Barter Trade Between Unequal Parties
Contribution by Ele Jansen Ever since Richard Florida’s notion that a vibrating “creative class” decisively contributes to the attractiveness of an economic region, city marketers love to refer to “their creative workers”. But it is often forgotten that a distinctive creative scene is fed by an active off scene comprised of young artists less interested in the mainstream and instead intervening with alternative approaches – eagerly consumed by the masses. Hamburg is such as city offering glamour, a bit of grunge, a lot of underbelly, and a scene. This is the mix that attracts them, the highly-qualified persons that any city would like to lure with their tax-paying enterprises. In face of this logic, however, it is surprising when alternatively used vacant lots are sold to large-scale investors, thus leading to the disappearance of places giving rise to non-commercial creativity.
For “off” initially emerges where it costs nothing, in a space that isn’t being used commercially: old factory halls, empty buildings and lots. If they are to be sold or gentrified, the scene, of course, airs its displeasure. One could now argue that there’s enough empty space for artists on the outskirts. There are two arguments against this alternative. On the one hand, artists are dependent on social tension, complexity, diversity, and development – things predominantly found in city centres. On the other, cities need their creative workers, not least to be attractive for economically important, highly qualified professionals. So every metropolis demonstrates aptitude when offering room to its free creative workers.
The example of Sydney could be path-breaking. In the city district of Rozelle of the Australian metropolis, the question was raised in a citizens’ decision whether a park should be sold or made available for self-administration. This model could set an example, even if it requires a financially relatively independent municipality and it is hard to foresee how (sensibly) a citizens’ committee can make use of the areas.
And in Hamburg? In HafenCity there is an empty plot of land yet to be allocated a use. To organise an off festival there at “Strandkai” was initially the result of requiring a suitable area offering such a large-scale festival as much attention and thus as many visitors as possible. Hence, nothing particularly special took place here: A limited company belonging to the city with commercial interests temporarily opens its empty land for an alternative use and, in turn, can look forward to gaining a positive image. A barter trade between unequal parties, gainful for both.
If one presumes that behind the festival lies an effort to gentrify HafenCity, one has understood neither HafenCity nor the principle of gentrification, in my view. The vitalisation of a neighbourhood rarely occurs top down, but usually bottom up, meaning through the residents themselves.