I discovered that New York City Environmental organizations are quite nice to talk to. I use to work in accordance with an environmental agency and they weren’t very nice so I expected this project to be like pulling teeth. Quite frankly it was the opposite thank goodness. I called three environmental organizations: TIMES-UP, New York City Environmental Fund-Hudson River, and Environmental Defense Fund. All Rights Reserved. What was most surprising was the amount of organizations solely based in New York City. Yes I understand we have hundreds of environmental problems but I though it always to be more productive if it were a nationwide thing, but hey that’s probably why I’m not going into the environmental field.
But what I found out from the three organizations is that there are a lot of issues in New York City they gave me lists and lists of issues like pollution, littering, toxic waste disposal, garbage issues, lack of trees, car pollution, factory-like industries, and so much more. But the three topics the three organizations concentrated on were car pollution, water pollution, and industry pollution.
TIMES-UP is an organization that encourages the use of bike riding to cut down on the car pollution that causes a million problems. They told me that they are concentrating on this one for a number of reasons. Some of them being that the car industry has grown so much and that more and more cars are being put on the street which adds to the carbon dioxide levels in the air. This leads to the higher amounts of asthma patients and other respiratory problems for the youth. So they are trying to encourage more and more people to ride bikes, they have implemented more space for bikes to be parked and they are also trying to encourage a shared space on the road initiative. I found this organization to be most interesting and most productive.
The New York City Environmental Fund organization was interesting but they didn’t have a well rounded environmental impact. They were solely concentrated on the cleaning of contaminated water. Which is amazing don’t get me wrong but I from what I got they don’t seem to care much about any of other environmental issues. Because the other organizations had more than one project going on that combated multiple environmental issues while this one was just the cleaning of the Hudson River. Unless there were different organizations within it that had other projects but I was unable to ask since the woman was in a rush. But none the less I found out their most pressing issue is the contamination of the Hudson River and its impact on the rest of the city. They feel with the cleaning of the water we can use it for the different environmentally friendly things. Such as they feel that allow it is extremely expensive they want to find a way to use the Hudson River as some type of energy producing tool.
The last organization was Environmental Defense Fund their main goal was to cut down on pollution. They are implementing a recycling program, an anti-littering program and strive on teaching the youth at an early age how to cut down on pollution. I found this to be very interesting because I work as an after school teacher so I am definitely going to use some of the lessons to teach my students about these issues.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Friday, May 7, 2010
BOOK REPORT by CAITLIN BUTLER
The book Always: Living La Vida Loca by Luis Rodriguez is about a man named Luis who grew up in L.A. during the 60’s and 70’s. When he moved from Mexico to L.A. that’s where things started falling apart for him. The major themes of this story are violence, police brutality, man vs. society, and fighting for something. The main argument of this book is when the Chicanos were treated as second-class citizens everywhere, but this mostly happened to Rodriguez in schools where he went. On page 137, it says, “Pulled in well off white kids”. The Chicanos were oppressed and the whites were seen as better people than the Mexicans.
The most interesting part of the book was when the girl had to join the gang in order to be protected from the others. Another interesting part was when Rodriguez and others were at the beach and got harassed and beat up by two guys who they later found out were both cops. It was very hard for Rodriguez because he basically grew up in a neighborhood where the people living there did not like Mexicans. So, the only way out for him was to join the gang. It became his only protection at that point and that is why he did it. There was definitely racism, injustice and prejudice that happened. On page 65, it says how the Mexicans suck. The white kids would also say to him and his brother, “what do we have here, spices to order, maybe with some beans”. They were right from the start harassed by all the whites kids in L.A. I know that if I had to deal with this kind of thing, I would just be so angry and upset. I would probably just go home and hide inside the house the whole time, until they left me alone.
This relates to the things that we talked about in class because this entire book is based in an urban environment. It also relates to class because just like we had to do storytelling, Luis also told his storytelling in his own way. It also related to gendered places. It revolves around mostly men. It’s amazing to see how much violence there is in urban areas all around. Not to say that there aren’t violent places elsewhere, but I always hear about violence in urban areas. One of my favorite things that Luis says in the book is that gangs are not the problem, but the society that creates these gangs that becomes the problem. That is very true. If one thinks about it, society is what makes gangs happen in the first place because of poverty level, etc. But it is how the person handles it that makes all the difference in the end. But for most minorities and the poor, there is no other alternative than to join a gang. That is all that they become to know and get used to. But it takes very special people, like Luis to finally get out of a gang and turn their life all around for the best, making it all worthwhile for the person.
Luis Rodriguez is a very smart, nice and dedicated person who later became and made something of him self. He later left the gang and became an activist against gangs. But even that didn’t solve all his problems. His son was in jail for 28 years for four attempted murder charges. So, just because one family member makes it out, doesn’t always mean all of the family members will get out. That is what makes the whole thing so sad. But I guess it can take just one person to change things for the best. I love how Luis courage and bravery got him out. He saw past the gang and the violence and instead saw love, hope and determination to a better life and world for himself and others. He can now go and carry that for the rest of his life. I just love inspiring stories such as this one. Because it shows that anything is possible if you try!
The book Always: Living La Vida Loca by Luis Rodriguez is about a man named Luis who grew up in L.A. during the 60’s and 70’s. When he moved from Mexico to L.A. that’s where things started falling apart for him. The major themes of this story are violence, police brutality, man vs. society, and fighting for something. The main argument of this book is when the Chicanos were treated as second-class citizens everywhere, but this mostly happened to Rodriguez in schools where he went. On page 137, it says, “Pulled in well off white kids”. The Chicanos were oppressed and the whites were seen as better people than the Mexicans.
