There weren’t many protesters — just seven — but they were loud. As the guests, many of them white, clutched their cups and cans and milled about the unfinished space, the protesters, mostly black and Latina women, began shouting: “Do not use art to pimp us out!”
“How many people are here that live in this neighborhood?” yelled one, while others handed out flyers. “How many people from this neighborhood are here?”
It was an April 23 opening for No Longer Empty (NLE), the New York nonprofit that stages art exhibitions in formerly abandoned buildings and vacant spaces. Organized by guest curator Regine Basha, the show was titled When You Cut Into the Present the Future Leaks Out, and it was taking place inside the Old Bronx Borough Courthouse, a towering Beaux-Arts building that straddles Brook and Third Avenues at the intersection of East 161st Street in Melrose. The courthouse had been closed to the public, before this day, for 37 years.
“Those protests took us by surprise, as nothing like that has occurred before,” the NLE team (which does not include Basha) told me over email as a unit. The nonprofit was founded in 2009, during the recession, and prides itself not only on its exhibitions but on “community engagement.” Its staff members — of whom there are also seven — were hardly expecting protesters. “We understand in hindsight, and from our partners, that NLE was a foil of sorts for long-standing community issues.”
More than a foil, one might say that NLE and its Bronx show have become a crucible for long-standing community issues — ones like displacement and gentrification, property ownership and development, and the role of the arts in those things. Over the past few months, these conflicts and questions have descended on the courthouse in the form of protests, conversations, and artworks (a piece by Melissa Calderón illustrates “The South Bronx Gold Rush of 2015” with gold embroidery thread atop an abstracted birchwood plot of land). They have taken up residence and burrowed into the crevices of the musty old building. They are, however, only the most recent layer to settle atop decades of frustration and neglect.
* * *
The Old Bronx Borough Courthouse was once simply the Bronx Borough Courthouse, when it was built in the early 20th century. Designed jointly by architect Michael J. Garvin and artist Oscar Bluemner, with a statue of an enthroned Lady Justice by Jules Édouard Roiné on the façade, the regal four-story building was erected between 1905–14. Unfortunately, it served as Bronx County’s primary courthouse for just two decades. “Because it had only one courtroom, and the Bronx’s population exploded rapidly, it was supplanted by a new court on the Grand Concourse and operations were transferred to other civic courts in the 1930s and ’40s,” explains the New York Times. By the late 1970s, when the Bronx was “burning,” the once-grand granite building with the tile floors, chandeliers, and marble staircases had fallen into serious disrepair. When the courthouse was landmarked by the city in 1981 (and added to the National Register of Historic Places the following year), its primary contents were graffiti and pigeons.
In the early 1990s, according to the Times, a conglomeration of local community groups, most prominently Nos Quedamos (“We Stay”), banded together to try and gain control of the courthouse. Envisioning the building as “a kind of town center” for Melrose, the groups petitioned the city for a lease and raised roughly $6 million to put towards the creation of a library, museum, and after-school programs. But the city declined — “Mayor Rudolph Giuliani put a thumb in the eye of his rival Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer,” is how the Mott Haven Herald describes it — and in 1996 the courthouse was sold at auction to Gus Kitkas and the Five Borough Electrical Supply Corporation for $130,000.
Two years later Kitkas had done nothing and the city auctioned the building again. Nos Quedamos bid on the structure but lost to Henry Weinstein and Benjamin Klein of Liberty Square Realty, who paid $300,000. The pair set off neighborhood flares once again when they put the courthouse on the market for $1.8 million in 2000, though they never succeeded in selling it. In the years since they’ve advertised their rehabilitation and renovation efforts and tried to entice tenants with federal tax credits, all to no avail. The building remains empty.
