Chicago Galleries Association

The Chicago Galleries Association: Founding Vision, Operations, Critical Reception, Prize System, and Eventual Closure[1]

The Chicago Galleries Association, active from 1925 to 1957, represented one of the most ambitious and structurally innovative attempts in the Midwest to bring artists, patrons, and the broader public into a mutually beneficial relationship. Conceived during a period of shifting artistic tastes and institutional tensions, the Association offered a compelling hybrid of cooperative venture, exhibition society, and sales mechanism for painters and sculptors across the Middle West and western states. Its organizational framework, prize-driven exhibition system, and consistent critical praise made it a significant cultural force for more than thirty years. Eventually, changing tastes, and the retirement of leadership led to its dissolution. Yet its legacy remains a noteworthy chapter in American regional art history.

Founding and Purpose

The Chicago Galleries Association emerged from the Municipal Art League of Chicago, which sought to provide a more vigorous connection between working artists and the many homes and collectors who could benefit from acquiring art. The Association was formally organized as a not-for-profit corporation, with the explicitly stated goal of selling “the works of Art of the Best Artists of the Middle West and western States.” This regional emphasis distinguished it from many contemporary organizations, which either promoted national salons or focused solely on emerging modernists. Instead, the Association emphasized high-quality, representational, and broadly accessible art that could appeal directly to the public.

The Association borrowed heavily from the model of New York’s Grand Central Galleries—also founded as a cooperative of artists and lay patrons—but incorporated modifications suited to Chicago’s cultural environment.[2] Artist membership was by invitation only, ensuring that the roster consisted of established and respected painters and sculptors. Only artists living and working in the Midwest were eligible, making the organization a powerful incubator for regional artistic identity. Trustees, all laymen, oversaw governance and financial decisions, keeping artists themselves free from administrative burdens while avoiding conflicts of interest. Professional artists, therefore, did not control finances or prize allocation but participated as exhibitors and contributors of work.

The founding plan envisioned 150 lay members, each committing to a three-year membership. Their annual dues—$200 per year—funded purchase prizes and administrative operations, while simultaneously guaranteeing each lay member ownership of one picture over the three-year period. This arrangement had the dual effect of providing artists with reliable income while ensuring patrons tangibly benefited from their support. The structure also encouraged artists to contribute strong work, knowing that lay member selections could result in substantial purchase payments.[3] The lay members also formed a jury for admitting paintings.[4]

The Association quickly became a complex but efficient ecosystem. Its operations centered on semiannual juried members’ exhibitions—one in spring and one in fall—that functioned both as public art shows and as mechanisms for distributing lay membership benefits. From its earliest exhibitions, the Chicago Galleries Association garnered enthusiastic and sustained praise from art critics, museum directors, and cultural authorities across the Midwest, and especially in Chicago where the majority of artist members were located.

Membership and Responsibilities

Artist members were required to exhibit at least one quality picture at every semiannual exhibition. They also paid a modest annual fee—originally $20 per year—to fund publicity and advertising, ensuring that the artists themselves reaped the full promotional benefit of gallery marketing efforts. Membership commitments lasted three years and demanded no additional financial contributions or donations of artworks beyond those entered for exhibitions and lay selection.

A complementary “circulating department” provided an additional outlet for artists. Small, framed pictures could be borrowed by subscribers for 30 to 60 days, much like books from a library. This democratized art collecting by offering affordable access while giving artists increased visibility. Subscribers paid only $10 annually, and the program planned to accommodate as many as 1,000 members, reflecting the Association’s attempt to cultivate broad public engagement. Artists could specialize in the circulating department or participate in both major exhibitions and circulation programs, offering flexible avenues for participation.[5]

Gallery Space and Location

The early gallery at 220 North Michigan Avenue offered five large, modern exhibition rooms with excellent lighting and neutral walls, explicitly designed to showcase art at its best. The location was central and highly visible, with large display windows attracting foot traffic along the avenue. Later, the association relocated to 215 North Michigan Avenue, a move that critics noted provided significantly more wall space and enabled even larger and more varied exhibitions. The gallery’s physical presence became part of its identity: elegant, accessible, and dedicated to displaying the best available works in an inviting environment.

Financial and Prize System

The financial structure of the Chicago Galleries Association was one of its most innovative features. At each semiannual exhibition, assuming the full complement of 150 lay members, the Association awarded a total of $9,800 in purchase prizes. The distribution of these prizes was systematically organized:

• 1 prize of $1,000

• 1 prize of $750

• 2 prizes of $500

• 3 prizes of $400

• 9 prizes of $350

• 9 prizes of $300

This generated twenty-five purchase awards per exhibition, or fifty per year, totaling $19,600 annually—an amount that exceeded the initial prize sum in the organization’s earliest years. Artists whose works were chosen received the prize amount set forth, while artists not receiving prizes could still obtain honorariums if their pictures were selected later by lay members.[6] 

Lay member selection was conducted by lot. Twenty-five members drew numbers establishing the order in which they could choose from among the exhibition’s roughly two hundred pictures. This selection process, combined with advisory juries of artists and connoisseurs, ensured members received works of quality while simultaneously stimulating dynamic competition among artists.

