Answer one of the following questions in approximately 4 (minimum) – 6 (maximum) double-spaced pages.  Papers should be in 12-point Times New Roman or similar typeface, with one-inch margins on all sides.  Answers should be well organized, well written, and thoroughly proofed.  Citations should be either MLA or Chicago Style format.  Use telling (but not too lengthy) quotes.   A bibliography is not necessary for this paper, as your answers should be based on the course readings.  The essay should address the main question (the question in boldface) and any of the smaller questions that will allow you to build your case.  Your paper must have a clear, focused argument that unambiguously answers the question.

All papers are due via email ([email protected]) by 5 p.m. on Friday, October 20 as either a Word, Pages, or Google Doc (if you submit the paper as a Google Doc, you must give me permission to access the file ([email protected] or [email protected]). Failure to do so may result in penalties for lateness. Submitting your paper as a PDF may also result in lateness penalties if I am open and download the document after the deadline.  Late papers (papers submitted after 12:15 pm) will be docked accordingly (one step for each hour late: (i.e. A to A-, C- to D, etc).  Papers submitted after 11:29 a.m. on Saturday, October 21 will not be accepted (except in documented emergencies).

QUESTION ONE: Examine the suburban communities described by Gans (The Levittowners), Jacques and Wright (Codes of the Suburb), and Alexandra Murphy (“Litterers”) through the lens of Zorbaugh’s The Gold Coast and the Slum. Would Zorbaugh draw the same conclusion about the absence of community in the suburbs that he made in reference to the Near North Side?  To successfully answer this question, you will need to discuss how Zorbaugh defines community, using specific components from his study to measure the presence/absence of community found in the chapters by Gans, Murphy and Lacy.

QUESTION TWO: Pretend you attended a panel discussion where two of the following scholars were invited to debate with Jennifer Sherman the similarities and differences between the structural challenges of poor urban black (and Latinx) and poor white residential areas: Patrick Sharkey, Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton, Victor Rios, Jooyoung Lee, and Alice Goffman. As a requirement for the Cities and Society course, you were tasked with summarizing the exchange between the panelists, identifying points of agreement and disagreement between the panelists. In other words, to what extent can theories on the hypersegregation of urban blacks (Massey and Denton; Sharkey) or studies on the economic and cultural strategies of urban blacks (Rios; Lee; Goffman) explain the dynamics we find in Sherman’s exploration of Golden Valley?  To answer this question, you would not only draw on their readings to extrapolate how they would see similarities and differences between the urban/rural/suburban poor, but you will also consider how the panelists may adopt or challenge ideas presented by the other panelists.

QUESTION THREE: We have extensively discussed Anderson’s conception of the “iconic ghetto,” where perceptions of ghetto lifestyles shapes whites’ perceptions of blacks (and other communities of color), regardless of human capital or social mobility. Drawing on at least two of the readings on the suburbs (Alexandra Murphy, Herbert Gans, Scott Jacques and Richard Wright, and Karyn Lacy), conceptualize the “iconic suburb.” How might the “iconic suburb” compare to the “iconic ghetto”? Who is likely to bear the association of the “iconic suburb”?  In what ways may residents be enabled or constrained through their association with the “iconic suburb”?  How does the growing diversity in the suburbs shape prejudices and stereotypes about its residents?  To answer this question, you should consider how the perceptions of the “iconic suburb” supersede the experiences scholars of the suburbs find on the ground.

QUESTION FOUR: In our class discussions, you have expressed disagreement over what constitutes “resistance identities” (Rios) in the daily lives of suburban (Jacques and Wright) and urban (Goffman, Lee) residents. Comparing the evidence deployed by Rios to flesh out the concept of “resistance identities” to those of Jacques and Wright, Lee, and Goffman (select at least two), consider the theoretical limitations of “resistance identities.” How would defend certain spatial practices as a “resistance identity” and not others?  How does the production of place/space shape our understanding of the term?