* * *
Or rather, it did, until April, when NLE filled it with art. And that was really the first problem — art used as an advertisement for private development — although no one picked up on it until the second problem emerged and immediately galvanized people: a planned party for real estate brokers in the courthouse during the run of the show. “Future Tenant – A Broker Party,” the event was called, scheduled for June 16 and advertised on NLE’s website. The listing, which is now gone, read:
NLE will promote cultural and economic vibrancy in The Hub, using the Old Bronx Borough Courthouse as a springboard to gauge interest in its long-term future use. To increase the neighborhood’s visibility, NLE and SoBRO [South Bronx Overall Economic Development Corporation] will introduce people to the neighborhood, and have created a tailored map highlighting sites of interest.
Utilizing its long-standing presence in the community, unique to No Longer Empty’s holistic model, NLE and SoBRO will host a tenant attraction event to convene entrepreneurs, real estate brokers, and business owners interested in the area.
“That was what really sparked everything,” says Wanda Salaman — “that” being news of the brokers’ party, which reached Salaman, executive director of local nonprofit Mothers on the Move (MoM) and one of the seven protesters, via concerned artists and activists in the community.
“What triggered me is I’m hearing about this attraction party at the Old Courthouse, and then when I’m going to the location of the event, I see all these people coming from all over, not from the neighborhood, going to the opening …. It was very overwhelming, for me and for people in the community. They were asking me: ‘Who are these people, and what are they doing here? We didn’t know of an art opening — what are these white people doing here?’ Some people were like, ‘I’m getting scared.’ Most of the time when I see a lot of caucasians, I see them at Yankee Stadium. At 161st Street, in the middle of the hood, it’s rare. What is going on? Who are those people coming to the neighborhood? And why did no one know about it?”
Some people, of course, did know about it. No Longer Empty received a grant for the show from the Department of Small Business Services, and through that and their own efforts they developed a number of community partners — including Casita Maria Center for Arts & Education, Ed García Conde/Welcome2TheBronx, and the Percent for Green project — all of whom presumably knew about the opening.
What people didn’t seem to know about was the brokers’ party. The artists in the show didn’t (or else didn’t care) — they only learned about it when one of them, Shellyne Rodriguez, stumbled upon it on NLE’s website a few days after the opening. “No one saw it; it was just quietly announced on their website,” she says. “So I screenshot-ed it and I emailed it to all the artists. I was like, you guys, what’s going on here?”
Between the opening night protest and Rodriguez’s email to the artists in the show, pressure began mounting on NLE to take some sort of action. The point of contention was not only the brokers’ party, but also NLE’s relationship with SoBRO, a nonprofit that, despite being based in the South Bronx since 1972, has a less-than-stellar reputation among the people I spoke with. “I’m hearing that they are the ones that are opening the gates to big developers to do whatever they want in the Bronx,” says Salaman. Nobody I spoke to could offer specific examples of the ways in which SoBRO is facilitating the borough’s gentrification. Nevertheless, that SoBRO and NLE were evidently planning to hold a private event to market a building whose private ownership is itself a longstanding soreness in the community did not help.
And so a series of emails and phone calls and exchanges ensued. Representatives from Nos Quedamos, MoM, and other community organizations wanted to meet with NLE, not at the courthouse but on their own turf. Radical grassroots group Take Back the Bronx wrote a letter: “We are very disheartened — and honestly, very angry — that artistic engagement with our community is being used to push the agenda of developers and financiers: gentrification.” Rodriguez delivered the letter, and she spoke with one side and then the other, acting as a messenger between the art people and the community. It was a role that both suited and weighed on her.
“Me being from the Bronx but being an artist, I wear two hats,” she says. “I am critiquing the show and talking shit, but I’m in the show. You see what I’m saying?” Rodriguez’s relationship to the courthouse runs deeper than just being from the Bronx (like a handful of others in the show). The last time her mother was in the building, she was pregnant with Shellyne. And during the summer of 1977, Rodriguez’s uncle was briefly locked up there during the blackout riots. Two of her pieces in When You Cut Into the Present harken back to that time: magnetically expressive small-scale ceramic sculptures that portray her family members as allegorical figures. They’re among the works in the show most carefully attuned to their surroundings.