The most interesting part of the book was when the girl had to join the gang in order to be protected from the others. Another interesting part was when Rodriguez and others were at the beach and got harassed and beat up by two guys who they later found out were both cops. It was very hard for Rodriguez because he basically grew up in a neighborhood where the people living there did not like Mexicans. So, the only way out for him was to join the gang. It became his only protection at that point and that is why he did it. There was definitely racism, injustice and prejudice that happened. On page 65, it says how the Mexicans suck. The white kids would also say to him and his brother, “what do we have here, spices to order, maybe with some beans”. They were right from the start harassed by all the whites kids in L.A. I know that if I had to deal with this kind of thing, I would just be so angry and upset. I would probably just go home and hide inside the house the whole time, until they left me alone.
This relates to the things that we talked about in class because this entire book is based in an urban environment. It also relates to class because just like we had to do storytelling, Luis also told his storytelling in his own way. It also related to gendered places. It revolves around mostly men. It’s amazing to see how much violence there is in urban areas all around. Not to say that there aren’t violent places elsewhere, but I always hear about violence in urban areas. One of my favorite things that Luis says in the book is that gangs are not the problem, but the society that creates these gangs that becomes the problem. That is very true. If one thinks about it, society is what makes gangs happen in the first place because of poverty level, etc. But it is how the person handles it that makes all the difference in the end. But for most minorities and the poor, there is no other alternative than to join a gang. That is all that they become to know and get used to. But it takes very special people, like Luis to finally get out of a gang and turn their life all around for the best, making it all worthwhile for the person.
Luis Rodriguez is a very smart, nice and dedicated person who later became and made something of him self. He later left the gang and became an activist against gangs. But even that didn’t solve all his problems. His son was in jail for 28 years for four attempted murder charges. So, just because one family member makes it out, doesn’t always mean all of the family members will get out. That is what makes the whole thing so sad. But I guess it can take just one person to change things for the best. I love how Luis courage and bravery got him out. He saw past the gang and the violence and instead saw love, hope and determination to a better life and world for himself and others. He can now go and carry that for the rest of his life. I just love inspiring stories such as this one. Because it shows that anything is possible if you try!
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Tania Damiano - Book Report - "Sidewalk" by Mitchell Duneier
“I am thinking about the sidewalk. Thank goodness for the sidewalk.” (80)
Mitchell Duneier spent years studying the sidewalk, but not much the physical sidewalk, that is, the pavement and the cracks in it, but how people move and act on it. He tells the story of how the men and women he studied looked at him with suspicious eyes, worried and ‘weirded out’ (for a lack of a better term) but soon let Duneier into their lifestyle as he tells their story.
First off, he tells the story of an African American book vender named Hakim Hasan who was feeling a bit uneasy to have Duneier observing his every move. He is sells what he calls “black books” from a small stand (well, table) on Sixth Avenue. As he approached Hakim to ask him what his role in on the street, Hakim kindly answered that he is “a public character" (6). I couldn’t hold in my laughter at the conversation that followed as Duneier was confused at what that meant and Hakim mentioned Jane Jacobs' “The Death and Life of Great American Cities.” I found it funny because it sounded like Hakim was frustrated with a man not knowing such a famous phrase and book. It is important to know that during Duneier’s first encounter with Hakim, he immediately assumed that he was unhoused and uneducated for he thought that “many of the African-American men selling things on the block lived right there on the sidewalk.” Interesting how we assumed things for no absolute reason or conscious thought.
Thanks to Hakim and one of his NYU colleagues he coincidentally found while walking down the street (21), he was able to observe and found out more about the lives of other venders along Sixth Avenue. All of them, however, were not the uneducated, ‘losers’ Duneier once assumed they were, but he saw them as “innovators - earning a living, striving for self-respect, establishing good relations with fellow citizens, providing support for each other" (79). Many of the citizens were thankful to have these men out here for they were of great help, which helped the venders stay in business. Duneier states that most of these men, now venders, were at some point on drugs or other illegal activities, and being “innovators- earning a living” by selling books or others down sixth avenue was what kept them out of trouble. After much research and observation, furthermore, Duneier noticed that these amazing men “worked directly in an unplanned way to bring this particular habitat into being” (154). This ‘habitat’ he refers to is sidewalk where "complementary sustaining elements were brought together in a working system" (154).
Much of this book, especially the conversation Duneier has at the beginning of it, is in conversation with Jane Jacobs’ mentioned book. He mentions that "Sidewalk life today is different from how it was when Jacobs was writing" and that “her account of sidewalk life is different not simply because the sidewalk was different but because the lens of the sidewalk was different” (192). Jacobs’ main argument on sidewalk safety was that, besides police officers and other government officials that worked for the public directly, the ones that kept the streets safe were its daily users- that is, if anyone were to be in danger, others would directly jump in to help or at least call for help. Yet Duneier argues that Jacobs’ observations ended in the 1960s and that years after that, the view and life of the sidewalk had changed dramatically. On page 157, Duneier says that just in the 80’s, the sidewalk was seen “as a kind of struggle” because people had changed and the contact between them had changed. Life, mainly in New York City is continually changing; the city’s sidewalk needed new eyes to keep it safe.
Another important issue is the theory embraced by Mayor Guiliani of “Broken windows.” His theory sees all kind of disorder in the city, not referring simply to cracked or broken windows but to any type of crime and illegal activity occurring in the city. Yet, Duneier looks at the bright side of the situation and proposed the “fixed windows” theory which is the exact opposite of the “broken windows.” He believes that when the government finally “abdicate its responsibility to help persons who come out of prison to find homes and jobs, such persons are left to their own devices if they are to transform themselves into persons that make a contribution to society” (315)- this is, men that will improve the city. As I mentioned earlier, these book vendors attempting to make “an honest living” (315) are well liked by the citizens that pass by Sixth Avenue, everyday and especially by Duneier’s NYU classmate who gets his reading materials from Hakim.
