Art Pokes Fun at Gentrification of Brooklyn

Gentrification can push people out of affordable housing and away from their communities. It may "improve" the look of a place at the price of making life harder for people in poverty.

The poor have to live somewhere. Often, though, gentrification takes place in areas that were once gentrified. There is not much anyone can do with original slums to make them better other than to bulldoze everything.

All of my artist friends live in brooklyn. In the past few years most of them have had to move because starving artists can't afford manhattan level housing prices. Not everyone living in poverty is a criminal.

I find gentrification to be the modern version of Manifest Destiny. Rich white people pushing out the undesirables. Only difference is that there's no killing this time.

I think it's safe to say that the gentrification of NYC has been mostly positive for residents. It has brought a lot of services, retail and law enforcement to areas that would typically be ignored.

In the future I really cannot wait to see those areas having been gentrified undergo a SECOND phase of gentrification again!

. . . either that or in the future we will all live in Urbmons

Ok, I am having a hard time with this one guys. You WANT the bad areas, and all that goes with it? Gentrification doesn't have to mean whites only, does it? That seems like a racist sentiment.

Should there be no improvements in a run down area to keep the rent down? Doesn't that seem wrong to anyone else?

Have you ever lived in these areas? I have, helicopters flying overhead all hours of the night, drug deals and worse just outside your door, screaming on the street, automatic gunfire in the empty field down the block. We just kept low, and were lucky nothing happened to us. I couldn't wait to get out.

You want that?

I had a strange feeling recently walking through an old neighbourhood I used to haunt. There are a lot of coffee shops, bicycle stores and art galleries and all of the new housing is expensive condos. The feeling that I had was sort of "sure that used to be a crack house, but it was our crack house"

What a racist idea.

It's not _implicitly_ a matter of race; it's a matter of wealth. Those who have money will dispossess those who don't. Those who don't have wealth will likely have to move... and moving to a new home costs money, which many of them don't have. So, you have a bunch of working poor who will very likely become homeless.

Of course, most of the people who have wealth in the U.S. are white, and NYC has a lot of working poor people who happen to be people of color. (Face facts. Most people on the planet _aren't_ white.) Undoubtedly, race issues will also play a part.

The same thing happened in Hoboken, NJ in the late 1980s/early 1990s.

Now, public services _should_ already be in those areas (i.e. police, fire dept., health services, etc.) regardless of the relative wealth of those living there, and their lack speaks to a larger, yet different, issue.

Affordable housing is needed, as most people simply can't properly afford housing (such as it is) in NYC. Rent controlled properties can help, to a degree, but that's a small regulation that isn't designed to help the larger issue. Again, that's a topic for another discussion.

im a Brooklyn native (black)and i think some gentrification of Brooklyn is cool but what makes Brooklyn, Brooklyn is its the gritty grimniness and the only good thing that white ppl bring is poppin bars

Yet more evidence that racism is not only ok, but it is cool, so long as it is directed at white people.

Gentrification has NOTHING to do with race. Do you think there isn't gentrification in cities like Nairobi or Cairo or Bangkok or Beijing?

Gentrification is a good thing in 99.9% of the cases. Many of the residents of a gentrified area actually benefit from it. It isn't as if the poor are herded out and the rich move in. Gentrification is a slow process and many of original residents actually profit from it as well.

That said, this "art work" is taking a decidedly racial and subsequently racist direction. If it was the other way around, Al Sharpton would be sporting wood right now and couldn't file the law suit fast enough.

@ SenorMysterioso..

i share your sentiments exactly.

original resident do not benefit as they do not live there anymore

I think it's funny when people rail against gentrification. Especially because the people I know that complain the most are booj themselves. Guilt maybe? I think the only people allowed to gripe are the people who have that legitimate nastolgia for and area they live in that has changed over the years.

Also, that art is pretty negative in my view. It just reinforces that rich=white. The people who move into the pod-style lux habitats in billyburg are more ethnically diverse than ever before, and increasingly so.