Early Endorsements

Leading figures such as Potter Palmer and Robert B. Harshe of the Art Institute of Chicago applauded the Association’s mission and execution. Palmer characterized the concept as “excellent” and stated that the Association “has justified its existence in every way.” Harshe emphasized that the structure improved conditions for living artists, facilitating the marketing of their work and stabilizing their professional output. Lorado Taft, Dudley Crafts Watson, and prominent figures from the Detroit Institute of Arts likewise applauded the Galleries’ service to both artists and the public, highlighting its broad regional impact and high professional standards.[7] This early acclaim reflected the Galleries’ ability to fill a gap in Chicago’s art landscape—one that balanced quality, accessibility, and reliable financial support for artists.

Sales Success and Public Engagement

The Galleries’ financial success during its early years demonstrated both public enthusiasm and effective organizational strategy. In the first three years alone, sales totaled over $185,000, with annual amounts rising significantly by 1928. Since the Galleries operated as a not-for-profit corporation, these proceeds benefited the artists directly or were reinvested into operations. Critics noted that the model fostered not only high-quality shows but also meaningful artistic livelihoods.

The circulating department further expanded public access, allowing individuals who might not purchase high-priced works to enjoy professional art in their homes. This program also served as a training ground for developing collectors, expanding the reach and educational role of the Galleries.

Critical Commentary in the 1930s

By the early 1930s, critics such as the Chicago Tribune’s Eleanor Jewett praised the Association for exhibitions that were “stunning, beautiful, effective, vigorous, brilliant.”[8] When the Association moved to 215 North Michigan Avenue, Jewett again endorsed its programming, noting that the new location allowed the display of work by every active member and declaring the exhibition a triumph of artistic variety and accomplishment. She and other critics consistently emphasized the organization’s commitment to accessible beauty, careful composition, and technical excellence.

The Logan Prize Controversy and 1937 Reviews

In 1937, Josephine Hancock Logan controversially removed the Logan Prize from the Art Institute of Chicago, accusing the Institute of rewarding “insane” modernist works. She realigned the award with the Chicago Galleries Association, signaling that the Association upheld the qualities she valued: beauty, sanity, craftsmanship, and representational clarity.

Paul T. Gilbert’s review supported this view, highlighting the “sanity as well as beauty” of the works and commending their ruggedness, grace, and fine composition. His assessment echoed the Association’s longstanding reputation for stability and quality, contrasting sharply with modernist trends. Gilbert reported that Mrs. Logan herself pinned blue ribbons on favored works, including pieces by Rudolph Ingerle and Pauline Palmer, demonstrating personal enthusiasm for the Gallery’s offerings. Jewett added her own effusive praise, calling the exhibition “flawless” and declaring that no Chicago gallery had mounted such a show of contemporary paintings by a group. Her review emphasized both the technical excellence and the emotional impact of the works, reinforcing the Association’s status as a premier venue for artistic achievement.[9] 

It was about this time that the exhibitions transitioned from semi-annual to annually, a reflection of harsh economic times.[10] As World War II was about to severely impact Chicago and the United States, the Association was able to continue exhibitions. In a 1941 review, Jewett continued to celebrate the Association’s exhibitions, describing them as “beautiful and cheerful,” characterized by decorative elegance and fine quality. She contrasted the Galleries’ work with the increasingly polarized debates between modernists and traditionalists, asserting that the Association's artists had weathered artistic controversies by focusing steadily on “painting good pictures.” Her commentary indicates that the Association served as a refuge for both artists and audiences seeking alternatives to avant-garde experimentation.[11]

Decline and Closure

Despite decades of success, several factors contributed to the eventual dissolution of the Chicago Galleries Association. The artistic landscape changed dramatically after World War II, with increasing dominance of modernist, abstract, and experimental styles. Although the Association maintained strong audiences for traditional and representational art, the center of gravity in American art increasingly shifted away from the type of work it promoted.

Operationally, the Association experienced a major transition when its long-serving director, Henry Leon Engle, retired in 1957.[12] With his departure, the institutional coherence and administrative leadership that had supported the Galleries’ elaborate membership and prize systems faltered. Without a sustaining visionary director and facing the pressures of evolving artistic tastes and market realities, the Association closed its galleries at 30 South Michigan Avenue and formally disbanded. Its final members’ exhibition—its 36th—had been held the previous year in November 1956. Critic Edith Weigle was clear to point out that tastes had changed significantly saying: “Art, these days, is pretty well divided into two classes: the realistic, and the nonrepresentational” About the annual exhibition, which no one at the time knew would be it’s last, she said, “Many a picture, however, injects some of each in its composition. There are semi-abstractions, for example, where a few conventional forms can be recognized (“as thru a glass, darkly”) and there are traditional landscapes and figure paintings that benefit by a new sense of color, movement, and proportion.”[13]

Conclusion

The Chicago Galleries Association represents a unique experiment in American art history—part cooperative gallery, part patronage system, part educational institution, and part sales engine. From 1925 to 1957, it offered a stable platform for Midwestern artists, provided lay members with exceptional value, and created a cultural environment in which quality and accessibility were paramount.

