The Bladgen Alley blog Baanc Blog has posted a picture of 1258 10th Street NW back in the late 80s. It’s so depressing looking. Gawd, would you want to live across the street from that? Next door?
There were parts of the eastern parts and mid parts of Shaw that looked like that when I was house hunting in 2000. Somewhere off U Street was a place I called the house of the ugly people. The block of the ugly people was kinda run down too. Now. As 1258 10th Street is now, it has come a long way, being a bit beyond my economic level. But then again my own house is beyond my economic level, good thing I bought it when I did.
Looking at the roughly 20 year difference in the pictures just makes me thankful for all those who stuck it out, those who tried and held back the decay as long as they could before retreating to save their sanity, and especially those who tried to make the neighborhood better but lost their sanity/ patience/ money/ life in the process. I’m on my block because of my neighbors L&D and Miss B who came 15-20 years before me, who fought against the drug dealing, pleaded with the city for services, and on their own tried to make their and their neighbors’ home a little oasis. I’m thankful to the neighbors, no longer on the block, like Pam & John, who did their part, said ‘I’m done’ and retreated to the suburbs or other parts of the city to recover.
Tag: Gentrification
Gentrification re: Loaded
Frozen Tropics mentioned it first. Sankofa Video and Books up on Georgia Avenue will be ‘exploring’ the issue of gentrification this week. According to them:
The panel discussions will allow the community to thoroughly examine the implications of gentrification, gentrification and racism, the institutionalized gentrification, the economic implication of gentrification, the implication of culture gentrification, the appropriation of African American cultural icons for the benefits of the ‘gentrifiers’, and the following questions will be addressed:
Have they come to live with us or displace us?
Who owns the planet?
Gentrification: Latest stage of colonial power – or – it’s relationship to colonialism?
I see a bunch of loaded questions and statements. Yes, the word gentrification is loaded, but you can additionally pack it with more explosives and how you pair it with other loaded statements.
I’m going to take a wild guess and say the answer to question one will be displacement. Maybe the idea of living with people you’re implying are colonial oppressors may be batted around for a minute. But seriously, colonialist oppressor is not a nice title and you damage your radical whatever cred by coddling ‘those people’. Does one become a colonial oppresser by virtue of simply living east of 16th St NW? Is this an opportunity to rail against the Fair Housing Act, which allows people to legally live wherever the heck they want.
Here’s a question, is the ideal located in places in DC (parts of NE & SE) where gentrification is not occurring and probably will never even bubble slightly in the next decade or two?
Sort of Retelling/rewriting History
I’m trudging through Monique M. Taylor’s Harlem: Between heaven and hell which looks at the role of the black middle class and gentrification in Harlem. Harlem, has a special place in AfrAmerican and American cultural history, so there is that attractive and laudable past that attracts middle and upper middle class blacks.
In the first chapter Taylor writes how Harlem came into being via a real estate bust. Speculators bought up properties in Harlem around the turn of the 20th century because the Manhattan subway or street car (I’m not clear which) was coming up to Harlem and well, you know. Too many houses constructed, too high of a price, and then the bubble popped. Sound familiar? In this economic crisis ” many landlords were willing to rent properties to blacks. … Others shrewdly took advantage of white prejudice. The hope was that by placing blacks into certain properties, neighboring whites would vacate their properties and free them up at extremely low prices.”[1] Around the mid to late 1910s Harlem became a majority black neighborhood. Then by 1920 notable and influential black organizations had established or relocated themselves in Harlem. Over time the positives that Harlem is known for flourished.
However, while there was this great Harlem Renaissance taking place, the glory outshone the negative side of Harlem. The unemployment, the crowded living conditions, the poverty and segregation. The famous Cotton Club was for white patrons only. The realities of the negatives resulted in large homes being carved up into smaller units to crowd poor people into and when the glitter of Harlem’s shine started getting dull a depressing ghetto began to show underneath.
The background is needed to understand the black middle class who come to or returned to Harlem to ‘restore it to it’s former glory.’ As I was reading the stories of the black mid class (let’s say buppies for short) fixing up properties I noticed something. They are making the buildings reflect their pre-black neighborhood past, while lauding the Harlem Renaissance period. You mix your time periods long enough they meld into one, so that it is easy to imagine people like us (buppies) living in the grand houses and participating in the Renaissance. No one in the book, so far, has confused the periods, but the thinking seems to skate very close to it.
The book is very interesting in addressing class. But class seems to be too clunky and static a term. Taylor does show in one example how the relationship between buppies and poor blacks goes from we are all one to those sorry so-and-sos. Maybe more about that later.
