28298903 the-elements-of-a-successful-artist-colony

THE ELEMENTS OF A SUCCESSFUL ARTIST COLONY
A Thesis
Presented to the
Faculty of
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science
In
Urban and Regional Planning
By
Thomas Oliver
2009

SIGNATURE PAGE
THESIS: THE ELEMENTS OF A SUCESSFUL ARTIST
COLONY
AUTHOR: Thomas Oliver
DATE SUBMITTED: Fall 2009
Department of Urban and Regional Planning
Dr. Felix Barreto _________________________________________
Thesis Committee Chair
Dr. Ana Maria Whitaker _________________________________________
Dr. Richard Willson _________________________________________
ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thesis Committee Chairman, Dr. Felix Barreto, provided a keen eye for
the direction of this research as well as a concern for serving those persons from
lower income brackets who may be effected detrimentally by a planning process.
He encourages a graduate student to not only display research and statistics, but
to interpret and produce a reasonable, ethical opinion formed by the research.
Dr. Barreto is a tough critic that did not let this research become ineffectual.
Thesis Committee Member, Dr. Richard Willson, is an artist -- as is this
researcher. He added an important voice to the committee as an advocate of the
interested parties for this type of research. Through past classes that this
researcher participated in, Dr. Willson encouraged this researcher in his desire to
expand this thesis project into the world of qualitative research. He is also an
evaluator that steered this study away from becoming a meaningless exercise.
Thesis Committee Member, Dr. Anna Marie Whitaker has an interest for
the “planner as advocate” form of planning theory that the AICP oath
encourages. She draws planning students out of their comfort zones and into the
world of authentic public discussion and understanding. Her voice was crucial in
understanding the negative and positive aspects of “gentrification” as it applies to
artist colonies. If the ideas expounded in this report were to add power to a
negative planning process, she would be the person to expose this dilemma.
iii

ABSTRACT
The fine arts often see artists gathering together in “artist colonies.”
Recent years have seen these colonies increase with the help of city planners
who use them as a remedy for blight, which can cause “gentrification.”
This study investigates the subject of artist colonies to inform planners who
assist in the creation of these communities. The first part of the study utilizes the
Oxford Dictionary of American Art and Artists (Morgan, 2008) as a resource for a
migration study of notable artists in the United States. Through this dictionary’s
biographies the study determines locations where successful artists gathered
during their lives and careers. The pull of particular locales that experience artist
clustering can make them candidate sites for planting “artist colonies.”
The second study, through survey, asks 206 artists to note the elements
of a successful artist colony. Elements, such as, “Marketing/Publicity” and the
“Community of Artists,” appear in a top ten list at the conclusion of the research.
Also, in the process of finding coding categories for artist colonies, definitions of
the distinct colony types become evident and may be used by planners as a
simple way to clarify the types of artist colonies. These findings and the artist
statements from the survey create a treasure trove of information for the planner
who would consider “planting” an artist colony.
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Signature Page.................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements............................................................................. iii
Abstract............................................................................................... iv
Introduction.......................................................................................... 1
Introduction
Pomona Arts Colony Case Study
Thesis Statement
Gentrification
Literature Review................................................................................ 22
The Background
The Artist Colony Defined
Artist Colonies and Economic Development
The Elements of Artist Colonies
Artist Colonies and Gentrification
Case Studies of Artist Colonies
Methodology........................................................................................ 44
Clustering and Migration of Artists
Survey of Artists
Research Findings.............................................................................. 51
Clustering and Migration of Artists
Survey of Artists
Conclusion...........................................................................................105
Bibliography.........................................................................................117
Appendix A: The Elements of a Successful Artist Colony.................122
Appendix B: Notable Artists Associated with a State........................ 125
Appendix C: Compiled Data of all the Elements Suggested..............127
v

INTRODUCTION
For many years the sometime solitary practice of the arts has seen artists
gathering together in certain neighborhoods to support one another in their
vocation. This gathering place is often called an “artist colony.” The last few
years have seen an increase in these colonies, not only being formed by the
natural gathering of artists, but by a “planting” of sorts by city planners who want
to increase the economic viability of a neighborhood, or even use artist colonies
as a remedy for blight. This planting can encourage the process known as
“gentrification” which is a process where the lower income residents in a
neighborhood can no longer live in the area because of the increased cost of
housing and cost of living brought on by persons with higher incomes moving into
the vicinity. Both of these terms “artist colony” and -- to a lesser extent --
“gentrification” will be discussed throughout this study.
The first phase of the study gathers information from the Oxford Dictionary
of American Art and Artists (Morgan, 2008) to examine where notable artists
have naturally migrated throughout the United States. This dictionary’s
biographies help this researcher to determine locations where successful artists
gathered during their lives and careers. The pull of particular locales that
experience artist clustering can make them candidate sites for planting “artist
colonies.” On the other hand, regions where artists have not been shown to
gather could squander important planning resources through the planting of an
artist colony.
1

The second phase of research is gathered through use of an Internet
survey of artists. These artists are asked to describe the elements that they
would like to see in an artist colony -- and then they are further queried for their
thoughts on “gentrification.” The findings and the artist statements from the
survey are intended to provide information for the urban planner who would
consider “planting” an artist colony.
Carr and Servon, in their article in the Journal of the American Planning
Association, call artist colonies a form of “vernacular culture (Carr & Servon,
2009).” They note that these vernacular neighborhoods are recognized by
having small businesses, tourism dollars, and economic contribution -- and fear
that cities will forget this important contribution (Carr & Servon, 2009). Niven and
Pletter, in the Economic Development Journal, call the future economy the
“Creative Age (Nivin & Plettner, 2009).” They say that “...the work done by
creative people in each economy creates the value-added and drives economic
growth and development (Nivin & Plettner, 2009, p. 31).”
The origins of American artist colonies are hard to pin down through
previous scholarly research and studies. According to the website,
Encyclopedia.Com, “The first American artists' colony emerged in 1877, when
William Morris Hunt, Barbizon painter and colleague of Jean-François Millet,
established a pleinair (outdoor) painting school in Magnolia, Massachusetts. The
1880s and 1890s represented the peak of rural colony activity in Europe, and
many American artists returned to the United States to create their own
communities stateside (Schrank, 2003).” On the other hand, Wikipedia states
2

that art colonies, as they exist today, are thought to have begun in the period of
1870 to 1910. This popular website encyclopedia says that “...it is estimated that
between 1830 and 1914 some 3000 professional artists participated in a mass
movement away from urban centers into the countryside residing...in over 80
communities (Wikipedia, 2008).” They name three types of colonies: transient,
mixed visiting/resident, and permanent resident.
New Hampshire’s MacDowell Colony, which began in 1907, has become a
model of sorts for other American colonies. Wikipedia notes that there are two
worldwide organizations dedicated to artist colonies, Amsterdam’s “Res Artis,”
and Providence, Rhode Island’s “Alliance of Artist Communities (Wikipedia,
2008).” These artist colonies organizations have been variously supported
through the years by private funds, the WPA and the National Endowment for the
Arts -- which has dried up in the current years (Goler, 2005).
The MacDowell Colony has had impressive alumni through the years
including Louis Guglielmi; composers Leonard Bernstein and Aaron Copland;
writers Thornton Wilder, Richard Wright, and Alice Walker; and sculptor Helen
Farnsworth Mears who completed some of their works of notoriety while living
there (Goler, 2005). This colony also has its own “Art Walk” event called
“MacDowell Downtown” and they have a mission to spread art to the local school
students called “MacDowell in the Schools, MacDowell Fellows” as well as an
ongoing art exhibit in the local town library (The MacDowell Colony, 2008).”
As another example, here in California, in the 1990’s, the 101 Artist
Colony in Encinitas leased its gallery location in a mostly-vacant building, called
3

“The Lumberyard,” with the help of financial support from the MainStreet
Association – a local business group. The group lives in nearby cottages and
through its nine years this colony became self-supporting, holds summer art
camps for kids, and is responsible for the City of Encinitas’ win of a 2004 Great
American MainStreet Award.
Not all of its news is positive, however. As of 2007, the 101 Artist Colony
is losing its lease as a developer plans to build a multi-use project on the site
(Kaye, 2007). The North County Times says that local officials, “...are
determined to keep the [101 artist] colony as an ingredient of the city's cultural
potpourri. They also credited the colony as playing a key role in the revitalization
of downtown Encinitas (Kaye, 2007).” A city official relates that, “The two
strongest elements that give us that unique identity are our historic buildings and
our art. These are critical, critical factors in downtown Encinitas (Kaye, 2007)."
In yet another side to this artist colony story, the Wall Street Journal writes
of an art colony of sorts that began in Los Angeles’ Chinatown, in 1999. “China
Art Objects Galleries,” an artist group, moved in to the struggling neighborhood
with the blessing of the area’s business development committee. The Journal
writes, that the business group says they are “...embracing the artists as a way to
bring in tourists and revenue (Trivedi, 1999).” To the contrary the Journal also
relates that, “Mr. Fong [owner of Fong’s Oriental Works of Art] and others worry
that the influx of artists could spell the end of Chinatown as they’ve always
known it, drawing in non-Chinese businesses. Many of the artists say that would
be a pity. They’re attracted to the area precisely because it’s so different
4

