More Economic Alfalfa

Back in March I linked to a story about how Philadelphia was trying to revitalize its South Street district by arranging for artists to temporarily take over empty storefronts.

Artsjournal featured a story from The Guardian today about a similar effort in London which seemed to be designed a little more constructively for artists. My concern about the Philadelphia initiative was that the artists’ tenure in the spaces was rather tenuous. In London’s case, the project is arranged by the South London Gallery who has secured a three year lease and will place artists in the stores for six month residencies. While this may ultimately be a much shorter time than the participants in the Philadelphia program will enjoy, at least the parameters are known from the start.

In fact, The Guardian piece acknowledges just how unstable such an arrangement can be. Referring to arrangements like the one in Philadelphia where landlords are persuaded to offer storefronts for free or low cost, Stroud Valleys Artspace director Jo Leahy notes,

“The downside for the artist is that they’re welcomed with open arms during the recession, they help to regenerate an area – and then they get tossed out when they’re no longer needed, because the economy picks up and the rents go up. So it’s worth having eye on the future, and trying to insure yourself for when times improve.”

And the good the artists’ residencies did for the city of Gloucestershire was measurable. Leahy notes that the 25 storefronts her program utilized in 13 years rented easily when her organization moved out. Even more importantly, it warded against the encroachment of negative influences.

“Leahy adds that the estate agent she works with has reported lower rates of vandalism in shops used by artists, as opposed to those that are left empty. Art in shops puts the feelgood factor back, she argues. “It’s another way of judging a town. We’re used to measuring a place by how busy the cash tills are. This is about measuring somewhere by its ideas, by the things that people are making happen here.”

What I thought was most constructive about the project South London Gallery is spearheading is that they are not merely content to plant artists in the storefronts and hope something grows. South London Gallery, which has an outreach manager, is hoping to bring arts exposure to the neighborhood in which they are located but whose residents they rarely see enter their doors. While they hope the people do one day come to the gallery, their immediate goal is to “demystify the process of creating art, taking it away from the private studio” and locating working artists in the familiar space of a business people used to patronize.

Artists- Economic Alfalfa

According to the recent Congressional debates about the economic stimulus package, the arts apparently make no significant contribution to the improvement of the economy.

I guess that is why Philadelphia’s South Street district has repeatedly owed its revitalization to artists.

According to an Associated Press piece the City of Brotherly Love is looking to have artists bring activity back to South Street for a third time.

Once it was a thriving entertainment district, then the artists were booted in favor of a planned highway that ultimately never emerged. The artists returned and enacted the old story of making the neighborhood so chic, they couldn’t afford to live there any more. Now there are empty storefronts again and the artists are being invited back rent free. All they need to do is pay utilities. The hope, of course, is that the activity will resuscitate the neighborhood again. The article makes it pretty clear that no one should expect to keep their space once conditions improve to the point where someone will actually pay to occupy the space.

“No-rent leases will be signed for two months, with month-to-month renewals, and new empty spaces will be found for the artists if their studio finds a paying renter.”

I guess I am feeling a little cynical on many fronts in regard to this story. First, I obviously resent the idea that the arts don’t contribute to the economy. As I read this article though, I wanted to be happy that people acknowledge the value of the arts to their community, but it seems like the recognition is just utilitarian. The lease arrangement feels like crop rotation. You plant artists in depleted soil and as soon as it is enriched enough to grow your target crop, you move the artist to the next depleted place. It is especially poignant for a place like South Street where artists get pushed out, return and are pushed out again.

If artists go into this with their eyes open and promote the hell out of themselves so they can make as much money as they can before they get displaced, then it can be a winning proposition. Whatever money they make becomes the seed money for developing their work elsewhere. Maybe all the artists taking up residency on South Street can get together and start planning what neighborhood to take over when they get evicted. Go to a place that has a couple decades before things get too expensive to operate so their money will last awhile. (Hello guys, Camden, NJ needs you!)