blot09

Starving for Their Art: Homeless Artists in NYC

MHC Seminar 4: Spring 2009

By:

Neyra Azimov

Nicole Babushkin

Victor V. Gurbo

Christina Squitieri

—-

Abstract
While researching the homeless population of New York City, it was evident that homeless artists were struggling with issues that were not being addressed by current policy. By analyzing past movements and programs for homeless artists, from the 1930s Federal Arts Project to the 1980s squat-art movement, we were able to formulate a policy that works to address the social and financial problems of all homeless while providing special services specific to the needs of homeless artists. Our policy includes permanent housing with job training, a small salary, and a workspace where artists can create, display, and sell their works.

—

I. Introduction
As far back as one can see, from the lepers of biblical times to the peasants of revolutions, the world has experienced homelessness. People who, for some reason or another, did not fit into the social molds society cast for them were tossed out into the streets, forced to build their homes—and themselves—from whatever was tossed out after them. In modern times the situation has been exacerbated by wars, economic crises, and drugs—forcing more humans out of their countries or foreclosed houses and onto the streets. New York City, with over 35,000 homeless living in shelters alone, according to the NYC Department of Homeless Services (2009, p. 1), and the figure rising to 700,000 when including those who live on the streets (Swarns 2008), is not unfamiliar with this problem.

In order to study homelessness, however, it is important to establish a concrete definition. When asked, “What is homelessness?” once is faced with infinite possibilities. Are homeless those who live on the streets, or do you count those who live in shelters, too? Does one need to be living outside for a certain amount of time before one is considered “homeless”? Does falling asleep on the subway and waking up the next morning mean you’re without a home? And what about people who live in cars or are doubled up in tiny apartments? If one lives on the street by choice and identifies himself as “nomadic,” does that mean he isn’t homeless?

Since the criteria for being a homeless individual can go on forever, here we frame “homeless” in a specific way. We have chosen to define homelessness through Kim Hopper’s (2003) definition: “those without conventional housing for the night, who take up lodging instead in municipal or private shelters, or retreat to the interstices of public space” (p. 11). We have also expanded Hopper’s definition to include, for the purpose of our research, those who live out of their cars as “homeless.” Although we are not specifying a length of time one needs to be “without conventional housing for the night,” for the purpose of this study we are not counting those who, for example, accidentally fall asleep on the subway one night as being under the umbrella of “homeless.” Instead, it is assumed that those who take up lodging in communal spaces are doing so fairly regularly, and thus should be counted as part of the homeless community.

The focus of this study is on the “homeless artist.” Although statistics are more than fuzzy when it comes to street artists—based on the first amendment right to freedom of speech, no artist is required to obtain a vending license from the government—we do know that over 500 NYC visual artists were arrested between 1993 and 1998, during the Fifth Avenue Association’s attempt to eliminate street vending (Lederman 1998, para. 9). Unfortunately, as no accurate statistic for the number of street artists in New York City exists, there is no way to tell what percentage of artists were arrested, nor what fraction of those were homeless.

Another problem with these bare facts is that they only give us information on visual artists, while our understanding of a homeless artist is much broader than that. For this research, the “homeless artist” is identified as anyone who creates “art”—which includes, but is not limited to: visual arts, such as paintings, drawings, sculpture, and photography; literature and creative writing, including poetry, short fiction, and memoirs; music, which includes homeless subway musicians; and theater, including homeless actors and those who participate in homeless theater programs. Since the “homeless artist” is so broad, no one statistic will be as accurate as one would like, nor will it give all the information about the trials homeless artists face on a daily basis.

When discussing New York City’s homeless population it is also important to discuss the common stereotypes and how they do not apply, especially for homeless artists. Mental illness is, unfortunately, a common truth, with nearly three-quarters of homeless living on the streets suffering from a “serious and persistent mental illness” (Coalition for the Homeless p. 1). Artists are most commonly grouped in this category, mostly due to the commonality of abstract “outsider art” that one sees on the street. While this can be true with some artists—schizophrenic Nathaniel Ayers, the brilliant violist/cellist/double-bassist studied by Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez is one of the most famous—not all homeless artists are mentally ill, and should not be perceived as such. Even though drug and alcohol abuse can also be common—homeless artist Sean Baity, in trying to break his drug habit, took up drinking instead (Kilgannon), while writer Lee Stringer (1999) was addicted to crack cocaine (p. 14)—this is another stereotype that should be tossed aside. The belief that the homeless are uneducated or unintelligent (“the moron,” as Hopper defines it [p. 48]) is perhaps the most false of all. Of the aforementioned artists Ayers was educated at the highly prestigious Julliard School (Lopez, April 2005) while Stringer (1999) was able to stave his addiction with his writing and just a pencil (p. 14). When it comes to homeless artists, “the moron” is an especially false misconception. A study done by the Freelancers Union (2005) showed that, of the 2,430 independent New York City artists studied, 85% had at least a college degree—an amazingly high number considering the US Census of 2007 (2009) had only 27% of citizens report a bachelors degree or higher (p. 1). Although this study was only done on a small population of New Yorkers, it is important to keep in mind that preconceived notions of “homeless” are often inaccurate.

Despite their education levels, even employed artists (or “creative workers” as they are called by the Freelancers Union [2005]) often have trouble making ends meet. According to the study conducted by the Freelancers Union (2005), despite the fact that New York City dedicates more money to the arts than any other city in the United States (p. 2), over 40% of the 2,430 surveyed artists made less than $35,000 in 2004 (p. 2) and 51% had “little or no” personal savings (p. 2). Although these creative workers were not asked if they had a home, when one has hardly any personal savings, no health insurance (39% experienced “a significant gap in health insurance coverage” [p. 2]), and made less than $35,000 a year while living in the city of New York, one can infer that the housing situation was not ideal for most.

For these reasons, we have chosen to take a more in-depth look at the contemporary and historical problems homeless artists have been faced with, along with the policies implemented to help solve these problems. We will then look at the past and present efforts of politicians, interest groups, and individuals to generate homeless art aid and awareness. From these facts, we will formulate our own policy proposal, taking into consideration the special needs of artists, to try and stop homelessness once and for all.

II. The History, Part One: The Great Depression & the WPA

To fully understand homelessness and deduce a probable solution to the issue, the history of the subject must be analyzed, dissected, and understood. One might ask something as simple as when did the terminology and perception change from a derogatory “hobo” to a “street person” and what was the reason? To answer this question we should introduce the devastating years from 1929 to 1939, known as the Great Depression. It all began on October 29, 1929, the infamous black Tuesday. The day when so many individuals dreaded and cried for help, for financial support that was denied. The Great Depression became an international economic downturn effecting cities around the world. From heavy industries to farming a demand of new alternative sources of jobs was at its peak. The Great Depression was a time of unprecedented economic hardship especially for the United States. The United States was hit hard with unemployment. In the midst of widespread unemployment, economic and environmental disasters, many people found themselves unable to afford their homes. Such circumstances triggered many to loose hope, stability and their lives. With this financial factor as the most essential cause a wave of homeless individuals and family swept the nation.

In the wake of the Crash of 1929, the government of the United States, as led by President Hebert Hoover, was reluctant at first to provide much intervention. A strong believer in the laissez-faire, or “hands off,” approach to economics. Even when aid began to be appropriated, much of it failed to find its way to the average citizen. With this increased unemployment and difficulty for a decent paying job more and more individuals became burdened with their payments on their homes or rent and on other financial needs, including certain essentials like food and clothing. Not only was it difficult and stressful to find a solution to their problem but the idea and possibilities of becoming homeless for many hit hard. For some, in desperate need of support, were able to turn to their families, but others found themselves lonely with no place to go. With no help, morally and financially many lost their homes and became homeless. The crash and its result was inevitable. Nearly a third of Americans were out of a job. Figures from the government put the number at roughly one and a half million people who have lost their homes. Effectively, then, almost one out of every two U.S. households directly experienced unemployment or underemployment. The epidemic hit all groups. It wasn’t just men who found themselves living on the streets, whole families had nowhere to go. The numbers of African American homeless also increased by almost a quarter. Women, children and minorities often faced the added struggle of dealing with prejudice from the communities from which they sought help. A homeless person could have been in any field or occupation. One major group was the artists, ranging from poets to musicians.