(Trivedi, 1999)” -- which brings up the subject of “gentrification” that will be
discussed later in this thesis.
Jesus Pedro Lorente, in his study for the University of Zaragoza, says
about Liverpool, England’s art district, “...Liverpool artists, who fear a similar
process of gentrification will even eventually substitute trendy yuppies for poor
artists, but amongst other Liverpudlians outside the arts-scene the analogy only
came as a wishful inspiration for promoting urban renewal (Lorente, 2000, p.
90).”
POMONA ARTS COLONY CASE STUDY
Near to this researcher’s own university, is an area in Pomona, California
known as the “Pomona Arts Colony.” The study of the Pomona Arts Colony was
the inspiration that spurred this researcher toward a desire for a further
understanding of this subject. Here is what was discovered about this local
“Artist Colony” through research into the “where’s and why’s” of this area
becoming known as an “artist colony/district.”
The first residents of Pomona were a Gabrieleno tribe of Native Americans
who vanished into the Spanish Mission work system of the 1800’s, and
intermingled with Mexican and American immigrants. In the 1870’s, railroads
brought real estate speculators to Pomona (Metro Pomona, 2008). The Metro
Pomona Website says -- in historical irony – that “...there were 15 saloons, a
financial panic, and a bankruptcy auction of land to bring in new people. Pomona
didn’t seem to be off to a promising start (Metro Pomona, 2008).” Later, Pomona
5

became a city in 1888 in an effort to outlaw saloons, which failed, so in 1911
Pomona passed a law to make it a dry town. This failed and induced a boom in
speakeasies until alcohol was legalized after the 13th
amendment repeal in 1933
(Metro Pomona, 2008).
1915’s Pomona boasted to having the only automated telephone
switchboard west of the Mississippi, and by 1922 the LA County Fairgrounds
called Pomona home (Metro Pomona, 2008). During the forties and fifties,
downtown Pomona’s Fox Theater was a venue for Fox studio previews because
of its large, everyday-American audience (Ascenzi, 2007). In film noir classic,
Sunset Boulevard, Joe Gillis snidely tells Norma Desmond -- about a screenplay
she has forced him to write -- "They'll love it in Pomona." She says, "They will
love it every place (Wikipedia, 2008)."
This incarnation of Pomona is where real-life Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz
honeymooned in 1940, and where -- more applicable to this artist colony plan --
the famous California painter Millard Sheets was raised (Wikipedia, 2008).
Sadly, Metro Pomona tells us, “...the golden age ended abruptly in 1954, when
the I-10 Freeway bulldozed through. Scores of homes were destroyed and
businesses followed the Freeway out of town (Metro Pomona, 2008). Downtown
Pomona fell apart throughout the 1960s as more businesses exited, leaving
downtown -- as the LA Times says -- “...a modern-day ghost town (Noriyuki,
2002).” In 1962, parts of downtown were turned into a pedestrian mall, which
failed when no one would leave their cars to walk to the businesses (Metro
Pomona, 2008). As well, the Montclair Plaza in nearby Montclair may have had
6

a negative effect. David Allen in his Inland Daily Bulletin article says, “The mall's
impact was felt almost immediately. Sleepy Montclair's share of taxable retail
sales rocketed while the former retail meccas, Ontario and Pomona, slipped. By
1976, according to a Progress Bulletin story that year, Pomona's downtown had
little more than storefront churches, antique stores and welfare offices. Ontario's
and Upland's downtowns were in decline. So while the Plaza secured Montclair's
future, its influence wasn't benign (Allen, 2008).”
Beginning in the seventies, some small changes did appear in downtown
Pomona: Antique stores opened, Western University located there, and artists
drifted in, saving many buildings from destruction. In an odd twist, the 1980’s
saw the new Phillips Ranch suburban Pomona development grow with great
success -- some say through its seemed “disassociation” with Pomona.
In the 1990’s the city named a section of downtown the “loft district,” and
officially called downtown a “major educational and cultural district,” which
inspired a preservation movement (Metro Pomona, 2008). Even still, Shigley, in
the California Planning and Development Report, says, downtown was “…
characterized by what one developer calls "occupied vacancies (Shigley, 2004).”
Residents of Pomona recently elected Norma Torres as Mayor, in 2005.
According to Wikipedia, she is “...the first woman of Guatemalan heritage to be
elected to a mayoral post outside of Guatemala (Wikipedia, 2008).” The city has
seen some small successes in downtown and has encouraged more private
development. This includes a plan to rehab the Fox Theatre – which is now
7

complete -- and also “provides housing finance assistance to multi-use projects,
which may include a transit-oriented development (Shigley, 2004).”
In the midst of this history, Edward Tessier, a developer, saw artists living
downtown and hit upon the idea of making this area an artist colony, which he
began in the 1990’s. According to the LA Times, “He helped open a coffee shop,
began developing artists’ lofts and recruiting arts organizations and galleries
(Noriyuki, 2002).” With creative use of zoning codes, he enticed struggling artists
from LA to this more affordable area (Shigley, 2004). By 2002, Tessier had
renovated 20 buildings, which house some of the 20 galleries, along with live-
work lofts, offices, restaurants, and nightclubs that comprised the artist colony
(Noriyuki, 2002) – and 200 artists called the area “home.” The famous writer,
Eldridge Cleaver, died in the Pomona Arts District in 1998 (Noriyuki, 2002), and
other notable artists are brought to the area through an artists-in-residence
program to help keep the district goals legitimate (Shigley, 2004). On the second
Saturday evening each month, an ArtWalk takes place, where anyone can visit
the galleries -- many of which feature Latino artists, which is an important
demographic which helped the surrounding neighborhoods to consider this
venture acceptable in their midst, according to many artists interviewed.
Ed Tessier and his brother (with whom he owns Arteco Partners, a
development company) have hailed the Colony as a success, since other cities,
in the past, paid him to bring the idea to their communities (Shigley, 2004).
Shigley says, “The Tessiers subscribe to Carnegie Mellon University Professor
Richard Florida's theory that the most economically successful cities are those
8

that attract the ‘creative class.’ In his book The Rise of the Creative Class,
Florida argues that “authentic, hip places attract the most diverse populations,
and the creative thinkers who drive the information-age economy want to live in
such places (Shigley, 2004).” While the city has a specific plan for downtown,
the process has been slow. City officials say they know that artist colonies often
lead to gentrification, but they need to take the chance (Shigley, 2004).
As the fifth largest city in Los Angeles County, Pomona is the venue for
the LA County Fair, the home of National Hot Rod Association drag racing, as
well as the location of the California State Polytechnic University. In 1999, it also
had the third highest murder rate in California and the 25th
highest murder rate in
the country, both of which records the city has improved upon since that time
(Wikipedia, 2008). Below is a year 2000 chart from the FBI comparing Pomona
with other LA County towns:
9

In the Business Press, Raymond Fong, deputy executive director of
Pomona redevelopment said ‘"We need a landmark, something that will anchor
the rest of downtown, and that's what this [the Fox Theatre] can be...It will give us
the prestige we haven't had for years’ (Ascenzi, 2007)." Arteco also believed this
vision and completed a $7 million renovation of the Fox Theater. They received
tax credits on the project for creating low-income housing and also due to the 76-
year-old building being on the National Historic Register (Ascenzi, 2007).
Another Arteco project is the city sponsored renovation of the Mayfair
Hotel building, which appears as “for sale” on real estate websites, because it is
in foreclosure. On a recent visit to this structure, the basement was a temporary
ArtWalk gallery. An active housing project by Arteco, the Arts Colony Village, is
in progress -- according to Arteco’s website -- and another of their projects, the
Tate’s Building, is complete (Arteco Partners, 2008).
On a note of support, Cal Poly has opened a gallery in downtown Pomona
-- with the help of the Tessiers -- and a Tessier backed non-profit organization
built a charter high school that has been open since 2003 (Shigley, 2004).
Tessier said in 2004, “...in the long run, the schools make downtown housing
more realistic for families....Plus, the schools provide a safety net of stable
employment, which is attractive to potential retail developers and to artists
looking for day jobs (Shigley, 2004).”
10

Pomona Arts Colony.com
This researcher visited the Pomona Arts Colony during its November
2008, monthly ArtWalk event (and has since participated as a gallery-exhibited
artist). The yellow map that is distributed to patrons of this ArtWalk is shown
above. The buildings in the area are mainly commercial buildings from all eras of
the last century. For instance, the Cal Poly Downtown Art Gallery is in a
renovated mid-century bank building, the Edison Building artist lofts are in a
renovated old, brick turn-of-the-last-century industrial building, and the dA center
for the arts is in a 1940’s glass storefront building -- like many of the other
galleries around the neighborhood. Many of the oldest existing artist work-live
11

lofts are in old repair shop buildings that were former television or radio repair
shops.
This evening many of the twenty-four area art galleries were crowded with
art fans from all over the Los Angeles area, and the city had part of Second
Street (near Thomas Plaza) closed for a band that performed for what looked like
approximately two-hundred audience members. The dA Center for the Arts, a
local non-profit gallery was filled to standing-room-only capacity, however, their
literature announces that they are out of money in the current economic crisis
(dA Center for the Arts, 2008). However, as of October 2009, this gallery still
exists in its same exhibiting form.
There were a number of buildings that are, or looked to be, in the process
of renovation, including the work/loft Edison Building (since completed), on
Second Street, but many artists interviewed that night said that this enthusiastic
renovation process has stalled under the current financial “meltdown.” As bad as
this “meltdown” sounds, the artists were somewhat enthusiastic at the same
moment because this meant that their rents would not be rising anytime soon –
but sadly it also means that people might not buy as much artwork.
A fact that one notices on a stroll through the colony area is the large
amount of pamphlet literature laying next to doors touting the many non-profit
artist organizations in this area – such as the Pomona Valley Art Association, the
dA Center, the Downtown Pomona Owners Association, the American Museum
of Ceramic Art, etc... Which brings this story to a problem statement for this
thesis: The Pomona Arts Colony, as it exists, only effects itself -- and not the
12

wider community. It appears to be a temporary phase, and may disappear if
developers successfully use the artists for gentrification. While the ArtWalk
locations are busy during the event, and benefits from the “funky vibe” of the
wonderful artistic group who lives there, it is clear that this neighborhood truly is a
ghost town with a temporary party set up amidst its detritus.
The unofficial surrogate historian of the neighborhood appears to be an
artist who is a Catholic priest named Fr. Bill Moore. When you ask artists about
the history of the neighborhood they send you to Father Moore whose gallery is
on Second Street (cross-street with Parcels Street). When you ask Father
Moore, or any other artist living there, how they think the Colony will progress
they seem surprised that they should worry about a question such as this. They
appear to be of the opinion that this is indeed a temporary location and that they
will one day be forced out. When asked if they have any kind of agreement or
encouragement from the city, or their landlords, they report that there is no
agreement -- and forlornly -- that they will trundle on to another place and town
when rents inevitably increase. The only agreement that has been made,
according to artist Lisa Cabrera, is with the nearby gangs that the Arts Colony is
a no-gang zone.
THESIS STATEMENT
The purpose of this thesis paper is to identify those elements that are
common to healthy and successful artist colonies.
13