And well, I don’t want to sound obvious but this book has EVERYTHING to do with the class. The study of people and their behavior is clearly depicted in Sidewalk. The way people interact, how the sidewalk life is and how the street venders have become their own “family” as they daily meet at the same spot hoping for a better life than what they most likely had before. It also connects to the class because Sidewalk has a lot of influence and input from The Death and Life of Great American Cities which we discussed a lot in Urban Studies. I enjoyed Duneier’s writing even more than Jacobs’. Probably because it’s more current and I could relate to it more, but also because of his writing and the way he presents city life.
Mitchell Duneier spent years studying the sidewalk, but not much the physical sidewalk, that is, the pavement and the cracks in it, but how people move and act on it. He tells the story of how the men and women he studied looked at him with suspicious eyes, worried and ‘weirded out’ (for a lack of a better term) but soon let Duneier into their lifestyle as he tells their story.
First off, he tells the story of an African American book vender named Hakim Hasan who was feeling a bit uneasy to have Duneier observing his every move. He is sells what he calls “black books” from a small stand (well, table) on Sixth Avenue. As he approached Hakim to ask him what his role in on the street, Hakim kindly answered that he is “a public character" (6). I couldn’t hold in my laughter at the conversation that followed as Duneier was confused at what that meant and Hakim mentioned Jane Jacobs' “The Death and Life of Great American Cities.” I found it funny because it sounded like Hakim was frustrated with a man not knowing such a famous phrase and book. It is important to know that during Duneier’s first encounter with Hakim, he immediately assumed that he was unhoused and uneducated for he thought that “many of the African-American men selling things on the block lived right there on the sidewalk.” Interesting how we assumed things for no absolute reason or conscious thought.
Thanks to Hakim and one of his NYU colleagues he coincidentally found while walking down the street (21), he was able to observe and found out more about the lives of other venders along Sixth Avenue. All of them, however, were not the uneducated, ‘losers’ Duneier once assumed they were, but he saw them as “innovators - earning a living, striving for self-respect, establishing good relations with fellow citizens, providing support for each other" (79). Many of the citizens were thankful to have these men out here for they were of great help, which helped the venders stay in business. Duneier states that most of these men, now venders, were at some point on drugs or other illegal activities, and being “innovators- earning a living” by selling books or others down sixth avenue was what kept them out of trouble. After much research and observation, furthermore, Duneier noticed that these amazing men “worked directly in an unplanned way to bring this particular habitat into being” (154). This ‘habitat’ he refers to is sidewalk where "complementary sustaining elements were brought together in a working system" (154).
Much of this book, especially the conversation Duneier has at the beginning of it, is in conversation with Jane Jacobs’ mentioned book. He mentions that "Sidewalk life today is different from how it was when Jacobs was writing" and that “her account of sidewalk life is different not simply because the sidewalk was different but because the lens of the sidewalk was different” (192). Jacobs’ main argument on sidewalk safety was that, besides police officers and other government officials that worked for the public directly, the ones that kept the streets safe were its daily users- that is, if anyone were to be in danger, others would directly jump in to help or at least call for help. Yet Duneier argues that Jacobs’ observations ended in the 1960s and that years after that, the view and life of the sidewalk had changed dramatically. On page 157, Duneier says that just in the 80’s, the sidewalk was seen “as a kind of struggle” because people had changed and the contact between them had changed. Life, mainly in New York City is continually changing; the city’s sidewalk needed new eyes to keep it safe.
Another important issue is the theory embraced by Mayor Guiliani of “Broken windows.” His theory sees all kind of disorder in the city, not referring simply to cracked or broken windows but to any type of crime and illegal activity occurring in the city. Yet, Duneier looks at the bright side of the situation and proposed the “fixed windows” theory which is the exact opposite of the “broken windows.” He believes that when the government finally “abdicate its responsibility to help persons who come out of prison to find homes and jobs, such persons are left to their own devices if they are to transform themselves into persons that make a contribution to society” (315)- this is, men that will improve the city. As I mentioned earlier, these book vendors attempting to make “an honest living” (315) are well liked by the citizens that pass by Sixth Avenue, everyday and especially by Duneier’s NYU classmate who gets his reading materials from Hakim.
And well, I don’t want to sound obvious but this book has EVERYTHING to do with the class. The study of people and their behavior is clearly depicted in Sidewalk. The way people interact, how the sidewalk life is and how the street venders have become their own “family” as they daily meet at the same spot hoping for a better life than what they most likely had before. It also connects to the class because Sidewalk has a lot of influence and input from The Death and Life of Great American Cities which we discussed a lot in Urban Studies. I enjoyed Duneier’s writing even more than Jacobs’. Probably because it’s more current and I could relate to it more, but also because of his writing and the way he presents city life.
Tania Damiano - Activity 9 - Why Blog if no one reads it?
http://onlytheblogknowsbrooklyn.com/category/civics-and-urban-life/
This blog was amazing. The post up “Bensonhurst Explorations in Pizza” was awesomeee! Besides having amazing pictures of pizza that made me ridiculously hungry, it reminded me so much of the time we went on the “group field trip” and how we ate in Astor Place and at the Brooklyn Ice Cream Factory right under the Brooklyn Bridge. We, well I, didn’t take amazing pictures of our food or ice cream, for that matter, but the point is that this blog reminded me of that day and how much fun we had. I also love “New Billboards Say: Drink WAT-AAH” because I am absolutely how New Yorkers, mainly the bloggers of course, find so many things fascinating. I remember that that same day when our group went out, we were taking pictures of posters or art work all over the street, talking about it, sometimes laughing, sometimes thinking, and sometimes noticing how messed up it all was.
http://savannahurbanstudies.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-03-22T19%3A27%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=1
Digital Tourism in Savannah “...such things [beauty and charm of the Savannah's historic district] do not guarantee that tourism in Savannah will prevail in the 21st century. The characters of tourists in the 21st century differ from those in previous centuries. The rapid technology changes transform the characters of tourists and subsequently change the demand of tourism.”
