Tricia Van Eck - Transcript

Tricia Van Eck Transcript
Interviewee: Tricia Van Eck
Interviewers: Dorothy Nygren, Mark Hallett and Robert Remer
Place: 6018 N Kenmore Ave.,
Date: November 24, 2018
Transcriber: Mark Hallett
Time:1:00:05

Copyright © 2019 Edgewater Historical Society

DN: This is Dorothy Nygren of the Edgewater Historical Society, along with Bob Remer and Mark Hallett of the EHS, interviewing one of our 2019 Living Treasures, Tricia Van Eck. Congratulations on being chosen as a Living Treasure, Tricia. We’re just thrilled with the work you’ve been doing in this building and in other ways to foster community. Congratulations.

TVE: Thank you. It’s an honor.

DN: We also say that we’re at 6018 North, our pride and joy, and it’s open now, so you may hear some people walking through enjoying it. Today is Nov. 24, 2018. So I’d like to start off by asking you Tricia how you came to live in Edgewater.

TVE: I arrived 20 years ago, my husband lived here. His aunt’s sister in law was Ray Anne Cercle and she suggested that my husband move into this neighborhood. His best friend had spent the summers fixing up Ray Anne’s buildings so he knew the neighborhood. Ray Anne called Tina Travlos and her mother and she had an apartment in the turreted building at Winthrop and Bryn Mawr. I think we lived there 2 years, and moved to 5726 N. Kenmore. Then during the economic downturn we bought this house, 6018 Kenmore. We live just a few blocks away from here on Sheridan. So we haven’t moved very far in the last 20 years.

DN: What got you involved in doing community work? What was a motivating reason for you to buy this house and create the place it is now. Also you’ve been involved in other community efforts. So if you could talk a little bit about that.

TVE: So, I first started going to the neighborhood building commission meetings, and became friends with Louise Rohr, and we used to go to the CAPS meetings at the Atonement. We were involved with the Church of the Atonement, and then this building committee to not have these buildings knocked down. We tried to save the building on Kenmore that’s now a parking lot. We tried to stop that and stop a few other buildings. Louise and I also developed the park, designed the park with a bunch of community members. But we designed the layout of the park, the Schulman Park, on Thorndale and Sheridan. We wanted it to be an oasis of calm within a busy corridor, Sheridan Road. And what else did we do? I have to be honest. I was quite busy at the Museum of Contemporary Art. That’s about as much as I could take on - that building. It was a community engaged decision-making team, and I wasn’t too involved with trying to save the buildings, with Mary Anne Smith.

RR: Yeah, that was Mary Anne Smith. She had a zoning committee. Every community group had a vote, and people could participate and get involved and stuff.

TVE: So we would meet with the developer. The developers would pitch projects. One of the things that I remember was the group wasn’t so excited about Metropolis coming, because it was a young kid and his father. And I remember I was the only young person at the meeting. I said, “Well Metropolis Coffee Shop is great – his dad is here.” Jung Joon also came, and he was also young. It was a little bit… but people said, “Well that’s OK, because at least that was Clark Street.” Because there was an anti-liquor focus here. So they said, “Well if there is a liquor store for Jung Joon it can be on Clark Street.” He’s actually my next door neighbor, the owner. So that was that committee. But to be honest I really didn’t have a lot of time then.

(04:57)

DN: Tricia can you tell me what the first community effort you did was and why you felt compelled to get involved in it, and then go on from there?

TVE: I used to go to the CAPS meetings at the Church of the Atonement. Then I got involved in Mary Ann Smith’s community organization: to get involved in stopping buildings from getting torn down; vetoing large buildings from being built; working with developers on Kenmore – the parking lot, between – I don’t know the address – to stop a large development from happening there; to encourage one of the organizations was Metropolis Coffee shop; to encourage that to come into the community; and then to encourage Jung Joon in Andersonville – who now lives next door, the chef and owner.

I worked with Louise Rohr quite extensively to develop the design of what is now called Schulman Park at Thorndale and Sheridan, to design it as an oasis of calm. We designed it down to the flowers. And one thing we really wanted which we didn’t get was an allee of trees. That was the one thing the city refused to do. They wanted a cement pathway. But at least we did get the pathway we wanted. To be honest though that was about the extent of what I could do beyond my job at the Museum of Contemporary Art which was quite a heavy load, so I didn’t have a whole lot of time extra.

