Public Art and a Return to Housing

There is so much I have to reflect on. I hope I get to everything. I will begin though, with a presentation that Bob gave us in class. It was about a public art project that he worked on, where there would be projections on a building, while voices played from a soundtrack to accompany it. He recreated this presentation (without the projections) but nonetheless, it was still powerful. It was a conversation between Lisa, a woman who lost her son to a tragic, unwarranted violent act, and an inmate from jail, responding to her (this wasn’t the guy who killed her son of course). It really had an effect on me. As Bob was reading her statements, you could hear (through his voice) her anguish…her confusion…her anger. That really hit a soft spot for me. After having lost two friends in the past months and one while I was in high school…my grief resurged. I couldn’t help but think about Travis Davis…. How I heard on the news that a man was found lying in the bushes, shot to death in Roseland (the housing apartments in the industrial park down the street from my neighborhood)….how I came to school Monday morning to see all of the forlorn faces, asking why everyone was so upset. Although I didn’t know him that well…I knew him... and I knew he got shot for reasons unknown to any of us. It’s funny, reflecting back on Upskit, he talks about how he can walk through the most dangerous neighborhoods in the nation, in the dead of night, and not be threatened by violence. As we walked through Wellston, I couldn’t help but get this feeling, I think we all had as students…”it’s not as bad as people make it out to be.” But there is some truth to the matter. Violence is real, and while it is not specific to these “bad neighborhoods,” it is still a prevailing cloud that hangs over them. Looking at the videos of City Faces, and hearing Bob talk about all of the students he’s lost… HELL, even to hear about those kids who were shot up just the other day in the Peabodies...how does one cope? It brings about that double-edged sword we talked about in class… being too emotionally distant will lead to apathy and lethargy... being too emotionally attached will result in constant blows to one’s psyche. I guess you have to find that happy medium.

Speaking about public art…the question arises. Why do something like this? Why did Bob have to put Lisa’s story on the side of the freaking Library downtown? Why is “Twain” by Serra still in existence, even though someone spray painted on it...”Get rid of this.” Who does it serve? Who does it agitate? One interview that we read traces the history of Public Art back to the Kennedy administration to maintain morale during the Cold War… but those days are over… yet public art is everywhere. In one sense it is to make the environment more aesthetic (as if trees and flowers and general nature are not enough now). But why does one need art? It is a hallmark of our culture, and from the anthropological perspective you can trace art back to our early hominid days when we made brilliant cave paintings and rock sculpture. But why? That is a question I don’t know the answer to... but it is an interesting one to ponder. Art has numerous purposes: religion, secular aestheticism, design purposes. But it is also up to one’s perception (as one of our quotes so lovely put it). But who’s perception is valued enough to determine whether an art piece is installed, maintained or removed. It is obviously not the public’s (as the roots of public art are grounded in the government being the catalyzing force for public art projects in the ‘60’s). That is where I believe the notion of power comes in. To make a decision such as that one, one must be powerful (and no…power does cannot be reduced to mere affluence). There is much more to it than that. For instance (and this is pure speculation), but when the Kennedy administration first thought to install public art to improve national morale… I wonder which gender was predominant in making those decisions….probably the male gender... for the simple fact that in that time period, and even before then, social constructions, ideas, and behaviors made it easier for them to inhabit the hegemonic power position in the gender binary hierarchy… Where there transgendered people making this decisions? Definitely not, because they didn’t even fit into the gender-binary…not even included in this hegemonic discourse. This notion of power extends beyond gender…to ability status, to economic status, to sexual orientation, to race and class. The Serra sculpture, for instance, was commissioned by the Pulitzer family as a gift to St. Louis (obviously they are white and rich, and therefore powerful). This power is manifested not only in their placement in those dominant social groups, but also because the city cannot remove the structure. One family gives a gift to the city that the city cannot remove! Theoretically, the city as a governing body should govern its constituents…but this relationship is inverted in this instance! Sheer power. It seems certainly obvious to me.