And yes, public services should exist in any neighborhood, and should not improve due to who lives there. Sadly, that was a big issue during the Crown Heights riots.

But, seriously, pick your battles. This is America. It may be rougher than some like it, but the people with the money won't abandon the tradition of making things the way they want them.

I'm actually surprised that people would object to something like this. I would much rather see a neighborhood get get better (even if it meant higher prices) than leaving it a drug filled death field.
If you've never lived in a neighborhood where you actually fear for your life if you open your door at night, then you have no idea.

Wow, if that said anything other than ''caucasian'', it would be scandalous to those who scream about racism every chance they get, wouldn't it.

First and foremost, I think these pieces of art are wonderful.

But more importantly, gentrification on a smaller scale (Local communities) is really ruining a way of life. My hometown, 10-15 years ago was a place bustling with culture, whether it be art, music or theater. Now because of high price condos, all of the many places we used to gather to share and enjoy these things, have been closed due to noise complaints and what have you. And the people who used to partake in these events, things that strengthen a community, have had to move out of town because of skyrocketing rents.

And besides, who needs Starbucks anyhow?

Wealth does usually = white. Yes the mix is becoming more ethnically diverse but the percentage of wealthy people is still majority white.

So when it comes to gentrification you have a community that is made up of mostly and largely communities of color (Like NE Portland Alberta district), gentrification happens, property values go up, new shops come in and the people that have lived there for generations can no longer afford to do so. The face of the neighborhood changes and those who used to live there populate another neighborhood. Until that neighborhood that's also primarily made up of communities of color gets gentrified and their forced to move again. The oppressions and continued pushing out of communities of color doesn't end and it happens over and over again.

Yes, the restaurants and coffee shops and stores are great. But it's at the downfall of the cultural and social aspects of the neighborhood.

I for one welcome the spread of this Caucasian blight. It will surely lead to the proliferation of more wifi hot-spots.

Racism sucks as a rule. I'm with Morgan Freeman who hopes you all have a great February, and stop relegating black history to one month.

Let's play a game of what if. Picture your neighborhood, apartment complex, housing development, whatever it may be. Yours, not your conception of an impoverished neighborhood - your own. The neighbors. The street shops, shopping complexes, mini-malls. Not a perfect spot, but you probably chose the area after some consideration.

Now imagine your preferred grocery location was bought out by a higher end retailer. Food's a major part of the budget, and it just got twice as hard to put it on your table, and there just aren't any better options to be had without spending a lot more time on getting to another, more cost efficient store. Imagine half of all your stores are upgraded. Your free time is now spent in the car or on the bus to go and take care of your necessities. Watch as your favored but slightly less capable neighbors examine their budgets and look to cut down on rent by moving away. And watch as their older, outmoded homes / apartments / condos are bought up in blocks and demolished while newer, bigger, and far pricier housing takes its place. Watch your rent go up. Witness neighbors who find your leisure activities almost criminally offensive. See the other local, ethnic shops shut down as their target audience flees, which in turn drives their remaining target audience outwards as they lose their jobs and their sense of community. And now you're about to enter the proverbial poor house.

Does that sound like good times?

Gentrification isn't making a crime-ridden eyesore into an upper-middle class friendly subdivision with higher property values. Gentrification is imposing one demographic's will on another through external and incontestable financial pressure.

I'm going to assume the question "what's wrong with gentrification?" was an attempt to provoke thought and discussion. So please chime back in, Alex.

It isn't good or bad, it's been part of the natural cycle of city life for a few centuries at least. One neighborhood is cleaned up and another one springs up in its place. Lately the trend has been for these to move further from the center, turning the diameter between the fashionable city centers and the suburbs into poorer areas. This is not a universal truth however.
Should a city become sufficiently fashionable and important then gradually the poorer citizens will be ushered out entirely. Once this happens, the city will be deemed to have lost its "charm", the young cool professional types move on, decline moves in again and we re-enter the cycle.

This is not a political issue or an excuse to vent at types of people that irritate you (whether they're hipsters or hispanic or whatever)...it's just how things are.