DN: I’d like to go back to what you were saying about large buildings, and how you were against having large buildings come to Edgewater. Can you talk about that a little? What kind of large buildings and why did you object to them?

TVE: Well, I previously had lived in Wicker Park, so I had seen what had happened in Wicker Park with the development that was just unregulated – it wasn’t in keeping with the neighborhood. This neighborhood had much better housing stock than Wicker Park and the buildings were historic – all designed by Cochran – or at least the buildings being torn down. There was an empty lot next to this large development – the developer wanted to realize this large development next to these beautiful historic structures, that had no correspondence – and also they crossed over the lot lines, so not even keeping with the minimal regulation. And so we asked them to move it the other way – just to maintain the historical character. I think that was in a few cases, I can’t remember all the buildings. But I had worked with a realtor to try to buy the building on Sheridan next to the We Work space. My realtor couldn’t figure it out. I saw that all these buildings were not even for sale, and these developers were just knocking them down - to try to intervene in that process. Clearly the neighborhood was against these buildings being torn down. How to even the playing field between the developer who seemingly had more power than the neighborhood?

DN: Maybe you could talk too a little about the density in this part of Edgewater and what bringing in large buildings would have done to impact on that. I mean Sheridan Road had a number of mansions torn down so that high-rise development could occur. We’ve seen all over Edgewater in recent years where single-family houses have been pulled down to make large structures - requesting zoning changes to allow for large structures, increasing the density of the neighborhood, and destroy the character of the neighborhood at the same time.

RR: Well, we have an example right across the street, where a home was torn down. Tell her about the time they started tearing down the building across the street.

[10:30]

TVE: Ah, yes – so the house across the street. So one of the reasons I was most interested in Edgewater was because of the mix of communities. I’m from the SouthWest Side, which is predominantly Irish – not just white, it’s Irish. So it’s a very insular community. And here in Edgewater it was very diverse – in all terms of diversity - including the house across the street, which was a hospice home for people with AIDS. Recently with the invention of medicine that has made AIDS a livable disease, it’s been turned into a home for people going through transgender changes. So to have that house be a welcoming house was wonderful to have across the street. To me that signified how Edgewater was a welcoming and tolerant community for all types of diversity, in terms of economics, this street because of the housing stock – the mix of single family homes, apartments, Section 8 homes – it’s very diverse economically, nationally. There are immigrants and refugees from all over the world, and sexual orientation.

Everyone seems to get along, so recently, since the housing crash has recuperated and now home prices have gone up, the house across the street – I was literally walking down the street and saw a wrecking crew tearing down a house. So we managed to get two doors – I mean the house was beautiful. It was actually in great condition, better than this house. So we got the balustrade – if you’d like it for the Edgewater Historical Society, the balustrade and two doors. In terms of density, I think you know when I was working at the MCA, one of the trustees, Marshall Holleb, is the developer – he and his brother developed much of the high-rises on Sheridan Road. Which I think was a little bit of an inside job because his brother worked for the state. He believed to his dying day that he had brought the ability of people with not great wealth to be able to have a view of the lake. He believed that was one of his accomplishments that he was proud of. I think there are probably mixed feelings that to tear down a beautiful building – a single family home, destroy the character of the neighborhood, but the result is that then there are 2,000 people who have the view that 7 or 5 people had. So density is a complicated issue, tearing down buildings is a complicated issue.

This house was meant to be a tear down. This house has astronomical heating bills. One could say this house is not green. It’s not green, it’s not sustainable. We try to make it as sustainable as possible. But in terms of taking care of the environment, heat is going out. In terms of the building next door, a six condo building, created very cheaply, I can’t say it’s sustainable. And the condos on Sheridan Road were not created sustainably. And so yes many more people fit so it’s more green in density, but I’m sure the heat is going out – in fact they’re probably much less sustainable than this building.

(15:42)

RR: Let’s talk about this building, and the historical context of this building. 6018 was the subject of a lawsuit with the Edgewater Historical Society (EHS), because it was one of the buildings recommended as a potential landmark district of single-family homes in Edgewater, Kenmore Sheridan. The owner sued members of the EHS for a million dollars, because they claimed they lost the sale due to our efforts to landmark the building. It (lawyer fees, etc.)was a major part of the resources shall we say of EHS for several years, and eventually it was settled and they withdrew the lawsuit. It was for sale, and you and your husband bought the place, which was important to us because it saved the building, but if you could talk to us about the process by which you got involved with this building, in terms of buying this building etc. If you can give us a little insight about what went on in that transaction.

