In class last Wednesday, we discussed my first question centered around redevelopment/gentrification and whether it could bring about positive impacts. Hyra had mentioned in his book, for example, that a once infamous drug center had been revamped into a farmer’s market. Most people would agree that farmer’s markets are a better contribution to society than drugs, but there are obvious costs to redevelopment. For one, it is possible for people to profit off of previous conditions/stereotypes about an area like we saw with the “bullet-ridden” wall in the sandwich shop. Though the owner had no evidence behind her claims, she was able to profit off of the fact that her sandwich shop was in a ‘scary’ neighborhood/building that may have had a troubled past before it was remodeled into her sandwich shop. Is it bad that she is now making money selling (probably overpriced) sandwiches? Not necessarily. But the problem exists because she is selling a story about the neighborhood and the building that isn’t necessarily true. And even if it was possible to see her ‘bullet-ridden’ wall story as a simple mistake, her decision to sell 40oz bottles of Rosé in brown paper bags reveals that she didn’t have the purest motives/thoughts. She is appropriating culture and stereotypes for her own profit, and I think that is the issue that redevelopment often holds. It can serve to displace certain groups of people while allowing others to benefit from the culture of those who have been displaced. I doubt that the owner would create that story if she found a hole-ridden wall in the suburbs— she would simply have it replaced.
For my second question, I wanted to know if it is possible for black residents to benefit from the perceptions of the “iconic ghetto” and of stereotypical black people that are marketed to others instead of continuing to be marginalized while white investors profit off of these perceptions. From the reading, it seemed as though it isn’t possible. I’m reminded of the story of the white woman who sought to preserve aspects of African-American culture by setting up tours of famous African-Americans’ homes. One of the tour-guides found, however, that white people who came to the tours were more interested in learning about the present value of the neighborhood because they wanted to move in. Although these tours had the potential to be lucrative for black people who worked for the organization/gave the tours, it became a point of frustration when the black tour guide realized she was giving tours to white people who could potentially displace her later. And I think that’s what’s often the case; black culture and history is profitable but black bodies themselves are marginalized and seen as lowering the value of a space. I think that is extremely ironic because so many people claim to want an “authentic experience” according to Hyra, but many of these same people have a strong aversion to the people whose culture is being sold. I think the only way for black people to benefit from perceptions of the iconic ghetto is for them to be the ones selling and advertising their own culture, but at that point it becomes a performance for money instead of an actual, authentic experience. An alternative is for black people to invest in their own culture and communities, but often times this requires capital that is not available, especially in lower-income communities.
Betty, you raise some very valid points that I myself wondered when we were discussing these questions in class. I especially agree with your thoughts on how “authentic” anything can be in the context of Hyra’s book and in our own lives. Millenials claim to want to experience “authentic” cultures, but only when that authenticity caters to their own tastes. When taking that into account, can anything be truly authentic in gentrified spaces? What does authentic even mean to gentrifiers? In response to your first paragraph about the “bullet ridden walls” of the high-end sandwich shop; in the same class, we discussed immediately after that example the white run Go-Go restaurant owned by a white man. In my opinion, this example of white people profiting off of Black culture was possibly worse, since not only was he claiming that this was an “authentic” way to experience Go-Go music (even though many Black D.C. residents refuse to step foot in the area), but the fact that on the website he claimed that his collection of Go-Go music that he chose to play in the restaurant was better than Go-Go musician’s own collections sounded extremely wrong to me.
Your response raises some interesting concerns about how Black people can benefit from Black branding and the gentrification of their neighborhoods. White people appropriating Black culture, as we have seen in Shaw U, is concerning but reveals a brutal and unpleasant ironic situation. While other people can profit off Black culture, they usually grab the negative stereotypical perceptions of Black people, the same stereotypes which often cause African-Americans to suffer unjustly. Meanwhile, the persecuted minorities struggle to capitalize on this harmful Black branding as it only reinforces the “iconic ghetto” perceptions while further fueling more interest in their “authentic culture.” You point out the hypocrisy behind the relationship between Black culture and Black bodies; how can people claim to appreciate one’s culture while ignoring the substance behind that culture?
Finding a way for Black people to profit off gentrification is challenging when there is a distinct lack of care and respect from these gentrifiers. As you mentioned, there are not many methods for Black people to benefit from the perception of the “iconic ghetto.” Supporting Black branding means turning Black culture into a caricatured spectacle, something to be consumed rather than fully appreciated for its complexity. One possibility for Black people to benefit from Black branding would be to funnel some profits from organizations that utilize these negative perceptions. This money could help the lower-income communities through helping subsidize housing, invest in education, and spread public awareness about the dangers of Black branding.
Betty, I appreciate your response and especially the ironies you expose in your final paragraph. Gentrifiers seem to expose black culture and history for profit, but continue to map crime, and less value onto black bodies living in particular areas. I wonder if there is a way to combat such tensions and ironies to both celebrate culture and black bodies within neighborhoods? Is it possible? I think these are big questions that are challenging to answer but deserve consideration.
I wonder if the sequence of events has to do with the inherent inequities observable here. One cannot celebrate black history if one cannot celebrate and appreciate black bodies. I wonder to what extent white folks should be allowed to celebrate black heritage? How can white people or individuals of differing identity more productively celebrate black bodies and black heritage?
This past weekend I had a facial at Pura Vida. The aesthetician and I talked about a variety of things before talking about my post-grad life. I told her about my desire to live in D.C. next year and was shocked to hear her relate so freely how D.C. used to be so scary. I asked her what she meant, and she went on a diatribe about how gentrification brings with it a safeness and overall better society. Now those “bad” neighborhoods are no longer scary because they have been gentrified (now white people occupy them). While I find her logic to be completely disturbing, I think it is interesting nonetheless how she conceptualizes gentrification and what the means for the surrounding areas. I think laden in the examples you mentioned above and this incident i mentioned here is an ease that allows ignorant white people access to all of these spaces.
I think Betty’s main post, along with the prior replies were extremely interesting. I have definitely thought about this when writing my final paper and have seen some of what Betty and the repliers have discussed in Newark, New Jersey (15 minutes from my house). My biggest concern/criticism of gentrification is the loss in culture from the group that was removed. I feel like when predominately white developers go into a minority groups area, they not only strip away the infrastructure, but also the culture of the group. People are displaced and therefore peoples’ relationships could be mutilated through displacement. I do, however, understand and have seen the ‘positives’ such as redevelopment of an area. As an Economics major, Newark’s gentrification and revitalization was relatively successful because it increased productivity, wealth, created thousands of jobs in the gentrification process but also from the companies that came from the gentrification. It would be interesting to hear other students perspectives on the culture loss from gentrification.