I wanted to comment in how much NYC and Savannah, GA are different. I don’t think ANYTHING could ever stop tourism in NYC. NO technology, no changes in people. New York City will always be the amazing, bright, full of life city and nothing beats that. Although I love quiet, suburban areas with lots of green areas, I always grew up in the city- in the capital, center of all attraction, in Uruguay (my country of birth) and I’ve lived in Queens and travelled back and forth to Manhattan for ten years now. What’s more, while tourism in Savannah may be dropping as people become less interested, no tourist seizes to be amazed at the beauty and greatness of New York City, babyyyy!!!!
http://johnson.blogs.nytimes.com/ ****
The City as Fortress: “There are good reasons, as I’ve discussed over the past few weeks, to preserve urban density. But that density creates an opportunity for terrorism; it’s not an accident that the most high-profile European and American attacks of the past few years have all targeted emblems of metropolitan living: subways, commuter trains and office buildings.”
Terrorism will exist wherever, whenever. It’s obvious that attacks will occur where there are the most people. The purpose, I assume, of a terrorist attacking is to kill as many people as possible and cause as much suffering they possibly can. Why attack the empty state of Wyoming when NYC is packed with people? I agree with the blog as a whole and I found it very interesting since it is not much I pay attention to. Steven Johnson here, after a long explanation of terrorism in NY, London and Madrid claims that whatever the situation, “it’s not worth building fortress cities, or giving up on the idea of density altogether” and I completely back this up. I never been to Madrid or London, but I can speak from experience about NYC. It is this diverse urban density that makes the city so great.
http://www.newcolonist.com/
The New York Flaneurs: “I sadly believe, however, that the New York "flaneur" is a dying breed. You can tell by the rapidity of movement, the glazed looks, even the quickness and carelessness with which we tear down old beautiful buildings to replace them with bland facades of dull white brick.”
Oh the lovely Flaneurs! The very first work in learned in Urban Studies Class. I loved reading this blog. Sadly I couldn’t comment on it (strangely, there was no “comment” button anywhere.) It’s great how the people that have not been in NYC for as much as I have and caught up with the hype of this city notice how fast everything moves here. I remember when we did the first activity “on being a Flaneur” how different it was from being part of the action of what seems speed walking to every person not in as much hurry as the rest of the city is. I agree with David Willems (author of this blog) how “the New York "flaneur" is a dying breed.” It’s totally true. The movement of NYC doesn’t allow for just walking around and observing. If you are born and raised a New Yorker, you miss out all of the amazing things this city has to offer. I was not born or raised here, but I caught up fast to the lifestyle. My mom constantly reprimands me for losing my sense of awe that I had when I first arrived. I know that my teammate Zack is utterly fascinated with everything he sees everywhere he goes because he hasn’t been here long. This sense of awe is lost by all New Yorkers that’s why the flaneurs there are “a dying breed.”
http://newyorkdailyphoto.blogspot.com/
White Sauce: “One of the extraordinarily fascinating facets of New York City life is the ethnic concentration that you often find in various businesses and enterprises. And one of those enjoyed by all is the cuisine. This is what makes New York a literal smorgasbord of delectable food from all corners of the globe and one of the biggest allures of the city to visitors.’
I just love how New Yorkers have that intense need to have one comment or the other about its food. Being the diverse city that it is, you find any kind of food at mostly any corner. This blog is all about the Halal Food Indian Carts that are located in almost every corner. I laughed while reading it because there is two right by Hunter- one right in front of Hunter West and another one around the corner. And more so in Manhattan than any other borough, you find not only these carts but so many other foods, for all likes, from all origins. I was amazed by this, too, when I first arrived to New York. The diversity of people and life shocked me since I was so used to the same old every day for my ten young years in Uruguay.
This blog was amazing. The post up “Bensonhurst Explorations in Pizza” was awesomeee! Besides having amazing pictures of pizza that made me ridiculously hungry, it reminded me so much of the time we went on the “group field trip” and how we ate in Astor Place and at the Brooklyn Ice Cream Factory right under the Brooklyn Bridge. We, well I, didn’t take amazing pictures of our food or ice cream, for that matter, but the point is that this blog reminded me of that day and how much fun we had. I also love “New Billboards Say: Drink WAT-AAH” because I am absolutely how New Yorkers, mainly the bloggers of course, find so many things fascinating. I remember that that same day when our group went out, we were taking pictures of posters or art work all over the street, talking about it, sometimes laughing, sometimes thinking, and sometimes noticing how messed up it all was.
http://savannahurbanstudies.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-03-22T19%3A27%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=1
Digital Tourism in Savannah “...such things [beauty and charm of the Savannah's historic district] do not guarantee that tourism in Savannah will prevail in the 21st century. The characters of tourists in the 21st century differ from those in previous centuries. The rapid technology changes transform the characters of tourists and subsequently change the demand of tourism.”
I wanted to comment in how much NYC and Savannah, GA are different. I don’t think ANYTHING could ever stop tourism in NYC. NO technology, no changes in people. New York City will always be the amazing, bright, full of life city and nothing beats that. Although I love quiet, suburban areas with lots of green areas, I always grew up in the city- in the capital, center of all attraction, in Uruguay (my country of birth) and I’ve lived in Queens and travelled back and forth to Manhattan for ten years now. What’s more, while tourism in Savannah may be dropping as people become less interested, no tourist seizes to be amazed at the beauty and greatness of New York City, babyyyy!!!!
http://johnson.blogs.nytimes.com/ ****
The City as Fortress: “There are good reasons, as I’ve discussed over the past few weeks, to preserve urban density. But that density creates an opportunity for terrorism; it’s not an accident that the most high-profile European and American attacks of the past few years have all targeted emblems of metropolitan living: subways, commuter trains and office buildings.”