TVE: So, my husband is German, and the owner of the building was German. Brigitta Kramer and her parents Maria and Frank were German. We were looking at a house on North Shore that was about the same price as this house, and I had already looked at this house. The mother had lived in this house, the father had died, the mother lived here. Carsons Ribs was the caretaker of this building, and employees lived in the building, and the parents were hoarders. The house was pretty much 1960s rehab, but filled with junk. So Formica everywhere. This was Formica but you couldn’t really see the bones of the house. But because she was German, she spoke German, when my husband walked in, he is German, and the house on North Shore was the same price as this. I said, “If you’re willing to pay as much for that house, why not buy this house, which is much nicer.” She spoke German and I knew that within 5 minutes we were going to buy this house. So that’s how. My husband is a lawyer. Brigitta was involved in the lawsuit. It was quite a difficult time for her. She had issues with her parents. She lived in the house, rented the house from us, paid our mortgage to sort through everything while the lawsuit was going on. It was a complicated issue because I’ve heard conflicting sides – I always tend to try to see both sides. On her side, she thought this was her nest egg that she had the right to do what she wanted. She wanted to sell it to a developer just like he had (pointing north, next door) and the home next door was in much better condition. Was a Mayer [architect] home, and well maintained. In fact this developer, our second, stored their bricks, which destroyed our back. They crossed the lot line. It’s a mess, because she was an old lady living here without any voice. Anyway she felt like people was taking over her private personal property and so she did get a lawyer, pro bono. I was really interested in the case, because I thought it was really interesting: public versus private, private versus community. Even in terms of the facade of the house, it looked really horrible. But the community didn’t take care of her mother either.

So what is the role the individual owes to the community? What is the role the community owes to the individual? So we did that actually for 6018 north – once I started the organization, that was one of the first shows that I did was home public or private. To discuss these issues. Of what is the role of the individual within a society, and what is society’s role, and how do we deal with these often conflicting (ideas). You know, the idea that my home is my castle, you can’t tell me how to live within my home, or what to do with my home and at the same time – the questions you are asking about density, about community issues, about what role the developer has to play in it. Harry [Osterman] has now disbanded the zoning and land use because Harry wants to decide that, doesn’t want a group of individuals deciding for the community.

RR: You mentioned that you were renting the place to her for a while. Had the lawsuit been withdrawn when you bought it?

TVE: No. No, in fact she was on the cover of the SunTimes after we bought the house. And then EHS found out – you don’t have a suit because you did manage to sell it. But the difference between what she was going to get! This guy got a million two [$1.2 million], so she got half of what she was supposed to get. When it became orange rated, the developer was out of there. They’re not going to wait for city hall to make decisions. Because time is money. He had to move fast. In the meantime - the housing crash - then the home was pretty much worthless overnight. She sort of lived here, for a year, she sued you guys – EHS, for the difference.

RR: It was actually a city proposal, not our proposal. One of the reasons they wanted to do the suit was because we were not the agent – we were simply supporting the proposal city staff had prepared, that Mary Ann Smith brought to her zoning and land use committee, and eventually they voted it down. What happened was that when they had the discovery, the depositions they discovered that the city, that Mary Ann admitted that it wasn’t our proposal, the EHS proposal, it came from the city staff, and we happened to support it. It wasn’t just this building, was the one across the street and all the other ones. There was a lot of lack of knowledge – about the lawsuit, as to who really was the perpetrator. The Edgewater Historical Society was blamed as the bad guy if you will. But it had a different genesis.

DN: I’d like to jump in here, Bob, because we’re already 20 minutes into the interview, and it’s really about Tricia and not the lawsuit. Mark, I think you had something you wanted to ask Tricia.

(24:03)

MH: Definitely. So it’s been great to learn about the house, which I adore. I’d like to pull back a little bit and hear you talk about the community. You spoke compellingly about the diversity of Edgewater but I wanted to ask you – there’s a quote on your website that maybe indicates that something is missing, or it sounds that way. On your website it says diversity does not necessarily create a diverse community. I wonder if you could talk about what you meant by that.