Webster’s Dictionary variously defines a “colony” as “a group of people
who settle in a distant land...,” “a community of people...of the same pursuits
concentrated in a similar district or place...,” but an important part of the definition
for urban planners is “a territory distant from the state having jurisdiction or
control over it... (Agnes, Webster's New World College Dictionary, 2000, pp. 288-
289).” This last thought could imply a responsibility for the welfare of a colony
which has at times been found lacking in artist colonies planted by city
governments.
The Popular “Sims” computer games have a spinoff game that is called
“Artist Colony (Oberon Media, 2009).” It is sometimes an inclination on the part
of people to control living breathing people in such a way as those who play this
and other “Sims” games. As seen in the Urban Renewal programs of past
planning practice, this is not only an exercise that people perform in video
games. It is hoped that a “real life” artist colony will be planted with more respect
than that given to the characters in a game. Because of this sometime oversight,
this thesis will attempt to answer the following question: What are the key
components to planting a successful Artist Colony -- given by those artists who
live this chosen profession -- that will help the planning official understand her/his
responsibility for the persons whose quality of life he/she has chosen to effect in
this way.
This thesis, if successful, may indeed be used for future policy planning,
as has evidently happened in large part with Florida’s research. It is hoped that
this study will augment Florida’s suggestions from his book with a further
14

understanding for the particular needs of the artistic arm of the creative
community. Further, this report is written with the intent to subsequently write an
article -- using research garnered from this thesis – for publication in scholarly
journals such as JAPA or Arts Management. If this is accomplished, the
researcher will ultimately revise the thesis report in a less-scholarly writing style
and expand the idea to a published book that could be easily enjoyed by the
general public.
The primary audience for this present research will be planners from cities
that consider using an artist colony to transform a blighted neighborhood. Also,
this researcher has received numerous requests from planning practitioners --
concerned with this issue – for a text of the findings of this thesis. This report will
also be a useful volume for artists who find the idea of planting an artist colony to
be an intriguing idea. It will prompt them, as they explore the concept, to plant a
colony with the dual objectives of success and social responsibility in mind.
For the last few years, Artist Colonies have been lauded by planning
professionals as an answer to economic troubles in blighted neighborhoods.
Using Richard Florida’s book, The Rise of the Creative Class, as inspiration,
some cities across the United States such as Pomona, the town where this
University resides, have encouraged the development of Artist Colonies. They
hope that this will be an organic way of solving a blight problem that was once
dealt with negatively through Urban Renewal programs.
GENTRIFICATION
15

David Zahniser in his LA Times article Gentrification City, says:
“Everyone wants to talk about gentrification — unless, of
course, that conversation is on the record... A shopkeeper on the
Eastside did not want to be named as she voiced fears that one
day her neighborhood could lose its Mexican-American residents.
A contractor, rehabbing a house in South Los Angeles, would not
produce a business card after he explained how he had cleaned
out a house once occupied by prostitutes and addicts. In other
words, the conversation gets uncomfortable once the topic shifts
from real estate to class, or race. Yet shouldn’t the neighborhood
rejoice that a drug house has disappeared? And why can’t we talk
openly about a whole class of people moving out? (Zahniser,
2007)”
In another investigative paper this researcher conducted -- to search for
the effects of gentrification -- the case study location was the first Historical
Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ) in the city of Los Angeles, called “Angelino
Heights.” These HPOZ zones have much in common with artist colony districts.
This particular intact Victorian suburb was designated a HPOZ in 1983. The
folks who live in Angelino Heights, for the most part, have remained too poor to
renovate these homes throughout the years, and this may be the only reason
why this historical area has survived intact. The HPOZ designation for Angelino
Heights may eventually cause the lower-income families to move away and for
16

the neighborhood to become “Gentrified” -- an appalling situation, certain to be
destructive to the community.
In this current research -- for the people who live in Artist Colony/District
neighborhoods -- becoming an Artist Colony resident is not without significance.
While various government agencies take strides to help the low-income
homeowners, any new zoning rules or rise in property values may overwhelm
them. The district designation, possibly gives low-income homeowners the
uncomfortable feeling of... “Thank you for saving this beautiful place. Now get
out!” And, the sometimes majority of ethnic homeowners that live in the
neighborhood may think, when they see higher-income individuals moving in
(often primarily Caucasian persons), that this gentrification may seem to be a
form of racism.
Discernment of neighborhood perception in the process “colony planting”
is important to planners, considering the relatively small amount of research on
the subject of art colony designation that exists. There are numerous art
colonies in the Los Angeles area alone, plus many more on the horizon both here
in Los Angeles and in other towns. Planners, responsible for representing these
new zones and possible regulations, must gain knowledge of what problems art
colony designation might cause to low-income homeowners.
Artist Colonies have indeed received negative press for the last few years
with the concern that they lead to the “gentrification” of blighted neighborhoods --
and thus negatively effect the low income residents who already live in the area.
In that case, an Artist Colony, ironically, appears to guide current renewal
17

programs by the historically negative concept of “colonization” to replace or
convert the inhabitants. Furthermore, even the artists who move in to these
colonies are often unable to remain in the neighborhood once it is back on its feet
economically and must move on as missionaries to another blighted
neighborhood. Hoch et al. mention this situation in their book on local
government when they note:
“Historically...central business districts were used for
wholesaling and light industry. As these businesses moved further
out, vacant buildings were left behind. Some communities are
facilitating the transition of such areas to other uses, including
office space, housing and gallery space for artists, and lofts
residences...If these efforts do not focus on maintaining housing
for existing residents, a strong residential real estate market...may
price lower-income residents out of the housing market – a
phenomenon...known as gentrification (Hoch, 2000, p. 10).”
Gentrification, as defined by Webster’s New World Dictionary, comes from
the word “gentrify” which means “to convert (a deteriorated or aging area in a
city) into a more affluent middle-class neighborhood, as by remodeling dwellings,
resulting in increased property values and in displacement of the poor (Agnes,
Webster's New World College Dictionary, 2000).”
Heather MacIntosh, a Preservation Advocate for Historic Seattle notes:
“In the 1960s, historic preservation, as a public policy, a
movement, and a profession, crystallized in the US in response to
18

nationwide urban renewal efforts that removed large ‘blighted’
sections of cities, and the communities who lived there affordably.
Rather than clean up and improve historic neighborhoods, many
cities chose to clear megablocks for the construction of high-rise
projects. The destruction of community, human scale
neighborhoods, and the hyper-density of high rises soon proved to
be a huge mistake (McIntosh, 2008).” She goes on to tell us that
what is needed is “Sensitive Revitalization (McIntosh, 2008).” In
short, what she desires is a revitalization that brings together all
groups that will effect -- or be effected by -- the process. This
includes government, non-profits, as well as the property owners
themselves.
David Zahniser once again, in his provocative way says:
“As middle-income residents move in, neighborhoods that
once heard low-flying helicopters and automatic-weapons fire have
found a greater measure of peace. Working-class families who
scraped together the money to buy homes in the mid-1990s have
happily cashed out, making hundreds of thousands of dollars en
route to a five-bedroom home in Fontana, Las Vegas or Phoenix.
Those who stay behind, however, frequently find themselves in a
neighborhood they don’t recognize. And those who rent in a rapidly
gentrifying neighborhood discover that they gained physical
security while losing economic security, with rents rising steadily
19

and the inventory of reasonably priced homes shrinking (Zahniser,
2007).”
Is gentrification, nonetheless, a natural process that all neighborhoods go
through? Neighborhoods rise up, and fall down, then rise up once again all
through our history. Seattle Mayoral candidate, Mark Sidran, said in MacIntosh’s
article, “I think it's a huge challenge because cities are living organisms. They
reinvent themselves, they change or they die, and the only thing worse than a
city that's changing and improving and growing is a city that's doing the opposite
of those things (McIntosh, 2008).”
In the LA Weekly, writer Zahniser again put yet another face on the issue
that was playing out at the time he wrote his article:
“Welcome to Gentrification City, where an overheated real
estate market is dramatically reshaping neighborhood after
neighborhood, where no one — from Salvadoran immigrants living
in tenements to homeowners in affluent coastal neighborhoods —
is being spared by the dramatic changes wrought by a condo-
fueled, property-mad economy. Tenants are appalled by rising
rents, fearing the day their buildings could be demolished or
cleaned out for a new class of buyer. Homeowners who have built
up a ridiculous amount of equity have watched even as their
communities change before their eyes. The sense of dislocation is
everywhere (Zahniser, 2007).”
20

Gentrification is indeed a painful subject. One that may have slowed with
the current recession, but certainly demands answers before the next rise in the
housing market forces us to deal with the issue as planners.
21