[1]Taylor, Monique M. Harlem: Between heaven and hell. University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis, 2002. p. 5
Empower DC
I’m in a good mood. I’ve got my hot cup of British blend tea and a warm bacon, egg and cheese sandwich on multi-grain toast. Life is good. So in this good mood I’m looking over the newsletter sent to me by Empower DC.
Normally, I’d just delete it as it is lefty activist stuff, but as I said, I’m in a very good mood.
According to their email “Empower DC seeks to enhance and improve self-advocacy efforts to improve the quality of life of low-and moderate-income people in DC.” And looking over their newsletter, which is not available via their website (as far as I can tell) and their website they are challenging developers and private uses for DC owned property. Their newsletter has a series they are documenting and they describe it as so:
This is the first in a series of regular reports, entitled “People’s Property Now”, to be released by Empower DC’s People’s Property Campaign, providing information and analysis about the fate of public property in DC.
Empower DC’s People’s Property Campaign asserts that:
• As long as community needs exist in DC, there is no such thing as “surplus” public property.
• Public property is the common trust of the residents of the District of Columbia and must be maintained as public for current and future generations, and used for the public, not private profit.
• DC’s current law only provides a process for disposing of public property. Legislative change is necessary to create a transparent, community-driven input process to determine new public uses for available public properties.
I’m near the end of my sandwich and tea, so let me add my gently to the right opinion. One, why so critical of charter schools? Kingman Park is listed as being an example of ‘currently threatened property’ because it is slated to be a charter school. In the TC part of Shaw, Armstrong School languished as a city owned property and finally (it seems to have taken forever) the school has been cleaned up by the charter school in charge of it now. I do applaud Empower DC recognizing that McMillan Reservoir is green space, however it isn’t accessible green space, except to Canada Geese. My last comment is on DC owned land. It is not that once land is sold that DC won’t or can’t get land ever again. The DC government, as many governments have the power of eminent domain, they can seize property for unpaid taxes or other wrongs against the city and add to the city’s catalog of properties. Also DC owns enough nuisance properties, and we can point to a dozen city owned problems in Shaw alone owned by the city. If the city can offload these problem properties, turning them into housing (luxury, rentals, mod-income, mixed-use, whatever), with people who pay income taxes, the city and the surrounding community benefits.
Book Review: Home Girl: Building a dream house on a lawless block, pt 2
See part 1 here.
One chapter says it well, “Nice Bones, Rotten Organs”. Besides the drug trade going on outside the author’s house the other main drama of the book is the renovation of the house she bought in Harlem. I have to say I’ve been lucky. I found one main contractor for the big stuff and I have stuck with him and it has been a good relationship. The author, Judith Matloff, sadly has a multi-ethnic, multi-skilled, multi-competent, crew tearing her house apart at any one moment. Old houses are like old people, they are charming but they do have problems that come with age, and poor maintenance. Part way through fixing the place up she calls in some experts who come up with a laundry list of things that needed addressing.
I’m also lucky in that I got to live in my house long enough to have a clue of what it needed and how I wanted to live in it, before taking on major renovations. I know, for me, that my bedroom only needs to be functional, and not some oasis or retreat from the world. And then there are a bunch of things that I wanted to customize to the way I live and want to live (radiators, claw foot tub, Corian counter tops, etc), that no developer could ever foresee. But enough about me.
The second major theme is the business of drug dealing and it is a business. It confirms Sudhir Venkatesh’s work in looking at the drug dealing that goes on in the streets of Chicago, NYC and DC as a business with a hierarchy. In Gang Leader for a Day, the manager of the drug trade was J.T., in this book it is Miguel. Our street has one too, and so reading Matloff’s and Venkatesh’s experiences, re-affirms what I am (thankfully) seeing less of, on my street each year. Managers, main drug leaders, whatever tend to be a little older (in their 20s or early 30s) and keep their foot soldiers, the younger men selling, running, looking out, etc in line. A manger’s primary interest is to move product with as little interruption as possible. Which on the good side means they are not interested in starting up turf wars or any other activity that would bring greater police presence. This is illustrated (in a chapter I’m currently at a loss to find), when the author is very pregnant, is threatened by a female crackhead and her boyfriend on the author’s front stoop. She calls the cops, however Miguel lets it be known that if she had just informed him, instead of calling the cops (bad for business) he would have taken care of it.
I know it sounds strange, but in these situations it is not unusual to work out some sort of ‘peace’ with the dealers, while at the same time battling the drug trade through other channels. As a middle class (white
Book Review: Home Girl: Building a dream house on a lawless block, pt 1
Several weeks back I got an email from the author’s publicist regarding this book about a woman who buys a fixer upper brownstone in Harlem on a street filled with Dominican drug dealers. In a quick summary I think the book will speak to several who have gone through or are going through the same experience, in other neighborhoods and cities.
