Response to a Classmate's blog

I was reading through various blogs and there were a couple that caught my eye, but Cesar's in particular. He talked about 47th street and some of the kids around there:

"These kids just go to school to gangbang and deal drugs not even paying attention to school or caring about graduation. I think it would be best if Mayor Daley would implement some sort of program to help out these kids becuase the YMCA isn't doing a good job. Some sort of an after school program should help out the kids, something along the lines of anti-gang violence."

This caught my eye because it's something that I've been saying for the longest time. I am a strong advocate for after-school programs for kids. I was mad when they tore down the Boys & Girls Club that used to be at Taylor and Racine (it's been torn down for almost 5 years now). And then when they were doing the rehabilitation of that entire neighborhood, I was saying that they should turn the old school that's on Ada just off of Taylor, they should turn that into a new Boys & Girls Club. For the most part, though, my views really solidified when some kids from Galileo Math & Science Academy pulled a knife on myself and some friends in the park behind their school (Sheridan Park). There's nothing for them to do, so they harass other people in the neighborhood. I've watched various video documentaries and read multiple books about kids who grew up in the projects and all of them had one thing in common: their Boys & Girls Club was their escape. There was someone there was someone there who was a mentor to them and helped them keep their priorities straight. And here you have a first-hand account of someone who went to school in a neighborhood that lacked an after-school program. I have always thought that after-school programs were a necessity, but maybe that's because I grew up in my mom's after-school daycare, which was just as good as a Boys & Girls Club with our snack time and homework time. Something along those lines is what the city needs--everywhere. It's not enough to have just a few placed here and there. It really isn't. Mayor Daley does need to step in and help the situation by making more after-school programs. And that means more funding for the schools so they can afford to pay people to stay. It all comes down to funding. So, Mayor Daley, is that was these taxes are for??

Questions Questions Questions

I have entirely way too many questions that seem like they should have common sense answers. A lot of them pertain to public transportation, but they're still important to me:

Why isn't there any security on the CTA? There's always reckless kids on the cars harassing anybody and everybody. And as I've mentioned before, my mouth tends to get me in trouble. I've definitely barely avoided getting into fights with these kids, but I never start anything. I can only be provoked for so long. They need to stop instigating. Or better yet, just get off the train.

Where are all these new taxes going? What are they going towards? As far as I'm concerned, they should all go towards CPS. No more new streets where they aren't necessary and no more huge parks that aren't raking in the proposed profits.

What is it that's really attractive about Chicago? We have so many problems, I really don't see why anybody would want to move here. I mean, staying here is a whole other story--this is home. But for somebody to move here in the midst of all this? Why??

If people are so against the fare-hikes on the CTA, why don't they just boycott it? That would do something, right? I mean this is how I see it: LA gets a lot more public funding than Chicago. But that's because there's not a whole lot of people riding it, so they need to make it look appealing to get people to actually ride it. Chicago, on the other hand, we'll ride on anything. So even if they train is rundown and falling apart, they know they'll still get some business. Maybe if we show them that they really need to fix the situation by boycotting it, we'll actually see some changes.

Why is there ALWAYS some sort of construction going on? Will we never be happy with what we have?

How does such a big city with high taxes already have so many big financial problems?

At this rate, it seems like we're going to go into a big depression. Please don't tell me I'll have to move to another city! Ahhh!

CPD

Ugh. Need I say more? I'm not exactly sure what started it, but I really do not like cops. Not even just Chicago police officers, but police officers in general. I guess I'm a bit prejudiced towards them, though, so I'm kinda the bad guy in this situation. But either way, cops--Chicago cops, especially--just rub me the wrong way. Almost every time I have an encounter with one of them, I'm greeted by a HUGE attitude. And I have a big attitude of my own, so it's hard for me to not say anything. But I don't wanna get in trouble, so I have to keep my mouth shut. It's just, I feel like I can't even ask a cop a question without feeling like I'm bothering him--or her. I don't know if it's a power trip these cops get on, but they just always wanna find something wrong that you're doing.
I mean, sure, you have your fair share of nice cops. The ones who actually seem like they're out there to protect the public. There's just too many cops who seem like they just want to catch the bad guy--even if the "bad guy" isn't bad at all. You catch my drift? I'll have cops pull up next to me when I'm driving down the street and they're searching through the car trying to find something to get me for. Or they'll slow up and get behind me. And I just know they're checking my plates to see if there's anything fishy. You know what I mean? I know I'm not the only one who gets this vibe from cops.
One thing I noticed is that it is GREAT to know a Chicago police officer. One of my friend's dads is a Chicago Police officer, but he doesn't do patrol-work. No, he's higher up on the totem pole and travels a lot doing the DARE program. He holds a lot of ground within in the Chicago Police Department. I've mentioned his name before and cops have just stopped talking to me. Now, the particular cop I'm referring to was clearly a shady cop, so I'm not sure if he stopped talking to me because he knew he couldn't get me for anything (since I had that connection up top) or because he didn't wanna say anything that could potentially get himself in trouble. But either way, it got the cop off my back. Haha. It's just all very political. And it's all about who you know and who knows you. I just know that I steer clear of cops every chance I get. I just don't like having to hold my tongue, but I know that my mouth is gonna get me in trouble sooner or later. So I'd rather just avoid the situation altogether.