LITERATURE REVIEW
THE BACKGROUND
Richard Florida’s book/study The Rise of the Creative Class has become
an outline for planners who wish to promote a stronger economy in blighted
neighborhoods. His 434 page study is where the current popularity of planting
artist colonies for neighborhood redevelopment found its calling. Florida believes
that today’s economy is a “creative economy” where “knowledge” and
“information” are “its products (Florida, 2002, p. 44).”
With the popularity of this book, it has also become the goal of many
scholars to tear apart Florida’s findings, because it goes against traditional
thought. He calls the old bureaucratic way of working “stifling (Florida, 2002, p.
41).” Paraphrasing Whyte’s book, The Organization Man Florida says, “...big
corporations of the time selected and favored the type of person who goes along
to get along, rather than those who might go against the grain (Florida, 2002, p.
41).” Florida says that his theory of economic growth is that it is grown by
creative people who choose a place that is open-minded. Contrary to popular
opinion, Florida’s findings seem to show that even with technological innovations,
the creative community still desires to be part of a community. For these people,
the living environment is the first consideration and then the selection of a
22

workplace and Florida also mentions that other experts have found that
“clustering captures efficiencies (Florida, 2002, p. 220).”
He agrees with Jane Jacobs economic constructs in varied ways. He
praises her emphasis on short blocks, diverse people, wide sidewalks, different
types of structures, people with different schedule, and the “public characters”
that Jacobs says is needed in a good neighborhood (Florida, 2002). Florida
particularly concurs with Jacobs when he calls our current economy a creative
economy that is run by those who innovate. He warns those that would throw
money at the issue that, while venture capital helps to encourage innovation, it is
not the answer to innovation. Innovation arises from neighborhoods that have a
“social structure of innovation (Florida, 2002, p. 51).”
Florida’s finds that the driving needs that encourage a creative class
individual to move into a neighborhood -- and thereby transform its economy –
are talent, tolerance, and technology or, as he calls them, the Three T’s (Florida,
2002). Some of the research that he and Information Week Magazine conducted
found that what IT workers -- who he places in the creative class -- want in a job
are: challenge and responsibility, flexibility, stability and security, compensation,
professional development, peer recognition, stimulating colleagues and
managers, exciting job content organizational culture, location and community.
Then later he tells us that the selection of a neighborhood, which is paramount, is
done by picking those places with a lifestyle that has: social interaction, diversity,
authenticity, identity, quality of place – especially a place that can be molded to a
23

creative person’s liking – and another ingredient was the nearness of the city to
an institution of higher learning (Florida, 2002).
The study by Donegan et al intends to find fault with planners who use
Florida’s findings. They believe that a policymaker’s intentions to encourage the
creative class to a neighborhood, in an effort to repair an economy, are unsound.
To quote their findings, “We find that differences in Florida’s measures of
creativity are generally associated with differences in metropolitan economic
performance. Indicators of human capital and industry composition perform as
well or better than talent, tolerance, and technology... (Donegan, Drucker,
Goldstein, Lowe, & Malizia, 2008, p. 180).” They call what policymakers are
doing “misallocating scarce public resources (Donegan, Drucker, Goldstein,
Lowe, & Malizia, 2008, p. 181)” and with the intention to prove this they bring
together a large team of researchers to conduct this study. However, what they
appear to miss in Florida’s assumptions is that when the neighborhood becomes
more economically sound, artists often disappear from these neighborhoods.
They agree with this in a small way by saying, “Planners could use Florida’s
arguments to lend support to many worthwhile development activities, including
downtown revitalization, entertainment district improvement, compact higher-
density projects, and promotion of the visual and performing arts (Donegan,
Drucker, Goldstein, Lowe, & Malizia, 2008, p. 191).”
Another critic, Markusen announces in the abstract to her study, “...the
implausibility of their [the artists] common cause with other members of Florida’s
creative class, such as scientists, engineers, mangers and lawyers (Markusen,
24

2006, 1921).” She has trouble with Florida’s definition of the creative class and
believes that they cluster based on their educational status. Her trouble with
Florida is that she feels his interviews and his and anecdotal references do not
show a complete picture (Markusen, Urban development & the politics of a
creative class: Evidence from the study of artists, 2006). Her research, however,
does give more credence to the use of artists in economic development as
explained in a later section of this review.
Florida’s book receives a long critique from Peck in his article. He uses
one of Florida’s former teachers, Peter Marcuse, to sum up his feelings when he
says in the report about the book, “Well written in an almost chatty style, it reads
like a series of well-crafted after-dinner speeches at various chamber of
commerce dinners (Peck, 2005, p. 741).” But, Peck does agree that Florida
found that the Creative class was drawn to the “magnetic ‘qualities of space’
(Peck, 2005, p. 744).” He points out that the State of Michigan started a “Cool
Cities” program based in part on Florida’s research with the intention to give
grants to places in the state that have “creative class”-encouraging elements.
From the Michigan grant process he says these elements are: “mixed-income
housing opportunities, pedestrian friendly environment, commercial retail...,
championing neighborhood/organizing mechanisms, higher density, clean/cared
for public and private space, food venue options..., historic districts..., recreation
opportunities/parks, arts – galleries, shops, venues, [and] accessibility (Peck,
2005, p. 747).”
25

Peck quotes many detractors such as Edward Glaeser, who says that the
creative class doesn’t want the three T’s, they want “the three S’s of skills, sun,
and sprawl (Peck, 2005, p. 749).” Malanga, another detractor, questions whether
Florida measured his research in a way to make it prove his bias toward liberals
(Peck, 2005, p. 749). Peck in the long run does agree partly with Florida in that
“For the average Mayor, there are few downsides to making the city safe for the
creative class – a creativity strategy can be quite easily bolted on to business-as-
usual urban-development policies (Peck, 2005, p. 752).”
THE ARTIST COLONY DEFINED
As stated in the Introduction, defining the term “Artist Colony” is difficult.
In some of the literature, as well as in popular culture, the terms “artist colony”
and “arts district” are interchangeable. For instance, in popular culture writing,
such as Nick Fong’s article in Coastal Living Magazine, the writer calls such
places as Carmel-by-the-Sea, to Provincetown, Massachusetts, to Rockport,
Texas…all artist colonies (Fong, 2009). Some would argue that these are just
towns with many artists living there. They may have each had a purposeful
“colony” at one time, but often they are now a loose confederation. Many
researchers have differing opinions on this issue. This said, for the purposes of
this thesis, those terms will remain interchangeable as a purposeful clustering of
artists in a particular place.
26

The migration and clustering of artists is studied by O’Hagen &
Hellmanzik. They state in their findings, “The data show that important artists
clustered in all periods at a remarkably high level (O'Hagen & Hellmanzik, 2008,
p. 121).” They also used an interesting method to find a data set. O’Hagen &
Hellmanzik scoured the biographies of 876 artists from the Oxford Dictionary of
Art and the German art dictionary called, Reclams Kunsterlexicon, and followed
their lifetime migrations. They did indeed find clustering, but they did not go so
far as to say why (O'Hagen & Hellmanzik, 2008).
A study by Galenson looks at prominent artists at their periods of highest
innovation. It appears to a good model to follow in discovering at what point in
an artist’s career an artist colony could be useful. The data set he used was
inventive in that he conducted a survey of all art textbooks (33) written in English
since 1990. Counting pictures of the most important works in artist careers, he
found a pattern for his study to follow. He believes that this shows when a career
for an artist is at its zenith. Many of his findings, interestingly, found one artist,
Picasso, to have multiple important career eras (Galenson, 2008).
Bain’s rich study is discussed in other sections of this review as well, but
initially her study explains the locations where artists tend to group together in
cities, and why (Bain, 2003). Her study quotes from Cole’s ground-breaking
study, which provides further credence to this study, that “the location of artists’
living and working space has the most profound effect on land-use change (Bain,
2003, p. 305).”
27

ARTIST COLONIES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Jane Jacobs, in her book, “Cities and the Wealth of Nations,” espoused
the well-known economic development subject of “import placement.” She tells
us that “city import replacing of any significance occurs explosively and
unleashes five great economic forces of expansion: city markets for new and
different imports; abruptly increased city jobs; technology for increasing rural
production and productivity; transplanted city work; city generated capital
(Jacobs, 1985, p. 47).”
In seeming ironic fashion to Markusen’s critique of Florida, her research
methodology was the use of interviews as well, but she supplements this with
surveys. What Markusen found does agree with Jacobs in that “Artists...boost
regional growth by providing import-substituting consumption activities for
residents and through direct export of their work (Markusen, 2006, p.1921).”
Their high education and contention with “status quo” causes great innovation
that improves neighborhoods, but often causes gentrification. There is also a
“chicken or the egg” dynamic to her message in that she believes the urban
environment also creates artists.
The Fund for Folk Culture was the subject of Walker et al’s report. This
fund was underwritten by the Ford Foundation to see if development agencies
could encourage folk artists to increase their place in the market. Small gains
were made initially, but, they say “...from a long-term perspective, we find solid
grounds for future collaboration between traditional arts organizations and
28

economic developers (Walker, Jackson, & Rosenstein, 2003, p. 1).” They also
suggest that artists and their organizations should partner with several economic
and urban development agencies.
Walker et al espouse that, “Traditional arts can support economic
development by strengthening communities, stimulating demand for local
products, and supporting the economic activities of other local businesses.
Economic developers can help traditional arts accomplish these goals by
providing market information and making direct investments according to a clear
and well-grounded economic plan (Walker, Jackson, & Rosenstein, 2003, p. 3).”
Hoch et al in their practical book, “The Practice of Local Government
Planning,” tell us that “Cities do not follow a set of simple rules. Instead, cities
are made up of complex, changing, and often unpredictable physical and social
relationships (Hoch, 2000, p. 20).” This appears to remind planners that the one-
size-fits-all equation, often used to deal with tough planning issues, is a wrong-
headed way to go about economic development. In the case of Artist Colonies,
what can be done is follow this ever-changing environment and look for current
trends, then adjust as time passes.
Lloyd, who will be discussed later in this chapter, tells us that our oft-used
economic development “...emphasis on big-ticket items like athletic stadiums
locates the production of new urban space solely in the hands of developers and
political elites. It obscures more evolutionary processes of cultural development,
including the expanding role played by traditional patterns of urban subcultural
affiliation and artistic innovation in the postindustrial economy... (Lloyd, 2002, p.
29