I digress, however, to talking about housing, yet again. I gave a reference in previous posting, likening African Americans to Jews in the Ghetto’s (which I believe is the root of what is now referred to as the “urban Ghetto”). I wondered how can this just…happen? How is it that the Peabodies, for instance, can be erected as temporary housing for white immigrants, but becomes a literal cage for African-Americans? In these quote given to us, it describes restrictive covenants which prevented blacks from living in certain neighborhoods (something not related only to St. Louis, as I have learned that the historically affluent neighborhoods in my home city also had restrictive covenants explicitly stated on the housing deeds). These neighborhoods were constructed to be this way. As the instructors told us…there were no “low income neighborhoods” back in the day. It is a relatively modern invention…and what trips me up is that there was a conscious effort to do so. Real Estate agents consciously maintain racial/ethnic concentrated neighborhoods when people are in the market to buy. And how interesting it is that they play to the minority middle class’s yearnings to move on “to something better”. I’ll admit, I have always “wanted something better” (as I spoke about in my first posting). What does that mean? And why is it that that “something better” is often conflated with white hetero-normative, upper class ideals? It is an interesting question. “Better”, just like public art, is entirely up to perception. Unlike public art, however, there is a general social consensus that “better” is just what I said, and we fail to realize that it too is socially constructed. On another bus tour for my scholarship program, the guide asked us, “Why is it that houses keep being built, even though the population isn’t growing as fast as they are being built?” Indeed, I am sure there are more houses out there than there are families to inhabit them. It generates a flow of people… that planned obsolescence that we spoke about last class. And to think that general migratory patterns of patterns can be often racially motivated (based upon fear). I was watching a movie where a con man doubly took advantage of this fear. He employed a black family (who had no where to live) to move into and rent apartments in traditionally white neighborhoods (which is capitalizing on the need of the black family, while exploiting them). He would then pose as a person looking to buy apartments. He would target the little old, white ladies, who upon finding out a “nigger family” moved in, would see their apartment cheaply and move out. The man would then move the black family to another residence, repeating the same cycle, selling both apartments for a profit. It’s funny…yet sad… Fear is a powerful emotion that drives us... It drives us to succeed... it drives us not to faThere is so much I have to reflect on. I hope I get to everything. I will begin though, with a presentation that Bob gave us in class. It was about a public art project that he worked on, where there would be projections on a building, while voices played from a soundtrack to accompany it. He recreated this presentation (without the projections) but nonetheless, it was still powerful. It was a conversation between Lisa, a woman who lost her son to a tragic, unwarranted violent act, and an inmate from jail, responding to her (this wasn’t the guy who killed her son of course). It really had an effect on me. As Bob was reading her statements, you could hear (through his voice) her anguish…her confusion…her anger. That really hit a soft spot for me. After having lost two friends in the past months and one while I was in high school…my grief resurged. I couldn’t help but think about Travis Davis…. How I heard on the news that a man was found lying in the bushes, shot to death in Roseland (the housing apartments in the industrial park down the street from my neighborhood)….how I came to school Monday morning to see all of the forlorn faces, asking why everyone was so upset. Although I didn’t know him that well…I knew him... and I knew he got shot for reasons unknown to any of us. It’s funny, reflecting back on Upskit, he talks about how he can walk through the most dangerous neighborhoods in the nation, in the dead of night, and not be threatened by violence. As we walked through Wellston, I couldn’t help but get this feeling, I think we all had as students…”it’s not as bad as people make it out to be.” But there is some truth to the matter. Violence is real, and while it is not specific to these “bad neighborhoods,” it is still a prevailing cloud that hangs over them. Looking at the videos of City Faces, and hearing Bob talk about all of the students he’s lost… HELL, even to hear about those kids who were shot up just the other day in the Peabodies...how does one cope? It brings about that double-edged sword we talked about in class… being too emotionally distant will lead to apathy and lethargy... being too emotionally attached will result in constant blows to one’s psyche. I guess you have to find that happy medium.