I shouldn't have used the word "cleaned up" because it obviously is not what's happening with gentrification. To repeat my point, this is not an orchestrated movement, there's no one behind this. You can't forbid the more affluent people from buying real estate where they want even if it absolutely does negatively effect the then current residents.

In Greenpoint, Brooklyn, gentrification came about from Polish Caucasians, some of whom don't speak a lick of English. Most of the independently-owned newsstands in Greenpoint have 99% Polish publications on their shelves, and just carry the Times based on principal. Most families are middle-class or lower-middle-class. Property values on gut renovations and rebuilds remain consistent with the rest of the area.

Stuff like this just propagates the spread of ignorance and racism.

My problem with gentrification is that it destroys every last bit of individual culture that the area had. For any mom and pop store that had to close because they could no longer afford the higher property taxes or rent... is a Starbucks that moves in and turns the area into yet another clone of any other previously gentrified location. Every area that has "gentrified" that I once lived in went from being its own area to a personality devoid trendy spot.

Gentrification doesn't solve crime, it is a crime. Forcing poor people out of their homes so useless real estate developers can make money should be a crime, and it often is in the first-world countries that care about their citizens instead of corporations.

Real estate prices going up adds no value to anything, they are based on credit balloons, not actual production of goods. Gentrification doesn't even cease drug-dealing and drug-taking, considering we know from studies that rich white people who do drugs don't go to jail, while poor black and hispanic people do.

Only an imbecile racist or a corporate tool asks "What is wrong with Gentrification." Which one are you, "Alex"?

bk, do you prefer squalor?

I'm neither an imbecile racist nor a corporate tool, nor a person who resorts to name-calling during a debate simply because another person's point of view doesn't jive with mine.

Alex you haven't actually shared your point of view.

And I agreed with bk until the name calling. (sorry bk)

It's not about squalor, people live where they can because it's where they can afford to. To have rich corporations come in and "clean up" the neighborhood that people have lived in for generations isn't about the neighborhood. It's about the money and pushing people that continue to be pushed out by society (people of color, elderly, disabled) out to another community to make money. How does that make sense to you?

Alex: I think the phrase is "doesn't JIBE with mine" not "doesn't JIVE with mine".

Unless "jive" was used as a black reference, in which case touché.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/jibe

There have been a number of interesting and non-derogatory comments with different takes on gentrification and its meaning and effect. It really would be beneficial to your community of users if you could engage while avoiding token dismissal of one commenter who can't keep their tongue (or fingers) in check.

Now that you've found out what some of your Neatoramanauts think, what about you?

che - ;)

All right - I've been called out to share my point of view. That's fair. Here it is.

I'm all for gentrification (in most cases) because it generates a huge amount of economic activity. Short of war, housing and construction provide one of the biggest engines of job and wealth creation. Yes, there are bubbles that pop (Japan's, Hong Kong's and our very own real estate bubbles come to mind) but long-term appreciation in real estate value is real.

Gentrification results in new homes, new restaurants, new shops - all of which provide new jobs. Keeping a neighborhood in squalor does not.

There's a knee jerk reaction that corporations are to blame. Actually, if you want to blame someone, blame the hipsters.

The first wave of "gentrifiers" aren't corporations or real estate developers looking to make a quick buck. They are typically young "trend setters" who establish artist colonies and open small shops, bars, and restaurants in places with cheap rents (as well as industrial areas). In the 1960s, artists and hippies gentrified Manhattan. In the 1990s, gays played a big role in gentrifying San Francisco neighborhoods.

Another false charge is that gentrification is racist. This is an easy charge to make given the socio-economic status of many minorities being displaced, but it fails to take into account that gentrification occur all over the world and across racial boundaries.

(Indeed, when gay people "gentrified" San Francisco, African-American communities screamed racism - in turn, gays accused them of being homophobic)

Gentrification is also not new, folks. Roman historians recorded instances of shops and villages being replaced by villas. It is also not stopping because its part of the natural ebb and flow of urban life.

And that's why we have art. Thanks, Alex.