519).” He says it takes special “urban arrangements” to cause creativity to grow
(Lloyd, 2002).
Kirk, in an Urban Land article says that, “Artists, rather than developers or
city governments are often catalysts for change in old industrial districts, creating
a hip, bohemian atmosphere that helps make neighborhoods attractive (Kirk,
2009, p. 55).” Kirk also quotes Michael Yame, development advisor in the San
Francisco Mayor’s Office of Workforce and Economic Development, in his praise
of artists who redeveloped areas like the SoMa district. He says, “If we lose the
arts community, we also lose our competitive edge in attracting the best and
brightest (Kirk, 2009, p. 57).”
A question that should be asked at this point is “How much money do
artist’s make?” Filer found in his 1986 study on the earnings of artists from the
1980 census, that artists do not seem “to make less than other workers of similar
training and personal characteristics (Filer, 1986, p. 56).” He says that even
artists do not know that “The Starving Artist” is a myth. He also saw that fewer
artists leave their occupation than those in other groups, and over time they earn,
for the most part, the same amount of lifetime earnings as those in other
professions.
Filer then begins to break this apart when he reveals that artist earnings
widely differ from artist to artist and that self-selection as an artist may have a lot
to do with who is talented enough to be considered a professional artist from the
onset. Another pattern emerges as well, that skews research, and that is with
the introduction of many artists from other countries that relocate to the US
30

because they are already notable, well-paid artists. However, other stereotypes
appear when he says that artists work fewer hours than others, which he did
admit might be accounted for in the time that artists take “looking or preparing
(Filer, 1986, p. 61).”
Useful to this study, Filer notes that many artists cluster in areas like New
York or California which gives rewards through the agglomeration of artist
resources. He notes that artistic pursuits are a stable career and that
employment seemed, at that time, to be growing rapidly -- although different
mediums, within those that are defined as art, have a difference in earnings.
Craig talks about the benefits that are garnered from sharing art, and in
particular, poetry. She mentions that art “must extend beyond economic
matters...,” and she calls this thought “another side of sustainability – generative
relations among the artists themselves (Craig, 2007, p. 266).” This is a benefit of
artist colonies that reminds planners that economic growth may not be the sole
important benefit of artist colonies and that the enjoyment of shared goods is just
as important of a goal. She says, “A shared good is simply good because it is
shared (Craig, 2007, p. 268).”
THE ELEMENTS OF ARTIST COLONIES
Sidney Brower in his book “Good Neighborhoods” studied the
environment needed to consider a part of town to be a true neighborhood. He
calls the elements he found: ambiance, choicefullness, and engagement
31

(Brower, 2000, p. 20). Ambiance, he says, “refers to the nature, mix, and
intensity of land uses and the form of the physical environment (Brower, 2000, p.
20).” Engagement, means “...the nature and extent of the interaction among
residents and the presence of facilities and features that foster or inhabit these
interactions (Brower, 2000, p. 20).” Then Choicefullness is “...the opportunities
for residents to choose alternative locations, lifestyles and living arrangements
(Brower, 2000, p. 20).”
Throughout the study of this literature, a clear picture of the basic needs of
artists, in particular, appears. Kirk says it best in her article, when she says that
“Abandoned warehouses, with large floor plates, high ceilings, and low rents, are
a good fit for artists (Kirk, 2009, p. 55).”
Bain’s study is useful for adding terms that inform the elements of a
successful artist colony. For Bain’s methodology she used informal interviews of
professional artists in a qualitative manner which included open coding of her
transcripts. She finds that artists gravitate toward un-gentrified neighborhoods as
well as marginal, neglected and overlooked spaces that are not exemplified in
“current dominant values (Bain, 2003).” She also quotes Zukin’s report on lofts
from 1982 to describe popular artist spaces of the 1960’s as having “cheap rents,
unobstructed, open-space floor plan, oversized windows and raw, unfinished
quality... (Bain, 2003, p. 304)” -- and adds further -- “generous amounts of natural
light (Bain, 2003, p. 305)...”
Bain then breaks down the geographic selections of artists into the
following elements: “artistic urban frontier” – a place lacking cleanliness and
32

safety, “improvisational space” – a place that can be changed, and a
“neighborhood” – a place for artists to network away from isolation (Bain, 2003).
Markusen explains that artists are encouraged to network through,
“...clubhouses, live/work and studio buildings and smaller performing art spaces
(Markusen, 2006, p.1922)...” Clubhouses have been important places for artists
to learn from other artists and, notably, older artists. She believes that much of
current artist migration outward from parts of Los Angeles and New York has
occurred through changes in NEA funding. The move to other cities came about
through the attributes of those places’ “...livability, artistic networks, and
philanthropic support (Markusen, 2006, p.1933).” She notes that in the Twin City
area of Minnesota, much arts funding comes from the 3M Corporation. The
support for clubhouses has also come from, “...city loans and donations of city-
owned land and buildings, Neighborhood Reinvestment Program funds,
Foundation investments and grants, and state/regional arts board’s funds
(Markusen, 2006, p.1940).”
With support from a study by Lloyd, Markusen conjectures that artists pick
neighborhoods that are “...denser, more central urban neighborhoods within
metropolitan areas than do residents as a whole, often to seedy, transitional
neighborhoods (Markusen, 2006, p.1933).” Studio buildings help them network
more through building conversions that use, “...low income tax credits, historical
preservation tax credits, city loans and land or building write-downs (Markusen,
2006, p.1941).”
33

A gold mine of suggestions come about from Rosenfeld’s study
conducted for the State of Montana in understanding how to nurture its clusters
of artists around the state. He calls these, “suggested actions (Rosenfeld, 2004,
p. 901).” In brief those nine suggested actions are: “...treat creative enterprises
as an area for potential growth,” “Increase emphasis on art and design...” in
schools, “offer incentives to live in less prosperous parts of the state,” “establish
cluster one-stop resource centers,” “...integrate art and industry,” “tax...incentives
for...creative enterprises to attract talented people,” workshops in creative arts,”
“establish partnering relationships...that lead to marketing activities (Rosenfeld,
2004, pp. 901-902).”
Markusen & Schrock’s study arrives at three suggestions to cities that
plan for “artistic dividends.” They are: 1) “support for artist centres,” 2)
“tightening the connections between an existing corporate community and
resident artists,” 3) “allocating public dollars to the arts (Markusen & Schrock,
The artistic dividend: Urban artistic specialisation and economic development
implications, 2006, p. 1683).” They suggest that using the U.S. Census is the
best way to find the representation of the numbers of artists in a community.
They found that Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco are the largest artist
centers, as one may have guessed. Los Angeles has five times the norm for
artists in the U.S. (Markusen & Schrock, The artistic dividend: Urban artistic
specialisation and economic development implications, 2006, p. 1682).
34

ARTIST COLONIES AND GENTRIFICATION
To begin this section, a definition from an oft-used planning reference tries
to set this discussion on a clear path. Hoch et al,” define gentrification and the
subject of redevelopment in urban areas this way:
“Historically, areas surrounding central business districts
were used for wholesaling and light industry. As these businesses
moved further out, vacant buildings were left behind. Some
communities are facilitating the transition of such areas to other
uses, including office space, gallery and office space for artists,
and loft residences... If these efforts do not focus on retaining
housing for existing residents, a strong residential real estate
market for rehabilitated housing may price lower-income residents
out of the housing market – a phenomenon that is known as
gentrification (Hoch, 2000, p. 10).”
Gentrification, as defined by Webster’s New World Dictionary,
comes from the word “gentrify” which means “to convert (a deteriorated or
aging area in a city) into a more affluent middle-class neighborhood, as by
remodeling dwellings, resulting in increased property values and in
displacement of the poor (Agnes, Webster’s New World College
Dictionary, 2000).”
Stephen Wheeler, in his book “Planning for Sustainabilty,” gives a
useful suggestion for sustaining neighborhood equity. He says, “If done
35

through inclusive and participatory processes, preparation of
neighborhood or community plans can be an important mechanism to
enhance local democracy and equitable decision-making.” (Wheeler,
2004, p. 212)
Ley’s study on gentrification and artists is quoted in many of the other
studies in this group. His finding that “The reconfiguration of matter involves also
the reconfiguration of meaning; an act of transformation has converted junk to
valued products (Ley, 2003, p. 2529),” explains in brief that: what artists do in a
blighted neighborhood is similar to what they do when they create art. Ley
quotes Habermas for support with “the avant-garde must find a direction in a
landscape into which no one seems to have yet ventured (Ley, 2003, p. 2533).”
He found that the locations of artists in four Canadian cities are predictors of
gentrification in those different tracts. Ley says that those who move in after the
artists have transformed the neighborhood claim “cultural competency” by living
near the artists, which makes “the edge...a new centre (Ley, 2003, p. 2541).”
Cameron & Coaffee further the study of artists and gentrification. They
describe the process as a wave of artist/colonizers/pioneers move in to an old
neighborhood, then a second wave of capital follows and forces the artist out,
and now in a third wave, cities form policies to use artists as “gentrifiers.” They
believe that the appeal to artists in this process is, initially, the cheap cost to live
in these areas (Cameron & Coaffee, 2005).
Martin, in The New York Times reports that, “It is a truism of urban
redevelopment: whatever shabby spot artists choose to populate, that place will
36

be gentrified next. A related truth goes like this: as the neighborhood turns
upscale, the artists are forced out to find new and funkier circumstances (Martin,
2005).” They continue by saying that the developer of New York’s Monroe
Center Development has plans to mitigate gentrification, keep the neighborhood
culture, and importantly, to help the seventy artists who created this nice
neighborhood to stay. The developer proposes to accomplish this goal while
adding new retail, plazas, and a park to the area that is near a newly built transit
village (Martin, 2005). They say their plan will ensure that “Ten percent of the
Monroe Center housing will be set aside for low- and moderate-priced units,
which will be offered to artists before the general public (Martin, 2005).”
In the current poor economy that exists, it is interesting to see that artists
are seen as a way to solve foreclosure problems that exist throughout the U.S.
by having them fill the empty spaces. Alter’s Wall Street Journal article on
“Artists vs. Blight” quotes Robert McNulty, from Partners for Livable
Communities, talking about the use of artists for help when he says, “The worse
things get, the more creative you have to become (Alter, 2009).” An organization
in Cleveland called Community Partnership for Arts and Culture is putting
together a website for artists to learn of foreclosed and vacant spaces. Some of
HUD’s Neighborhood stabilization Program money is being used by a developer
in Cleveland to renovate properties as artist residences. Using an innovative
move, in St. Louis, a shopping mall is charging low $100 rents for artists to fill
empty stores (Alter, 2009). Through Alter’s article it appears that even during
this emergency situation the various aspects of gentrification remain fixed in
37