Its operational model fostered artistic excellence through juried exhibitions, generous purchase prizes, and innovative membership structures. Its critics consistently praised its exhibitions as models of beauty, craftsmanship, and emotional resonance. The Association also played a pivotal role in shaping how Chicago audiences engaged with regional art and provided a counterbalance to growing modernist tendencies in other institutions.

Although the organization ultimately closed due to leadership changes and shifting artistic climates, its impact endured for decades. The Chicago Galleries Association remains a testament to how structured patronage, thoughtful governance, and a commitment to quality can foster a vibrant artistic culture—even during periods of great transition in the broader art world.

[1] “Notes: Chicago Galleries Association,” The American Magazine of Art, v.16, August 1925, p.443. The Municipal Art League of Chicago presents Chicago Galleries Association. Prospectus, (Chicago: The Municipal Art League of Chicago, 1925). Letter to Members of the Chicago Galleries Association from Henry L. Engle, 3/30/1926, IHAP Library.

[2] The New York venture was in Grand Central terminal and became known as the Grand Central Galleries. For announcement of the New York group see: “Pool Formed To Buy U. S. Artists’ Work,” Chicago Daily News, 12/18/1922 in Art Institute of Chicago scrapbooks, vol. 44; George C. Briggs, “Chicagoans Aid Fine Arts Sales Center,” Chicago Daily News, 3/21/1923 in Art Institute of Chicago scrapbooks, vol. 45 and Lena M. McCauley, “Big Business Men Promote Art Sales,” in “News of the Art World,” supplement, Chicago Evening Post, 11/28/1922, p.11.

[3] For an extensive and complete explanation of the entire plan of organization see: “Art League Plans Gallery Association,” The Chicago Evening Post Magazine of the Art World, 6/16/1925, p.4. For a copy of the letter of invitation sent to artists see: “Artists to Be Invited to Join Association,” The Chicago Evening Post Magazine of the Art World, 8/18/1925, p.6.

[4] For a discussion of the jury system employed see: “New Jury System for Prizes Planned,” The Chicago Evening Post Magazine of the Art World, 9/1/1925, p.14.

[5] “A Circulating Art Gallery,” All Arts Magazine, Vol. II, No. 8, August 1926, p.18

[6] See for example, "Oskar Gross Wins First Chicago Prize,” Art Digest, Vol. 2, No. 8, Mid-January 1928, p.4.  “108 Works Are Shown And 26 Get Prizes,” Art Digest, Vol. 2, No. 17, June 1928, p.4. “$8,900 In Prizes Awarded By The Chicago Galleries Association,” Art Digest, Vol. 3, January 1929, p.6. “28 Painters And Sculptors Get Prizes In Chicago Exhibition,” Art Digest, Vol. 3, June 1929, p.9.

[7] The Chicago Galleries Association: Prospectus for the Second 3-year Period, (Chicago: Chicago Galleries Association, 1929), p.10.

[8] Eleanor Jewett, “Here's Exhibition That Pleases Senses; Stands Criticism, Too,” Chicago Tribune, 3/4/1930, p.29. Other examples of praise include: Eleanor Jewett, “Better Features of Modern Art Displayed at Chicago Galleries,” Chicago Tribune, 12/3/1930, p.33; and Eleanor Jewett, “Fine Paintings in the Chicago Galleries Show,” Chicago Tribune, 10/29/1931, p.16. Also see, Tom Vickerman, “You Didn't Like the Last Chicago Show? Well, Try This One,” Chicago Evening Post, 6/7/1932, Art Section, p.8.

[9] Paul T. Gilbert, “Paintings In Chicago Galleries Show Have Sanity As Well As Ruggedness,” Chicago Herald and Examiner, 12/19/1937. Also see, Eleanor Jewett, “Two Splendid Art Exhibits Now on View,” Chicago Tribune, 12/19/1937, part 8, p.4. Jewett continued her theme about painting that made “sense” in: Eleanor Jewett, “Sound Painting Brings Beauty to New Exhibit,” Chicago Tribune, 12/7/1938, p.23.

[10] See for example the fact that the Spring show in 1932 was withheld due to the Depression. “Chicago Galleries Look Ahead to Members’ Show,” Chicago Evening Post, 10/11/1932, Art Section, part II, p.1.

[11] Eleanor Jewett, “Art Association Exhibit Is One of Rare Beauty,” Chicago Tribune, 12/9/1941, p.20.

[12] Information courtesy of the artist’s daughter, Alice Engle Seaborne.

[13] Edith Weigle, “Traditional Describes This Show,” Chicago Tribune, 11/25/1956, part 7, p.8.