A unique aspect of homelessness during the Depression was the emergence of shanty towns called Hoovervilles. Derogatorily named after President Hoover, they were cobbled together by the homeless in various locations around the United States. Men, women and even children who had no place else to go came together in a temporary community. The homeless would sleep in tents or in shacks made out of any available materials, mainly cardboard or other inadequate materials. One of the largest of the time was located in Central Park in New York City. There were simply not enough shelters and other charitable organizations available to deal with the sudden increase in the numbers of homeless, and public officials were often overwhelmed, leaving the homeless to fend for themselves. Many, as well, adopted a dangerous lifestyle by riding the rails, which meant traveling from place to place by catching rides on moving trains. The widespread homelessness provided the most visible gauge of the nation’s economy. These and other homeless indicators reinforced the need for some form of government aid.

Hoover’s administration began a series of attempts to solve the economic problems by starting numerous programs. In June 1930 Congress approved the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act which raised tariffs on thousands of imported items. In 1931 Hoover urged the major banks in the country to form a consortium known as the National Credit Corporation (NCC). The Federal Home Loan Bank Act was introduced to spur new home construction, and reduce foreclosures. The final attempt of the Hoover Administration to stimulate the economy was the passage of the Emergency Relief and Construction Act (ERA) which included funds for public works programs such as dams and the creation of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) in 1932. Sadly to say all these programs failed and as well worsened the situation.

With the situation reaching its all time low Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected to office in 1932. He immediately blamed the excesses of big business for causing an unstable bubble-like economy. Democrats believed the problem was that business had too much money. The New Deal was intended as a remedy. These programs sought to stimulate demand and provide work and relief for the poor through increased government spending and by instituting financial reforms. Empowering labor unions and farmers and by raising taxes on corporate profits was the basis of the New Deal program. Certain reforms, one dealing with unions raising wages, together with several other relief and recovery measures, are called the First New Deal. Soon after, the economic stimulus would be controlled by new agencies, the Second New Deal. The “Second New Deal” added Social Security, a jobs program for the unemployed (the Works Progress Administration or WPA) and, through the National Labor Relations Board, a strong stimulus to the growth of labor unions. One of the most fundamental and largest agencies was the WPA. It was able to employ millions of people and affect almost every locality in the United States, especially rural and western mountain populations. Headed by Harry Hopkins, the WPA provided jobs and income to the unemployed during the Great Depression in the United States. Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA provided almost 8 million jobs. The program built many public buildings, projects and roads and operated large arts, drama, media and literacy projects. It fed children and redistributed food, clothing and housing. The goal of the WPA was to employ most of the unemployed people on relief until the economy recovered. Worker pay was based on three factors: the region of the country, the degree of urbanization and the individual’s skill. It varied from $19/month to $94/month. The goal was to pay the local prevailing wage, but to limit a person to 30 hours or less a week of work.

The WPA spent money on a wide variety of programs. One of these programs particularly reached out to homeless artists. “The Federal Arts Project gave unemployed artists the opportunity to decorate hundreds of post offices, schools, and other public buildings with murals, canvases, and sculptures; musicians organized symphony orchestras and community singing.” The Federal Theatre Project was another program set for the arts that brought drama to communities with repertories of old and new plays, which were only heard through radio. The FAP maintained more than 100 community art centers across the nation, managed art programs, and held art exhibitions of works produced by children and adults. Under this program thousands of posters, prints, sculptures, paintings, drawings, and murals were produced, which were then, in turn, loaned to schools, libraries, galleries, and other institutions. These programs spawned a new awareness of and appreciation for American art and provided jobs for needy artists. An estimated number of artworks produced were: 2,566 murals, 17,744 sculptures, 108,099 easel paintings and 240,000 prints. The FAP had two goals which were previously mentioned, to provide artworks for non-federal public buildings and to provide jobs for unemployed artists on relief rolls. The program had three activities, production of works of art, art education, and art research through the Index of American design. Production of works of art emphasized nationalism and the rediscovery of America in artwork subjects. Mural creations, where the focus was on works for public places. (Some examples were: Chicago for realistic American scenes, New York City for abstract murals, and California for an Oriental theme.) Another subject was sculpture, where artists were encouraged to work with less expensive materials. And lastly, graphic arts, which produced posters for the government. For Art education community art centers were established. Art centers were similar to institutions where it was devoted to community education rather than practical training. Such centers were rare before the Federal Arts Program. By December 1936, there were 25 art centers in the south and west. The educational program provided through classed was the heart of the community art center. Miami and Key West had active WPA community art centers. To qualify for work in FAP, artists had to meet the professional standards as artists, and also the relief requirements of their state WPA relief board. After being selected to be on the project, artists were reviewed periodically and could be removed from a project if their financial status changed or if their work was unsatisfactory.

By the 1940’s the WPA began to change its policy by providing educational training. Even though the WPA was considered a great success, it was not able to continue its programs. With the onset of war production in World War II, unemployment disappeared. WPA began to focus on issues related to national defense, and by 1941 the entire effort shifted to war preparation. Therefore Congress shut down the WPA in late 1943. Since then no major administrations or policies were created that were as great or unique as the WPA. We see the next great incline in homelessness and attempts to aid the issue introduced only twenty years later by the Beatniks or known to be the hippies.

III. The History, Part Two: The Psychedelic 60s and the Homeless Hippy

The next major flux of homeless artists came about three decades later, the 60s. While there isn’t much specific data on the homeless during the period, we see the concept romanticized for the first time by various artists—the era of peace and love did however, spell out a decade of severe homelessness. Many people who were housed in psychiatric homes were released to community-based institutions that never actually formed, or were deinstitutionalized due to disorganization. In 1962 the government funded the APTD (Aid to the Permanently and Totally Disabled) and John F. Kennedy signed legislation for the Community Mental Health Centers in October of 1963 which allowed many people who would have ended up homeless to become eligible for federal benefits.
The Community Mental Health Centers Act (CMHC) established services that would be offered to those suffering from mental illness, such as: inpatient services, partial hospitalization (during the day only), outpatient services, emergency services, and consultation and educational services (Torrey, 1988). Yet none of these guidelines included coordination and communication between facilities. Thus, patients were released who were in dire need of follow up attention and aftercare. This “deinstitutionalization” became a major issue for the 60s.

In the early 1960s, releasing patients in this manner didn’t pose much of a problem because the first phase of the program targeted, for the most part, highly functional people. More then half of those deinstitutionalized went to live with their respective family members upon discharge. The government spent roughly one billion dollars per year on the mentally ill, and 69% of that was spent on a state level only. Due to the turbulence of the time period and the emergence of civil rights in every faculty of life, there was not a shift from state to community. One result was that there was a significant drop in the use of qualified physicians. They were replaced by social workers, psychologists, and foreign doctors who were under-trained.

With deinstitutionalization, homeless rates climbed. The CMHC responded by adding seven new guidelines to their original five. These guidelines included: screening of patients prior to admission to state hospitals; follow-up care for those released from mental hospitals; developing of transitional living facilities for the mentally ill; and providing specialized services for children, the elderly, and drug and alcohol abusers (Torrey, 1988). The CMHC though, for the most part, failed to fulfill its contractual obligations due to the complexities of working with this population. As a result, many people ending up on the street, completely homeless. Many of the mentally ill patents and drug abusers were artists. This is a strong statement – do you have something to back this up.
These artists often flooded into the underground culture of drug abusers, vagabonds and thieves, which was initially labeled or identified as beatniks. This underground culture was a major inspiration to such writers as Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsburg, who became leading members of what is known as the Beat Generation. Their writing and thinking, focusing on such things as self-expression, eventually helped to shift the focus of a whole generation, away from the desire for material possessions. The beat poets and the jazz artists that arose from this culture reshaped the creative playing field and inspired such artists and bands as Bob Dylan, Pink Floyd, and The Beatles.

Jack Kerouac’s famous On the Road, and actual trip on the road inspired many other artists. The work is a largely autobiographical piece that was inspired by and written on the spontaneous road trips Kerouac and his associates took across America. Inspired by jazz, poetry, and psychedelic experiences, On the Road is considered the defining work of the Beat Generation. Kerouac’s creative escape into a self-made world of homelessness, void of material possessions, inspired artists and others to embrace his way of life. For the most part, the counter culture of the sixties became identified by this type of living. For example, beatnik is defined by Merriam-Webster as:
A person who participated in a social movement of the 1950s and early 1960s which stressed artistic self-expression and the rejection of the mores of conventional society ; broadly : a usually young and artistic person who rejects the mores of conventional society (Merriam-Webster Online)
The etymology of the word comes from “hipster,” which stems from the word “hip.”