people’s thoughts. Through all of this economic tension, a positive comment
stands out as mentioned by a developer, Brian Friedman, who says, “Our chief
goal is ownership [for artists]. We don’t want the neighborhood to gentrify them
out (Alter, 2009).”
CASE STUDIES OF ARTIST COLONIES
As mentioned earlier, Lloyd conducted an ethnographic study in Chicago
to support his idea of a “neo-bohemia.” His neighborhood for study was the
Wicker Park area which he feels exemplifies the elements of neo-bohemia. He
feels that these elements are: 1) “displacement of older economic functions,” 2)
“culture as commodity,” 3) “educated, culturally competent workers (Lloyd, 2002,
p. 518).” Lloyd says those individuals who participate in the economics of this
neighborhood purposely harken back to bohemian lifestyles. He calls this
“bohemian chic” and “diversity that often fetishizes the gritty and the illicit as
authentic (Lloyd, 2002, p. 518).” He proceeds further to say that the capital
investment that goes along with this atmosphere tends to work against itself and
makes for a homogenized environment (Lloyd, 2002).
Lloyd primarily conducted interviews, observation, and census data to
formulate his findings. The interviews were two hours each, and conducted with
around 36 informants that he drew from “local artists, designers, entrepreneurs,
and service workers (Lloyd, 2002, p. 520).” He says that these people seek
historical spaces that can’t be found in suburbia. He tells us that the “embedded
38

culture” in these environments is “raw material in new productive processes
(Lloyd, 2002, p. 524)” The bohemians resourcefully transform these spaces, add
value by being there, and live in these working class neighborhoods through
“privileged marginality (Lloyd, 2002).” They agree to take less compensation in
the effort to live in a bohemian neighborhood.
Over time, Wicker Park has become a safer community, and for the neo-
bohemians that live there, this is a negative. Lloyd says they miss having their
art amidst the decay and diversity of the neighborhood, but they also know that
they had a small part in causing the change (Lloyd, 2002). This seems
reminiscent of the real life Cannery Row in Monterey that has transformed from
John Steinbeck’s “Cannery Row” haven for the down-and-out to a place where
richer person’s can feel safe in exploring the idea of what was once there.
Cole’s study follows three groups of artists who left Manhattan for New
Jersey when rents became too high after that artistic area gentrified. These
three groups started all over again in the towns of Hoboken, Jersey City, and
Newark (Cole, 1987). This article was written at the time when this kind of
gentrification was become a hot-button issue.
Hoboken started seeing artists from Manhattan begin to move to this area
in the 1960’s, says Cole. When this area began to gentrify, the Hoboken
Community Redevelopment Agency started an affordable housing policy that
helped both artist and low-income residents stay. In 1982, when Cole’s article
was written, the artists were also trying to buy their own residences, because
39

light-industry needed their large spaces, but this would have weakened the bond
between them and their low-income neighbors (Cole, 1987).
Cole found that the Jersey City artist community grew as a result of the
City designating the area the River View Arts District. No mention of any
gentrification is made in this study, however, the district designation was part of a
development plan, which was not in a blighted area, but had a few low-income
residents who were mostly Hispanic. The special zoning from the City allowed
artists to live and work in their studios. At the time of Cole’s article, the artist
rents were becoming too high and those who had not purchased their studios
were feeling they were used as part of a real estate plan to make the area look
good (Cole, 1987).
Cole explains that Newark’s artist population moved into safer, more
stable – but low-income – multiple neighborhoods, and what is interesting is that
many black artists made this migration. The migration was spread out
throughout the area rather than concentrated. They had little quantifiable effect
but some noticed that some developers found their communities and would begin
to capitalize on artist presence because they make the area appear “safer” to the
middle class (Cole, 1987).
In all three of these cities of migration Cole felt that the only way artists
would not have to move out of a neighborhood was if they could own their homes
and workspaces. He also sadly noted that his study found that artists were
indeed involved in the redevelopment and displacement process in the New
Jersey suburbs of New York. He did mention that some of the artists were
40

attempting to start organizations with their low-income neighbors to stop the
process, but that the neighbors resented the artist leadership (Cole, 1987).
Kirk’s article has current case studies of what financial incentives have
worked in helping differing artist colonies to get on their feet. In St. Louis, the city
– said Otis Williams of the St. Louis Development Corporation -- offered
“developers financial incentives on a case-by-case basis, including tax
abatement at the 18-story Syndicate Building in exchange for dedication of one
floor to affordable live/work space for artists (Kirk, 2009, p. 56).” In Dallas,
developer, Jack Matthews, requests that artists teach classes to children and do
“creative projects to enhance the development’s atmosphere” in exchange for
lower rents (Kirk, 2009, p. 59). In St. Paul’s Warehouse District, help was given
to artists through non-profit organizations who created live/work spaces that
catered to artists with families (Kirk, 2009).
Grant’s article in “American Artist Magazine,” also provides useful
information on the development of Artist Colonies in diverse parts of the U.S. He
says in example that:
“Maryland and Rhode Island...have legislated tax incentives
specifically for artists, exempting them from the payment of state
sales and income taxes for artworks produced and sold in special
districts where artists reside. The catch is that artists have to be
eligible to receive these benefits. In other words, their art form
must be one that is recognized by their state, and must go through
41

an application procedure to receive the benefits offered (Grant,
2006, p. 72).”
In Providence, Rhode Island, Grant says that the town has created
a Department of Art, Culture & Tourism that specifically caters to the
needs of artists who are looking for funding and grants, needing studio
space, and trying to deal with economic issues. Grant continues with
other small examples of incentives that may encourage artists to an area:
“Six states – Connecticut, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, New
Mexico, and North Carolina – permit an artist’s death tax to
be paid with artwork... Two additional states (California and
Michigan) allow artists’ heirs several years to raise funds
for...real estate taxes...to hold off on selling artwork...
Oregon...permits artists to deduct the fair-market value of
artwork donated to nonprofit institutions (Grant, 2006, p.
73)...”
On a down note, Powers’ article on the Las Vegas art district, serves as a
reminder that not all redevelopment plans using artists progress as some intend.
In 2002, an art gallery owner and others in Las Vegas set up an unofficial arts
district and asked the city to help out. The city was willing to lend a hand since it
had a redevelopment project progressing in the downtown area already. The city
repaired the streets, lighting, landscaping and helped to support a community art
crawl of sorts. But, the district has constantly struggled and, in the current, poor
42

economy, 30 of 170 galleries in Las Vegas went out of business and more are
soon to close. In spite of this sobering statistic, some are not ready to blame the
artists, but place responsibility on a Las Vegas economy that is built solely on
gambling and other forms of entertainment (Powers, 2009).
43

METHODOLOGY
This intent of this study is to use mixed methodology (both qualitative and
quantitative) in the pursuit for discovering the elements of a successful artist
colony/district. This study is by no means a complete study of artist colony
elements. It does however increase the knowledge of this subject for the field of
Urban and Regional Planning.
Originally, this analysis planned to use a statistical study to discover what
effect an artist colony has on its home neighborhood. Consequently, a short
study was conducted to find a method to accomplish this investigation. A classic
statistical study was performed of the neighborhood surrounding the Pomona
Arts Colony in California in an effort to understand the existing conditions in this
local (to Cal Poly) colony. Population, median household income, housing
tenure, and other relevant statistics were studied at the tract, or block, levels from
the U.S. Census and then compared to the county and state level figures. In this
study of the Pomona Arts Colony, it was found that the median household
income in the 2006 Community Survey for Pomona was $46,544. In the 2000
census, the 1999 median family income for Pomona was $37,660, as compared
to Los Angeles County’s 2006 figure of $46,452, and the State of California’s
$53,025 (the median for entire U.S. was $50,046). Sadly, the figure for the
downtown Pomona tract (of which the Arts Colony is a part) exhibited a dismal
$22,754, which is the minimum figure for Pomona. The maximum was $89,569
in Phillip’s Ranch, an upscale residential tract in Pomona. The median nonfamily
44

income for the downtown tract was $12,545, which is, again, the minimum tract
for Pomona when considering similar figures across the other units of
measurement (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008).
The 2000 total occupied housing in Pomona according to the 2000 census
was 37,074 of which 21,140 were owner occupied and 15,934 were renter
occupied. In the downtown census tract, there were 1,107 housing units, 170 of
which were owner occupied and 937 were renter occupied (U.S. Census Bureau,
2008). This information, of course, does not bode well for showing an artist
colony as an “economic engine.”
This statistical study found little evidence of prosperity in this artist colony
which has existed in one form or another for many years shows that a much
larger study would need to be conducted to find the effect that artist colonies
have on their local economies. Unfortunately, this type of study does not provide
evidence of other qualities which could be argued to be more important, such as
quality of life issues. For instance, the local artists in Pomona had a hand in
making the Arts Colony district a “gang-free zone” which is certainly a valuable
quality of life improvement for the citizens of Pomona. That said, the researcher
decided that other more efficient studies could be performed within the bounds of
this thesis.
ARTIST CLUSTERING AND MIGRATIONS
45