TVE: So, thank you for that question. As I said about the diverse housing stock - I often see people walking down the street. They are walking down the street, in their diversity but they’re not necessarily meeting. How can a community or a space like this be a meeting point for people? So they are walking down the street but they’re actually stopping to talk. Can churches do that? Can art do that? So that was one of the main goals of this house, to be that nexus or that location where people can come and go to events. Then we wanted to have the “One Long Table” – things outside the house so you don’t have to necessarily come inside. There’s events outside on the street, or on the beach, so you don’t always have to come inside or cross the threshold, or walk up the steps. You can look at things outside. There’s a see saw where you can play outside and we have a hole in the ground that you can sit in, or the One Long Table where people come and have a picnic so they don’t have to come inside.

It’s a staple of most neighborhoods in the city but it hadn’t been done here in this neighborhood maybe because people were diverse or also because people work a lot here, or people are immigrants so it’s not something that’s in their experience of what you would do in your home country. To have this opportunity where the table is already set where you just arrive and show up to know each other, more than just passing on the street. So giving these points of contact or opportunities to meet someone you may have seen- “Oh you’re my neighbor I live next door.” Yeah.

MH: So, I’m really interested in what you just talked about, the role of the neighborhood-based arts space. But before you opened this, you were a curator at a major downtown arts space for 13 years. So I’m wondering what did you learn in that work that helped prepare you for doing this, and what kinds of things can you do here that you could never do in a major downtown arts space?

TVE: I think a lot of what I do is try to meet needs and fill gaps that are not being filled. Because if someone is already doing stuff I don’t feel I need to do it better or do more of [it]. So at the MCA there were a lot of painting shows, a lot of photography shows, there weren’t a lot of intimate shows. I did a lot of performances that involved whoever would be walking by. Or artist book shows. I also did a Warhol show. I did do painting shows and trying to make intimate encounters in various capacities within the museum. That is the same as what I try to do here, is to try to make intimate encounters. It’s somewhat easier here because it is a home, it is a kind of intimate space. But also I like to bring strangers together and I did that at the MCA. So, what I can’t do here is – my shows were in some cases small. I did not have a large budget, so I knew how to do this kind of you know scrappy.

I’ve worked with a lot of other organizations, so at the MCA I would often work with different groups – like the Art Institute, the Cultural Center, so I knew all of those people. In many ways at the MCA I joined force with them there. And join forces with them here. But we don’t have 100+ staff. We have volunteers; we have a board; we are a nonprofit. We have some part-time youth but I don’t have a design team, a marketing team, you know the MCA has 100+ staff. Even though some of my shows might have had smaller budgets than I have here, they did have a marketing department that would check the calendar for different events – so I think it’s the large staff.

But in some ways we can do what we want. This show is about immigration. And this show is in response to the neighborhood being an immigrant neighborhood. But it’s also in response to the vitriol that is coming out of this administration. I don’t know if the MCA could have responded so quickly. Nor do I know if it would want to respond. We can be nimble but we can’t maybe be as large in terms of marketing, PR. We’re not a museum. We’re a house museum, but we’re not a large downtown organization.

DN: So, getting the message out is more difficult, but in exchange for that you have the freedom to pursue a larger agenda perhaps than a public museum would care to take on.

(31:59)

TVE: Yea, and we can also, to fill those needs and gaps, we can respond quickly and say ok, so kids in the neighborhood need x, y and z. So how can we do x, y and z. Now we’re starting this Justice Hotel on the South Side. We’re kind of a lab for experimentation. What works and what doesn’t work. If One Long Table hadn’t worked we would not have done it the next year. But it worked, so we have continue it. We have black out dinners, our only [fundraiser]– we couldn’t do them this year because we have this show up. So we don’t do it. Do we do it again next year? Every year we do what needs to be done, see what doesn’t need to be done. The neighborhood is changing. So are we needed?