Still, Rodriguez has no illusions about what it means to be a working artist in New York today — even one from the Bronx. “Artists are not the root cause [of gentrification]. But artists are well aware at this point that we are the bees to the honey. We’re strike breakers, is what I say. The New York tenants, they’re on strike. They’re fighting for their lives, and we’re coming in as scabs for developers. So, if you know that — you know that’s the model — then are you using yourself as bait to developers in order to gain access to interesting spaces without really fully thinking about the repercussions?”
* * *
In the middle of May, fed up with all the back-and-forth, the groups Mothers on the Move, Nos Quedamos, Take Back the Bronx, Banana Kelly, and Rebel Diaz Arts Collective invited staff members of NLE, as well as the artists and partners involved with the show, to a community meeting at Nos Quedamos’s headquarters on May 30. NLE President Manon Slome, Executive Director Naomi Hersson-Ringskog, curator Regine Basha, and some of the artists attended. It was there that Slome quietly announced NLE had ended its relationship with SoBRO and canceled the brokers’ party. “I would say that was a community victory,” reflects Salaman.
In its place, NLE said it planned to hold a tenant attraction event, which would be, rather than private and only for brokers, an “open event, for the community.” According to Rodriguez, that event was planned for the afternoon of June 16 — the same date and time as the original brokers’ party — but when she emailed the day before to check on its status, she was told that NLE had pushed it back to mid-July.
A few days afterwards, on June 18, the Center for Bronx Nonprofits hosted a panel discussion at the courthouse. Titled “Shifting Sands: New Dynamics in the Bronx Art Scene,” it convened seven established members of the Bronx art community — including former Bronx Council on the Arts Director Bill Aguado, artist and Percent for Green founder Alicia Grullon, and Edwin Torres, deputy commissioner of the NYC Department of Cultural Affairs — to grapple with the challenges currently facing artists and arts organizations in the Bronx. Despite taking place at 11:30am on a Thursday, some 75 people turned up, including members of MoM, Nos Quedamos, and Take Back the Bronx, plus Rodriguez.
Like so many of its kind, the panel consisted more of a series of monologues than a substantial dialogue. The concerns discussed were entirely founded but deeply familiar: fears of displacement, the arts as a force of gentrification, the question of how to bridge the gap between artists and community. “How can the community stay strong in this overly capitalistic environment?” asked Arthur Aviles; “We need to ask funders to uninvest from activities that displace,” said Grullon. Things were proceeding smoothly, if dryly, when Michael Kamber, founder of the Bronx Documentary Center, introduced himself and said: “Frankly, I don’t think we should be in this building today. There are plenty of spaces in the Bronx. We should not be in bed with for-profit developers.” A number of audience members cheered and applauded.
The panel wasn’t meant to be about the courthouse or No Longer Empty, but certainly there was no getting around that we were there — we were sitting in the building, amid a show whose very existence crystallized so many of the issues the panelists had gathered to discuss. It seemed hardly a coincidence that an oversize color drawing of Giuliani by the artist Onyedika Chuke hung on a wall not 10 feet behind us; his arms were crossed and his stern face seemed to taunt the community he had once shunned.
Kamber wasn’t the only one who wanted to talk about the courthouse and NLE. During the Q&A session, a woman from Take Back the Bronx approached the mic. “These issues affect artists but also all people, working-class people,” she said heatedly, before accusing NLE of scheduling a brokers’ party in the space and demanding an answer to the question: “What is the agenda from No Longer Empty?”
“Questions are to be directed to the panel,” countered the moderator, a soft-spoken man from the Bronx Council on the Arts. The young woman, shouting from her seat, retorted, “What is the agenda from No Longer Empty?” The room came to a standstill, and it seemed that others wanted an answer to this question too. Manon Slome stepped up. She laid out the mission of NLE, told everyone that the brokers’ party had been canceled, and added that NLE wanted “the community to come and vision what the building could be.”
Because, she explained, “The fact remains that it is a vacant building.”