First, it is an interesting task to track O’Hagen & Hellmanzik’s (O'Hagen &
Hellmanzik, 2008) study methodology a step further and find out where
successful artists clustered during their lives and careers in a search through the
artist biographies in the Oxford Dictionary of Art and the Reclams Kunsterlexicon.
This study would also make note of the migration of the artists to see if they
clustered into specific locations with other successful artists. It is significant, that
the magnetism of places such as the Cabaret Voltaire, in Zurich, for Dadaist
artists or the Moulin Rouge for the Impressionists in Montmartre, France appear
as generative gathering places for successful artists -- and could be said to be
“artist colonies,” although not recognized as such. Further, if artists do not
normally gather in certain regions to engage in their professional careers, there is
the possibility that it may be a waste of resources for a planner to take on
creating a colony in one of these areas – or, at the least, they would find it to be
an uphill battle.
Early in this study, it was discovered that Oxford University Press
publishes an Oxford Dictionary of American Art and Artists (Morgan, 2008),
which provides for a more local artist study of the United States. This is after all
the area where the planners -- to which this study is directed -- are planting artist
colonies and would find useful results in this thesis.
The variables gathered from the Oxford Dictionary of American Art and
Artists were: “Birthplace,” “Colleges or Universities Attended,” “Living Locations
as Adult,” and “Place of Death.” Out of their importance to the world of art, a few
persons with ancillary roles in the art world, such as important art collectors or
46

gallery owners, were added to the dictionary due to their indispensable role --
such as the gallery owner Betty Parsons (Morgan, 2008, pp. 360-361). They are
often the people whom artist colonies are formed around. Therefore, they are
included in this dictionary and are included in this study. The researcher noted
all of these variables throughout the dictionary and input this information into a
Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for further analysis.
It appears that the editor of the Dictionary followed a format for information
related in each artist “definition” and the ability to glean all of these variables was
notably consistent throughout the Dictionary. At rare times it was difficult to
discern the location of a variable, from the dictionary; therefore that individual fact
was omitted from the study. For instance, at times the author of the individual
“definition” of an artist may have assumed that a reader would know in what state
a city named was located. If it was not clear where said city was located, this
researcher omitted that city name from the Excel spreadsheet.
When all of the variables were input, from the Oxford Dictionary of
American Art and Artists (Morgan, 2008), there were over 3500 rows of
information gathered in the Excel spreadsheet. The entries were then studied
through descriptive statistics, and analysis of variance (ANOVA).
ARTIST SURVEY
The next research was conducted by online survey, and hand distribution,
beginning in June 2009. Rosenfeld’s study arrived at categories for nurturing
47

artistic communities, and a survey was determined to be the best way to further
the findings from this earlier study (Rosenfeld, 2004). The survey for this current
research was created and posted on the online survey website named
“SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey, 2009),” and asked artists to relate examples of
appropriate, or inappropriate, elements of an artist colony/district. It was
anticipated that this research will also add value to the findings of the
researchers described in the literature review, such as Florida, Bain and
Rosenfeld, as well as Markusen and Schrock, in their various studies. This style
of survey process appears to be a conventional process for qualitative as well as
qualitative research, as related to the class by two visiting qualitative-specialist
Professors from Cal Poly for this researcher’s URP 502L class.
The twenty-two (22) questions asked in the survey were both qualitative
and quantitative. The questions consisted of normal demographic, quantitative
statistics such as sex, race, and state the artists live in, to qualitative questions
such as: “Do you have any opinion you would like to relate about the possibility of
gentrification caused by an artist colony?” Or: “If you do not live in an artist
colony/district, what is the most important element that a city government could
provide to encourage you to move to one?” The goal of the researcher was to
gather the answers of more than two-hundred (200) artist respondents, and was
distributed in five ways: email, online artist organization distribution lists, hand-
distribution of fliers, placement of fliers in artist gathering places, and setting up a
survey table at a local artist colony “arts walk.”
48

This researcher has an extensive email list of his fellow students, his
fellow artists, and from his own contact list as a stand-up comedian, to which was
sent an initial request for these persons to distribute a request to artists for
responding to the survey. Next, the researcher spent the last two years
connecting with artists through websites such as LinkedIn, MySpace and
Facebook. All of these friends and artists were contacted with a request to
spread the announcement of the survey. Within these same online community
sites the researcher had joined many artist announcement distribution lists to
which were sent announcements of the survey, after which resulted in the
Facebook staff threatening to cancel the researcher’s account.
In the same last two years, the researcher spent time becoming a member
of various online artist gathering spaces such as MyArtSpace, AMP (Artist
Meeting Place), and Deviant Art, through which many artists were notified of the
survey. Then the researcher also conducted searches through the Google
search engine and contacted the leaders of artist websites, artist colonies, artist
teaching institutions, and others (three at least, daily) for approximately three
months adding up to 150, and more, personal contacts.
Fliers were also distributed. The researcher created a flier with the
announcement of the survey that included the survey website address. The
researcher hand distributed stacks of fliers to artist gathering places or places for
artist resources, such as Bergamot Station (Artist Galleries) in Santa Monica,
Blick Art Supply Store in West Los Angeles, and the Art Supply Warehouse in
Westminster, CA. The researcher also handed out fliers, to any artist that would
49

accept one, at various “artist walk” events around Southern California, such as
the Downtown Los Angeles ArtWalk, the Culver City “ArtWalk,” and the Long
Beach “ArtWalk.”
As a final method of distribution, the researcher set up a table outside of
Cal Poly’s Downtown Pomona Art Gallery to hand-distribute -- and manually
enter – surveys to any artist who attended the July 2009 Pomona Arts Colony
“ArtsWalk.”
The answers to the quantitative questions were input into Excel and
studied through normal descriptive statistics, and then the qualitative questions
were coded and then studied in a quantitative way or are quoted as statements in
this study’s findings. Many of the coded categories are informed by Bain’s earlier
study (Bain, 2003).
50

FINDINGS
AMERICAN ARTIST MIGRATION AND CLUSTERING
The first findings to report are gathered from the Oxford Dictionary of
American Art and Artists (2008) which will hereafter be mentioned as the “Oxford
Dictionary.” This study comprised notable artists throughout of all of American
history -- a history which was admittedly concentrated for a period on the East
Coast during this timeframe. However, there were less people and thus, fewer
artists during the timeframes as well.
There is also a chance that Oxford Dictionary may be biased, and indeed
does appear “New York”-centric in the included bios. Not surprisingly, New York
City and its state came in first place by a large margin in all categories of the
statistics. However, the art world of the United States has been concentrated for
some time in New York, much as the entertainment industry appears to be
concentrated in Los Angeles.
This slice of the study is about the locations and clustering of artists in the
US. The variables gathered were the artist’s “place of birth,” the artist’s “college,”
and the artist’s “creative cities” as an adult, and the artist’s “place of death.” Most
of the artists lived in more than one city, and some may have lived in the US for
only a short portion of their lives -- but they did live here at one time or another in
their life’s travels. Some of these of these “American” artists only were born
here, and some were born elsewhere then moved here.
51

It can be said that common sense could presuppose many of these
findings, but this study did unearth enlightening results that made this exercise
useful. For example, these statistics seem to develop as a cautionary warning or
a bugle call to those city officials who plan to “plant” an artist colony in certain
areas of the country.
Please note that some of the figures are rounded as appropriate, but can
be found, in their entirety, in the appendix to this thesis.
ARTIST’S “BIRTHPLACE”
This variable, gathered from the Oxford Dictionary, would be a purely
random selection of home cities from the entire United States in a perfect world.
The growth of the US over history shows that migration can account for a few of
the following skewed statistics in part, but other factors are clearly at work here
as well -- one of which may be a bias of the Oxford Dictionary editor, as
mentioned earlier. Therefore it is suggested that further study of this subject
should be also performed using other “art dictionary” references as well.
The number of birthplace cities that could be gathered from the Oxford
Dictionary (Morgan, 2008) was 1150 in 593 different US and foreign cities.
52

The top nineteen cities, shown in the chart, account for 36% of the total.
As revealed, New York City is by far the locale with the largest number of these
noteworthy artists born in the city, having 127 artists. This number is eleven
percent of the total artists counted. The mode was one artist per city, which
equaled the median at one artist per city. The mean is 1.93 which skews the
statistics a small amount to the right.
Philadelphia and Boston emerge in second and third places with 63 and
44 artists, correspondingly. These top three cities account for 20 percent of the
total. If the surrounding cities of these three cities were added to the numbers it
would be an even larger percentage of the whole. Other remarkable statistics
were the presence of Berlin, London, and Paris in the chart of cities having six of
53

more artists born there with the number of artists being seven, eleven, and ten
artists, respectively. To pursue this model further, the number of artists for each
state, as well as those who number as foreign born, was the next area of interest.
The above chart reveals another attention-grabbing statistic. 278 of the
1150 artists from the Oxford Dictionary (Morgan, 2008) were foreign-born, which
is 24% of the total. Much the same as shown in the earlier figures, New York,
Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts find their way to the top states with 231, 108,
and 106 entries, in order. These top four locations -- one of which is foreign-born
artists -- account for 63 percent of the total artists.
Alaska, Arkansas, Nevada, and South Dakota find themselves without a
single representative of these notable artists born in their state. The mean of
22.5 was right of the median, with six, which skews these statistics to the right.
54

The mode was “five” for this list of the fifty states and those artists who were
foreign born.
ARTIST’S “COLLEGE”
Quite a number of colleges appeared in the Oxford Dictionary (Morgan,
2008). Some of the colleges were only temporary places of learning for a
particular artist, and others were the institution where the artists earned a degree,
whether it is an art degree or some other type of degree.
55

There are 1,241 separate entries in the Oxford Dictionary of college
attendances for these notable American Artists. These entries were associated
with 328 separate institutions across the United States and elsewhere. It is not
noted in the dictionary whether the artist graduated from the school, but only that
they attended there. It is interesting to note the inclusion of two Paris colleges in
the above list of those twenty schools who had ten or more artists in attendance;
the Academie Julian with 35 students and the Ecole des Beaux-Arts with 31.
Once again New York City rises to the top with the greatest number of
students going to the Art Students League having 138 students. More New York
environ schools appear with the City College of New York (14 students),
Columbia University (42), Cooper Union (25), National Academy of Design (89),
the New School in New York (10), New York University (21), Parsons, the New
School for Design (10), and the Pratt Institute in Brooklyn (13). These New York
schools account for 362 of the entries, and 29% of the total entries. Many other
New York area colleges had a few of these notable students as well.
Near to New York, Philadelphia’s Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts
comes in third on the list with 67 students who went on to become notable artists.
The Northeastern US, in general, is a clear destination of higher learning for
these artists. The Art Institute of Chicago has 45 of the entries, as would be
expected from this esteemed art school. Harvard and Yale arrive in the list
showing a sizable 38 and 28 students, respectively. The State of California has
three colleges on the list with California College of the Arts in Oakland having
eleven students, San Francisco Art Institute having ten, and the University of
56