However, these concepts and definitions were constantly evolving; being reinterpreted and changing as each group of people embraced these concepts in different ways. For instance, the famous novelist Ken Kesey and his “The Merry Pranksters” were a group of people who lived communally in California and advocated the use of psychedelic drugs. One of its many members was Beat Generation hero Neal Cassady. Their early journeys were documented in Tom Wolfe’s book The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, where Cassady drove the Merry Pranksters across the United States to celebrate the publication of Kesey’s novel, Sometimes a Great Notion and to visit the 1964 World’s Fair (in New York City.) The Merry Pranksters were known for using marijuana, amphetamines, and LSD. During their tour they introduced their way of life and narcotics to many people along the way. The Merry Pranksters embraced the concept of communal living, which was also embraced by The Diggers.

The original diggers were a group of British agrarian communists, but their later incarnation was a radical community-action group of improv actors created by Emmett Grogan, Peter Coyote, and Peter Berg. This group existed from about 1966 to 1968, and were based in San Francisco. They opened “free stores” which gave out anything to anyone who needed it—from food to medical care to housing. They also hosted free musical concerts and sponsored political art. Bob Dylan dedicated his 1978 album Street Legal to Grogan, who was a huge fan and would sing Dylan’s songs with his troupe. Peter Coyote is an American born actor, author, director, screenwriter and narrator (of films, theatre, television and audio books.) His work includes narrating the opening ceremony of the 2002 Winter Olympics as well as co-hosting the 2000 Oscar telecasts. The Diggers inspired Abbie Hoffman to later found the Youth International Party.

Another supporter of these communal ideas was folk legend Woody Guthrie, who was homeless for a period of his life. Woodrow Wilson Guthrie was born on July 14, 1912, in Okemah, Oklahoma—his father was considered a cowboy, and both he and his Kansas born mother nurtured Guthrie’s musical talent by teaching him western songs, Native American songs, and Scottish folk tunes. Guthrie, an inquisitive topographical individual from the start, experienced a great deal of turmoil and loss at an early age. The Guthries suffered the loss of their daughter, financial ruin, and the institutionalization and eventual death of Nora Belle Guthrie, Woody’s mother. In 1920, Guthrie’s hometown experienced the oil boom, which after refurbishing the city, dried up and left the town and the family penniless.

Woody abandoned his home for Texas soon after. He married a fellow musician’s sister in 1933 and had three children with her. In Texas, Guthrie attempted to utilize the skills honed from his parents teachings and began his musical career. He also developed a taste for fine art. With the onslaught of the depression and the great dust storm period, Woody was forced onto the road like thousands of other “dustbowl refugees.” He set out in search of some means to support his family, who remained back home in Pampa, Texas. Guthrie hitchhiked, hopped boxcars and freight trains, and hoofed his way to California. He ended up taking any odd jobs that came his way—he would play songs and paint signs in exchange for a roof over his head. In doing this, he developed a love for traveling and the road—a theme that would prevail over his music.

After witnessing experiencing tension and racism first hand as a refugee outsider, Guthrie secured a job with Los Angeles Woody’s KFVD radio, singing traditional songs as well as a few original compositions. With his associates, he gathered a large movement, garnering support from many refugees much like himself, who were living in makeshift cardboard and tin shelters. Guthrie also used his radio position to propagate his controversial political and social views. With his broad topics ranging from politics to religion, Woody fought for civil rights for his fellow homeless migrant workers. These themes made their way into his songs, which changed the face of music.
Woody headed for New York City and arrived in 1940 where he was quickly embraced for his style and heritage, and was recorded. In New York, he worked with, many great musicians such as Lead Belly, Cisco Houston, Burl Ives, Pete Seeger, Will Geer, Sonny Terry, Brownie McGhee, Josh White, Millard Lampell, Bess Hawes, Sis Cunningham, and many others. In collaboration, inspired, he would continue to play and write songs. His songs, , were always driven by political themes. The band, “The Almanacs” which would later be reincarnated as “The Weavers,” would become the most commercially successful and influential folk music group of the early 1950s. It was through their popularity and publicity that Guthrie’s compositions would become known throughout the United States and beyond. Using the funds they accumulated from sales of recordings and concerts, Guthrie was able to bring his family to New York.

In time, Guthrie’s talk radio show became increasingly chaotic and unexplainably delusional, according to musician’s official biography. He left New York with his family and headed out to Oregon where a documentary film crew working on a film about the building of the Grand Coulee Dam wanted to utilize his songwriting talent. After working on the film, his life in Oregon was less grounded and more transient and Guthrie found himself desirous of returning to New York. In a constant state of travel, under great pressure because of his political views, life proved to be too stressful for his wife. With his family in a continual state of flux, His constant travels and political ambitions proved to be too stressful for his wife and Their marriage ended as Guthrie continued his journey. Guthrie remarried, moved again, and was inspired by a multiplicity of events and cultures during and following the Second World War. Although he continued producing his radio show, possibly brought on by a medical condition, his behavior on air was erratic and unpredictable. His life in New York deteriorated. He left home after he became erratic and violent. He was blacklisted during the McCarthy era, a period of political hysteria, focusing on post world war two fears of communism in America. He was later diagnosed with Huntington’s chorea, a progressive genetic neurological disorder. Dying a slow painful death, he was hospitalized in New York, were he was visited and inspired various artists such as Bob Dylan and Joan Baez. Woody Guthrie died on October 3, 1967 at the age of 55 while at Creedmoor State Hospital in Queens, New York. In his lifetime he composed over three thousand songs, published two novels, created numerous artworks, authored manuscripts, poems, prose, and plays and wrote hundreds of letters and news articles. He also inspired a new generation of folk musicians who have tried to live up to his potential and continued in his path.

While the information we have is for the most part, scarce, we are presented with crucial facts that shaped the art world. The idolization of the beat generation and such artists as Woody Guthrie created an ideal concept of the homeless artist, when in truth the lives of such people were riddled with strife. Just for example, Guthrie’s voyages caused the end of his marriages, and he led a deeply troubled life. While we see many great examples of the good that came from the era, like the free stores and communes, we still have the debilitating ideal. Regardless of good or bad though, homeless art and artists from the sixties completely altered the art world, on the streets and in the galleries, permanently.

IV. The History, Part Three: 1980s – 1990s Squatter Artists and the East Village

As New York City entered the 1980s it was met with an escalating number of homeless people. According to the Coalition for the Homeless, the total homeless population in shelters in 1983 was, on average, 13,000, with the exception of September and December of 1983 where only, on average, 5,000 homeless were accounted for. As the years went by, up until March of 1987, the numbers of homeless was steadily increasing, reaching 28,737 people in March. The numbers then steadily decreased in the early 1990s to, on average, 20,000 people and again increased slowly after 1992, reaching about 24,000 in 1996 (“NYC Homeless Shelter Population,” 2008, p.5).

While the period between the end of World War II and the late 1970s was characterized by the homeless living in flophouses, single room occupancies (SROs), and missions in the Bowery district, the 1980s experienced a radical transformation in the homeless population. The economic recession of the early 1980s led to more citizens finding themselves on the street and relying on public homeless shelters. In addition, the rising housing costs left many unable to pay for their homes with the wages and public benefits they received. Changes in city policy resulted in the SROs becoming extinct, federally funded public housing projects ceased, and the HIV and crack epidemics further pushed more and more people onto the streets. In 1980, shelters in NYC were taking in, on average, 2,000 people on any given night (Levinson, 2004, p.418).

A series of court decisions in the 1980s followed: Callahan v. Carey, filed in 1979, required the city to provide homeless shelter to all men that requested it. Other cases extended the requirement to provide shelter to women and families with children (Eldredge v. Koch in 1982 and McCain v. Koch in 1986, respectively). Costly welfare hotels were replaced with apartment-style “Tier II” shelters run by nonprofit organizations (Levinson, 2004, p.420). Other shelters were also remodeled, transforming from congregate shelters with hundreds of cots to smaller facilities with more private sleeping quarters. Despite the reforms in the shelter systems, many were still left to struggle to survive, residing in abandoned city-owned buildings in neighborhoods such as the East Village. State-supported gentrification that affected the area in the 1980s put an end to building affordable housing and resulted in riots and bitter encounters of the homeless squatters with city officials. The housing struggle was marked with the encampment of homeless people in Alphabet City’s Tompkins Square Park on August 7, 1988.

