Chaya Lenkiewicz

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #12254

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    Back online, but a few comments (along with chunks of pre-existing comments) were lost. testing to see if I can post ok…

    in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #11220

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    No… the debate on the fb group is still very much in the present. The trouble is that the people commenting there don't have accounts here, and are unable to get them. If you don't have a facebook account, perhaps another TLF spokesperson could answer questions there on your behalf?Once again I'm going to be a headache and go totally off topic, but I would like to request something. Does there exist anywhere an accessible/public list of the owners and lenders of the paintings of the Germany shows? If not could I request one please?Thank you

    in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #11208

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    As an aside regarding the shows (I know this is off-topic, but whilst we're engaged in open debate):How do TLF feel about their main sponsor (the Somerville Gallery) having a “50% off” – everything-must-go, bargain-bin-sale sign slapped across Robert's work in the gallery windows?Do they think, as I do, that this is negligent, unprofessional and damaging to the work of all artists that he represents - and perhaps in direct contradiction to the work that TLF is trying to do in getting Robert to be taken as a serious artist? Should they reconsider their ties to this gallery?

    in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #11207

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    For the purpose of clarity, it is only Thais posting from this account on this thread unless otherwise specified.Francis, of course, I am not currently familiar with the details of the CAT scheme and what it does and does not allow. If that is the case that it can't support programs that are run by funding then fine, as I said, it could be set up in a manner in which it would run itself. Hopefully the major funds would only be needed to save the building, something which the council shouldn't be opposed to surely. I know it's not listed, but it would be a terrible shame to see it torn down.Keeping the books is more important than keeping St Saviours. But the fact that St Saviours is a fascinating, unique and beautiful building in a great location makes it a natural destination for the public, regardless of it's contents. And of course because of its link to Robert it's important to the foundation. If you didn't have St Saviours then where else could you have? Where is that other big empty building in an excellent location going spare for all these books?Because I strongly, strongly hold that you can't get rid of the books.And there is nowhere more preferable, short of the actual studio, than St Saviours. So if it is possible to keep it, then it should be kept.At the current rate there will be no Robert-related artefacts that aren't either under private ownership or lost forever.Regarding my statement that you question:I was more referring to the recent canvas prints that were wheeled out for Christmas, and to a lesser extent print subjects in general. I can see that you think they are more commercially viable - “It probably won’t surprise anyone though that so far the evidence is that there is little demand for Vagrancy or Jealousy compared to Painter with Women or Landscape”.Of course the general public will prefer a picture of a pretty woman to a picture of a tramp shitting himself, and of course they might like a canvas option, to match the one they got of their dog. The question is whether you exist to satisfy the preferences of the public. I know it's a complicated issue, as Robert released prints of this kind himself, and maybe TLF, like Robert did, need pot boilers right now.However, the need for an income needs to be balanced against the potential (and real) effects that such 'releases' have on the legacy and image of the artist.I know that there are plenty of examples of the more palatable/popular works of big-name artists being made into prints, but I think there is a fundamental difference of situation; they are already established, and so disseminating their (arguably) 'less intellectual' work will not, due to their already-established standing, have an effect on their credibility and stance in the Art world (I know this is a bit of a tangent, so I'll not tread this route of discussion further..).But the shows - I think the shows were positive.

    in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #11203

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    Are TLF unconfident about winning funding? Or are they questioning whether to apply in the first place? And if so, why?I only ask because TLF are giving the impression that they would prefer to get rid of the books and church, rather than to pursue the avenue of keeping them.If the church takes 2 years to secure, is there not the possibility of funding in the mean time?

    in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #11202

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    On your first point –

    in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #11199

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    What is TLF's stance/opinion on St Saviours and the assets?

    in reply to: TLF – the future – your view. #11198

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    It's Thaïs here, using Chaya's account as I don't have one.Is there a digital CAT form that can be signed and sent or emailed back to TLF? Does it have to be hand written or signed? I only ask because I haven't seen it publicised online.TLF's website states that one of its purposes is to “disseminate the library”.

    in reply to: jojo’s book #10778

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    It's a shame that Jojo's book has been made unavailable at the RWA by TLF. As for saying it's 'chatter' or 'gossip' – I disagree. Personally, in my family's case, we have many letters from Robert, hours of home video, photographs (all with negatives) and all sorts of other information to back up the things we say. To question the credibility of the information provided by people in Jojo's book, then lays open the possibility to question anything in any book. In fact TLF has made a significant error about Diogenes in the catalogue for the RWA. My mother helped my father intensively with Diogenes before and after his death, as did a number of people; perhaps deeper research could have uncovered more facts about the reality of Diogenes. Many people will have interesting information about my father but perhaps do not want to share this at the moment. To TLF: What is it exactly that you find so offensive or inaccurate about Jojo's book that you have banned it from the RWA?

    in reply to: PETITION #10795

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    As I understand it, the South West image Bank were, at first, willing to consider a 'swap' – 25 Parade for St. Saviours church.St. Saviours church has been in the hands of Robert's executor for eight years, and unfortunately has been left to badly deteriorate to the point where floors are collapsing etc, and a very large amount of money will have to be spent on it. Not surprising then, that the Barbican Association don't want to do the swap anymore - who would?My question is - Who is now actually responsible for the upkeep and repairs to St. Saviours?

    in reply to: TLF – the future. #10602

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    To TLFA question, about access for all. My cousin Chris has just finished a course at Plymouth Art College. He has Muscular Dystrophy and like some other students at the college, he is confined to a wheelchair. When my father linked the ‘main’ studio to the smaller building, 25 Parade, he planned to restore the lift that was in the bedroom area. Obviously this isn’t possible now. To fit in with the rights of the disabled members of the public, businesses occupying older buildings that cannot be adapted with ramps and lifts, have to make every effort to bring their services outside to people (weather permitting). Although my family are very attached to 25 Parade (my father made sure that it was Thais’ birthplace on her birth certificate, as a member of TLF said – Robert’s DNA is in the building), can it realistically be used by all for the listed TLF objectives? How can reading rooms, studios, galleries etc be made available to everyone? My cousin and his friends would love to participate in all these things TLF hope to provide. My father once helped raise money for an electric wheelchair for Chris. Surely it must be possible to find suitable premises where everyone can enjoy Robert’s work, The Plymouth Dome perhaps? Any other ideas?

    in reply to: ‘Lenkiewicz museum will be at his studio’ #10520

    Chaya Lenkiewicz
    Participant

    To say that my father died with only £12 in his pocket is misleading. As usual he stayed with on us on the saturday night and on that morning of August 4th 2002 he gave my sister and I a very generous amount of pocket money, as he always did. He also made a private sale that morning.Just because he so happened to go to bed that night possibly with only £12 in his pocket, does not make an informed statement about his financial position and should not be used for this purpose. He was extremely private and had many compartments to his life.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)