Speaking about public art…the question arises. Why do something like this? Why did Bob have to put Lisa’s story on the side of the freaking Library downtown? Why is “Twain” by Serra still in existence, even though someone spray painted on it...”Get rid of this.” Who does it serve? Who does it agitate? One interview that we read traces the history of Public Art back to the Kennedy administration to maintain morale during the Cold War… but those days are over… yet public art is everywhere. In one sense it is to make the environment more aesthetic (as if trees and flowers and general nature are not enough now). But why does one need art? It is a hallmark of our culture, and from the anthropological perspective you can trace art back to our early hominid days when we made brilliant cave paintings and rock sculpture. But why? That is a question I don’t know the answer to... but it is an interesting one to ponder. Art has numerous purposes: religion, secular aestheticism, design purposes. But it is also up to one’s perception (as one of our quotes so lovely put it). But who’s perception is valued enough to determine whether an art piece is installed, maintained or removed. It is obviously not the public’s (as the roots of public art are grounded in the government being the catalyzing force for public art projects in the ‘60’s). That is where I believe the notion of power comes in. To make a decision such as that one, one must be powerful (and no…power does cannot be reduced to mere affluence). There is much more to it than that. For instance (and this is pure speculation), but when the Kennedy administration first thought to install public art to improve national morale… I wonder which gender was predominant in making those decisions….probably the male gender... for the simple fact that in that time period, and even before then, social constructions, ideas, and behaviors made it easier for them to inhabit the hegemonic power position in the gender binary hierarchy… Where there transgendered people making this decisions? Definitely not, because they didn’t even fit into the gender-binary…not even included in this hegemonic discourse. This notion of power extends beyond gender…to ability status, to economic status, to sexual orientation, to race and class. The Serra sculpture, for instance, was commissioned by the Pulitzer family as a gift to St. Louis (obviously they are white and rich, and therefore powerful). This power is manifested not only in their placement in those dominant social groups, but also because the city cannot remove the structure. One family gives a gift to the city that the city cannot remove! Theoretically, the city as a governing body should govern its constituents…but this relationship is inverted in this instance! Sheer power. It seems certainly obvious to me.

I digress, however, to talking about housing, yet again. I gave a reference in previous posting, likening African Americans to Jews in the Ghetto’s (which I believe is the root of what is now referred to as the “urban Ghetto”). I wondered how can this just…happen? How is it that the Peabodies, for instance, can be erected as temporary housing for white immigrants, but becomes a literal cage for African-Americans? In these quote given to us, it describes restrictive covenants which prevented blacks from living in certain neighborhoods (something not related only to St. Louis, as I have learned that the historically affluent neighborhoods in my home city also had restrictive covenants explicitly stated on the housing deeds). These neighborhoods were constructed to be this way. As the instructors told us…there were no “low income neighborhoods” back in the day. It is a relatively modern invention…and what trips me up is that there was a conscious effort to do so. Real Estate agents consciously maintain racial/ethnic concentrated neighborhoods when people are in the market to buy. And how interesting it is that they play to the minority middle class’s yearnings to move on “to something better”. I’ll admit, I have always “wanted something better” (as I spoke about in my first posting). What does that mean? And why is it that that “something better” is often conflated with white hetero-normative, upper class ideals? It is an interesting question. “Better”, just like public art, is entirely up to perception. Unlike public art, however, there is a general social consensus that “better” is just what I said, and we fail to realize that it too is socially constructed. On another bus tour for my scholarship program, the guide asked us, “Why is it that houses keep being built, even though the population isn’t growing as fast as they are being built?” Indeed, I am sure there are more houses out there than there are families to inhabit them. It generates a flow of people… that planned obsolescence that we spoke about last class. And to think that general migratory patterns of patterns can be often racially motivated (based upon fear). I was watching a movie where a con man doubly took advantage of this fear. He employed a black family (who had no where to live) to move into and rent apartments in traditionally white neighborhoods (which is capitalizing on the need of the black family, while exploiting them). He would then pose as a person looking to buy apartments. He would target the little old, white ladies, who upon finding out a “nigger family” moved in, would see their apartment cheaply and move out. The man would then move the black family to another residence, repeating the same cycle, selling both apartments for a profit. It’s funny…yet sad… Fear is a powerful emotion that drives us... It drives us to succeed... it drives us not to fail…it motivates our every decision (consioucly or unconsciously). We live in a “post racial society” yet these modes of city migration, and the races chasing each other in and out of the city, in a cicadic manner continues to exist. It is irony, but also a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Well, that’s my rant. Until Next Time!il…it motivates our every decision (consioucly or unconsciously). We live in a “post racial society” yet these modes of city migration, and the races chasing each other in and out of the city, in a cicadic manner continues to exist. It is irony, but also a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Well, that’s my rant. Until Next Time!

Housing Projects in St. Louis

I'm trying to filter through all of the information that has been given to me (for this class) in the last couple of days. Readings, Voices, movie clips, class lecture and discussion...it is a lot to synthesize, but I will try to do so.