The homeless in the East Village didn’t only consist of those plagued by drugs and AIDS, but also artists who were victims of the declining art scene of the 1970s and 1980s. Going back in time to almost the beginning of the 20th century, the East Village/Lower East Side neighborhood was one of the main contributors of arts and culture in NYC. Hip-hop, folk music, punk rock, experimental theater, and the Beat Generation were all born in this cultural niche. The art gallery scene of the 1980s introduced a new post-modern art in America characterized by artists such as Kiki Smith, Jeff Koons and Greer Lankton (“East Village-Manhattan,” n.d). As artist Walter Robinson said, “The East village art scene was “about making an ‘art movement’ seem more real by anchoring it to a concrete physical area” (“Selling the Lower East Side,” n.d).

The commercial art scene was short-lived, however, lasting roughly from 1980 to 1984. Although the 1970s were marked by many underground subcultures where artists could exhibit what they experimented with and created, these exhibitions were less than welcomed by corporate art marketers that were centered uptown and in SoHo. The art scene did continue to expand to include about 70 commercial galleries located throughout 14 blocks (“Selling the Lower East Side,” n.d). East village clubs and galleries functioned as a means for artists to promote their work. Art bars such as the Red Bar and the Pyramid opened where fashion, music, performance, video and painting could be promoted; all but a few of these galleries closed by the late 1980s (“Selling the Lower East Side,” n.d). Artists such as Basquiat would socialize in the scene, he being one of the most renowned self-promoting artists.

This art scene began to be viewed by the media as not only a place of littered sidewalks and urban decay, but as a place of curiosity and desire. Real estate developers were quick to take advantage of that new view and promote redevelopment of the area, leading to the end of many galleries and consequently to more struggling and starving artists.

A perfect example of the struggling/starving artists that dominated the East Village and Alphabet City in the late 1980s was immortalized by Jonathan Larson in the rock musical RENT. The theatrical production, based on Puccini’s La Boheme, takes place in the Alphabet City area of New York City and follows a year in the life of artists—including a filmmaker, actor, and musician—who are trying to make a living through their creative endeavors. Like many struggling artists, the characters are squatters in a loft, suffering from many issues that plagued the 1980s. The characters are coping with HIV/AIDS, working to overcome drug addictions (mostly heroin, the popular street drug that is the reason one of the characters contracted HIV in the first place), and are tossed and turned as they try to find their place in an area undergoing gentrification. Although the musical’s story is fiction, it is strikingly accurate in exposing the issues that artists faced during the 1980s in New York City, and is a great artistic example of the struggles both artists and the homeless had to overcome.

While the city did dispossess hundreds of squatters in the aforementioned abandoned buildings in Alphabet City, the anti-gentrification struggle did help save 12 squatter buildings as they outlasted official resistance. Many of these squatter buildings became places for artists’ exhibitions and galleries in the early 1990s. As Alternative Art New York, 1965-1985 states, “The artist presence in the squats…served a political purpose, because it humanized the squatters to those neighbors who resented them as loud, dirty, and threatening” (Ault, 2003, p 350). A significant homeless artist whose work was featured in squatter galleries was John Ed Croft, “the most visible animateur of homeless art in squats” (Ault, 2003, p 350). He ran the Chocolate Milk Gallery in a squat on East Seventh Street organizing exhibitions and selling homeless artwork. Tina White, another significant figure, ran the Art Program for the Homeless, distributing art supplies to shelters and collected the result. White visited the squat art exhibitions and her gallery exhibited work by squatters such as Carla Cubit. Between 1987 and 1989, Martha Rosler organized a series of discussions and exhibitions about urban homelessness called If You Live Here. Work by squatter artists was exhibited, much of which was work from artists of Bullet Space, a well-known squatter building on East Third Street. If You Live Here brought squatters’ struggle to broader notice among activists and politicized artists (Ault, 2003, p 350). In 1998, the New Museum of Contemporary Art featured an exhibition called Urban Encounters consisting of a “symbolic squatters shack” constructed from street materials and filled with artwork. The exhibition featured a urine-filled bottle, which was symbolic for the sanitation conditions of the squats where there are no toilets. As Bullet Space squatter Andrew Castrucci said, part of the pleasure regarding objects such as this lies in knowing the secret language of survival. He credits the squatters with delaying gentrification. Seth Tobocman wrote an urban fable entitled War in the Neighborhood about the squat art’s struggles. He combined narratives with oral recollections and videotapes of other artists to portray the struggle and the destruction that urban transformation entails. To conclude, Julie Ault writes:

But what is the significance for squat art in artistic culture? Artists caught in a mesh of historical events, like a revolution or a war, and constrained to image those conditions and feelings, are pushed towards producing correspondingly intense imagery. The squatter resistance of the late 1980s and early 1990s was a quasirevolutionary circumstance, a revolt against the rule of the absolute bourgeois. It took place under the noses of New York’s cultural establishment, which, for the most part, chose to look away. (Ault, 2003, p 355)

It is the year 2009, and New York City is still choosing to look away.

Paralleling the presence of squatter artists was the rise of graffiti art and artists.

The start of New York City graffiti can be traced to World War II, during which some servicemen created images of “Kilroy” poking his head and nose over a fence wall with the words “Kilroy Was Here!” (Ancelet, 2006). This graffiti (see Appendix I) became a common sight in American cities and wherever the American military traveled abroad, soon becoming a symbol of America’s presence throughout the world. Interest in graffiti art among the NYC youth, however, started in the 1960s with a young man named Julio who began to write his tag, Julio 204, on the subway system. A young man named Demetrios who went by the tag Taki 183 also left his mark on the subway system, which earned him an article in the New York Times. Consequently, many youth began to follow in their footsteps and express themselves on the subways. As Pamela Dennant (1997) exclaims in her American Studies research:

Writers and trains have an almost spiritual connection to one another, as this is where hip-hop graffiti was first conceived. The subway system was seen as a network system for graffiti, it was an icon for graffiti writers. (Chapter 1)

But subway graffiti doesn’t always refer to graffiti on train cars. It may even be in places we least expect or don’t see at all. In her book, The Mole People, Jennifer Toth dedicates Chapter 12 to this form of art by the homeless who live in the subway-system tunnels underground: Tunnel Art. For the tunnel artists, or “graffiti writers,” as they are usually called, their masterpieces are their lives. As one of them exclaims, “…they’re works of art, and they mean a lot to us. We got food down here, some warmth, and we got art. What more could we ask for?” (Toth, 1993, p.119). The chapter speaks a lot about an 18 year-old homeless graffiti artist named Sane, who passed away due to unknown circumstances (Toth, 1993, p.119). What is captured is the passion of this artist, his skill and creativity in creating huge, 15-foot murals that captured the sense of disorder and the rubbish in the lives of those living underground. It’s implied that perhaps he committed suicide after he realized how many years he had lost to graffiti and the tunnels. Another graffiti artist named Chris exclaimed, “When I go down there, I can’t wait to come back up…I hate the danger, I hate risking my life each time for something so stupid. But I get an idea in my head for a piece and I can’t get rid of it…and I have to do it” (Toth, 1993, p.123). It’s not so much that the homeless want to spray paint in the tunnels voluntarily but because they have no place else to express that creativity (since graffiti is considered vandalizing public property and is discouraged by law.) Their need to see their concept completed and appreciated is not met aboveground and what results is their having to complete their works underground. In the 1980s, when graffiti art was at its peak, New Yorkers appreciated graffiti art and the artists. According to Lee Quinones, “The art captured a movement which New Yorkers understood, a message of color on darkness, individuality, continuity, and survival,” further claiming that New Yorkers respected the artists for the risks they took when painting on subway cars, bringing color and imagination to the crumbling city (quoted in Toth, 1993, p.132). For example, in 1978, a group of young boys spray-painted a whole train for Christmas, with the words “Merry Christmas and Happy New Year” (Toth, 1993, p.131).The public was awed, some applauded, others just smiled and admired. But the media portrayed graffiti as vandalism and the graffiti artists would be imprisoned if caught doing it, so subway train graffiti became a vanished art form as the practitioners moved into the dangerous tunnels.

Perhaps if homeless graffiti artists were given the means to better themselves, they could transport their art onto canvas and away from public property. Or, they could put their graffiti skill to better use, and give rise to more creations such as the “5 pointz” building in the Bronx (see Appendix II). Artists need special permits to be able to paint on this building, giving their acts legality. There are many places and buildings in NYC which could use some color and decorated murals, so why not employ graffiti artists to do that?