Terrorism will exist wherever, whenever. It’s obvious that attacks will occur where there are the most people. The purpose, I assume, of a terrorist attacking is to kill as many people as possible and cause as much suffering they possibly can. Why attack the empty state of Wyoming when NYC is packed with people? I agree with the blog as a whole and I found it very interesting since it is not much I pay attention to. Steven Johnson here, after a long explanation of terrorism in NY, London and Madrid claims that whatever the situation, “it’s not worth building fortress cities, or giving up on the idea of density altogether” and I completely back this up. I never been to Madrid or London, but I can speak from experience about NYC. It is this diverse urban density that makes the city so great.
http://www.newcolonist.com/
The New York Flaneurs: “I sadly believe, however, that the New York "flaneur" is a dying breed. You can tell by the rapidity of movement, the glazed looks, even the quickness and carelessness with which we tear down old beautiful buildings to replace them with bland facades of dull white brick.”
Oh the lovely Flaneurs! The very first work in learned in Urban Studies Class. I loved reading this blog. Sadly I couldn’t comment on it (strangely, there was no “comment” button anywhere.) It’s great how the people that have not been in NYC for as much as I have and caught up with the hype of this city notice how fast everything moves here. I remember when we did the first activity “on being a Flaneur” how different it was from being part of the action of what seems speed walking to every person not in as much hurry as the rest of the city is. I agree with David Willems (author of this blog) how “the New York "flaneur" is a dying breed.” It’s totally true. The movement of NYC doesn’t allow for just walking around and observing. If you are born and raised a New Yorker, you miss out all of the amazing things this city has to offer. I was not born or raised here, but I caught up fast to the lifestyle. My mom constantly reprimands me for losing my sense of awe that I had when I first arrived. I know that my teammate Zack is utterly fascinated with everything he sees everywhere he goes because he hasn’t been here long. This sense of awe is lost by all New Yorkers that’s why the flaneurs there are “a dying breed.”
http://newyorkdailyphoto.blogspot.com/
White Sauce: “One of the extraordinarily fascinating facets of New York City life is the ethnic concentration that you often find in various businesses and enterprises. And one of those enjoyed by all is the cuisine. This is what makes New York a literal smorgasbord of delectable food from all corners of the globe and one of the biggest allures of the city to visitors.’
I just love how New Yorkers have that intense need to have one comment or the other about its food. Being the diverse city that it is, you find any kind of food at mostly any corner. This blog is all about the Halal Food Indian Carts that are located in almost every corner. I laughed while reading it because there is two right by Hunter- one right in front of Hunter West and another one around the corner. And more so in Manhattan than any other borough, you find not only these carts but so many other foods, for all likes, from all origins. I was amazed by this, too, when I first arrived to New York. The diversity of people and life shocked me since I was so used to the same old every day for my ten young years in Uruguay.
Zachary - Book Report
In Behind the Gates: Life, Security, and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America, Setha Low combines techniques of personal narrative, ethnography, and social theory to problematize the growth of gated communities in American suburbs. Her analysis does not focus so much on the often times tense relationship between suburban and inner-city residential development, but on the precise characteristics of a gated community that set it apart from suburban development generally. "Even though the gated community evolved from suburban designs and development practices and responds to middle-class values and desires, this housing solution is distinctive in its political significance and potentially disruptive consequences, and must be understood in terms of how it changes the social organization of the neighborhood and a sense of community and security for individuals." (Pg. 52)
Gated communities have existed since European settlers began migrating to North America and began as a defense against the indigenous populations. With the subsequent extermination of these populations, however, defensive walls surrounding European colonists ceased to be necessary. (Pg. 14) Gated communities that function as an exclusionary status symbol of the American ruling class date back to the mid-nineteenth century, but did not take on their present form and enter the current period of explosive growth until the 1980s. (Pg. 14) In 2001, "7,058,427, or 5.9 percent of households reporting that they live in communities, live in those surrounded by walls or fences, and 4,013,665 households or 3.4 percent, live in communities where the access is controlled by some means such as entry codes, key cards, or security gate approval." (Pg. 15) This represents a massive increase, as even in 1995 only four million people lived in gated communities. (Pg. 15)
This growth points towards the question that motivates Low's book: given that gated communities are, in fact, no safer than comparable, non-gated suburban developments, what motivates people to move to them? This question is further complicated by the substantial sacrifice of personal freedoms that residents frequently make in conforming the often-extensive rules and regulations established by homeowner associations in these developments and by the substantial cost associated with maintaining gates and guards. Low argues that the driving force behind the growth of gated communities is primarily symbolic and psychological and that it is not actual well-being but a sense of well-being rooted in complex, multi-faceted social factors. (Pg. 11)
An important psychological factor that motivates many of the subjects Low interviews to move to gated communities is a search for community. "The important elements of community-shared territory, shared values, shared public realm, shared support structures, and shared destiny-are all part of the gated community package." (Pg. 57) The material basis that secures these commonalities is two-fold. First, gated communities tend towards homogeneity in housing prices because of the high cost of security and amenities fees in most gated communities. (Pg. 46) Second, most gated communities are privately owned and enforce rules through "covenants, contracts, and deed restrictions (CC&Rs)" (Pg. 19) that dictate the terms under which residents may move into a development. Both of these factors have a homogenizing effect that tends to select residents that share values and lifestyles and that binds those residents together by creating a common set of norms and regulations.
