Rubber Ducks and the Surplus Population

If you have been staying current with the news then you are aware that Pittsburgh has recently seen the departure of a dearly loved rubber duck. Thousands flocked to the city to see the duck strategically placed at Pittsburgh’s point. This year Pittsburgh also received a yarn bombing of the Andy Warhol Bridge. I will not argue that both of these occurrences were not rewarding or visually stimulating. I, myself was delighted to see the various patterns stretched across the bridge. Yet, I must ask who does these visual displays of installation art benefit? 

Photo by Pittsburgh Magazine.com

     First, those who are able to travel to see the art in the first place. Let us look at where the art was displayed. Downtown Pittsburgh, although formerly covered in smoke and smog is now developing into a self-reported cultural district. Real estate prices are high and to freely travel into Downtown Pittsburgh one must have bus fare, although this may be changing.. If bus fare is unavailable and driving is more desired then there are numerous parking garages but be warned parking in Downtown Pittsburgh is expensive. So how were children and families living in disadvantaged neighborhoods who have limited access to resources to begin with least of all spending it on parking supposed to benefit from having a rubber duck if they couldn’t see it. But, perhaps this duck was not to benefit them. 

     Pittsburgh has been going through a renaissance. Adopting a version of the Rick Florida plan, Pittsburgh is beginning to draw the ‘creative class”, but what about vulnerable populations? The direction of white flight is suddenly changing. Instead of moving further to the suburbs and being forced to deal with nightmarish traffic on route 376 high SES families (who are mostly white) are beginning to flood back into the city. But, they are not blending and adapting to the neighborhoods as they are instead they are slowly pushing local residents out. As property values increase lower SES (mostly women and/or people of color) are being forced to relocate to more affordable housing. This affordable housing is largely located in the suburbs, particularly in the Mon Valley. According to the U. S. Census the median home value of a Clairton house is about $49,200 dollars. This is in comparison of the PA statewide median of $163,200 dollars. City wide the median value of a house is $87, 800 dollars. That is a large difference, suddenly living outside of the city seems to be more affordable so residents with the aid of government programs, such as section 8 vouchers begin to move into suburban neighborhoods. Who can blame them? For half of a century suburban living has been flouted as an important part of the American Dream. Yet, suburban poverty is beginning to rise. A new atmosphere is settling over Pittsburgh, does it have room for neighborhoods like Clairton?