The fact also remains that no one besides Henry Weinstein, Benjamin Klein, and Liberty Square Realty knows what the future of the Old Bronx Borough Courthouse might be. During the panel discussion, Mike Kamber claimed that a woman he knows — someone who’s worked in the Bronx for 30 years and runs a nonprofit — offered the owners a large sum of money for the building, but they turned her down. She then offered them “top-dollar rent” to put a school in, and again they said no. “The owner of this building is holding out to cash in,” Kamber pronounced.
When I followed up with him to confirm the story, Kamber said he could tell me only that it was “hearsay” — the woman would not go on the record — but that “I totally trust her.”
“I think we have to be very careful when for-profit developers tell us they’re here to help the community,” he added. “These things don’t happen in a vacuum. If you look at what happened in Dumbo, on the Lower East Side, in Williamsburg, artists become part of the strategy for real estate investors. They use the cachet and the creativity of artists to make money, and in the end the artists are the ones that get pushed out — artists and low-income people.”
I tried calling Liberty Square Realty, as well as another real estate company listed to Weinstein’s name, and I asked No Longer Empty to contact Weinstein on my behalf. I was never able to reach him or anyone else, not even a secretary.
The staff of NLE says now that they have scrapped the idea of a tenant attraction event altogether, in favor of initiating a four-to-six-month “community visioning phase” for the building. “What I’m envisioning is community groups sitting down and talking about how the community can tackle this issue of working with a private building owner, coming up with a plan instead of just throwing everything against the wall and seeing what sticks,” says Lindsay Smilow, NLE’s director of external affairs.
These efforts are admirable, and Salaman says she appreciates how responsive NLE has been. “They have been trying … they just had no idea what they were getting into,” she says.
But Salaman also makes a good point when she reminds me that Nos Quedamos has “already done a visioning around what people in the community want to see” at the courthouse. They’ve been planning and fighting for that building for 20 years. “I guess there should be a meeting with the community to talk about the space, but the next step is really having a meeting with the owner,” Salaman says. “We have all types of meetings with No Longer Empty, but it doesn’t matter because they don’t own the building.” Maybe in Melrose, art can at least start a conversation between local residents and property developers.
Three Looted Antiquities at the Met Repatriated to Turkey
Nine other repatriated works were seized from Met Trustee Shelby White, whose collection was subject to a criminal investigation.
This week, the world’s lightest paint, Pakistan’s feminist movement, World Puppy Day, and were some of Vermeer’s paintings created by his daughter?
The Wider World and Scrimshaw
On March 28, join the New Bedford Whaling Museum online and in-person for a symposium on global carving traditions from across the Pacific Rim.
Who Will Decide on the Future of a Miami Native Burial Ground?
Native activists say sacred remains and objects dug up from a Brickell construction site should remain there, but mega-developer Jorge Pérez is pushing back.
How Can a Curator Approach South Asian Futurisms?
How do I acknowledge my shortcomings while reckoning with obscured histories and the exclusion of subaltern narratives in the fine art landscape? A working checklist for curators.
MCA Chicago Presents On Stage: Frictions
Will Rawls, Shamel Pitts | TRIBE, and Barak adé Soleil explore Blackness, queerness, movement, and dance in performances at the Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago.
The Complicated Legacy of Camilo Egas
The Ecuadorian painter, a leading figure of Latin America’s Indigenismo art movement, has been both praised and scorned for his representation of Indigenous peoples.
Tom Jones Zeroes in on Ho-Chunk Visibility
“I think about the young kids, the teenagers, and I think being able to see yourself represented in art is so powerful,” says the artist.
Haggerty Museum of Art Presents Tomás Saraceno in Dialogue With Dr. Somesh Roy
The artist and researcher will explore soot’s effects on climate change and public health in this online conversation.
Hundreds of Artworks by NYC Teenagers Go on View at the Met
The talented seventh through twelfth-grade students are recipients of the 2023 Scholastic Art and Writing Awards.
NYC’s Flatiron Building Sells for a Whopping $190M
The sale to outsider bidder Jacob Garlick puts an end to the protracted legal battle between the iconic skyscraper’s five former owners.