We’re starting this Justice Hotel on the South Side, to again address the issue of developers. I briefly touched on how developers can change a neighborhood, maybe not for the good. I believe you [to Bob] touched on it. Also, just with getting the word out – there is a barrier to a house. You can easily walk in. There is a barrier to a museum, too. Certainly the MCA is not easy to walk in to – because of the stairs. And it’s a “you pay money.” But a house – it’s a little bit odd to walk in to someone’s house. So people usually – ‘hello’, knocking on door. You don’t knock and say hello when you walk into the museum. Someone says hello and you pay. So it’s a little odd. We had one community discussion where one of the presenters didn’t come because the door seemed weird, and they didn’t know – didn’t bring their phone – it broke or something, didn’t have the exact address, so they thought this can’t be it. And they left.

We were thinking of the next phase of this – is to start a Justice Hotel on the south side, and where gentrification is going to happen, and how you can control that gentrification. One of the ideas of the summer youth employment program is to teach people to build the hotel themselves and run it and own it, kind of eliminating the developer because the developer comes in and builds the house and he leaves. Now he or she never atones or deals with what they have done because they’re gone. They often take the money out, and leave. They develop, and leave. What happens if the developers are the owners, and stay? A hotel is a little different from a home – that threshold barrier is less, because you walk in to a hotel you know what a lobby is. You walk in to the Palmer House, and you don’t feel like you need to knock on the front door, you just walk in.

DN: Where is the Justice Hotel going to be located?

TVE: Well we don’t know yet. Again it’s this lab, so we’re still working with teens on the South Side. The next thing we’re doing is renting limos and taking teens through the neighborhoods for them to discuss what places have value for them.

DN: I’d like to ask you a little bit about sustainability, and your commitment to that, and the different projects that are involved in that whole vision.

TVE: I don’t know if you remember but when Jimmy Carter was in office, he had put all these solar panels on the White House. And he sent out all these packets about how you too could go solar. I thought that was the future. Then Ronald Reagan, the first thing he did was to take the solar panels off the White House. I’ve always been obsessed with sustainability. I was excited to find out that in Edgewater, that the neighborhood has the Edgewater Environmental Sustainability Project [EESP]. I was really interested in how this house also being a lab as to how it could be sustainable because an old house is not sustainable, for the many reasons I mentioned.

But can you turn – there’s an architectural 2020 challenge. The most sustainable is the existing house. It doesn’t – it’s not sustainable to knock down a house, and build a green house. You have to figure out how to make the existing structure green. And so this is a lab. The first project we did was to work with IIT [Illinois Institute of Technology] students. It was called Deep Energy Retrofit. The students tried to figure out the greenest way – all the different ways they could make this house green. So we’ve tried to incorporate many of those. But still – (pointing to the wall) we have no insulation. It’s a trade off. These walls you know they’re historic - you see the painting and the plaster. But there is literally no insulation. How do we – we’ve insulated many of the other walls. I’m involved in the EESP (Aside to Bob: You’re more than involved, you’re one of the co-chairs, aren’t you?) now and we’re trying to have 6221 – we’ll do the address (6321 and 6330), being knocked down by Loyola [University]. Also, Loyola in terms of density and character - that’s also a problem. When Loyola wants to turn the neighborhood into a – I almost see it as kind of a I don’t now, a community for Loyola, as opposed to … I guess the building on Kenmore - what we’ve tried to do is to get the building to respect the neighborhood. And the same with Loyola. Loyola should respect – I just don’t understand why – I do contemporary art, and am very interested in contemporary ideas, and contemporary aesthetics. And yet I don’t understand why someone puts a contemporary esthetic home next to an old home. Isn’t there a way you can make contemporary blend with historic?

(39:35)

And I think Loyola wants to have a shopping mall mentality because often the students are from the suburbs. They want the ease and the mentality of the suburbs in the city. The city is not an easy place. It is difficult. It is difficult for the density, it is difficult for many. It is difficult because of this idea of tolerance. Tolerance is not easy. And when you try to make things ‘easy’ and you tell students and teach students that life is easy – we’re going to make things easy for you. We’re going to build a beautiful dorm. That’s incredible! That’s not how you should be educating students for the future. It’s going to be even more difficult for them, because of climate change. To knock down these buildings, to make things easy. Then they’re paying an exorbitant amount that the students later can’t afford. Because they have huge loans, and huge debts.