Many artists all over New York City are victims of homelessness, not just those in the East Village. An anecdotal case would do justice here. Jimmy Mirikitani, a resident of Hell’s Kitchen and a past resident of Hiroshima was a homeless painter for almost two decades. He was born in Sacramento in 1920 but raised in Hiroshima. He returned to the U.S to pursue a career in art when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and he was forced to move to an internment camp in northern California under Executive Order 9066. In 1947, he was finally released and tried to resume his art but wasn’t successful. He ended up doing seasonal work in resorts, but eventually became homeless in the 1980s, living in New York City’s Greenwich Village and selling artwork to survive. After almost 20 years he was helped by filmmaker Linda Hattendorf to move into an assisted-living retirement center where he lives now, with whom he then collaborated on an independent film, Cats of Mirikitani, about his life (Rosofsky, n.d).

Jimmy Mirikitani is certainly one of the many struggling artists that New York City’s streets have come to house. Various programs were created to attempt to assist the artists. For example, in the 1980s, Maria Fridman from the Social Service Board of the New York Society for Ethical Culture (NYSEC) helped organize a Homeless Artists and Writers Workshop which, as NYSEC’s homepage states, provides for artists “a way to keep their artistic integrity” through annual performances of their talents for a live audience, “keeping hope alive” (“NYSEC Social Service Board,” n.d). In June 2005, the Jan Hus Presbyterian Church on East 74th Street organized the Circle of Arts program through its Homeless Outreach and Advocacy Committee as an empowerment opportunity for homeless artists. The Circle of Arts brings together artists from all walks of life to develop a professional art gallery. The goal of the program is to promote emotional satisfaction and social relationships to strengthen people’s ability to achieve goals such as employment and housing. Many artists are denied the opportunity to share their work with the larger community, and the program lets them. Not only can the homeless showcase their work with other supportive artists, but they are also given the chance to sell their works.

After a substantial amount of research it was obvious that not many instances of homeless art programs are found in New York City. It is essential to look outside of NYC in certain instances, especially to those dealing with homeless art programs. Many other projects we came across were in California, one being a theater program run by John Malpede for homeless people who live in the Skid Row neighborhood of Los Angeles. The theater is called the Los Angeles Poverty Department and includes free workshops where anyone from the neighborhood could partake in making and presenting shows. The program spread the word of life on Skid Row out to the rest of Los Angeles as it included shows where the homeless were able to share their life stories and who they were. It also gave homeless artists something to do. One of them painted a mural that was then made into a phone booth and put on the street with a phone. Anybody who passed it could make a phone call to a loved one anywhere in the world. This creative idea not only allowed people to get in touch with their loved ones but also promoted the program and gained more support. Various artists and performers would attend the shows and make acquaintances with the homeless, giving the latter hope of one day getting out of their situation.

Another homeless-art program is located in Austin, Texas, called “Art From the Streets.” This program consists of gallery openings held in the Austin Resource Center for the Homeless. The artists display their artwork, which is available for purchase. All of the money from the sale of a painting goes directly to the artist who created it. For many homeless artists, this opportunity to showcase and sell their artwork gives them a chance to open bank accounts, purchase food and clothing, and even rent apartments (“Art From the Streets,” n.d)

Walking through Central Park it’s very likely that one will come across at least one artist, either a man or a woman sitting on a bench drawing or painting (see Appendix III). It’s hard to imagine that some well-known actors, hosts, musicians and artists that we regularly hear or read about were also, at one point, homeless. Danny Bonaduce, Halle Berry, Kelly Clarkson, Kurt Cobain, Ella Fitzgerald, and Woody Guthrie are some of the many examples. They made it through and reached success and fame. Other homeless artists, however, are less fortunate, and something must be done to help them.

V. The Current Situation

On April 23, 2009, The Coalition for the Homeless put out their “State of the Homeless 2009” report, describing the grim facts of homelessness in New York City. According to its compiled statistics, in 2008 nearly 110,000 New Yorkers slept in homeless shelters (p. 3), with more than 36,000 individuals staying per night (p. 3). The most recent daily census (April 23, 2009) by the NYC Department of Homeless Services counted 35,008 homeless individuals in shelters, 14,769—or over 42%—of those who were children (p. 1). The State of the Homeless (2009) goes on to discuss the drop in affordable housing from 2005-2008 (p. 11), in which over 80,200 fewer rental apartments cost $1,000 or less per month in 2008 then they did four years before, perhaps the reason for 32% more New Yorkers using shelters than they did six years ago (p. 6). With the economic downturn hitting even housed Americans hard, the Bloomberg Administration is focusing its efforts (and budget) on low-income families suffering from the recession, pushing more homeless onto the streets (p. 15)—the city went from moving 5,777 homeless families into public housing in 2004 to a sickly 474 in 2008 (p. 17). Based on these statistics, it is clear that New York City is suffering from one of the worst homeless crises in recent memory, and it is vital that something be done—vital that some litigation be passed (or even proposed)—to help not just the homeless artists, but all homeless individuals.
Homeless artists are, unfortunately, not New York City’s main priority when it comes to homeless politics. However, while there hasn’t been a policy to help homeless artists since the 1920s, there have been some efforts made to stop it from retrogressing. When the Fifth Avenue Association, deeming sidewalk art sales as “magnets for prostitution, three-card-monte gangs, pickpockets and petty crime” (Lederman 1998), tried to “eliminate all street vending” (para. 7) by getting art reclassified as to require licensing to sell, artists fought back. When the police began arresting (but never charging) artists such as Robert Lederman (Sept 1996), the president of Artists’ Response to Illegal State Tactics (A.R.T.I.S.T), for selling their artwork on the streets, again artists fought back, this time going all the way to court, winning an appeals case. While Lederman (1998) himself may not be homeless, his fight for the rights of all street artists led to the repeal of the licensing requirement, the judge saying, “It is well settled that a speaker’s rights are not lost merely because compensation is received; a speaker is no less a speaker because he or she is paid to speak…” (para. 22),.

For artists and other street vendors, the fight is ongoing. In 2005 a new law, Intro 621, was proposed—a bill that would open up all streets and avenues to vendors, but also restrict them to three per block, one of which could be a food vendor, one a general vendor, and one a “First Amendment” (such as an artist) vendor (Kludt 2005). The biggest problem with this bill was giving vendors a “priority number,” forcing some sellers to be moved to a bad location (para. 10). In 2007, another bill appeared to limit the activities of street vendors, especially artists, who were being harassed (Bragg 2007). The bill, proposed by Councilmember Alan Gerson (para. 28), was followed soon after in 2008 with another slew of proposed legislation:

The [eight] bills the Council considered would…increase to 1,023 from 853 the number of merchandise vending licenses; restrict book and magazine vending in certain heavily trafficked areas; prohibit vendors from leaving pushcarts, stands and goods unattended for more than 30 minutes…[also] the Bloomberg administration wanted to change state law to require the fingerprinting of people arrested for unlawful vending—a means of cracking down…on unlicensed vendors who unfairly compete with licensed vendors, crowd sidewalks and endanger pedestrians. (Moynihan and Chan 2008)

Most street vendors were only happy with the expansion of licenses given out, saying creating more jobs would help the economy (para. 22), while the rest of the proposals were “confusing or unnecessary” (para. 19). Again, the idea was raised to require licensing for art vendors, despite the fact that they are selling their own creative works. For the street artist, it seems that every few years a new bill is proposed to limit his or her ability to make a living—a huge problem for homeless artists who need all the income they can get.

There is, however, good news when it comes to federal policy. Earlier this year, the House of Representatives approved $50 million in recovery funds for the National Endowment for the Arts (New York Times 2009) as part of the economic stimulus package. At the end of February (Pogrebin 2009), another bill was introduced that would include an addition $10 million increase in funds for both the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, two organizations that are vital in supporting art and artists around the United States. The Obama administration is even planning stronger support of arts education in schools, promising increased financing (Spears March 2009). While this appears to be a lot of money, the Freelancer’s Union reminds us that “this funding, however, is earmarked almost exclusively for arts and culture institutions; little is aimed at addressing creative workers’ needs directly” (p. 2).

Despite these gains on the federal playing field, the current legislation in New York City is not following Obama’s path. Beginning in 2005, the Bloomberg Administration radically changed the city’s policy on homeless, instituting a “cut-off” (Coalition for the Homeless 2008) program in which homeless were no longer receiving priority for “federal housing programs, including Section 8 vouchers and public housing” (p. 13), believing it would lead to less-crowded shelters. Unfortunately, the policy seems to have had the opposite effect (see Appendix IV), increasing the number of homeless in shelters as more Section 8 vouchers go to low-income families hurt by the economic crisis (Coalition for the Homeless 2009, p. 15). In 2007, the Bloomberg administration’s “House Stability Plus” program was finally conceded as a failure (p. 16) after two years of forcing thousands of homeless either back onto the streets or into illegal boarding houses as “independent living” (Coalition for the Homeless 2008, p. 25). So far, the Bloomberg Administration has done nothing but damage to the homeless population, a group that is only increasing in size.