Creative Class

So Richard Florida mainly talks about how companies and cities are gearing themselves to appeal to the "creative class." Why? Because rumor has it that's where all the profits come from. It's a strange idea at first, I was even a bit thrown off by his intro. Usually, it's the artsy kids who are being exiled and ignored. They're generally type-casted as being strange or weird and are even pariahs at times. But those are who make a company thrive. They are the ones who come up with brilliant ideas and help companies just flourish. I had to think about it for a minute before I fully understood what Florida was getting at, but now it almost seems like common sense.
Cities need idea-filled people, otherwise things aren't going to change. And, generally speaking, change is good, right? So how is a city gonna go anywhere if nothing changes. Well, I guess it's not. So the Creative Class is a good thing. And it's even better because a big bulk of it comes from my generation--so that makes me feel extra special. ^_^
Companies are changing themselves, too. They're making themselves seem more appealing because they want the artsy kids to choose them. They want the people with creative ideas and unique ways of thinking to be drawn in their direction. It almost seems natural. So it's a win-win situation. Companies are getting the kids with the big ideas while the kids are getting jobs in flourishing cities and rich companies. It doesn't seem like anything's wrong with that.

Christmas in Chicago...

...is absolutely GORGEOUS. I love going by Millennium Park and seeing everyone skating outside and enjoying the lights and the holiday season. The city just looks amazing during the winter. Everything is all decorated all pretty. And then the snow (the fresh, white snow, at least) just makes everything stand out and pop. It amazes me every time I go downtown. I'm just hypnotized by the lights in the trees and the decorations along lightpoles and in store windows. It just warms my heart. Maybe because it reminds me of the movies like Miracle on 34th Street, but either way, it's still absolutely beautiful. (I've realized through writing these blogs that I love the word "absolutely.")
I've only gone ice skating downtown once--that I remember at least. It was for my friend's birthday two years ago. It was so much fun, I don't really know why I haven't gone back yet. But it was so much fun. Just being outside just a couple blocks from the lakefront in the heart of the city. I don't know, I guess you could say I felt actually a part of the city, you know?
But that's besides the point. What I had intended on getting at when I started this was the way the city can, as big as it is, make itself seem like a fun little town. The way it unifies itself during certain times makes it feel like that. Like, during Breast Cancer Awareness Month, all of the buildings have pink lights glowing from their rooftops. Even Navy Pier has each building along the pier lit up in pink lights. And the diamond shaped building (I don't know the name it goes by. Whoops.) will usually have a message corresponding to the lights. Like, for Breast Cancer Awareness Month, it says "Think Pink" I'm pretty sure. Last night, though, I noticed that it says "Pink + Blue." Now, I'm not too sure what that's for, but since I was driving down Lake Shore Drive, I was able to get a good look at all the buildings, I noticed that there was indeed a mixture of some pink lights and some blue lights. It just amazes me how a city so big can be so coordinated, you know? (So I guess Daley deserves some credit.)
But Christmas is still my favorite time to be in the city. I especially love going by the Marshall Field's building because they always have the best window displays. And actually going into the store and going up to the Walnut Lounge (you all know what I'm talking about, right?), well that big Christmas tree always gets me going. Its ornaments are ginormous and the train goes all the way around it. At least, that's how it was when I was there last--like 5 years ago. But still, that's the image I have in my head, so that's what I know. I'm just really looking forward to all the decorations for this year and I think I'm actually going to go out and soak as much of it up as I can. I have a long to-do list for this season.