We’re in a precarious state of work for kids. There are not – we don’t have that same middle class largesse for students coming out. To have students coming out with one hundred to two hundred thousand dollars debt – because they’re lived in a fancy nice dorm is ridiculous. It’s doing a disservice to the community, to the students, and to their mind that the world can be shaped – and should be shaped – for them. Because we have to learn to get along, we have to realize that the world just doesn’t operate the way that we always want it. We can work together to try to nudge things, but we can’t just say, “Hey I want the world to be my way,” because the world doesn’t always conform, especially when there are 50 different ways. (Laughing) I’m getting on my soapbox, but I’m very upset with Loyola for wanting this kind of ease of existence for students, at the expense of the neighborhood.

RR: I’m just blown away by what you just said. You pulled things together.

TVE: Well I have talked to the person who has designed the dorms for 20 years. And it’s a sociological thing they’ve been doing for the students. They’re easing the student.

MH: Speaking of students, Bob had what I thought was a wonderful question for you, and your own investing in young people.

RR: Yeah, I mean you’re always having students here. And it’s a wonderful dynamic. And a related question is – the community as a place for young artists. Is there a future for Edgewater, which currently has a lot of support systems for artists? But with gentrification happening, what do you see as the future for the community in terms of the arts community and art students in Edgewater?

TVE: I don’t know. Edgewater is increasingly expensive. So often artists were on the blue line [CTA], because it connected to the Art Institute, and often actors were on the red line. So now that is changing. The apartments are larger for artists, but I think it’s expensive. I have noticed that there is more – I mean so it’s a little complicated to the Kenmore Winthrop corridor, which is completely different from the Broadway, west of Broadway, and completely different from the east of Sheridan. They’re almost like three different – and then you have Andersonville – which is even more different. So you have these four different communities that often don’t connect. But I have been noticing that more young people are moving into the high-rises on Sheridan, and more of the Andersonville gay community is moving into the condos, and this neighborhood is becoming much less refugees.

Since internet apartment rental domu.com this neighborhood is changing. It used to be just word of mouth, your friends, and your friends were not artists. Really. Or white people so much. Polish, or refugees, or immigrants. Or Section 8 homes. Now that’s changing here. I don’t know if there is much change in your neighborhood as for artists – I’ve noticed that a lot of people who have come for this show, say that they have just moved here, live around the corner, so the neighborhood has changed. Does that answer?

(45:40)

RR: Well, the future of the arts, as far as supporting artists. Because right now it seems that Edgewater has been on a crest, in terms of public support, the arts show, the galleries opening up, the public support of organizations supporting the arts, seems to be cresting. Do you see that as continuing into the future making Edgewater a home for the arts, or is this just transitory?

DN: For example, there have been a burgeoning number of theatres opening up in Edgewater. Steep Theater just expanded. That is an economic issue because as rental prices go up in Edgewater, not only can artists and musicians not afford to live here, but these little storefront theaters also have a problem meeting the rent.

RR: Ray Ann I know has invested heavily of her time and resources to help import the arts and artists and almost brand Edgewater as a home for the arts. Do you see a future – given the other changes you’re seeing – the other social and cultural changes happening in Edgewater?

TVE: Well, when I moved in 20 years ago the theaters were here and that’s sort of that Red Line contingent. It’s an open minded community, intellectuals. So I think there is support. But it’s hard to predict. I don’t have a crystal ball. It’s a function of available spaces. It’s a function of pricing. Ray Ann uses empty storefronts. If there are no empty storefronts, then that’s a good thing. Then she wouldn’t do her storefront arts spaces. I mean there’s – every community has opportunities for all different types – theaters, storefronts. I mean if it became so wealthy you could have a gallery where people would buy stuff. I don’t know. What I like about Edgewater is the different housing stock. So you can have different kinds of people. You can have collectors – as well as artists. But if the housing stock changes. I mean this building next door to me – not to call it – but buildings like it – they [condo owners] don’t stay here long. There’s always for sale signs. So in these new condo developments – it’s often people who often come to the neighborhood because it’s cheap. The amount per square foot is cheaper than in the neighborhood they really want to live in. And then they find out – oh this isn’t the neighborhood I really want to live in – and then they leave. Or they’re younger, so they’re off to Atlanta or LA. They’re transitory. So that’s not the type of person who starts a gallery. They don’t frequent – they may go once, but they leave. These new developments that are catered to this upper middle class worker – they don’t stay, I’ve found. They constantly have for sale signs.

DN: I’d like to ask you, since you are involved with young people and have been in this neighborhood a long time, what advice you would give young people about getting involved in building community, and why that might be important?