California in Berkeley showing fourteen students in total. The most heartening
statistics on the list, which pulls these top twenty colleges out of the stereotypical,
are the University of Iowa with 10 students and the Cleveland Institute of Art, with
another 10.
These top twenty schools account for 53% of the entire entries. The mean
for the entire list was 3.77, and the median was one, which equals the mode at
one. These numbers skew the statistics to the right. From the mere entering of
these notations on Excel it is clear that these notable American Artists are a
highly-educated group of individuals.
ARTIST’S “CREATIVE CITIES”
In total there were 3,263 entries of cities or general areas that the artists
lived and worked in as adults, as gathered from the Oxford Dictionary (Morgan,
2008). The chart below shows those locations with fifteen or more entries
attributed to their particular city.
57

The entire field correlates to a list of 787 different cities across the world.
The mean for this total set of data was 4.03 with the median and mode both
being one, thus skewing the statistics to the right. The top 23 are shown in the
chart above with New York and surprisingly, Paris, in the first and second
positions. New York far outweighs other cities with 670 instances of these
notable artists living there at some point in their adulthood which accounts for
20% of the entries. Paris has 290 entries, at 9% of the total, which appears to
show that a large amount of these artists make some kind of longer-term
pilgrimage to this city at some point as an adult in the artistic field.
Note that ten of these top 23 places are foreign locations, Rome having 61
entries alone, although a few are regions that include other possible cities
58

already noted elsewhere in the chart (In the next chart, the foreign locations are
lumped together as a whole).
Boston and Philadelphia are the only other cities with entries that pass the
century mark, with 117 and 111 entries respectively. Some of these figures are
accounted for by the early US history that took place in these towns, but there
were also a smaller amount of artists around, to be accounted for, during this
time period as well. It may be a useful task for future research into this topic to
separate the artists born earlier than the turn of the last century into a separate
grouping to see what the actual current trends of the last century have been.
Most of these top locations are large cities which can account for higher
numbers, but some towns are glaring outliers to this thought, such as
Woodstock, New York with its 23 entries. Woodstock is a town where an artist
colony of sorts has existed for a number of years partly through the founding of
the Byrdcliffe Artist Colony planted there in 1902 (Woodstock Chamber of
Commerce & Arts, 2009). And another is Provincetown, Massachusetts with its
25 entries. Provincetown’s Tourism Office proclaims this town as the “...nation’s
oldest artist colony” having started in 1899 (Provincetown Tourism Office and
Visitor Services Board, 2009). In the appendix to this thesis, from the list of
locations, it may be seen that many artists have lived in Artist Colony-type towns,
such as Cornish, New Hampshire and its colony, with 10 notable artists. This
town’s colony of artists began by those following the sculptor, Augustus Saint-
Gaudins, to the city to escape the summer temperatures of New York City
(Cornish, New Hampshire, 2009).
59

For the state chart, the entries are once again broken down by state, with
foreign cities lumped together as one. The states with ten or more entries are
shown in the chart above. The total number entries were 3,263 in the fifty United
States, and other foreign locations. New York, as a state, arrives in the top
position again with 969 entries, but only by a small margin. Foreign cities, when
lumped together, are the second most lived-in location with 965 entries. New
York State accounts for 30% of the total entries, with foreign entries possessing
30% as well, and together they account for 59% of the total entries.
Sadly, it is found that Mississippi, North Dakota, and Arkansas had none
of these noted artists who have lived in the state during their creative life.
Alabama, Alaska, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wyoming only had one artist
60

each. Kansas, North Carolina, Nebraska, and Nevada had only two each. This
may mean that the notoriety of artists in these states does not extend further than
the state line but, looking at the numbers, it appears that these states may not
possess the elements needed to draw artists.
California (182 entries), Connecticut (104), Massachusetts (258), and
Pennsylvania (159) all have over 100 entries each. A surprising note is that the
City of Washington, DC, being its own state-like town has 60 entries, which rises
just above Illinois and New Jersey, with 57 and 54 entries, respectively. The
mean was 62.77, with the median being nine, the mode as one, with the statistics
skewing to the right.
61

ARTISTS “PLACE OF DEATH”
The editor of the Oxford Dictionary, Ann Lee Morgan, says that those
towns that are listed as “permanent residence” may be assumed to be the place
of death (Morgan, 2008, p. Intro).
There were 851 entries of towns mentioned where these notable artists
died or permanently resided. The mean was 2.35, and the statistics skew to the
right with the median, as well as mode, at one. By a very wide margin, and
placing it in first, 207 of these entries were for New York City. This figure for the
city is 24% of the total number. Tied for second were Boston and Paris, having
62

23 mentions, each. The last two double-digit numbers were for the cities of
London, Philadelphia, Rome, and Washington DC with 14, 22, 11 and 18,
respectively. The rest of the cities listed in the chart above fall within the range of
five to nine entries each.
Interestingly, of these twenty two cities shown above, the category for
those who died “at sea” materializes with five entries, as well as five for Nyack,
NY -- the home of the famous artist “Edward Hopper” shows with five as well.
Once again, the Artist Colony town of Woodstock, NY (6 entries) appears as
does Bronxville, NY (6) that had an illustrious Artist Colony called the “Lawrence
Park Artists Colony that was formed around the turn of the last century (Village of
Bronxville, NY, 2009).” Santa Fe, NM with its five entries is well known for its
artists -- Georgia O’Keefe for one -- as well as its art galleries. What is surprising
are the mid-range numbers in other large American cities, such as Los Angeles
(7) and Chicago (5). Cincinnati, a city that figured more prominently in other
statistics, had only one entry. Not surprisingly, when looking across the entirety
of these towns where the notable artists died, it appears that artists tend to live in
smaller towns around retirement age.
63

The figures for the state are interesting as well. New York State
climbs far above the top states, again, with 338 of the total entries -- 40% of the
847 numbers. Foreign cities and the State of Massachusetts come in at second
and third with 108 and 84 entries. California, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania
boast 47, 49, and 39 each. Eleven of the total states had no notable artists that
died in their state – Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi,
Nevada, North Dakota, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Utah. And twelve other
states had only one entry to their name. The mean was 6.8, and the median was
one, with the mode being .49. These statistics skew to the right.
64

ANOVA
For a final look at this subject the ANOVA test is performed on the three
sets of entries for the 50 states and foreign locations (combined). To reiterate,
the first group was the number of notable artists in each state at birth, the second
was the number in each state during the adult period of the artist’s lives, and the
third group was place of death. The hypothesis for this test is to determine if
there is a statistically significant difference in the number of artists who lived in
each state throughout different the periods of life. The null hypothesis posits that
there is no significant difference between the number of artists who lived in each
state during the periods of birth, adulthood, and at death.
Once performed, the P-value of the test displays .089, with an F-critical of
3. 055 and the F is 2.453. Finding the F inside the F-critical the ANOVA test fails
to reject the null hypothesis.
This finding seems to say that artists are not necessarily migrating, or not
migrating, from one area to another. Many of these artists have stayed in one
location for their whole lives, and it may be that this area works harder to support
artists from birth to death.
65

SURVEY RESULTS FOR “THE ELEMENTS OF A SUCCESSFUL ARTIST
COLONY”
The results of the survey are remarkable. 206 artists from across the
country and from other nations became enthusiastic subjects, giving excellent
insight to the subject of artist colonies, through the process of answering the 22
questions. The first few questions are demographic in nature.
For Question number one, 75 of the respondents are male, 128 are
female, and three decline to state their sex. This correlates to 63.1% females
and 36.9% males who participated.
Please note: for the remainder of this discussion, figures such as these
will be rounded as appropriate, and do not necessarily add up to a perfect 100%
figure, but are within an acceptable range (1% more or less than 100%).
66

For question number two it is found that 76% were “Caucasian, non-
Hispanic (155 artists),” 8% are of “two or more races (16),” 7% are “Hispanic
(15),” 3% are “Black (7),” 2.5% are “Native American (5),” and another 2.5% are
“some other race (5),” .5% are “Asian(1),” none of the respondents are Hawaiian
67

or Pacific Islander,” and two of the artists decline to answer this question.
Question number three asks “What state or country do you live in?”
The survey received responses from 205 artists in all but 19 of the United States
– one artist declines to state his or her state. At the top, California has the most
responses with 74 artists, Illinois provides 22, Connecticut has 13, and TX had
68

nine. Californians account for 36% of the respondents, and Illinois produced
11% of the answers. There are respondents from 7 foreign artists in Canada,
England, Israel, and surprisingly even New Caledonia.
When asked what the respondent’s art medium is, 168 artists answer and
38 skip the question. Many of the artists participate in more than one art
medium, and therefore there are more individual numbers -- in all of the art
mediums combined -- than the number of respondents to the survey. There are
419 responses in 22 categories. The responses are then coded to simplify the
answer categories. For instance, “Puppetry” is placed in the “Performance”
category, “Watercolor” is labeled as “Painting,” and “Animation” is placed in
“Media” category.
As can be seen in the chart the top three categories are “Painting” with
113 respondents who paint, “Design” with 50 respondents, and “Sculpting” shows
69

28298903 the-elements-of-a-successful-artist-colony

28298903 the-elements-of-a-successful-artist-colony

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 28298903 the-elements-of-a-successful-artist-colony

Similar to 28298903 the-elements-of-a-successful-artist-colony (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

28298903 the-elements-of-a-successful-artist-colony