These material elements, however, may not actually create a sense of community for residents. Despite frequently citing the desire for community as an important reason for moving to a gated community, the majority of residents of gated communities do not feel that their gated community provides a sense of community. (Pg. 70) Low suggests that gated communities may actually exacerbate feelings of isolation by intensifying the division between insiders and outsiders.
This division between insiders and outsiders touches on another crucial aspect of Low's investigation. The fear of others strongly motivates many people to move to gated communities. A host of factors that range from status anxiety to fear of crime to concerns about terrorism to outright bigotry give rise to the figures of otherness that permeate the culture of gated communities. For instance, in an extraordinary number of interviews that Low conducted, subjects casually made reference to a fear of construction workers who entered the community to do maintenance and repairs and to build new homes. (Pg. 59, 98, 102, 147,150) These fears tend to be deeply radicalized and motivate the construction of spaces of whiteness that in turn reinforce the fear of others. "Racist fears about the "threat" of a visible minority...are remarkably similar. This is because many neighborhoods in the United States are racially homogenous. Thus, the physical space of the neighborhood and its racial composition become synonymous. This "racialized" spatial ordering and the identification of a space with a group of people is a fundamental aspect of how suburban landscapes reinforce racial prejudice and discrimination." (Pg. 146)
This insistence that the organization of space is not just consequence but cause of social and political tensions is for me the crux of Low's analysis and the main intersection between her book and our class. She at no point attempts to fully diagnose the complex reasons why people move to gated communities nor does she try to attribute them to some fundamental cause. Instead, she provides a multitude of analytic tools for understanding this phenomenon and, above all else, lets her interviewees speak for themselves. In this way she raises more questions than she answers, but this is as it should be.
What does become clear is that exclusion is spatialized and self-perpetuating, For instance, fear of crime is a strong motivating factor for people who move to gated communities. However, spatial separation and isolation from surrounding communities tends to perpetuate and reinforce the fear of crime and victimization. Thus, gated communities form, in a sense, a self-reinforcing system of exclusion and fear that has disastrous political and social consequences. If ever there was an argument for analyzing cities and neighborhoods as a confluence of social, psychological, and political factors then this is it. That cities are not only built from out political and social imagination, but help to create and recreate it means that only a sustained and critical intervention into the techniques and process that construct cities can provide alternatives to what are, in many cases, flawed and dangerous ways of thinking about and planning cities and neighborhood. By laying bare the assumptions, motives, and desires of people who move to gated communities, then, Low allows us to rethink this phenomenon.
Gated communities have existed since European settlers began migrating to North America and began as a defense against the indigenous populations. With the subsequent extermination of these populations, however, defensive walls surrounding European colonists ceased to be necessary. (Pg. 14) Gated communities that function as an exclusionary status symbol of the American ruling class date back to the mid-nineteenth century, but did not take on their present form and enter the current period of explosive growth until the 1980s. (Pg. 14) In 2001, "7,058,427, or 5.9 percent of households reporting that they live in communities, live in those surrounded by walls or fences, and 4,013,665 households or 3.4 percent, live in communities where the access is controlled by some means such as entry codes, key cards, or security gate approval." (Pg. 15) This represents a massive increase, as even in 1995 only four million people lived in gated communities. (Pg. 15)
This growth points towards the question that motivates Low's book: given that gated communities are, in fact, no safer than comparable, non-gated suburban developments, what motivates people to move to them? This question is further complicated by the substantial sacrifice of personal freedoms that residents frequently make in conforming the often-extensive rules and regulations established by homeowner associations in these developments and by the substantial cost associated with maintaining gates and guards. Low argues that the driving force behind the growth of gated communities is primarily symbolic and psychological and that it is not actual well-being but a sense of well-being rooted in complex, multi-faceted social factors. (Pg. 11)
An important psychological factor that motivates many of the subjects Low interviews to move to gated communities is a search for community. "The important elements of community-shared territory, shared values, shared public realm, shared support structures, and shared destiny-are all part of the gated community package." (Pg. 57) The material basis that secures these commonalities is two-fold. First, gated communities tend towards homogeneity in housing prices because of the high cost of security and amenities fees in most gated communities. (Pg. 46) Second, most gated communities are privately owned and enforce rules through "covenants, contracts, and deed restrictions (CC&Rs)" (Pg. 19) that dictate the terms under which residents may move into a development. Both of these factors have a homogenizing effect that tends to select residents that share values and lifestyles and that binds those residents together by creating a common set of norms and regulations.
These material elements, however, may not actually create a sense of community for residents. Despite frequently citing the desire for community as an important reason for moving to a gated community, the majority of residents of gated communities do not feel that their gated community provides a sense of community. (Pg. 70) Low suggests that gated communities may actually exacerbate feelings of isolation by intensifying the division between insiders and outsiders.
This division between insiders and outsiders touches on another crucial aspect of Low's investigation. The fear of others strongly motivates many people to move to gated communities. A host of factors that range from status anxiety to fear of crime to concerns about terrorism to outright bigotry give rise to the figures of otherness that permeate the culture of gated communities. For instance, in an extraordinary number of interviews that Low conducted, subjects casually made reference to a fear of construction workers who entered the community to do maintenance and repairs and to build new homes. (Pg. 59, 98, 102, 147,150) These fears tend to be deeply radicalized and motivate the construction of spaces of whiteness that in turn reinforce the fear of others. "Racist fears about the "threat" of a visible minority...are remarkably similar. This is because many neighborhoods in the United States are racially homogenous. Thus, the physical space of the neighborhood and its racial composition become synonymous. This "racialized" spatial ordering and the identification of a space with a group of people is a fundamental aspect of how suburban landscapes reinforce racial prejudice and discrimination." (Pg. 146)
This insistence that the organization of space is not just consequence but cause of social and political tensions is for me the crux of Low's analysis and the main intersection between her book and our class. She at no point attempts to fully diagnose the complex reasons why people move to gated communities nor does she try to attribute them to some fundamental cause. Instead, she provides a multitude of analytic tools for understanding this phenomenon and, above all else, lets her interviewees speak for themselves. In this way she raises more questions than she answers, but this is as it should be.