There are, however, currently proposals for new legislation out there, including the reauthorization of the McKinney-Vento bill (NCH Public Policy Recommendations p. 1), originally proposed by the National Coalition for the Homeless and actually introduced to Congress in mid-April (NPACH 2009). The McKinney-Vento bill, first enacted in 1987, was renewed in 1990, and has since expired. The McKinney Act was “the first significant piece of federal legislation to address homelessness in fifty years” (Hopper p. 181), consisting of “fifteen programs providing a range of supports to homeless people, including emergency shelter, transitional housing, permanent housing, job training, primary health care, and education” (NCH Public Policy Recommendations p. 2). Historically, the McKinney-Vento Act helped hundreds of homeless, decreasing the number seeking shelter from 27,712 in January of 1988 to 20,995 in January of 1990 in New York City alone (NYC Homeless Shelter Population 1983-2008 p. 3), and was expanded in 1990 to include aid for homeless children and homeless with severe mental illnesses (Hopper p. 181-2). With the ever-increasing homeless population based in the economic crisis, reinstituting the McKinney-Vento bill (and the other policies that went along with it, including Projects for Assistance for Transitions from Homelessness [PATH] that would assist homeless with disabilities [Hopper p. 182]) could very well be a smart move to help all homeless, including the artists.

VI. Policy Proposal

Based on the efforts of both private homeless organizations and state- and city-wide policy attempts, we have put together a series of suggested steps that should be taken to combat homelessness is the widely diverse city of New York. By looking at what has been successful—whether in the city specifically or in other areas of the United States—along with what has failed, we hope to set up a policy that will be both effective in combating homelessness and benefiting the community as a whole.

As homeless artists represent only a small percentage of the homeless population, in order to establish a policy that would be reasonably debated we have divided it into parts. The first part (I) will focus on issues that directly affect the majority of homeless people, while part two (II) will be concerned with the specific needs and issues facing homeless artists today.

I. Helping the Homeless

The population of homeless individuals, as previously stated, has reached frightening levels in recent years, and the current recession shows only signs of expanding it. In some ways, however, this slew of “new homeless” could been seen as useful for policymaking as it is transforming the typical view of “homeless” from a crazy, drunk, filthy “idiot” to someone who is down on his luck, whose home has been foreclosed, whose job was lost. Using this new image can be an advantage as it gives room for more innovative policy suggestions, such as what is described below.

Since the number one problem homeless people face is the lack of consistent shelter for the night, the first part of our policy will work to remediate that. Instead of sending homeless to shelters that lack beds or privacy, we suggest to convert unused buildings into “apartment shelters” for the homeless. As it would be economically impossible for every homeless person in New York to get his or her own full apartment or even private bedroom, we have established a sort of college dorm set-up for these buildings, with partial communal resources such as kitchens and bathrooms (such as 1 for every 4 people) and a multi-use “performance space” for artists (more on this later). In 1983, the city of Amsterdam, working to eliminate squatting, used state funds to purchase “two hundred buildings that were occupied by squatters” (Pruijt p. 5), turning them over to “housing associations” who in turn gave “lease contracts” to the individuals that lived there. Overall, this seemed to be fairly successful. Since “entire buildings” (Pruijt p. 5) stand empty in areas of New York City—some of which are occupied by “covert” squatters (Pruijt p. 10)—by having the government purchase these, hundreds of homeless could be taken off the streets and given a place to live. Since these homes aren’t being used anyway, this program could be a win-win situation.

Homes would not come without being repaid, however, which brings us to the next phase of our policy, “work-study.” After living on the streets for many years, most homeless people lose their social skills, become distrustful, and need help to assimilate back into society. Homeless, without an address or access to cleaning themselves and their clothes—find it different, if not impossible to get a job. It seems that homeless need a job to afford a home, but need a home in order to get a job—a catch-22 that leaves them at a standstill. Our work-study program will allow the homeless to build up their skills—both social and job-specific—in a low-stakes environment. As the apartment shelters will have communal areas such as kitchens, living rooms, and restrooms, each homeless person living there would be required to participate in the “chores” a household would be expected to have, only with payment. For example, a homeless person living in apartment A could work as a one of the “cooks,” helping to prepare food for the homeless that live in his building, while his roommate could work as a janitor, helping to keep the communal areas clean. While the rooms that belong to individual homeless would be their own responsibility (this will also help homeless to get used to what it is like to live in a house again), everything communal will be taken care of by a homeless individual whose “job” it is to take care of it. Each job will be headed by a supervisor from a non-profit or government organization, whose job is to make sure things run smoothly and to dole out “paychecks.” As these homeless are working, they will be paid, although a large percent of that will go toward “rent.” If someone living in these apartments has a job that earns him say, $500/month, perhaps $300 of that would go to rent. It is very important, however, that not all of the money goes into housing, since being given a paycheck would allow the individuals to purchase their own things and to begin learn to save money.
Saving money is a big part of these housing programs, since the final goal is to have a homeless individual assimilate back into society. Supervisors will be there to open individual bank accounts (before an impossibility based on the lack of a home address) and teach effective ways to save money. This work-study method will be effective in more than one way. First, it will give the homeless time to get used to having a job again in an encouraging environment. Second, it would allow them to start a savings account that could help them out of poverty. Third—and most important—by working with other homeless it would build a sense of community, something that is lacking in all other shelters. Many homeless, such as “Footy” who was seen in a documentary on homelessness, expressed the dangers of going to a shelter—you could be beaten, raped, or robbed. These fears seriously damage social skills, and make many homeless (rightfully) untrusting, keeping to themselves . By having homeless work together, they will learn to count on one other, help each other out, and become friends—extremely important psychological skills that will help them out when they re-enter the work force.

This program is “work-study,” however, so it is important to focus on the learning aspects as well. As social skills will be built by working together, classes to prepare you for an outside job (another goal of this program) will be taught by various organizations. English classes and preparations for GED exams are two classes that would be especially helpful in increasing the skills of the homeless to enhance the likelihood of them getting a job. The ones who run these classes would also help the homeless to find and apply for jobs outside of their home. Once a job is found, the homeless would begin to pay for their apartment out of their new paycheck. As long as they can keep making payments, they would be allowed to stay, but the goal would be to find a real place to live outside of these apartment shelters.

Other services, such as psychiatric counseling (both group and individual) and illness management would also be provided for those homeless who have diseases such as schizophrenia or epilepsy, thus making it more difficult for them to live on their own. Group counseling will be open to all who want to talk about their own experiences of being homeless and how to overcome them.

Funding would also not be as big an issue as it seems. Since the homeless would be doing the main services in their shelters, there would be a reduction in the costs of outside employment. While these apartments would be subsidized by the government, funding from private donors and non-profit organizations would also help sustain the program. According to the Coalition for the Homeless, emergency shelter for “homeless families costs $36,000/year” (p. 37), or “approximately $8,076 more than the average annual cost of a federal housing subsidy” (National Alliance to End Homelessness) and that is not including emergency room care for illnesses that occur while on the street. According to a study done on hospital admissions of the homeless in Hawaii, “Their rate of psychiatric hospitalization was over 100 times their non-homeless cohort…the excess cost for treating these homeless individuals was [an estimated] $3.5 million or about $2,000 per person” (National Alliance to End Homelessness). Homeless individuals also “spent an average of four days longer per hospital visit than comparable non-homeless people. This extra cost, approximately $2,414 per hospitalization, is attributable to homelessness” (National Alliance to End Homelessness). This means that not only is shelter cost more expensive than giving homeless personal housing, but there is the cost of emergency care on top of that. While our policy would be able to help all aspects of homelessness and prepare homeless men and women to go out into society, the current practices are detrimental to both the homeless people being treated and society as a whole.

II. Addressing the Specific Needs of the Homeless Artist

While the proposed apartment shelters will be used to house homeless artists as well, there are still many specific needs that artists have that need to be addressed. For these purposes, we will take ideas from both the WPA and private artistic organizations established to help homeless artists, such as the Flux Factory (Silverman), a building where local artists could “live and work, displaying their art to each other and the public” (para. 1). Since the housing needs of the homeless artists will already be taken care of, this section of the policy will involve how to employ currently homeless artists, allowing them to make a living off what they love.