TVE: So I always tell people to vote. And I say – I use Sheridan Road as an example for why you should vote. Sheridan Road votes as a block. And they always vote for senior citizen issues and for society in general. You are never going to see a politician say, “Yes, we are going to cut social security.” Senior citizens vote and so young people need to a) vote and b) they need to start voting as a block because their issues are not represented because they don’t vote.

Politicians are not forced to represent them because they’re not scared that they’ll lose their job or lose their office if they cut whatever – whatever young issue there is. Also there is no young solid young issue, whereas there are very bloc issues that senior citizens support. So one is voting; two is voting as a block and organizing and three is meeting needs. What needs need to be met? It’s hard when you’re starting out. You often have to work really long hours when you’re starting out. We talked about the current state of young college students coming out, and often they’re working three jobs. Time – it’s much easier for people who are retired to have time. Or if they [young people] have families, and kids. It’s hard, but they I don’t know if they want to see changes, it does require effort. If they don’t want to see changes then they get what they kind of deserve.

(52:24)

MH: So when you were asked about the future of the arts in Edgewater you had compelling things to say but at first you said you don’t have a crystal ball either. So I’m curious about 6018 and the same question: what is the future of 6018? You’ve talked about Justice Hotels and other things, but is there more you’d like to share about where you see this space headed in the future?

TVE: Yeah. Ideally we would live on the second floor. It would save money. But it’s complicated – to figure out how to rehab this building and I haven’t really figured it out. There’s a little bit of a problem, in that artists really love this kind of decrepit old [house]. The house offers this sense of possibilities. When you walk in, you think ‘oh, my god, you should do x, y and z’. It needs this, it needs that. If you did this… and it gets your juices going. As opposed to when you walk into a done house – you think – I guess. You were asking about young people. This house suggests possibilities. You can do things in life. Because if you come out of here, and think oh gosh, you can do that – then you can apply that to somewhere else in your life. The possibilities – that things are possible. So when the house is done, and finished, then it has shut off that sense of open-ended possibilities. It also gives artists a sense of freedom. And when it’s done then that sense of freedom is kind of – that idea of possibilities, that they can do whatever you want – is taken away. So it’s a double-edged – it’s great that it’s like this, but then it’s also ‘well, this floor is a mess’. We need to fix it up. Or we can’t live here in this state. We needed to put up drywall but when we put up drywall, you lose that magical openness between the studs. When you put up drywall, it’s a code regulation. We don’t know exactly what the balance is.

RR: I’m just blown away by your thoughtfulness, and how you’ve integrated the environmental, community, art and the physical spaces – how you’ve synthesized all of that – in all of your thinking, and it’s all so interconnected.

DN: - It’s a beautiful vision. Isn’t it?

RR: Honest to God. I thought she was terrific before – now I’m doubly impressed!

TVE: Well, bring him on our board (laughing).

DN: Tricia, we’ve asked a lot of questions. But this is really your story. Is there anything else you’d like to add to this interview?

TVE: It’s a little weird that it’s just me because I am literally in front of your (pointing to Mark) daughter’s work. And you (to Bob) have done so much to connect this house with so many issues, and advertising when you were talking about advertising. So it’s humbling to be in this position, and it’s odd because this house is the culmination of so many different people I mean it’s my husband. I mean I would never – he purchased it. It’s all the different artists. Literally we have 50 artists in this space, in this show. This artist we are sitting in front of literally spent 3 months making this work. So it makes me look good, but it’s her work. Laurie Waxman, who writes for the Tribune, lives in this neighborhood and wrote about this show. There are so many different organizations that have been involved in this space throughout the years. So many people who have donated. Even my knowledge about sustainability comes from the Edgewater Environmental Sustainability Project, Pivot Art system and different environmental conversations here. For me – the house is a repository and a bringing together of all this talent… I mean this was 4 or 5 years ago. That gets built on. So it’s a culmination of the history. You connected us to the second owner of the house. We have the history from 1920 to 1940. And they’re part of the piece upstairs – with all their family photos and books. So I’m deeply grateful and thankful and humble and exhilarated that the community even appreciates this kind of thing because there are so many community centers that nobody seems to even care about. So Edgewater is a very welcoming neighborhood to do this kind of space in.