What does become clear is that exclusion is spatialized and self-perpetuating, For instance, fear of crime is a strong motivating factor for people who move to gated communities. However, spatial separation and isolation from surrounding communities tends to perpetuate and reinforce the fear of crime and victimization. Thus, gated communities form, in a sense, a self-reinforcing system of exclusion and fear that has disastrous political and social consequences. If ever there was an argument for analyzing cities and neighborhoods as a confluence of social, psychological, and political factors then this is it. That cities are not only built from out political and social imagination, but help to create and recreate it means that only a sustained and critical intervention into the techniques and process that construct cities can provide alternatives to what are, in many cases, flawed and dangerous ways of thinking about and planning cities and neighborhood. By laying bare the assumptions, motives, and desires of people who move to gated communities, then, Low allows us to rethink this phenomenon.
ACTIVITY 10- Freshkills Park by CAITLIN BUTLER
On Wed. May 5th, 2010 I went on a fieldtrip to Freshkills Park with other people from my Urban Studies class. At first I was confused at what time exactly I had to catch the ferry, but I ended up taking the ferry in time, which was good. The ferry to Staten Island was free! That was the best part. When I first got on the ferry, I could not believe how big it was. It reminded me of the Titanic ship. I am used to taking ferries when I go out to Long Island for the summer, but this boat was ten times bigger than the one I take. When we got off the ferry, we met up with Dough, our tour guide at Au Bon Pain. Then we all went on the bus and drove for half an hour until we reached Freshkills Park in Staten Island. Dough told us about the park itself and how it used to be one of the biggest landfills in New York. The New York City Department of Parks and Recreation team are working to rebuild the landfill into a Freshkills park, so that the public could enjoy activities such as biking, hiking, skiing, baseball park, kayaking, etc. In the New York Article it said how there are lots of birders that come to Freshkills Park to watch all the different types of birds there. Even Dough told us how there are lots of birds here. And while on the bus he pointed out to us this big nest that this bird was in. The bird was huge! I forget what kind it was but it was a grayish colored bird, watching over its babies. It was very cool thing to see. I love nature and animals so for me it was pretty cool. I wish I could have spotted a red-tailed hawk on this trip though. O well, I can always come back once the park opens up to the public, which Dough said would open up sometime next year. I was really shocked when Dough told us that FreshKills Park will be the second largest Park next to Pelham Bay Park. I did not know that. See what you can learn just by listening to your tour guide! In the NY Times article titled, “Turning Trash Piles Into a Bird-Watcher’s Paradise”, the birders were complaining how now there aren’t enough birds that they can see, compared to when it was a dump. They said they couldn’t see the birds now because they had closed down their food sources. There are now only hundreds are low thousands bird remaining in the park compared to more in the past before the rebuilding of the landfill. The thing that also shocked me was when we were asked in the bus to sign this sheet of paper that promised not to hold the Sanitation Department responsible for injuries or death at the landfill. I was like well why are they taking us where it is dangerous. But it ended up being okay anyways. There was no danger there that I could sense. So, I was also very happy about that! Dough took us to see North and South mound, but it will soon be called North and South Park once the park opens up to the public. North mound was much taller than South mound. It went up to 150 feet as the NY times article stated. When I saw it, it looked very big. It also says how it will be a viewing platform there for the birders, which should make all the birders out there very happy. As long as no one hurts the wildlife there, I am all for the platform building. When Dough took us out onto the stones to step on, I asked him a question. I asked him if anyone can just come up here on their own and he said no. The only way you can come up here is through the tour. I wanted to know this question because I am interested in shooting up there with my camera. I really liked the scenery of the place. It was overall very open, green and calm looking. Another thing that I learned from Dough was how Freshkill park get its name. Dough said that the name means fresh water in Dutch, which makes total sense if one thinks about it. He also said that some people in Staten Island were confused on the new park being built. Some wanted this and some did not. I really liked this trip overall. Besides the hassle of actually getting there, it was really all worth it in the end. I got to learn about things I did not know before and I got to see just how beautiful this park is and is going to be. It’s incredible how something so disgusting like a waste fill place can get built into something really nice. Now, I will just have to wait and see the new park when it actually opens up and do some of the activities there!
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
COMMUNITY BOARD MEETING BY CAITLIN BUTLER
On April 15,2010 I went to the Community Board 5 meeting. It was located on 27street between 6th and 7th avenue. The meeting started at 6pm. I am guess that the meeting was held here because it is safe, clean, protected, monitored, and easy to get to. Midtown is surrounded by major transportation areas, such as Grand Central, Penn Station and Port Authority. Without these places, people would have a very hard time getting around. It is a business area as well as a tourist area, great for sightseeing such as the empire state building, the observation, and radio city music hall.
The Community Board 5 main goal is to address issues such as: homelessness, security, new developments, noise, traffic, zoning, school and library funding. This community board exists because it’s a way for regular folks to get involved in their own local communities and address what issues that they may have. The Community Board’s boundaries are from 3rd to 8th avenues from 14th street to 59th street. At the meeting, it was mostly white men, but there were also women there. The men were dressed all in business suites, which I guess would make sense since they probably all, came from work. There were men of all ages there, but it was mostly older men in their 40’s and higher. The meeting began with the public having two minutes each to address their concerns about their neighborhood. At first this wasn’t going so well, because not everyone followed the two-minute rule. It was getting a little out of hand. Then the woman who was in charge had to warn the people to really take only two minutes because of so many speakers that still had to speak out. The layout of the place was there was a big round table that wrapped around and that was for the committee group only. Then you had behind them all other chairs for the public to sit at. It was very crowded. Some people even had to stand and wait there turn to speak. If you had to speak, you had to sign up your name before you came inside. There was this one particular police officer to spoke out at the meeting about the Times Square shooting which occurred on Easter Sunday. He said that 250 cops were working that day. There was 50 adults and 10 juvenile arrested. 2 of them were affiliated with a gang. It is terrible how anyone can do street fighting to the point of death. It is quite shocking to me.