We’re perfectly aware that demographic changes, that in shorthand we call gentrification can be hard on struggling old timers. After reading this, the author, Judith Matloff, illustrates that it’s no picnic for the new group moving in either. Fixing up and living in a house, having to deal with contractors of varying skill, competency, and temperament, is not fun. Nor is having to navigate through an active open air drug market to get home. Or living next door to a crackhead squatting in the building next to yours, who harasses you and your spouse, and has occasionally broken in to your house and caused damage.
I’m reviewing the book in parts. This part I’ll deal with the first 7 chapters of this 25 chaptered book. I can say quickly that it starts off slow. I recognized the necessity of explaining Ms. Matloff’s background as a devil may care foreign correspondent in dangerous war torn/corrupt countries. However, I found the first couple of chapters dragging and I wanted to get past the biographical material as soon as possible.
It begins to get interesting when she begins working on the house in chapter 5. In the next chapter she recalls a statement that I feel is unfortunately true:
…Three policemen on horses clopped past and told the dealers at Salami’s house to move on. The muchachos ignored the cops, and the horses rode on.
“There goes the cavalry,” the woman remarked dryly. “They can’t do anything. It’s legal to loiter. You bought this house?”
“We’re under contract.”
“I’m glad someone finally bought it.” Her eyes swept over my dust flecked jeans and untamed curls. As she pursed her glossed lips, I got the impression that I wasn’t her first choice of a neighbor. “That house has been empty since the doctor died six months ago, It’s a blight on the block. I hope you have the energy. If you don’t mind my saying so, and please don’t take this the wrong way, the police will listen to you whites. They don’t take us black folks very seriously when we complain about the problem.”
The woman is her neighbor Leticia, and old timer who invites her to a police meeting and into her home to talk. The author notes the pristine condition of Leticia’s home and writes:
This was yet another reason that our house was so cheap. It had been destroyed. Ruined. Wrecked. Lecticia’s immaculate abode was the ‘before’ version of my house.
….
In sharp contrast, my dilapidated property was a museum of the crack epidemic. It served as a reminder of all that had destroyed Harlem: crime, looting, despair, poverty, failing schools. My house screamed, “Neglect.”
Chi-town gentrification tour- surface impressions
Chicago, like New York, but without the pesky New Yorkers and surrounded by Midwest farmland. I took a bunch of pictures, and I need to download them and label them properly. Then again 1/2 of them may be crap and only worth a delete button.
This weekend I did the Robert Taylor tour. We drove down to south Chicago, after getting bagels in Sokie.
Just my first impressions, there’s a lot of empty land round the former Robert Taylor Homes. I’m trying to imagine them with big ol’ apartment buildings on them, but all I see are acres of empty land and thinking, urban agriculture. It didn’t help that I also so plenty of community gardens and seethed with envy. Also Chicago, much bigger than DC and with tons more space. When I was reading about the Robert Taylor Homes in Sudir Venkatesh’s books I imagined something more compact, like Sursum Corda.
My guide and driver was also from Florida, so we kept comparing it to depressing parts of Orlando. There was enough barren open spaces, storefront churches, run down looking buildings that if you knocked off most of the 2nd and 3rd floors, you’d have Orlando.
Well after taking a few pictures, wandering over to the University of Chicago area and hitting a neat little farmer’s market attached to a nice community garden you could walk through, we drove to Gary, IN, for more looks at depressing areas.
Once I ID most of the pictures and locate the SD card reader, I’ll post more.
Taking a Break/ Chi-Town Gentrification Tour
I’m probably not going to be posting much for a while. I’ve been assigned to a 3 month detail that has made my commute 3x longer than normal, so I’m not really interacting with the hood that much. And I have to get to bed earlier because the disruption to my normal schedule is screwing with my sleep so that my body is sending me all sorts of nasty signals that I need more rest. It’s a good project, a good detail, and once I get to where I’m supposed to be I really like the work.
Knowing I need some sort of rest, I’ve been planning a late vacation. Normally I avoid going anywhere in the summer. But summer vacation time is nearly over and I’ve been reading a couple books by Sudhir Venkatesh, who wrote Gang Leader for a Day and American Project. I just cracked open Off the Books: The Underground Economy of the Urban Poor and man, I wanna go to Chicago. I want to get a lay of the land that was the Robert Taylor Homes. I also want a pizza. I hear they make good pizza in Chicago.
Two years ago I did the London Gentrification tour, walking around the gentrified Brixton neighborhood. Yet, I had experienced Brixton several times before in 1993 and could sense a change. I’ve never been to Chicago. So I’ll take suggestions of books I should read and places I should eat at.
