CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR
Artists vs. Themselves
(reprinted, with permission, from Everybody's News, Issue 562, June 25, 1999)
by Michael Blankenship
Ah, the creative mind. It's chock full of both possibilities and pitfalls. Words that may sound fine to a group of like-minded artists or social activists can fail significantly when we try to communicate them to a mass audience. Or we may get so wrapped up in developing and considering creative options that we lose focus on our objectives. And, of course, to try to establish a unity of purpose among folks who are accustomed to doing their own thing can be a difficult, uphill climb.
In the current effort of a group of artists to stand up for the territorial integrity of the Drop Inn Center, a unified purpose needs to be established. Tough questions need to be asked, not just of the people who would like to remove the Drop Inn Center to accommodate Erich Kunzel's "Dream Plan" for the Greater Cincinnati Art and Education Center (GCAEC), but of the group of concerned artists themselves.
I attended my first meeting of the group on Monday night, and it seems that focus is clearly needed. Is this a fight to stop the development of the GCAEC, or is it a fight to save the Drop Inn Center? Is it an effort to prevent the further gentrification of Over-the-Rhine, or is it an effort to preserve an integral part of the OTR neighborhood? Are we out to champion the rights of homeless and low-income people, or are we simply trying to preserve the bare essentials of a social safety net required for a healthy, civilized society? Do we want to maintain the area as an exclusively low-rent neighborhood, or are there ways that the Art and Education Center and the Drop Inn Center can peacefully coexist, or perhaps even mutually benefit each other?
To present the issue as an either/or situation is a false choice, I believe. There is no reason for the Drop Inn Center to be ripped from its home to accommodate the arts complex. Both institutions, the one that exists and the one being planned, belong in the neighborhood. As the cultural heart of the city, OTR would have been an appropriate location for the complex that became the Aronoff, but the issue wasn't about art or culture so much as it was about money, power and image. This is why Kunzel's plans for the GCAEC are suspect, because we've seen this sort of thing before. But the Maestro has put his name upon this dubious development, and if he doesn't want to be accused of ethnic and economic cleansing, or forced relocation, if he doesn't want to be compared to Slobodan Milosevic, then he and his board need to stop presenting the issue in mutually exclusive terms.
Likewise, the Drop Inn Center has been a neighborhood institution for the past 21 years. It is integrally connected and woven into the fabric of the neighborhood through its transitional housing for persons in recovery and permanent housing for graduates of its treatment program, as well as that offered by ReStoc, Tender Mercies, the OTR Housing Network and the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority. Drop Inn Center clients have access to medical care through the Health Resource Center's presence at the Freestore and at the Elm Street Clinic. Those individuals trying to put their lives back together rely on the neighborhood meeting places for Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous, as well as the Center for Chemical Addictions Treatment in the West End. DIC clients are put to work rehabbing buildings for future housing, working manual labor for day-temp agencies and volunteering at the Peaslee Neighborhood Center. Because the Drop Inn Center is not simply a flop-house, but an involved participant in the community. It ranks as one of the model homeless shelters in the nation. But an effort to save the Drop Inn Center should not be turned into a condemnation of what could be genuine neighborhood improvements.
Take a walk or a drive down 12th Street in the afternoon. Is there anyone who views the scene and thinks it should be preserved as is? No. Most people are not interested in saving OTR as a sanctuary for the poor and dispossessed. Not a lot of folks treasure the scenic value of loitering gangs, paper bag drinking or random insanity. Most people, I suspect, would like to see Over-the-Rhine restored to its rightful place as the city's historic cultural hub and downtown residential neighborhood. To many folks, Erich Kunzel's plan for the GCAEC is an attractive and expedient way to effect a such a turnaround.
But if you ask those same people if we should consider the needs of those who have nothing, if we should maintain a sanctuary for those whom society has thrown away, if we should allow a place for people to have hope of taking control of their lives, if we should help homeless people to help themselves, if we should keep drug and alcohol treatment available where they are most needed, or if we should give any concern at all to providing the bare minimum of food, clothing and shelter to our city's most vulnerable population, they will likely answer, "Yes, we should."
After the artists' meeting Monday night, as I was leaving the Drop Inn Center, I met a former neighbor of mine named Tim. He didn't come to any meeting of artists. He wasn't there to do his civic duty. He was there to get something to eat, and I suspect he was going to stay the night as well. My neighbor had become homeless. And there but for the grace of God go I, or you. Should it happen to us, where do we want to be? Warehoused in the middle of nowhere, or within walking distance of training, jobs and resources to help us turn our lives around? The Drop Inn Center needs to stay where it is. Music, art, and drama are nice, but food, clothing and shelter are necessities.