What has stood out to me most was the focus on "public housing" or housing projects in St. Louis (Pruitt-Iagoe in particular) and in Chicago (Cabrini Green). Going through the voices, it seems as if people were happy in these places...many of them spoke about a sense of community and taking care of their own. Even in Mill Creek Valley (a large, urban, black neighborhood that pre-dated the Pruitt-Iagoe housing projects) there was a sense of community. We saw in the documentary today about Cabrini Green that there was not only a sense of community, but that generations of families were housed in those apartments....that people have specific and fond memories of the place. It leads one to wonder: how can a person enjoy themselves amidst the squalor? Even when there were plans for "urban renewal" and relocation of the tenants there was a uprising (particularly in Cabrini Green). Why?

I have come to the conclusion that although these housing projects became notorious for their crime and decrepitness, they fostered a sense of community. Not only that, displacement from these communities in the name of "urban renewal" tore at the very fabric that made the community what it was. It's a sad thing to hear on one hand how families deal with the inferior construction and maintenance of these buildings, and on the other hand, to hear how they are displaced because governments want to tear them down. It amazes me, particularly in the case of Pruitt-Iagoe, which was not even opened for twenty years before it was torn down. Why was it in such a degraded state? Obviously the blame cannot be placed solely on the tenants, because in what apartment buildings do you know where the tenants play a very active role in maintaining public space (such as hallways and elevators?). There is obvious foul play.. and to think that the millions of dollars that were used to build the project went to waste...to be torn down...

There is a bigger question of choice, which was brought up during class. That along with the notion of planned obsolescence in our capitalistic culture (here I go delving into economic theory again). Really, though. From my research I found that Pruitt-Iagoe, was constructed to fail...faulty from the beginning....In our Voices there are two quotes from the same year that have very different interpretations of the project. From the very beginning it was established to fail. Why? I have the hardest time trying to figure out why the housing projects are in such disrepair, and other apartment buildings are not?

What really intrigues me is the notion of "urban renewal," a term I have run into studying the history of my hometown. To me it's just euphemism for gentrification. More often than not, in the trends of cities, you see a cyclical chasing of the races....As the Great Migration occurred during and after WWII, whites moved to suburbia as blacks migrated to the cities....Now urban land is intriguing again.. superficially determined to be in style. To make the urban centers more hospitable, they go through a phase of "renewal," tearing down the slums (more often than not housing a high percentage of minorities), displacing them to the suburbs (where they may be stranded because they have no transportation into the city). Who drives this cycle? The people who have the choice in the matter..the people in power.

This reminds me of the Ervin (my scholarship program) Orientation bus tour. Our guide told us to follow the trail of money, and you will see the trend. In the real estate market that in inevitably true. Our population is growing exponentially, but not nearly as much as new houses are being developed...or redeveloped in the "renewal" lingo. So you have new houses being built, that would stay vacant if we didn't liven in an absurdly superficial capitalistic society. What drives the real estate market (and brings in money) is continual movement and flux of people...how does this happen (and this is pure speculation, but I do suspect that there is truth in it)...they help drive the city-suburb cycle of movement, capitalizing on fear of the "black people moving in." But this is a self-fulfilling prophesy. As racial and class dynamics change drastically in neighborhoods, it is inevitable that they would not be kept to the highest of standards. White flight yields no positive results to the larger community, and only contributes to fear and stereotyping..

it fascinates me at just how expansive and numerous the housing project system really is...some people have even compared it to being imprisoned. I remember one little boy saying in the Cabrini documentary that he was ashamed to tell people where he lived. I remember speaking to one of my summer co-workers (a few summers ago), who was complaining that she had to put a housing project sticker on her bumper so that she could park her car near her apartment at night. It seems like a great system...keep those who don't belong out...but it was a source of embarrassment for her...riding around with a literal label pointing out not only where you live, but allowing those who encounter you to judge you because of it..Who thought it was a good thing to lump people like this together in the first place? Did someone say, let's just put all the poor people (who just happen to be mostly black) into one area? It's a re-incarnation of the Jewish Ghetto's in Nazi Germany (complete with the wearing of labels as I pointed out in the aforementioned anecdote). Do we not learn from history? I understand that a sense of community has been established in these areas (as we are human, and as social beings, we establish communities wherever there is an aggregate of people). Yet I do not understand how people can be shepherded like sheep.. Stay in these projects! Then urban renewal hits, and people are dispersed again...pushed out of the way.

