:29 P.M., Although I'm poor, I've given several thousand dollars to Maya Works, an organization which helps girls and women in Guatemala obtain decent educations. Also, I've donated canned goods and cash to our Foodbank and I've supported HALO. From time to time, I cut checks to Doctors Without Borders and The Smile Train (a medical charity which provides Third World kids with first-class cleft palate surgery). Although I haven't saved any lives, my little presents have improved conditions for others.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dear Al,Even though aesthetics and ethics can coexist in theory, in practice one will trounce the other early and often. Japan during the Shogunate possessed one of the artiest possible cultures in which elite class males would sell their own daughters into prostitution after composing exquisite poetry. Conversely, Savonarola fried thousands of superb art objects in the name of improving the morality and government of Renaissance Florence.Regarding the postgraduate aesthetics and ethics courses at Wayne State University, I didn't sleep through them. Rather, I found them fascinating. Over the years, what my professors taught me aided me in understanding the causes of Racine's chronic malaise.Perhaps, someday, we'll find and administer the right remedies.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You call Racine "Rat-Scene" while pretending to care about its citizens. Then you rant about beauty being bad. How are we supposed to take you seriously?

    The majority of Racine's residents are NOT impoverished. There is a larger percentage than in other cities, but not a majority.

    I don't know who did what to you when, but get over it and stop taking it out on everyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If a person didn't have a chair to purchase, it doesn't mean they'd give that money to the poor. What exactly are people supposed to do? Is it Downtown Racine's responsibility to take care of the crime ridden, trashy areas all around the perimeter of downtown? That's not their job, it's the job of the City's elected officials and all the community groups who are being funded by tax dollars to be doing something.

    ReplyDelete
  17. For those of us who weren't born with the proverbial silver spoons in our mouths, Racine IS Rat-Scene, The Rodent City, The Mickey Mouse Company Town. Unless you're a wicked Waxie or one of their pet Ivy League yuppies, there's NOTHING in this badnews big-buck bullies' burg. The oligarchy and its upper-middle class lackeys run The Dumbbell City for their exclusive fun and profit. Believe me, they don't give a rap about the impoverished working class and lower-middle class majority. Like the late, far-from-great Marie Antoinette, our kleptoplutocrats are off in their own arty-tarty money-mutts' world.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Dear Anonymous 6:27 A.M., No, beauty in and of itself is neither good nor bad. However, obsession with aesthetics to the detriment of ethics is pure evil. Here in the Lakeside Looney Bin, we have a hyper-privileged corporate crime family whose members fell for Frank Lloyd Wright's sick slick notion that the pursuit of pulchritude should trump all other values and considerations. As a result, we have a tarted-up downtown designed to impress visiting grandees of greed right next door to some of the most poverty-oppressed and crime-ridden neighborhoods in our stompin' state. If the art and architecture lovers in yuppie La-La Land think that the poor won't settle accounts with them, they're in for a rude awakening. (No, this is NOT a threat. Just look at the demographics and examine a map of this town and you'll see that when the word is given, the downtrodden classes could destroy plenty of the pricey property and playthings cherished by the bourgeoisie. Whether or not The House of Wax and its dollar-sign dynasty like it, what goes around will come around.)

    ReplyDelete
  19. 7:32 - take your crippled mind and body elsewhere. do you think anyone cares that you went to Wayne University. Most of us have gone to more pretigious universities and received degrees you can actually do something with. We are all tired of hearing your daily negative views. I know you think that you have a disbility eveyone should feel sorry for you, but I have friend who have lost a leg and play golf, someone who has only one workable arm and plays tennis. Maybe instead of feeling sorry for yourself and taking your issues out on the community you should actually go out and do something worthwhile.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Are you that kooky broad that calls Racine a "pauper town" and claims to have all sorts of advanced degrees?

    ReplyDelete
  21. "when the word is given, the downtrodden classes could destroy plenty of the pricey property and playthings cherished by the bourgeoisie"

    Can someone please make sure this guy gets his Lithium scrip refilled?