The second thing mentioned at this meeting was the building of a tall building about 1,200 feet wide by Vornado. They want to build this at 15 Penn Plaza. A lot of people was in favor for this happening, because they said it would increase for jobs, it would make a easier for people to travel in Penn Station, and it would bring business around the areas, during these tough economic times. The main purpose for this is transit improvement for the commuters going to and from work. This one Chinese man names Jim spoke and said that this would be a great thing to do because he is frustrated at the fact that there is not enough space on the sidewalk for him to go to Penn Station. Building this tall building would make an easy access to Penn Station for him and others he said. It would also clean up the streets if this building were built, according to some. The Land Use and Zoning Committee apposed to having this building built. They said that it was insufficient to clearing out the big crowds at Penn Station. Also they had a problem with this because they said the building is just too tall to be built. It would be considered the second largest building after the Empire State Building, which honestly in my opinion, do we need another tall building like that? I personally do not need another tall building blocking the sunlight from my day. I spoke to this one woman asking her why she attended the meeting today? She said she attended the meeting because she doesn’t want the official to shut down Hotel Penn, because of its beautifulness. She wants to see what will happen to this building. I then asked her, how did she find out about this particular board meeting and she said they had pamphlets in the hotel. This was her first community board meeting that she has gone to. Her name is Mekala and she lives in Queens. She was very funny I must say. Throughout the meeting she was making face gestures, and noises at some of the people who were speaking. She couldn’t believe at what some of the people there were saying. She was overall very friendly though. I thought parts of this meeting were confusing, and some people repeated things over and over. I am not going to lie; the meeting was kind of long and boring. But still interesting to actually experience a community board meeting and see what was bothering some people. Now I can say that I have been to a Community Board meeting before!
On April 15,2010 I went to the Community Board 5 meeting. It was located on 27street between 6th and 7th avenue. The meeting started at 6pm. I am guess that the meeting was held here because it is safe, clean, protected, monitored, and easy to get to. Midtown is surrounded by major transportation areas, such as Grand Central, Penn Station and Port Authority. Without these places, people would have a very hard time getting around. It is a business area as well as a tourist area, great for sightseeing such as the empire state building, the observation, and radio city music hall.
The Community Board 5 main goal is to address issues such as: homelessness, security, new developments, noise, traffic, zoning, school and library funding. This community board exists because it’s a way for regular folks to get involved in their own local communities and address what issues that they may have. The Community Board’s boundaries are from 3rd to 8th avenues from 14th street to 59th street. At the meeting, it was mostly white men, but there were also women there. The men were dressed all in business suites, which I guess would make sense since they probably all, came from work. There were men of all ages there, but it was mostly older men in their 40’s and higher. The meeting began with the public having two minutes each to address their concerns about their neighborhood. At first this wasn’t going so well, because not everyone followed the two-minute rule. It was getting a little out of hand. Then the woman who was in charge had to warn the people to really take only two minutes because of so many speakers that still had to speak out. The layout of the place was there was a big round table that wrapped around and that was for the committee group only. Then you had behind them all other chairs for the public to sit at. It was very crowded. Some people even had to stand and wait there turn to speak. If you had to speak, you had to sign up your name before you came inside. There was this one particular police officer to spoke out at the meeting about the Times Square shooting which occurred on Easter Sunday. He said that 250 cops were working that day. There was 50 adults and 10 juvenile arrested. 2 of them were affiliated with a gang. It is terrible how anyone can do street fighting to the point of death. It is quite shocking to me.
The second thing mentioned at this meeting was the building of a tall building about 1,200 feet wide by Vornado. They want to build this at 15 Penn Plaza. A lot of people was in favor for this happening, because they said it would increase for jobs, it would make a easier for people to travel in Penn Station, and it would bring business around the areas, during these tough economic times. The main purpose for this is transit improvement for the commuters going to and from work. This one Chinese man names Jim spoke and said that this would be a great thing to do because he is frustrated at the fact that there is not enough space on the sidewalk for him to go to Penn Station. Building this tall building would make an easy access to Penn Station for him and others he said. It would also clean up the streets if this building were built, according to some. The Land Use and Zoning Committee apposed to having this building built. They said that it was insufficient to clearing out the big crowds at Penn Station. Also they had a problem with this because they said the building is just too tall to be built. It would be considered the second largest building after the Empire State Building, which honestly in my opinion, do we need another tall building like that? I personally do not need another tall building blocking the sunlight from my day. I spoke to this one woman asking her why she attended the meeting today? She said she attended the meeting because she doesn’t want the official to shut down Hotel Penn, because of its beautifulness. She wants to see what will happen to this building. I then asked her, how did she find out about this particular board meeting and she said they had pamphlets in the hotel. This was her first community board meeting that she has gone to. Her name is Mekala and she lives in Queens. She was very funny I must say. Throughout the meeting she was making face gestures, and noises at some of the people who were speaking. She couldn’t believe at what some of the people there were saying. She was overall very friendly though. I thought parts of this meeting were confusing, and some people repeated things over and over. I am not going to lie; the meeting was kind of long and boring. But still interesting to actually experience a community board meeting and see what was bothering some people. Now I can say that I have been to a Community Board meeting before!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