As previously established, “homeless artists” include writers, painters, sculptors, photographers, actors, and musicians. Because of these varieties of art forms, different aspects of the policy will affect the different artists. The following categories are broad, and some methods will overlap, but it is important to address the specific needs of each type of homeless artist.

i. The Visual Artist

The “visual artist” is perhaps the most visible of all homeless artists, being the one that sells her photography, paintings, and sculptures on the streets of New York. Visual artists are also the ones that have been the most helped by private organizations, such as the Bronx building known as “5 Pointz” that dedicates itself to graffiti art (“About 5Pointz: ‘The Institute of Higher Burnin’’”). As seen earlier, many artists throw themselves into dangerous situations, such as underground tunnels, for a place to put their art. Inspired by 5 Pointz, part of this policy will contain public spaces specifically set aside for the use of art. These spaces will include parts of buildings, such as the 5 Pointz (once a warehouse), theater spaces, parks, and areas in public school yards. Since most schoolyards have lots of blank walls—some of which are covered with murals—artists could be employed to paint those—or similar walls in public parks—to beautify the community. Of course, unlike other spaces, the paintings done would have to be approved by the school board (the last thing you want is a gruesome anti-war painting based on Guernica painted in front of a grammar school). Other programs, including the MTA’s Arts for Transit, also help to employ visual artists to create sculptures, murals, and mosaics to help beautify the subway system (Arts for Transit). These jobs would both pay the artist and help to make the school or park more cheerful looking, a win-win situation. These visual artists could also be employed to build and paint sets for local theater groups, especially ones that employ homeless actors. This way, the artists are able to work together, building a sense of community, to create art that everyone can enjoy.

Restricting artists to just what can be painted in areas with children wouldn’t be fair, however, so we would also follow what many private organizations already do—homeless art sales. Part of these apartments could have a workspace for the homeless to work on their art, whether that be sculpture, photography, or painting. Depending on the amount of art produced, the apartments would run an art exhibition to the public, perhaps charging a small admission fee, where the art can be sold. The revenue from these sales would mostly go to the artist, while a small percentage would go to the apartment for the purpose of purchasing more art supplies. While art would still be allowed to be sold on the streets (First Amendment rights still protect that), this environment would bring in high profits, raising the self-esteem and credibility of a street artist to one with high art hanging in a gallery.

ii. The Creative Writer

Unlike visual art, creative writing is one of the least visible art forms created by the homeless. In order to help employ creative writers, our policy would like to suggest local newspapers, especially free ones such as The NY Metro, to have a column, such as “Poem of the Day” that could be open to both homeless and non-homeless writers. Excerpts of short fiction or memoirs could also be included in the column, giving writers a chance to get their work out there. Lee Stringer, author of Grand Central Winter, when speaking at the Macaulay Honors College, spoke of how he was discovered based on an article he wrote in Street News, a newspaper run by the homeless. While our policy would like to require certain newspapers to have a creative writing section in them, if this cannot work we would encourage privately run homeless newspapers to do the same.

For longer works, there have been anthologies of homeless writing published before, such as I Have Arrived Before My Words: Autobiographical Writing of Homeless Women, edited by Deborah Pugh, or Robert Wolf’s An American Mosaic: Prose and Poetry by Everyday Folk, two books that were looked at in this research. While we cannot mandate private publishers to publish the works of the homeless, self-publishing is always an option. In this case, the larger organization that handles all of these homeless housing locations could publish a yearly anthology of the best creative works—which could also include some art—and sell it at the gallery alongside visual art. We will also use the communal art space for “Open Mics,” open to the public for a small ticket fee, where poets can read their poetry and prose writers can read either short stories or excerpts from longer works. Just like the visual art, a percentage of income will go to the writer (smaller, since the book/magazine will contain the writings of many different people) while another percentage will go towards keeping the program alive.

iii. The Musician

Music Under NY (MUNY), a section of the MTA’s Arts for Transit, is one of the best ways the city has been helping musicians. Although these musicians are not often homeless, all musicians are invited to apply. Auditions are held once a year at Grand Central Terminal (“Music Under NY”) where everything from a single harpist to an authentic Louisiana Big Band are granted spots through the NYC subway system. Our policy would try to increase the number of musicians the subway employs along with setting up other spaces for concerts. Just as there will be gallery openings for visual arts, the space could be use for concerts held by homeless musicians. CDs could be self-published as well, and sold at the concerts. Not only would the musicians make money, but it would also grant them publicity while spreading new songs and great music to the public for a minimal fee.

iv. The Actor

The actor is the one artist that will make the most use of the performance space each apartment shelter would have. Like the homeless art troupe started in Los Angeles, these performances spaces would hold shows for homeless actors, whether they are professionals or, in the L.A. case, just want to try out theater. Since theater is such a collaborative effort, producing a show would involve every type of homeless artist so far described. The actors would act in the show, the musicians could play the music (whether or not it’s a “musical,” most theater utilizes a band), visual artists would build and paint the set, and writers could help produce a script. Once or twice a year, these apartments could put on shows—from one-act plays to huge musicals—that are open to the public for a small fee. Charging $10-$20 a show, these shows would allow all the actors to express themselves in their own ways.

v. All Artists

In order to discourage anything stronger than friendly competition between each apartment shelter, we will also have a yearly “Art Festival” containing the artworks of all the buildings. Tickets will be sold to get in, and all types of artwork created throughout the year will be displayed and sold. Writers will recite some of their work, musicians will play songs, and skits or excerpts from plays will be performed. Visual artwork, literary magazines, and CDs will be everywhere with the ability to purchase or just enjoy. By putting all the arts together, we hope to give the public a different view of homeless artists, displaying their talents instead of their “homelessness.” The yearly art festival will also be a place for networking with others in the art world, and perhaps even local publishing companies or record labels willing to offer homeless artists full-time jobs.

Although exact numbers are not readily available, the cost of this policy being implemented would not be as much of a burden as one would believe. In Denver, Colorado, a group of non-profit and governmental organizations purchased “a 62-unit apartment complex…for $3 million” (Denver Business Journal) to convert into low-income housing. While the cost in New York City might be higher, this is still inexpensive when compared to the cost of emergency shelter ($36,000/year per family). For example, this apartment complex in Denver holds 62 units, costing approximately $48,000 per family—for life—as opposed to $36,000 a year in shelters, and that is if every family had their own full apartment, not just a bedroom. Also, having the homeless employed in shelters would save an average of $27,000/year per person (Davis, para. 2). Even with the homeless receiving a salary, as a large percent of it goes to “rent” for the building, the cost will be significantly less. Not only that, but a percentage of sales from the artwork sold would be put back into the system, eventually being able to make enough money to pay the government back and have the building become sustainable. Unlike shelters, which often do more harm than good and cost taxpayers thousands of dollars, these “apartment shelters” would end up saving money in the long run.
All in all, this policy, while not that expensive, would provide ways for homeless artists to build a sense of community, enhance their skills, create their art, and express themselves through healthy means, all while simultaneously giving them the means to assimilate back into society. They would build job skills, learn to trust one another, and can deal with problems such as addiction and illness in a stable and encouraging environment. Sales would allow them to earn money through both jobs and the selling of their work, encouraging them to save up and live in a place of their own. Unlike current policy that is doing more harm then good, this policy will help relieve the homeless from the dangers of the street, allowing both the homeless to benefit themselves and society to benefit from their creations.

VII. Conclusion

Inspired by successes and learning from the failures of past policy, we have come to determine that our method of apartment shelters for homeless artists is a low-cost and effective way of aiding artists who call the streets home. Learning from the accomplishments of the WPA in the 1920s, the changing needs of homeless artists in the 1960s, and the surge of squat artists in the 1980s, we were able to shape our program to fit the specific issues homeless artists face everyday. By including a look at the tactics used to mitigate homelessness in other areas of the world, we were able to mold our policy of shelter, work-study, and artistic expression into what we believe to be a unique and effective method give homeless artists a place to live, create, and build their skills to move forward in all areas of their lives.