McKnight Visual Artist Fellows Discussion Series at the Minneapolis Institute of Art
The series features 2021 Fellows David Bowen, Mara Duvra, Rotem Tamir, Ben Moren, and Dyani White Hawk in conversation with renowned curators and critics.
The Best Memes Roasting the “We ❤️ NYC” Campaign
A graphic designer on Twitter created a hilarious send-up of the universally reviled logo, and the rest is history.
Did You Know These Museums Were Free for New Yorkers?
The “Free Admission” campaign is advocating to make ticket pricing information more transparent to visitors, who may be confused or misled by institutions’ language.
privatization is authoritarianism.
This is real art reporting. Thank you!
Artists and art writers need to stop pretending to be critics of real estate developers rather than their front-line pawns. Why the hell did everyone praise Kara Walker’s “A Subtlety or The Marvelous Sugar Baby” as something to celebrate? She pimped out her “black art” brand to make good PR for Two Trees Management, who is building luxury condos on that site no working class person could ever afford, much less those “downtrodden” sugar factory workers Walker pretended to honor. The Walker piece was a Creative Time commission, though, right, not a real estate developer’s? It was both and the same. Jed Walentas is Principal at Two Trees Management and co-chair of the board at Creative Time. Kara Walker and rich developers profited big time on people’s gullibility.
Now we have No Longer Empty being called out for what it is.
This should have been done in Bushwick years ago, but there was no single event to let the residents there know they’d soon be displaced by a colony of white artists, bringing with them artisanal cheeses, gluten-free muffins, condos, and skyrocketing rents. Then, art writers, (many of those, here) will drive that gentrification to the limit (in real estate, it’s called “full maturation”) by praising, like a PR team, the neighborhood as some kind of “authentic” or “DYI” place for scrappy artists outside the art world system. Please, rethink this. Take account of what your art, “criticism”, and intentions really bring about, folks. It’s not always good.
You make (some) valid points, and connect (some) good dots; but, curious, why don’t you use a real name and come out of the woodwork? Real discourse is only possible with real people, not obscure internet names.
Quite the opposite. Reddit is the most popular and largest site for “discourse” on the internet and no one uses their real names. But they are real people. This site is unique in requesting “real names” from commenters. It’s a form of editorial intimidation and conversation control, protecting agitprop from getting hit too hard or ignorance exposed. That in addition to just deleting comments, a tactic used on me yesterday by writer Laura C Mallonee after I answered her response to me, then wrote in detail how her article might likely damage the career of the artist she intended to promote. In any case, if my handle and comments aren’t up to your particular standards, maybe ignore them?
I’m not talking about Reddit. I’m talking about “real discourse” which could happen here, if you used your real name. My comment never alluded to the “largest site” (I don’t care about size, I care about quality). Why not use your name, here?
Any response to my other question for you?
What are you talking about?
Are you talking about accountability?
The notion that real discourse is only possible when people don’t use monikers, is absurdly inaccurate.
Substance of arguments is what makes discourse real/substantial.
Some times a person can feel more comfortable framing a substantive argument when they have a degree of anonymity. I mean unless you are passive aggressively getting at something else, in which case unmask that shit and spit it out.
I am not passively aggressively getting at something else.
There also cannot be something “inaccurate” about something which has no point of accuracy.
I am not saying anonymity isn’t vital to life on the internet, but that progressive discourse is only possible when attached to real identities; a la all the philosophers you have ever quoted, or economists you have ever read, or the author of this blog article. (See what I did there?)
Thanks for chiming in – however my opinion is that 5 comments in 8 months suggests you’re not really interested in online conversations. CIAO!
Thank you for your thoughtful, researched coverage, and for bringing this discussion to wider audiences who may not know the politics of this borough very well. The title of No Longer Empty alone is problematic, and it was/is really awesome to see and hear about artists and community groups standing up to speak clearly about this.
Important to note is that most of the artists mentioned in this article live and work in the Bronx, have lived here for a long time, and are of color – not white. However, nothing makes the disturbing whiteness of the NYC artworld more clear than when an exhibition like this is installed, and opens to the public. Very visible in the segregated South Bronx.
