In a pay-to-play art fair ecosystem designed primarily to keep galleries coming back and collectors entertained, new fairs looking to gain a foothold can’t stray from the traditional model. But the founders of GJALPI Fine Arts Fair didn’t want to play the game as it’s usually played and, in fact, strayed so far from the norm that – on paper – it reads less like a fair than a social justice initiative. But BUTTER, which was launched in 2021 in Indianapolis and expanded to Los Angeles ABOUT LA Art Weekis very much a fair, albeit an experimental one that is exploring in real time what happens when the economic structure of an art fair is restructured around the artists.
Launched in 2021 in Indianapolis by the cultural development organization GANGGANG, which was co-founded by Raspberry Simone Jeffers AND Alan BaconBUTTER was conceived as a consequence of the reckoning of racial equality that engulfed the cultural sector after 2020 and poses an open question that most fairs avoid: if artists generate value, why do they see so little of the revenue? The answer is structural, not rhetorical. Instead of the familiar art fair pipeline—galleries applying for booths, paying high fees and presenting a list of artists—the fair has artists and collectives directly mounting the exhibits. Chosen through a juried selection process, guest artists not only do not pay booth rental fees; the fair also covers travel and accommodation. Most importantly, the financial model removes many of the middlemen that normally strip profits from the top. There are no commissions, so proceeds from sales flow directly to the artists in one of the few serious efforts in the US art ecosystem to redistribute economic power.
In its first five years, BUTTER has featured nearly 200 artists and welcomed more than 46,000 visitors, generating over $1 million in art sales, all directed to the artists. Each edition typically features 30 to 50 exhibitors that include emerging names, mid-career artists, and occasional established figures from across the United States and the wider African diaspora. Price points reflect the same diversity: works can start in the low hundreds and climb into the six-figure range, making the fair just as comfortable for first-time collectors as for seasoned buyers.
But the appeal of the fair is not only economic. GJALLI is at the intersection of several shifts reshaping the contemporary art landscape: a growing insistence on equality for black artists historically overlooked by the commercial gallery system, the decentralization of the art market away from its usual ivory towers, and a wave of artist-centered platforms experimenting with new ways to connect creators and collectors.
After all, BUTTER is equal parts marketplace and testing ground. The fair managed to expand beyond its Midwestern origins in just a few years, suggesting the model has legs beyond its original civic context, but whether it can reshape the broader fair culture is still an open question. The Observer caught up with Jeffers and Bacon to learn more about the fair’s origins, how it works and where it’s going.
First, tell me about GANGGANG. What drew you to focus on the intersection of social justice and art?
In 2020, during the social justice and upheavals happening across the country, we saw the need to make culture a platform for justice. With our deep experience in civic engagement and creative advocacy, we wanted to develop a model that focused equality—not just on message, but on economic impact—by ensuring that artists retain control of their work, their narrative, and their financial future. GANGGANG is about giving the power back to the artists and creators who make our culture meaningful. It is about proposing to cities that the center of art and culture can improve the outcome, the equity within and the narrative of a country.
As for the fair, let’s start with the obvious! Why “BUTTER”?
BUTTER softens the rigid structures of the art market. It signals that culture can be nurturing, accessible and built on joy, not just commerce. It is a cultural movement that signals gentleness, excellence and confidence. We wanted a name for the experience that felt instantly familiar and comforting to everyone.
Art fairs are not the first thing that comes to mind when I think of equality. How did launching an art fair support GANGGANG’s mission?
Traditional art fairs are built around galleries, dealers and institutions, with artists often receiving only a portion of sales. Through BUTTER, we turn the narrative around by centering the artists. From the beginning, we designed the fair to maximize artists’ agency and profits, providing a space where artists sell directly to collectors and keep 100 percent of their proceeds with no entry or exposure fees or commissions. Since 2021, BUTTER has generated over $1.5 million in sales that go directly to artists, with the inaugural BUTTER LA generating more than $175,000, proving that equity and sustainability are not mutually exclusive.
How does a fair work financially where 100 percent of sales proceeds go directly to the artists? What are the biggest structural obstacles in organizing a non-commissioned fair?
The commission-free model requires deliberate income planning. Sponsorships, grant support, ticketing and partnerships underwrite production costs, including everything from venue hire to staff and event infrastructure, so artists don’t have to absorb those costs or pay commissions. A non-traditional model like ours requires funders who understand long-term value over short-term branding, and that’s not something every partner is used to navigating.
The biggest structural barriers are perception and scale. Many sponsors and institutions are conditioned by traditional pricing models and visibility exchanges. We are constantly educating partners on why investing early in artists is not just ethical, but smart. When they see artists keep 100 percent of their sales and build sustainable career paths, we win over the skeptics.
Who is your target collector? Who is shopping at BUTTER?
Our collectors include seasoned collectors expanding their collections and institutional buyers purchasing pieces for permanent holdings. We’re also a place for first-time buyers to invest in original work, as we build the collectors’ market alongside artists.
Do you think there is tension between activism and commerce with an initiative like this? Or the potential for it if ALIVE gets much bigger?
There is always tension when you build within systems that you also criticize. But for us, trading is not at odds with our value – extraction is. We intentionally design the experience and economy to be artist-forward, and with the scaling of BUTTER, that imperative only deepens. Growth does not mean weakening, but expanding opportunities for artists, collectors and cultural stakeholders to participate in an equal market. Our commitment to economic justice and structural access remains non-negotiable.
How has organizing the fair in Indianapolis been different versus organizing the fair in LA?
Indianapolis is where the experiment began—rooted in community, context and a deep sense of ownership. Its impact is palpable: local artists, families and institutions see their city again, and this place-based pride makes the experience powerful. In contrast, Los Angeles extends that model to a global market at a different pace and scale. LA’s collector base is broader and more institutionally connected, but the spirit is the same—a demand for art experiences that are equitable, culturally grounded, and artist-centered. Now, with BUTTER LA produced by stoodeo – our production agency designed to scale these experiences – we’re able to bring our model to new markets with care, rooted in community and cultural impact.
Do you have thoughts on future markets you want to break into?
We are intent on expansion. The goal is not a cookie-cutter footprint from coast to coast, but to create environments where artist ecosystems can thrive. Cities with rich creative histories and thriving black arts communities feel like natural candidates, but any new market must align with our values of accessibility, long-term investment and deep community engagement. GJALLI requires significant emotional, financial and physical investment. Where it spreads should be based on invitation and influence.
What kind of feedback did you get from the artists who participated in the LA edition of the fair?
The reaction in Los Angeles was overwhelmingly positive. There was a clear sense that LA needed something like BUTTER: a platform that intentionally highlights artists of color while also introducing new audiences to collections in a way that feels accessible and non-intimidating. Artists shared that it felt affirming to be centered during LA Art Week, rather than positioned on the fringes of larger fairs. For many, it wasn’t just about sales, it was about visibility, building relationships, and centering within the richness of Black LA’s cultural ecosystem. BUTTER offers a different kind of art experience during a week that can often feel exclusive by providing access to students, families and first-time collectors.
Whose work is in your collection? Which artists should our readers follow?
Indianapolis artists like Ashley Nora, FITZ! AND Gary Gee represent the depth of talent coming out of the Midwest. Ashley’s work carries an emotional and textural resonance that feels intimate and expansive, while Gary’s sculptural practice reflects a distinctive perspective rooted in community and lived experience. The artist collectors to follow are those who build lasting careers, shape the visual language in real time, and expand what the art market makes room for. And many of them come through BUTTER.
More interviews on the Arts