It is an injustice that is not new to history. You would think someone would have figured out by now, what is the most effective way to solve this problem. I guess the problem has yet to be effectively distinguished, for it is not a problem of "where will the poor be housed tonight," but rather, Why are the poor poor? Why can they not advance the economic ranks? Why must they require social welfare? Pruitt-Iagoe was an ill attempt to fix the more pressing superficial issue...but it dd not solve the problem. When will the problem be fixed?

What is Diversity?

I've been doing some of my readings for Bob's class today. I find that although I have more pressing things to do... other readings...papers...etc, it draws me. Some of the quotes in the Voices really stirred me, one of them being "Do you eat every day?"- Little girl living in Clinton-Peabody public housing c. 2003. I can only imagine--a troupe of WU students walking around the Peabody projects, and a little girl tricycling on the sidewalk asking the group this question...in sheer innocence. I am sure it was a sobering experience.

That, however, wasn't the most intriguing quote though. "Celebrating Diversity of American life has become the American left's way of accepting their poverty, of accepting inequality"-Walter Benn Michaels 2006. After seeing this, I was dumbfounded. How can this be? For so many years, I have characterized myself as someone who advocated for diversity and social justice (my exact language)--yet here is this man critiquing the very ideals that I have been championing... but more importantly, that I thought were right. At that moment, however, I felt myself mature. How can one design without constraints was a question that was posed in class. How can one advance with no struggle. This quote...this direct challenge on the principles and passions that are the very fabric of me. I realized that to a certain extent this phenomenon is true. It goes back to what I reference earlier as the 'American Paradox'. The celebration of "diversity" is just another American ideal (albeit, one in which I fully believe). We all speak about the "Melting Pot" (or more appropriately, the "Tossed Salad" referencing different, but autonomous elements that make the American whole). These euphemisms ("Diversity" included) allow for a tacit acceptance of inequality (Michaels particularly argues that this allows for the acceptance of ec9nomic inequity).

The notion and celebration of "diversity" is inherently American, as it appeals to the capitalist mindset....that someone always has to be on the bottom... and that is okay. It's amazing. Relating this to the construction of Pruitt-Iagoe...perhaps the most infamous housing project in the nation, contractors inflated their bids for the project, so much so that construction of the project was severely inadequate...yet they were still inhabited by the working poor. Would that have been the case in a more affluent area of town...inferior construction, subpar to the plans initially proposed?

Related to the diversity issue is this idea of "colorblindness" which always brings a little chuckle to me, and there are several reasons why. First of all--who are the people who say they are colorblind (not in the biological sense, but to be relatable to the multiplicity of races)--more than likely those who claim this social disability are those in power...white people. I wonder when they say "I'm color blind" what do they envision... a white and black world? (This isn’t color-blind at all, and in fact begs the white-black racial issues anyway). On top of that, how dare you continue to exercise your inherent racial power by stripping me of my racial identity? Here is where "diversity" should come in: we should recognize the beauty, the privilege and oppression that results from it, and reconcile them... not get rid of the issue completely. As Michael Eric Dyson said, "As a presumed achievement, color-blindness reinforces the very racial misery it is meant to replace."

I guess what I am taking away from these notions is to be very intentional with language, and to be honest with oneself. Now, I not only claim that I am passionate about diversity and social justice, but that I am also passionate about alleviating inequalities (particularly in the medical field...as I want to work on health disparities). More importantly, to really understand and comprehend these issues, the solution is not to mask, or to delete entirely the problems...but instead to be honest with oneself. I have prejudices (even after going through countless "diversity” workshops). I judge people. But I recognize those feelings, acknowledge and grow from them. That is what will resolve these issues... self-improvement... which will then foster compassion for others. I will end on this note from Susan Sontag "Compassion is an unstable emotion. It needs to be translated into action, otherwise it withers.

What is Diversity?

American Paradox

Yesterday, my Community Building class with Bob Hansman went on another all-day Saturday, this time of the northern half of the downtown St. Louis area. That was, perhaps, one of the most intense experiences in my life...standing and walking for 7 hours straight...no time for bathroom stops...no time for eating, unless you brought snacks with you (of course I did). I was probably too tired to fully enjoy it, to fully consume and process all of the information that we unearthed...in retrospect however, I think that day is one that will forever be ingrained in my memory. I've been at Wash U for 3 years now...and I have seen more of St. Louis in these opening weeks of the semester, than I have in my previous years combined.