As a side note, the photos of outside of the courthouse include art by Lady K Fever (light graffiti lions and lady justice), who should be credited.
Thanks for the kind words, and for the note regarding the works by Lady K Fever on the courthouse’s exterior. The photo captions have been updated.
This little passion play is one of millions and millions taking place all over the world, and increasingly in the U.S., as we who aren’t wealthy, except in relatively small increments, fight with one another over the few scraps left in the rat race for profit, stressed by the pressure squeeze being put on us all by corporate greed for more and more that knows no stopping point. We need to identify and attack our mutual enemy instead of blaming one another.
They were asking me: ‘Who are these people, and what are they doing here? We didn’t know of an art opening — what are these white people doing here?’ Some people were like, ‘I’m getting scared.’ Most of the time when I see a lot of caucasians, I see them at Yankee Stadium. At 161st Street, in the middle of the hood, it’s rare. What is going on? Who are those people coming to the neighborhood? And why did no one know about it?”
Why is the above attitude and parochial fear not challenged? Where is the celebration of diversity, and tolerance of others different from yourself? I’m listening and waiting patiently for a response…
When white people, either incrementally or in a horde, come into black neighborhoods, it’s for a reason. Even when it’s a “good” reason (e.g., to “help” the neighborhood) it ends up badly. Black people don’t want a white savior. It’s demeaning. They don’t want other people gentrifying their neighborhoods. Likewise, they don’t want their neighborhoods turned into tourist destinations, where white people go see “culture” as they do in museums or zoos.
More to the point, they don’t want to leave their neighborhoods because they got priced out by “multiculturalism-loving” white people. They don’t want juries predisposed toward cops because white people couldn’t imagine those cops being so gosh darn brutal. It doesn’t matter if you’re an enlightened liberal with a masters degree in culture studies; you’re still a threat, a real one. It doesn’t really matter if you’re WHITE white (if I recall, Mr. Vartanian doesn’t consider himself “white”), it’s a class conflict and there’s no dodging it by being good-hearted or politically correct.
Ms. Steinhauer had the good sense to pick up on what these women were saying and take it seriously. Maybe she didn’t “challenge” their ideas because she’s actually being a reporter. It’s you, here, your job, to teach these women in the Bronx about tolerance.
So, in essence, aside from your latent racism, hatred of whites, and insane hostility, you’re making the case for segregation? Also, you didn’t answer my question. However, you’ve provided plenty of nonsense to invalidate yourself from public discourse.
Save the ad homs; I’m a white over-educated artist living in Bed-Stuy. I answered your question. You just didn’t like it.
If you need further clarity, I can give you directions to the right bar and the right time to “challenge” people about tolerance. Report back when the casts come off.
I don’t accept responsibility for the incoherent ignorance of any one. You’re identification up above is laughable, even more so because you wear it as a badge that somehow should command respect. Thanks for the chuckle at your expense.
I’m curious, what was your “reason” for moving into Bed-Stuy?
An amazing apartment at an amazing price.
Thank you. I’m a lifetime near-native NY’er, born in Poland (a very white country) and I’m always bewildered what aspect of “I don’t want the white economic system to step all over me and my community and kick us out” translates as “I hate white people”?
It’s like someone punching you, you punching back, and they accuse you of assault.
Gentrification is a violence, a colonization, whether it begins with good intentions or not. NLE and the wave of development they will usher in under the guise of “bringing culture” to the native rubes are somehow even worse than those who straight-up admit they just want to clean up. Meanwhile, these rubes in NYC neighborhoods are the ones who brought salsa, hip-hop, punk rock, graffiti/street art, and so many other contributions to the world.
The quoted material you included above is racist talk, pure and simple. It’s the fear the “other” (whoever that may be from your perspective) that’s going to continue keeping us all in the whirlpool of hate and not progress toward something better for everyone. It’s disgusting.