    ReplyDelete
  22. 9:43 - he is one sick bastard. His comments are boardering on threats to be turned over to the police.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "Bordering" that is!

    ReplyDelete
  24. dear 8:47 A.M., I'm glad that your pals enjoy their golf and tennis. However, a lot of disadvantaged folks have a rough time in The Rodent City surviving. Please don't look down on them. It would be great if you and your capitalist clique could learn a little compassion.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Dear 9:37 A.M. No, I'm not a "broad" but rather a broadminded guy who knows that our bourgeois system is in big trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Dear 9:43, No, I'm not sick. However, our capitalistic system isn't in very good shape. If we want to save it, we'll have to reform it and build a social safety net to keep poverty from driving our disadvantaged people to despair--and violence. Regarding our RPD, I support our Men and Women in Blue and have plenty of good friends on the force. When I report on the conditions in our Dumbbell City, I'm just telling you what I've observed and what I believe could happen if we don't reform our system a.s.a.p. NEVER DO I THREATEN ANYONE. THAT WOULD BE MORALLY WRONG AND TOTALLY FOOLISH.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Dear 7:32 A.M., Regarding your snide attitude anent Wayne State University, I'll let that slide. Anyone who's genuinely secure about his own self-worth and the value of his credentials wouldn't indulge in such snooty shenanigans. Please wake up, though, and see what's happening in our town. Unless we change the system pronto, all of us could be in for something that could make the Detroit Insurrection of July, 1967 resemble the pie-eating contest at the Four H picnic.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 10:25 No, I would say just the opposite. Anyone who has to continuely remind readers that he has a degree from Wayne University must be insecure about his own self-worth and the value of his credentials. the rest of us do not throw our credentials around. And I know plenty of individuals with disabilities, but they don't dwell in it like you do. They know they can add value to the community and are out doing so, not wallowing out on this blog. And lastly your comment about being broad minded is the most laughable thing you have said.

    ReplyDelete
  29. STFU and move away if you don't like it.

    ReplyDelete
  30. 11:07 - that is a very learned comment - I'm very impressed.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Oh, and lastly 11:07 - you are dismissed!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dear 11:44 A.M. , Who--or what--are you to dismiss any of God's children? Seriously speaking, I pray that you may listen to my message instead of arrogantly brushing it aside. Whether we like it or not, our system is on the brink of destruction. Perhaps if we reform it, we'll be able to avoid the anti-capitalist perfect storm.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Dear 10:53 A.M., Until we reform our corrupt bourgeois system, credentials will be a part of the game our richie-poos force us to play. By the way, that statement applies to the person who bragged about possessing degrees from "pretigious" universities.

    ReplyDelete
  34. 11:44 - I'll dismiss anyone that says STFU - he is hardly one of God's children.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Hello friendly neighbourhood bloggers. I have two simple points to make. (Post 1 of 2)

    First, our friend “Anonymous Socialist” (hereunto referred to as “AnSoc” to avoid confusion with the myriad other Anonymous blog posters) appears to be an educated person with an opinion on society and capitalism and socialism and how certain events, people, and constructs within this city attribute to its decline and inevitable failure.

    That’s ok. We live in this great country where we get to communicate our opinions freely and are protected by this right to free speech in our Constitution. This man also has a higher education from Wayne State University, as he consistently reminds us, and firmly believes in everything he is saying based on his personal experience, education, and observation. Again, that’s ok. We all get to agree or disagree with him and his ideas in public forums such as a blog because we are all afforded these inalienable rights.

    The one thing we need to all be cautious of – myself included – is that these rights are granted to even those we don’t agree with. Respect for their freedom of speech should not be confused with agreement toward the opinions given. The line however can be crossed, and honestly – may have been already – by threats, suggestions, or insinuation of certain individuals doing things illegally (I think both the concepts of “libel” and “vilification” would be appropriate here). Generally speaking, it is accepted that anything posted on a blog comment has the hidden pre-text of “In my humble opinion, I think… [post]” – however, not including that pre-text may be up for legal debate as to whether or not defamation has occurred. At the very least a tort of defamation or possibly a tort of false light may have occurred. I’m no lawyer, but I’ll leave it at that.

    From what I have read on this and other blogs is that an opinion is presented, people disagree with it, and then it inevitably gets ugly and personal. That’s hardly healthy debate. Now, I admit, I tend to use wit / sarcasm / etc to make points, and I may have crossed that line myself, so shame on me if I have.

    I believe Pete and Dustin encourage healthy debate in their blog comments, and would prefer to put controls in place to ensure this is the case. However, their respect for freedom of speech (from journalists! I know!) partially prevents them from what some may call censorship, and I applaud them for their public encouragement of healthy debate whilst preserving as many of the aspects of “open forum” as possible.

    (Cont'd...)

    ReplyDelete
  36. (Post 2 of 2)

    The second point I am going to make will be provocative, but only in the analogy I give. I’m doing this on purpose not only because I find humour in it in my own little sick way, but because it would be an analogy that I think both sides of the debate would find interestingly accessible.

    For those that AnSoc and his point of view on the evils of capitalism and the socialistic constructs that he believes will save the system from inevitable doom, you might see him as someone you cannot argue with. His beliefs are ingrained in his head and soul, and he will live and defend them until he can no longer type. Any attempts at a counter-point to his point are met with a detailed and concise rebuttal, and probably with an additional point to substantiate his argument.

    Now let’s be fair. Those who take an opposing view to AnSoc (let’s call them “AnCap” for lack of a better term) hold their beliefs just as strongly, and are willing to defend them with as much vigour and zeal as he does. At the end of the day you will end up with two unbreakable forces (opinions and beliefs of AnSoc vs. the same of AnCap) that are not willing or fundamentally able to alter their stances.

    There are other prominent names in current events that could just as easily be analyzed in this way. I submit to you the names of George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden. Now – keep in mind that I am not saying that AnSoc nor AnCap is either one of these figures, however, both of them have deeply rooted beliefs that no debate would ever settle. Unfortunately, their (GWB and OBL) weapons were of the physical nature instead of the war of words that we are afforded here. Without getting into the politics around their actions, but instead focusing on their strong willed belief systems, it is actually quite comparable to some of the personas (not the beliefs) that post on these blogs.

    So here’s how these debates between AnSoc and AnCap can continue. As is, in which case you will see nobody win, but instead individuals will score what they believe minor victories because they made a point they believe to be infallible no matter the rebuttle.

    Another option might be to see if Pete and Dustin would be interested in an Open Forum dedicated to this topic and let the war of the words play itself out, lessening the impact of the debate from clogging the comments section of an event such as “Chair Auction” or “Racine Arts Council” or whatever. That might not be what Pete and Dustin want to do, but that’s up to them.

    I’m sure there are other options as well, such as AnSoc or AnCap setting up their own blogspot blog to host these intriguing debates elsewhere.

    Anyways, I’m done for now. Lunch hour is over so I’m back to my backbreaking job as a member of the proletariat working my tail off for the benefit of the bourgeoisie… and to make money to pay my mortgage and feed my family.

    ReplyDelete
  37. 1:35 - Way too much information. What you have to say is not that important!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Right back at ya buddy, welcome to the blogosphere.

    ReplyDelete
  39. TMI - no one cares.

    ReplyDelete
  40. 8:19 -

    You cared enough to comment!

    ReplyDelete
  41. BradK - get back to work.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Thanks for the order master, but it's my lunch break.

    ReplyDelete
  43. BradK - that' a pretty long lunch break you are taking 10:10 - 12:09!

    ReplyDelete
  44. A snarky comment! I like it!

    ReplyDelete
  45. BradK - glad to accomodate.

    ReplyDelete