While on the tour, I was constantly struck with this notion of the "American paradox" (this may be a new coined phrase, or I may have read it somewhere). It amazes me how stark the differences are between neighborhoods, and between different areas of town.. and how these differences are further demarcated by "borders" that Bob speaks about. It amazes me that the inequality is so apparent that we refuse to acknowledge it it. Traveling on the border of North St. Louis, looking at the housing projects that still exist there...looking at how everything was in such disrepair (often times at no fault to the people that live in those communities, for example when Cardinals fans come to party in the parking lot near St. Patrick's Parish leaving tons of trash there). How do we not notice? or fail to recognize the dissonance? I was speaking to one of my classmates, saying how Americans have this romanticized notion of entrepreneurialship, independence and freedom, or that we still operate under the Horatio Alger illusion that one can pull himself up by his bootstraps. That stands in direct contrast to capitalism, the economic system that we champion. And that people can justify the resulting economic stratification with "that's just what capitalism is.. someone has to be on the bottom" WHAT SENSE DOES THAT MAKE? That is in direct contrast to the statement that "all men are created equal." What is even more interesting is that if one does champion equality...one is labeled as a "communist" or a "socialist," with such a negative connotation. Why? What's wrong with that? I think this paradox is epitomised by the following quote from our Voices that we receives a few days ago:

"There are a lot of reasons why you still have poverty in America. Most of these disadvantaged families don't have a clue as to how to get out of this cycle of poverty that they're in. And it's easy for us to have an abstract opinion about how they should do it; they should just take care of themselves, they should pick themselves up, they've got the same opportunities I have. You hear that sort of rationale quite a bit, and what you need is for everyone to step over that threshold of this sort of our world. We think that they should come into our world. What we should do is go into their world and understand it.

Sam Mockbee, c. 1990s"

It reminds me of the notion of "Structural Violence" that Paul Farmer (a noted anthropologist and public health advocate) coined. That term is so applicable to this course even. Literally, Farmer speaks that the way that infrastructure is developed (in the context of this class, Architecture) and how that can be directly violent, especially those who are oppressed, those who have no voice, have no say. The point that I think Bob, Tegogo, and Mikey were trying to make that design has direct implications...it isn't some theory... your drawings/plans will be manifested...and in one way or another, if you don't watch your assumptions, your thoughts, you may end up doing what we saw with the American Building.

The American Building was probably the most surreal examples of structural violence to me. as we learned yesterday it marks the northern end of the downtown area. Facing downtown there is a sort of grand ceremonial entrance... On one side of that you have the undecorated place where the design is for purpose and utility with few embellishments. In the back facing the housing projects is where the trucks come in and where the loud A/C system is located...facing the housing projects across the street. Think about how much sleep has been lost to those family living there.. not only dealing with the constant drone of the A/C, but also with increased traffic (which is very dangerous, particularly if you have younger children. On top of that, I recognized trees acting as a natural border between the American Building and the housing projects..maybe trying to hide them from view?

The point is that the design of this building itself is inherently violent (proximity to the street, A/C loud and maybe blowing out harmful chemicals(maybe coolants for instance?)). It amazes me. This BLATANT discrimination... Yet we say that everyone has an equal chance... an equal opportunity to make it to the top 1 percent of the population, who controls 99 percent of the wealth. These things aren't mistakes...Houses don't just crumble like they do in the Wellston neighborhood..Trash just doesn't magically accumulate in one area of town and not the other. There are conscious decisions that are made.. and not by the people who live in these neighborhoods.

Anyway, I feel as though I am getting into rant mode. the thing that troubles me is that these are people's lives that we are dealing with. That disrepair that...those crumbling houses...the noisy A/C system... that all has a direct impact on people's health. And we wonder why health disparities are so stark and prevalent in America? It's just as much a public health issue, as it is a design issue..

Well, those are my thoughts.... Until next time

Who's Not Here?

First of all, I want to thank everyone who has read my blog throughout the summer. It is incredibly heart warming to hear people express their concern for me. I have decided to re-vamp my blog for this academic semester. I am taking a class called Community Building, Building Community. It is taught by Bob Hansman...perhaps one of the most interesting but lovable figures I have met in my years here at WU. The course gets students (mostly architecture students) into the community to learn about St. Louis, why it exists in the conditions it does, while learning about the social factors that play into urban development. For this class, I must keep a journal...and this blog will serve as my journal--for convenience, so if I am somewhere and struck with an idea, I can quickly access it without having to carry paper around, but also so that I can share my experiences with friends and family...

