Summary and Conclusion

  • Geoffrey MossEmail author
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Sociology book series (BRIEFSSOCY)


I begin my concluding chapter by summarizing my overall analysis, and by arguing, in a preliminary way, that the central concept of this analysis, the artistic creative class enclave, is not a Pittsburgh anomaly. I also hypothesize that the artistic creative class enclave tends to be the only type of artistic enclave that has the capacity to avoid short-term existence and/or socio-spatial invisibility within major contemporary cities. I then offer a brief commentary on the policy implications of my analysis for those who wish to promote artistic creative class enclaves, and conclude by offering “two cheers” for this creative class subtype.


Lawrenceville Pittsburgh Artistic community Artistic enclave Creative class Arts policy Marketing Selling art Shopping malls Urban sustainability 


  1. Abbing, H. (2002). Why are artists poor? The exceptional economy of the arts. Amsterdam University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Bain, A., & McLean H. (2013). The artistic precariat. Cambridge Journals of Regions Economy and Society, 6(1), 93–111Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, L. (1992). Strategies for social mobility: family, kinship and ethnicity within jewish families in pittsburgh. Anthropological Quarterly, 65(1).Google Scholar
  4. Florida, R. L. (2002). The rise of the creative class: And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  5. Florida, R. L. (2012). The rise of the creative class revisited (10th Anniversary Edition). New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Gittell, R., & Vidal, A. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Grodach, C. (2011). Before and after the creative City: The politics of urban cultural policy. Journal of Urban Affairs, 34(1): 81–97.Google Scholar
  8. Jacoby, R. (1987). The last intellectuals: American culture in the age of academe. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  9. Ley, D. (2003). Artists, aestheticisation and the field of gentrification. Urban Studies, 40(12), 2527–2544.Google Scholar
  10. Lloyd, R. D. (2006). Neo-Bohemia: Art and Commerce in the Postindustrial City. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Menger, P. M. (1999). Artistic labor markets and careers. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 541–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Morgen, G., & Ren, X. (2012). Introduction: The creative underclass: Culture, subculture, and urban renewal. Journal of Urban Affairs, 34(2), 127–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Peck, J. (2005). Struggling with the creative class. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29, 740–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rosenstein, C. (2011). Cultural development and city neighborhoods. City, Culture, and Society., 2, 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Strom, E. (2010). Artist garet as growth machine? Local policy and artist housing in US cities. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 29(3): 367–378.Google Scholar
  16. Zukin, S. (1982). Loft living: Culture and capital in urban change. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Temple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations