Duncanson's success as an artist is partially attributed to the many abolitionist patrons who supported him. Abolitionist patrons provided him with ample commissions, acquired his paintings, financed his travel to various locations nationally and abroad, and introduced him to other prominent people in the art community. Abolitionists were motivated to support artists like Duncanson because it emphasized the abilities of African Americans to participate in and contribute to mainstream culture. Additionally, abolitionists would often commission works with overtly racial themes in order to further the antislavery cause. Duncanson likely received even more support from abolitionist patrons because he was considered mulatto. Duncanson’s lighter complexion, due to the miscegenation that occurred when his ancestors were enslaved, allowed him greater access into the art world than African Americans with darker complexions. There were a number of other African-American artists who shared these advantages due to their light skin, including African-American painter Joshua Johnston. The North, particularly cities like Cincinnati with substantial black populations and strong abolitionist presences, was a more advantageous place for African-Americans to pursue fine arts professions. Although Duncanson never explicitly addressed race issues in his work, there is debate among historians on whether or not Duncanson subtly referenced, or alluded to racial problems and racism in the United States. For example, Joseph Ketner II argues that in Duncanson's painting "Garden of Eden" (1852) "paradise with its palm trees might also be the promised land of slave songs." David Lubin also believed that Duncanson's paintings "may have contained hidden allegories on racial themes whose meanings were available only to certain audiences."