Why Some Galleries Stop Representing Local Artists

This isn’t about individuals—it’s about the erosion of trust and the fragile balance of Detroit’s creative economy.

Recently, a work I hosted and promoted through my gallery was removed from the agreed framework and circulated through a private deal that bypassed the gallery entirely. Despite assurances that the piece would remain in my care until sold, the arrangement shifted without transparency. What makes this more troubling is that the artist involved has long drawn from my mentorship—sourcing techniques and research across anthropological, sociological, and historical subjects that inform his current practice. Even now, he continues to seek knowledge in these areas, recording conversations that extend his work into broader cultural inquiry.

I’ve always shared freely, believing in collective uplift. But when mentorship and trust are met with extraction instead of reciprocity, the ecosystem suffers:

• Galleries lose the stability needed to advocate for artists.

• Artists lose long-term allies who protect their legacy.

• Collectors lose transparency and provenance.

• Communities lose continuity in their cultural economy.

This is why many galleries hesitate to represent local artists. When agreements are broken and principle is replaced by opportunism, the marketplace itself is disrupted. And yet, the show was a success—70% of the work sold, including my own piece Last Pocket, now hanging at the Carr Center for the Bridges Because Of Them exhibition.

I remain committed to Detroit’s artists and to cultural stewardship. But I won’t co-sign exploitation. If we want a thriving art economy, we must honor our agreements, protect our cultural stewards, and stop treating legacy like a hustle.

#EMBContemporary #DetroitArt #ArtistIntegrity #GalleristPerspective #BridgesBecauseOfThem #LastPocket #EastsideLegacy #CulturalStewardship #IntellectualAuthorship