Well, it’s a mistake, but an understandable one. The fundamental issue is class war. In America, and many other places, color codes pretty reliably for class. If you’ve lived in a neighborhood where almost everyone you saw for decades was not White, and suddenly a lot of White people start coming around, it usually means your rent is about to double or triple. And artists and bohemians, of any color, have been the shock troops of gentrification. The people of the Bronx are right to be worried.
How is that fear any different from the irrational, racist fear of
whites that black people moving into “their” neighborhood means it’s
about to rapidly devolve into a ghetto of crime and poverty?
One difference is that if the Whites of mid-20th-century White Flight had stood their ground, the self-fulfilling prophecy of decay and dissolution might not have happened. They had that power. Whereas the victims of gentrification do not have sufficient power to avoid being kicked out, because the thing kicking them is not their own fears but the power of money and political connections.
Great reporting! Highly informative and showing the digging to get to the facts rather than hearsay. Keep it up.
I’m moving to the South Bronx in two weeks. I have lived in several communities in the US that gentrified right in front of my eyes. I have also been the only white person living in neighborhoods that never gentrified in the years I lived there. Gentrification is a dirty word, a buzzword, but let’s not forget that artists are also the ones who get screwed by this type of thing. Artists need cheap places to work and to live. Most artists are barely scraping by and have jobs they must go to, as well as trying to find the time to create work. Desperation is a common theme. One’s need for cheap space and solitude means that one may be used by nefarious interests in a game of “mutual benefits”-you get cheap space where the community may look at you askance, to say the least; and the real estate interests get to build their property values on our backs. Right now the Bronx is the only place I can afford to live. I’m a working class guy with a job, not an artist. But people need inexpensive housing, and the Bronx is where it’s at.
Are things going to radically change in the South Bronx? You bet. Is there something intrinsically bad about that? I don’t think so. So far everyone I have met in my new neighborhood is positive and upbeat. Of course, I’m kind of an optimist, so maybe that’s just the way I see things, like I find it inspiring that NLE created a huge and what looks like an amazing art show in a long-abandoned building. I have worked with community groups all my life and some people are simply never going to be satisfied with newcomers, or people different than them. But most people are good people, and if one bridges the divides early, and has all lines of honest communication open, good things will come.
So hello Mott Haven. I promise, no swear, that I will never call it SoBro.
I think change and bringing business and art into a community is generally good — one of the reasons that it’s problematic is because the minority populations that have been long-time residents of those communities don’t have the upward mobility that you, as a white male, even a working class one, inherently has in a society that values white males.
The solution isn’t to stop development, but to find ways to increase the access to new and better opportunities for all people, including low-income people of color.
If we allow ourselves to focus on what divides us, rather than what unites us, we will never move forward together. Incidentally, I have had family in the Bronx for decades, and still do. Also, I’m not sure what you mean by “upward mobility”, unless you’re addressing the fact that I’m moving north.
What unites us is class war. You’re on one side or the other, but you can’t escape it. Not in New York City, anyway.
You’re a delight! I’d like to subscribe to your newsletter.
I’ll have to start one, then. But my analysis isn’t very novel or unique.
How telling is the title “When You Cut Into the Present the Future Leaks Out”? The organizers and interested developers are not interested in the past. They are not interested in the families, workers, students, teachers, and leaders and their personal histories who make up the present community. They only want to cut them out to create their own future. Long term residents of this city are watching as their collective histories are erased and they are being treated as if their very existence is a problem to be eradicated. I prefer a future that doesn’t leak. I prefer a future that is cultivated, nurtured and respects the dignity of all.
one of the best articles i have read in a long time…thank you!
With pressure coming from the established suburban property owners who are sick of sitting in traffic, NYC gentrification is becoming an important issue. Obama’s new policy of allowing benefits (rent subsidies) to poor people to be transferable by zip code, will make this problem worse as folks move out of poor neighborhoods for better schools. Now may be the time to advocate that rent subsidies be converted into mortgage payments. Enfranchisement is this country in many ways means equity.
Comments are closed.