Are the Bohemians also Badguys?

Badguys assuming you're against "gentrification," that is. Some interesting thoughts on the role of artists in the gentrification cycle in this article from Milwaukee.

"Artists who just want a space of their own obviously have difficulty with the idea that their own way of life might drive them and other people out of a neighborhood.

For instance, some anti-gentrification anarchists in West Philadelphia were accused of aiding gentrification when they tried to buy an old YMCA building for their community in a mostly black neighborhood. One of the anarchists, James Nasti, said "Gentrification is a touchy thing because regardless of what we, a mostly white radical community, regardless of what we're doing, all that is needed to start the ball rolling [for gentrification] is our white skin. The artists and radicals move into a neighborhood and the white faces make it safer for others to follow."

New Urbanist architect Andres Duany and, to my knowledge, everyone else who has commented on gentrification, agrees with Nasti. It is not the iconic "rich" professional who starts the gentrification process. A study by the National Endowment for the Arts has shown that downtown gentrification in cities all over the US increases in proportion to the number of artists in the area. This trend has been observed in Milwaukee too: students, artists and other "bohemians" settle in depressed, low-rent districts and then complain about the influx of yuppies that follows them, driving the bohemians out as prices rise. But it is the artists and other bohemians themselves who set up the conditions for the process that unfolds.

Like the Philadelphia anarchists, from the perspective of the urban poor (usually minorities) and elderly people on fixed incomes, the bohemians (who tend not to be minorities) are the first wave of gentrification...

...Bohemians like to think of themselves as connected with their community, but their definition of community is often very restricted. Most aren't homeowners and do not have children in the local schools, so they don't have stakes in the most influential political and economic institutions around them. This shows in Riverwest where the "bohemian participation quotient" in neighborhood, homeowner, and business organizations is basically nil. And despite bohemian disdain for yuppie/bobo consumption habits, both groups favor a local economy centered around things that are widely perceived as non-essential "speciality" items: arts and crafts, health food, micro-brewed beer and rock bands.

By and large, these are not the kinds of products that sustain and appeal to urban minorities and members of the working class. They are things that appeal to bobos who truly have more in common with bohemians than anyone else. This could change if specialty stores, food co-ops, and artists diversified their products, taking steps to reach a wider market oriented to the local, domestic economy of working class people, retirees, and minorities. But barring major changes in the defining traits of artists and other bohemians, it would seem that they have to accept their role alongside yuppies and bobos in the gentrification process and look for ways to make it less disruptive as an endless cycle of displacement."

AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT: I love this bit from the article:

"Perhaps gentrification will not hit Riverwest as hard as it has hit other communities. Riverwest is not like highly underoccupied and depressed areas that have rapidly gentrified."

"Highly Underoccupied?" Sounds as if gentrification isn't the only thing driving people out. Why is it that no one seems all that concerned about displacement from poor neighborhoods until the yuppies start showing up.

It's enough to make one think the poor are just an excuse, not the real issue.