Fun with ProQuest and the Historical Washington Post
Rob Goodspeed covered this use of the word “gentrification” and its use in the Post in his blog here. So I cannot even improve upon his work. However I can make some observations and provide a bibliography.
For the years 1970-1979, a few:
“Londoners vs. Developers” by Jerry Edgerton. Mar 25, 1973. p. C2
“Will ‘Saved’ Cities Mean Suburban Slums?; Mr. Peirce writes a syndicated column, on the problems of cities and states” by Neal R. Peirce. Jul 30, 1977. p. A15
“Gentrification of London; Working-Class Residents Vie With ‘Colonizers’ For Housing Working Class Vying For ‘Gentrified’ Homes” by Clay Harris, special to The Washington Post. Nov 5, 1977. E1
“Harlem Woos Tourists in Bid to Level Ghetto Barriers” by Lee Mitgang Nov 8, 1978 A30
“The Future Is Behind Us: Make Way for the Past; Architectural Outlook for the ’80s: Make Way for the Past” by Wolf Von Eckardt. Dec 30, 1978 C1
“Opportunity for a Livable City; The Urban and Suburban Choices Facing Washington’s New Mayor” by Wolf Van Eckardt Jan 13, ’79 B1
“The Motown Model; GM Spruces Up Its Neighborhood General Motors’ Motown Model” by Wolf Von Eckardt Jan 20, 1979 D1
“Going ’round in (Logan) Circles; How a Modest Dream Was Transformed Into a Bureaucratic Nightmare: Cityscape ‘Gentrification’ and Logan Circle” by Wolf Von Eckardt Feb 3, 1979 D1
“Preservation Is Not the Enemy of the Poor; Preserving Cities For Poor Residents” by Beverly A. Reece Feb 10, 1979 E29
“Measuring Change in the Cities” Feb 22, 1979 A16
“Mayor Voices Housing Concerns” by Blair Gately, special to The Washington Post Mar 15, 1979 DC5
A few articles in my own ProQuest gentrification query were written by Wolf Von Eckardt, who did the art & architecture beat. January 13, 1979 in “Opportunity for a Livable City” (B1, B4) he has hopes for the new mayor, Marion Barry. As a candidate it seems that Mr. Barry was not fond of the ‘rehabilitation movement’ taking place in the city by the middling classes. Von Eckardt wrote:
In the first place, displacement due to rehabilitation may not be as widespread as Mayor Barry was told. His task force said approximately 150,000 families were in danger of being thrown out of their houses. The Census Bureau just told us that the city lost population. Could it be that many of these endangered families have displaced themselves– to Prince George’s County?
I’m also noticing in the results for the mid to late 1970s an anixety about the growth of suburbs. Which leads me to think that some people are ‘renovating’ and moving into economically depressed areas and there are more getting the heck outta D(odge) C(ity), either to PG, MoCo, or NoVA.
Change?
The last post’s comments have gotten way off topic so I’m going to try to move them here.
There is a comment I want to answer in a bit of a longer length.
Are all of these new businesses for the existing residents or to attract new, higher income residents? And if they are primarily to attract new residents, and push out the lower income families and residents who have been living there for decades – well, I think that’s a problem.
My question is what will happen to the ordinary hardworking lower income people as the professionals move in? Ironically, the young urban professionals who move into these areas looking for diversity, often end up driving out the “diversity” by raising the cost of living beyond the means of long term residents.
My question is how to prevent this from happening and to create a truly diverse community, comprised of every income level, educational background, race, religion, etc.?
Regarding new businesses, there was a demand (residents) that attracted the business, not the other way around. This is no Field Of Dreams. Business failure is a very real possibility, and with small businesses we could be talking about someone’s life savings, a mound of debts (business loans) on the hope that the perceived demand is not a load of hype. There was/is a great demand for the businesses in a way that residents go out of their way wooing and supporting (see Queen of Sheba, Vegetate). And in the case of Windows (feel free to correct me Scott) the business was already there, but over time expanded and changed. There were residents, people who’d been here from 20 years to 20 days whose demands for a dry cleaner, a place to go and sit and eat, a place to get a decent wine, etc were not met. So yes, the businesses are here for a portion of existing residents, as well as visitors, and sometimes those visitors decide to become residents.
esse, a commenter, answered the other part regarding long time residents quite well:
On my street, the long time residents are dying.I have lived on my street for 15 years. I have yet to see a single household “forced out”. 5 vacant houses have been renovated and have people living in them now, three houses were owned by seniors that died. Their kids sold the house,because they have their own house in the suburbs. One family did cash in and moved to the suburbs for more room and better schools. I think that many neighborhoods in DC are renovating, rather than than gentrifying.