Roosevelt Island, imagined as an affordable housing utopia in the 70s, has strayed far from this vision in its contemporary housing privatization, luxury residential complexes, and clustered project buildings/section 8 housing. Roosevelt Island is transforming from what was once a small and relatively integrated community into a commercialized and socioeconomically segregated neighborhood.
The Cornell Tech campus in Roosevelt Island, officially open in 2017, attempts to “blur the boundaries between tourist and nontourist practices” (Gotham, 2007) by branding itself as accessible and open to use for all. Yet the “centrality” (Sassen, 2000) of Cornell Tech marginalized working-class residents and workers by tearing down the Goldwater hospital that previously housed rehabilitation patients and employed working-class people. Cornell Tech’s pristine condition — with high-tech buildings and absence of litter — “strengthens existing inequalities” (Sassen, 2000) in highlighting the run-down living environment of low-income residents on the “margins” of Roosevelt Island (Sassen, 2000).
Affordable housing developments on the “margins” (Sassen, 2000) of Roosevelt Island manifest “urban aggression” (Davis, 1992) in the hostile drab brick walls and privacy-eliminating-out-in-the-open-windows. In emphasizing trespasser prosecutions, Roosevelt Island isolates and quarantines poor people into clustered “strategic hamlets” (Davis, 1992) that inhibit interactions with wealthier residents who reside elsewhere.
Once a neighborhood buzzing with graffiti, Roosevelt Island’s recent criminalization of graffiti is met with resistance from local graffiti artists, who turn to old dumpsters and trash cans as canvases for their art. Roosevelt Island appeals to the influx of “creative class” (Florida, 2003) residents in the “war on graffiti,” who, contrary to Florida’s theory, the “creative class” have not only voiced their disdain with graffiti but admire “physical attractions” (Florida, 2003) — like high-rise condominiums and aesthetically pleasing parks — as opposed to the “diversity of all kinds” (Florida, 2003) that graffiti artists offer.
The “A City in Motion” mural is a RIOC (Roosevelt Island Operating Corp) “beautification project” where artists create mural paintings across Roosevelt Island. Seemingly involving the community at large, as residents sign and contribute to the mural, RIOC “beautification projects” instead perpetuate the “disneyification of urban space” (Gotham, 2007) on Roosevelt Island by (1) replacing “authentic” (Gotham, 2007) local artists’ graffiti and (2) only commissioning sanguine and pro-Roosevelt Island art — like A City in Motion — for public display. In encouraging artists to paint murals but criminalizing graffiti, “A City in Motion” reflects an “urban imaginary” that “socializes visitors” (Gotham 2007) to regard Roosevelt Island as a close-knit and cheerful community.