The last week has been intense with my Community Building class.... we had class for the first time last Friday, had a seven hour St. Louis tour on Saturday, followed by films on Sunday. Today marks a repeat of this process. Although I have already dedicated many hours to this course.. I've realized that this course is not only about looking at St. Louis, and the communities that exist within it, but how we as a class develop our own community. I've never taken a class at WU where I have become so close and interacted with my peers in such a way. Discussing the atmosphere around us, eating at Mom's restaurant, or just interacting with neighbors in the communities we tour, we develop our own little community... I think it will be a great semester.

We were told to think about "who isn't here." By here it was meant in the class, in Wash. U. (or at least that is how I have interpreted the question). It is obvious that the people who we will be interacting with--the neighbors--those are the one's who aren't here. People who obviously struggle. What I have learned over the past couple of tours, however, is that these aren't people who necessarily struggle with "bad neighborhoods" and the people who we stereotype would gather there (e.g. Prostitutes, hustlers, drug traffickers)....not to say that those issues don't exist, but that in most cases those aren't the biggest problems. The biggest problems tackled deal with gentrification (as we have heard some say when we approach on a tour "are you here to buy our homes"), poor urban planning or benign neglect (how can we let houses crumble in certain neighborhoods, but not in others... this isn't a residential issue--it is an administrative/legislative issue), and so forth. Reading portions of William Upski's book, it is amazing to me how he has walked through the "most feared neighborhoods in the nation" in the darkest of night, and yet they were just as quiet and serene as any neighborhood in the suburbs. It's interesting how there is a perpetuation of fear propagated through the media, through our own stereotypes... and the paradox that exists (the more fear we have, the less likely these neighborhoods will be treated with respect...which results in the further degradation of these neighborhoods).

Through this course, I have been forced to confront my own identity within the context of WU. I found myself quite bothered today with the notion that Bob (our instructor) takes a "bunch of white kids through the hood". I think there is an expectation that a wide gulf exists between us Wash U students and the neighbors. It goes back to stereotypes, and how I don't fit comfortably into any. On one hand, i am forced to tackle this privilege that I have for attending one of the nation's best schools, but with that status, some people assume that I came from a well-to-do background... a nice house in the suburbs maybe? Somewhere up north? I probably attended some nice school with parents who paid my way maybe? The fact of the matter is that these tours are not entirely foreign to me. I grew up down the street from Roseland, a housing project in North Carolina. I was 2 minutes away from Boulevard Homes and Little Rock apartments.... notorious for drug trafficking and violence. I took piano lessons in Hidden Valley, a neighborhood nationally recognized for it's violence particularly with the Hidden Valley Kings (a notorious gang). Not to say that I have it worse ( in fact, I have realized that the neighborhoods that we visit are sometimes in far worse shape... particularly with the windowless, boarded up, crumbling houses). But it is to say that i am in an interesting position. On one hand I feel as though I don't fit into this Wash U mold...I'm black, working class, (the fire alarm just went off.. now I'm back again), gay and disabled (to some degree). I am confronted every day with how my identity is oppressed, particularly in this white, affluent environment. But taking Community building has brought something to my attention. The fact that I am being educated, the fact that I am attending Washington University is privilege within itself.

Today, while touring Wellston, I was haunted by the dreams that I have shared with my friends.. about leaving my "hood" back home, to become rich...to live in a "nice" neighborhood (whatever that means). I realized what a trade-off that is though. How often is it that you see people sitting on porches keeping a loving watch over their neighborhood in a community that has multi-million dollar houses (often those houses are kept into themselves, with gates that form little compounds separated from the community). How often is it that in affluent neighborhoods, you can walk to the corner store where people know your name. There's a closeness, a sense of community that may not exist in my dream neighborhood.... it's rare that I occupy that "power" position in the privilege/oppression dichotomy, but with my education, I realize that I have a leg-up now.

It just matters what I do with that power now.. Will I do like so many others and leave the neighborhood that I have called my home for more than 18 years?all in pursuit of what is considered "better" or a "nicer neighborhood". It is an interesting choice, I'm sure I will be revisiting in coming journal entries.

Well, I have another 7 hour tour tomorrow...I'll see what else I can tie together then.