VIII. Bibliography

1. 1970’s, t. m., Manhattan, T. 9., competition, t. l., “long, m. o., & thin. (n.d.). Articles – The Emergence of Graffiti in New York City. Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.hiphop-network.com/articles/graffitiarticles/emergenceofnycitygraffiti.asp
2. Adams, D (1995). WWCD. Retrieved May 1, 2009, from New Deal Cultural Programs: Web site: http://www.wwcd.org/policy/US/newdeal.html
3. An interview with John Malpede / Part 1 – Mobilizing homeless people / Art Changes / In Motion Magazine. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/jm1.html
4. Dennant, P. (n.d.). Pamela Dennant: URBAN EXPRESSION. Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.graffiti.org/faq/pamdennant.html
5. Arevalo, J. (n.d.). the Official Woody Guthrie Website. Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://www.woodyguthrie.org/index.htm
6. Arts For Transit. (n.d.). Facts about the program: Music under New York. Retrieved April 20, 2009, from http://www.mta.info/mta/aft/muny/factsheet.html
7. Art From the Streets :: Art created by the Homeless :: Volunteer-Run Program :: Austin, TX.. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.artfromthestreets.org/index.html
8. Ault, J. (2003). Alternative Art New York, 1965, 1985: A Cultural Politics Book for the Social Text Collective (Cultural Politics).. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
9. Beatnik Bags :: Beatnik History. (n.d.). Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://www.beatnikbags.com/beatnik.html
10. Bragg, C. (2007, March 28-April 3). Art vendors say police get picture all wrong [Electronic version]. The Villager, 76(44). Retrieved March 25, 2009, from http://www.thevillager.com.
11. Case, Dick (2009, March 12). Depression-era WPA put many, including artists, to work in Syracuse area. The Post Standard. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://www.syracuse.com/case/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1236848174318820.xml&coll=1
12. Celebrity Research Lists – Famous Who Were Once Homeless. (n.d.). Retrieved April 26, 2009, from http://www.angelfire.com/stars4/lists/homeless.html
13. Coalition for the Homeless (2008, December). Homelessness in New York City, the basic facts. New York, NY: Author.
14. Coalition for the Homeless (2008, March 27). State of the Homeless 2008. New York, NY: Author.
15. Coalition for the Homeless (2009, April 23). State of the Homeless 2009. New York, NY: Author.
16. Cohen, J., curator. (2009). About: 5Pointz aerosol art center. Retrieved April 23, 2009, from http://5ptz.com/graff/about/
17. Davis, M. (2008, December 18). Spare some change? Homeless shelter workers threaten wage strike [Electronic version]. The Portland Mercury. Retrieved May 8, 2009 from http://www.portlandmercury.com
18. Dennant, P. (n.d.). Pamela Dennant: URBAN EXPRESSION. Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.graffiti.org/faq/pamdennant.html
19. Denver Business Journal. (2008, January 16). Apartments to be turned into affordable housing [Electronic version]. Denver Business Journal. Retrieved May 8, 2009 from http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/
20. East Village, Manhattan – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Village,_Manhattan
21. Findlay, J (1998). The WPA: An Exhibition of Works Progress Administration (WPA). Literature and Art from the Collections of the Bienes Center for the Literary Arts. Broward County, Fl: Bienes Center for the Literary Arts.
22. History: New York Society for Ethical Culture. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.nysec.org/sitemap/about-ethical-culture/history/
23. Homeless Outreach and Advocacy Program. (n.d.). Retrieved April 30, 2009, from www.janhus.org/homeless.htm
24. Hopper, K. (2003). Reckoning with homelessness. New York: Cornell University Press.
25. Horowitz, S., Buchanan, S., Alexandris, M., Ford, R.C., Syman, S. (2006). 2006 Report: Creative workers count, New York City’s arts funding overlooks individual artists’ needs. New York, NY: Freelancers Union.
26. Incredible graffiti covered building — 5 Pointz in New York City at FraudWasteAbuse. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.fraudwasteabuse.com/2007/03/incredible-graffiti-covered-building-5-pointz-in-new-york-city.html
27. Irwin, Helen (1935, March 14). Adele Clark, Richmond artist. Richmond Times-Dispatch [Electronic Version]. Retrieved March 14, 2009, from Richmond then and now online: http://richmondthenandnow.com/Newspaper-Articles/Adele-Clark.html
28. Kilgannon, C. (2008, December 10). Living on the street with his art. City Room. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/living-on-the-street-with-his-art/?scp=12&sq=homeless%20art&st=cse
29. Kludt, A. (2005, April 20-26). Street artists and vendors aren’t sold on new bill [Electronic version]. The Villager, 74(50). Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://thevillager.com.
30. Lederman, R. (1996, September 15). Street artists endure harassment that’s illegal [Letter to the editor] [Electronic version]. The New York Times, section 13, p.15.
31. Lederman, R. (1998). Why New York City still illegally arrests, harasses and persecutes street artists. The Ethical Spectacle, 4(1). Retrieved April 20, 2009, from http://www.spectacle.org/198/art.html
32. Levinson, D. (. (2004). Encyclopedia of Homelessness. ‘: Sage Pubns.
33. Lopez, S. (2005, April 17). Violinist has the world on 2 strings [Electronic version]. The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved March 20, 2009, from http://www.latimes.com
34. Lorance, N (2005). New Deal Art During the Great Depression. Retrieved May 1, 2009 from New Deal/WPA Art In New York Web Site, http://www.wpamurals.com/newyork.htm
35. Markee, P. (2008). New York City homeless shelter population, 1983-2008. New York, NY: Coalition for the Homeless.
36. Moynihan, C. and Chan, S. (2008, November 14). Hearing on street vendors gets heated. City Room. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/hearing-on-street-vendors-gets-heated/
37. National Alliance to End Homelessness. (n.d.) The cost of homelessness. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from http://www.endhomelessness.org/section/tools/tenyearplan/cost
38. National Coalition for the Homeless (2009). NCH public policy recommendations: HUDS McKinney-Vento reauthorization. Washington, DC: Author.
39. New York Daily Photo: Homeless Art Scene. (n.d.). Retrieved April 26, 2009, from http://newyorkdailyphoto.blogspot.com/2006/08/homeless-art-scene.html
40. New York New Deal Art. (n.d.). New deal/WPA art in New York. Retrieved March 15, 2009, from http://www.wpamurals.com/newyork.htm
41. New York Times. (2009, February 13). Stimulus bill retains N.E.A funding. Arts Beat: Culture News and Views. Retrieved on April 24, 2009, from http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/stimulus-bill-retains-nea-funding/
42. N.Y.C. Department of Homeless Services. (2009, April 24). Daily Report. New York, NY: Author.
43. Parker, K. (n.d.). Jean Michel Basquiat. Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://www.english.emory.edu/Bahri/Basquiat.html
44. Pogrebin, R. (2009, February 24). House bill would increase funding for arts and humanities. Arts Beat: Culture News and Views. Retrieved March 30, 2009, from http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/house-bill-would-increase-funding-for-arts-and-humanities/
45. Pruijt, Hans (2003, March 4). Is the institutionalization of urban movements inevitable? A comparison of the opportunities for sustained squatting in New York City and Amsterdam. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Preprint.
46. Pugh, Deborah (January 1997). I have arrived before my words: Autobiographical writing of homeless women. Massachusetts: Charles River Press.
47. Roberg, Robert (1999). Selected poetry. In Robert Wolf (Ed.), An American mosaic: Prose and poetry by everyday folk (pp. 30-34). New York: Oxford University Press.
48. Rosen, J. (2009, April 14). McKinney-Vento reauthorization bills introduced. NPACH: The National Policy and Advocacy Council on Homelessness. Retrieved April 24, 2009, from http://npach.org/2009/04/mckinneyvento_reauthorization.html
49. Rosofsky, I., & Ph.D.. (n.d.). Art is the Only Thing That’s Left in the World | Psychology Today Blogs. Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-healing-arts/200901/art-is-the-only-thing-that-s-left-in-the-world
50. Selling the Lower East Side – The Art Scene in the East Village. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.upress.umn.edu/sles/chapter7/ch7-3.html
51. Silverman, J.R. (2008, April 12). Art in flux: Soon-to-be homeless artists go out with a bang [Electronic version]. The New York Post. Retrieved April 18, 2009 from http://www.nypost.com
52. Social Service Board: New York Society for Ethical Culture. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2009, from http://www.nysec.org/social-service-board/
53. Spears, D. (2009, March 12). When the gallery is a classroom [Electronic version]. The New York Times, p. SPG1.
54. Stringer, L. (1998). Grand central winter. New York: Washington Square Press.
55. Stubbs, P. (n.d.). Perspectives – Vol. 3, No. 4 – The Story of Deinstitutionalization. Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=368
56. Swarns, R. (2008, September 15). Capitol strives to define ‘homeless’ [Electronic version]. The New York Times, p. A9.
57. Torrey, Edwin Fuller. (1988) Homelessness and Mental Illness. U.S.A. Today. 3:26-27.
58. Toth, J. (1993). The Mole People: Life in the Tunnels Beneath New York City. Chicago: Chicago Review Press.
59. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009). Educational Attainment in the United States: 2007. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.