Have you ever noticed that whenever you see luxury housing some kind of art is often nearby? It might be a wall mural, a piece of sculpture or a painting or maybe an artifact from a factory or warehouse reimagined as art. It could be an art gallery or an art museum. Luxury housing and art just seem to go together. Is this a coincidence or is there more to it?
The arts have long been associated with the redevelopment of many cities and Jersey City is no exception. Sometimes they serve as a prelude to urban revival, other times they accompany it or follow it. In Journal Square the arts appear to be accompanying a luxury housing boom there with the city’s announcement of a plan to bring a version of the Centre Pompidou, a world-class contemporary art museum, to the area. The satellite museum, referred to as the Centre Pompidou x, is scheduled to open in 2024, and, according to the city, will be a catalyst for “an all-new leading international cultural hub located at the heart of historic Journal Square, serving as a dynamic destination for residents and attracting visitors from all over the region.”
Next door to the proposed site of the Pompidou x work has begun on two 64 story luxury housing towers with 1,723 apartments. And, across the street, the famed Loew’s theater is being transformed from a local arts center into a national entertainment venue with a $72million investment from the Devils Arena Entertainment company. And, within blocks of the Loew’s and the new museum, many new luxury housing towers are under construction. So much new development is taking place in the Journal Square area that the mayor has called it, “a historic turning point for our city.”
Last year, the City Council voted to approve a memorandum of understanding to establish the Centre Pompidou x in Jersey City. The city will spend five and a half million dollars for planning and staffing for the initial phases. And, once the museum opens, the city will pay the Pompidou $5.9 million a year in fees for artwork and exhibitions as well as for “branding” for the use of the Museum’s name and the prestige it bestows.
However, there are additional costs that include things like transportation, insurance copyright and maintenance that must be figured in as well. Added to these costs is the cost of renovating the Pathside Building where the new museum will be located, estimated at $15 million. To allay fears about these costs, the mayor said he would ask the ask the state’s Economic Development Authority to contribute $15 million toward the project. He cited fees from ticket sales and developers, along with funds from corporate donors and philanthropies as additional sources of support.
Some City Council members cited the lack of detailed information on the cost of the project and the wisdom of investing in it when the city is struggling to pay for basic services such as schools. However, despite these misgivings, only one member of the City Council voted against approving the city’s memorandum of understanding with the Centre Pompidou questioning its financial viability and the absence of any financial analysis of the project.
And, as pointed out in an analysis by the Jersey City Times, there has been a mixed reaction to this project in the local community. According to Jersey City Arts Council Chair, Heather Warfel, the organization supports bringing a “world-class art museum to the city and in working with it.” Gallery owner, Robinson Holloway, said the museum could become a “transformative cultural anchor” for the city. At the same time, according to the Jersey City Times, many in the local social justice and arts community are unexpectedly silent in the face of this major financial commitment to the museum which may come at a cost to many of the programs and causes they espouse. Some in the arts community believe this reluctance may be based on fear of being excluded from potential financial support from the city’s recently created Arts Trust Fund.
However, others in the arts community have been outspoken in their opposition to the new museum:
Amy Wilson, a resident, as well as an artist, art professor and blogger, questioned the cultural appropriateness of the Pompidou x for the local community:
“JSQ is a neighborhood that is largely immigrant, mostly Indian and Southeast Asian. Not entirely; there are pockets of it that are old school Irish and Italian, and other areas that are Black and Dominican. Into this mix, we are talking about dropping a museum that is entirely foreign to the experience of all of those people: a museum that presents the history of 20th and 21st century art through a completely wealthy, Western European lens.”
Others, outside the arts community, have also raised questions about the cost of the museum and whether tax dollars could be better spent on local needs. Resident Jeanne Daly said: “I’m absolutely appalled by this Pompidou thing. I think it should be called Pompidon’t. We can’t even afford our school budget. Why are we spending money on this vanity project?”
One way to see if the Pompidou x is a good fit or investment for Jersey City is to look at similar attempts by other cities and their outcomes. The most famous example is the Guggenheim Bilbao Museum in Bilbao Spain. A satellite of New York’s Guggenheim Museum, it is said to have revitalized the economy of a depressed city, attracting hordes of tourists with its contemporary art housed in a striking building designed by the “starchitect,” Frank Gehry.
Since then, many other cities, from Perth, Australia to Hong Kong, have attempted to attract a version of a world class museum in hopes of a ripple effect in revitalizing their local economies. This aim has become known as the “Bilbao Effect.” In an apparent reference to this phenomenon, Jersey City’s mayor said: “We hope to have the “‘Pompidou Effect.'” But what are the chances the city’s investment in this museum will pay off in terms of branding Journal Square as a destination for the arts bringing tourists, new businesses and jobs?
The record on big name museums having a major impact on local economies is mixed at best. Many cities that have tried have failed. And the apparent success of Bilbao’s Guggenheim, which inspired so many other cities to copy it, is open to question. Some accounts claim it has been responsible for making the city a major tourist destination, reviving the city’s economy. Other research suggest it has saddled the city with debt and prohibitive annual costs. This study also found that the cost of the Guggenheim resulted in cuts to local Basque culture which included, libraries, theater, art, literature, arts and crafts.
However, according to one report, local officials are looking closer to home – at MoMA PS1, a contemporary art museum in Long Island City, Queens – as a model for Jersey City. And there are similarities with the Pompidou x. MoMA PS1 is housed in a repurposed public school. It is in a working class neighborhood with a large Hispanic population. One study, found that, according to some residents, the museum does not reflect or embrace the local community or its artists. In 2001, one year after MoMA formed a partnership with P.S.1 Contemporary Art Center creating MoMA PS1, Long Island City was rezoned for higher density with mixed retail and residential development. New York City also promoted transit-oriented development with improvements to subway stations, creating a more desirable and walkable neighborhood. These public policies raised property values attracting luxury housing developers, making the neighborhood less affordable for longtime residents.
MoMA PS1’s backstory is similar to Pompidou x’s. The Pathside building, where the Pompidou x is to be housed, is also a public building, owned by the city, and last used as a school. It too is in an ethnically diverse area with a significant Hispanic population. It is also in a area rezoned for higher density with mixed retail and residential development. State and local governments are also promoting transit oriented development there. These public polices have raised property values attracting luxury housing developers, making the neighborhood less affordable for longtime residents.
In the last several years, the term “artwashing” has been used by critics to describe the process of using the arts as a way to disguise or legitimate efforts to transform working and middle class neighborhoods into luxury housing enclaves. Artwashing is a combination of the words art and whitewash. Whitewashing refers to a deliberate attempt to conceal one’s real purpose by presenting it in a positive light. It was coined by activists in the Boyle Heights section of Los Angeles who protested the placement of art galleries in the neighborhood by developers whose real purpose was to attract high income earners for the luxury housing they wanted to build there.
Is the Pompidou x an example of “artwashing” or a great addition to the cultural life of the city? What do you think?
Follow This Blog
Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.
- Gentrification Math & the False Promise of Affordable Housing
- Why is the City Selling Public Property to Luxury Housing Developers?
- Why So Much Luxury Housing in a City Where Most Can’t Afford It?
- Why Do So Many New Apartment Houses Look Alike?
- Signs of Gentrification: House Numbers, Their Color and Design
Jersey City Today 