Chicago Public Schools

It seems like there has always been a problem with Chicago Public Schools. Well, in most neighborhoods at least. The funding for the schools is based off of property taxes. And since different neighborhoods have different property values, the fundings for the schools in each neighborhood is different. So, with that sytem in place, you have more money going towards schools in neighborhoods where the property costs a lot more. So you can assume that the kids who go to the better-funded schools come from families with more money, since they can afford the more expensive housing. And vice versa; the not-so-well-funded schools are attended by students who are coming from poorer families. So, the question is, is this way of funding the public schools a good one?

My response: No. I think that it segregates the city so much more. It really separates the poor from the rich. The poorer schools have less teachers and larger classes and not as many amenities. The richer schools, however, are able to pay more teachers to have smaller classes and are able to keep extracurriculars around. The poor kids are almost punished for coming from a poor family, and that's just not right. Sure, "life's not fair" but this is America--one of the most prosperous cities in America, at that--and we should be able to work out a better system that would ensure everyone gets the same education. Here's my proposal.

How about doing a blanket tax. Like, it could still be based on property taxes, but instead of focusing all of that on the school in that neighborhoods, pool it all together and distribute it equally. Yes, I know that would make the richer end of the rope angry because their tax money would be going towards funding schools in the "ghetto." But in my eyes, that's good. Because they would realize the need to help the "ghetto." It would no longer be a distant problem, one they don't have to deal with. And that might actually help the city become desegregated and more equal on an economical level.

That's just the way I see it. Maybe I'm just being an idealist in thinking that, but I believe strongly in it. I honestly think that by doing that, it'd be a wake up call to the richer people of Chicago and they'd be motivated to help the city in its entirety.

My 5 Favorite Places

OK, so I've been thinking about what I'm going to put for this blog ever since we received or second sheet of assignments. And I've come up with this:

1) My dormroom
2) The El
3) The lakefront--between North Ave. and Chicago Ave.
4) My friend's grandma's house in Hyde Park
5) My highschool--St. Ignatius (Roosevelt and Blue Island)

And here are my reasons:

1) I absolutely love being in my dormroom because it's my room. As a matter of fact, I just love being in the building. The view is absolutely amazing. Especially from the top floor lounge in my building. It looks straight at the skyline...it's gorgeous. Sometimes, I'll go sit and just gaze out the window for what seems like forever.

2) I love being in public spaces; I'm a people-watcher. I love taking the CTA and just thinking things over, watching the way people interact. It's interesting to me. But more than anything, it's the best way for me to work through things. I'll just sit on a train for a prolonged period of time--sometimes even hours--and just think about things, work them out in my mind. So, in a way, it's a win-win situation for me. If I'm not working things out for myself, I get to watch people interact.

3) Well, this one really only works in the summer, but I have to admit, I'll go out there in the dead of winter, too. The sound of the waves crashing, especially like they were last night, just puts me at ease. Everytime I go to the lakefront, it feels like I'm escaping in a sense.

4) First of all, my friend's grandma is like my grandma. I love her to death. And when I'm at that house, I feel like I actually have a grandma (all of my grandparents died by the time I was three). She'll start cooking up dinner and we'll all sit in the kitchen--which is so reminiscent of the 70s--and talk and tell stories and just have so much fun. And then the neighborhood itself is so calming and just so nice. I go over there every chance I get, even if my friend isn't over there.

5) Yes, I like to go back to my highschool. Preferably with friends who I graduated with, but I'll go by myself, too. There's just so many memories there, I like going back because it's easier to reminisce that way. I mean, yea, it's strange tha there's all kinds of new kids there, but I still like being at the actually school. And then it's right down the street, so it's easy to go back. A lot of people say that they don't like going back to highschool--that once they're done, they're done. And I was like that at first, too. But I can't lie--I like going back.

Part IV: Land Use and Housing

Basically, the conclusion I came to is this: more affordable housing. Maybe that's just what's stuck in my head since that's what the end of the reading talks about, but it's still the thing that sticks out in my mind most. But it's true, we do need more affordable housing. I mean, especially in Chicago. The lack of affordable housing is insane. And this whole CHA Transformation just made the problem even worse if you ask me. I mean, I understand that they're trying to integrate certain neighborhoods and everything, but I am just extremely against it. This is how it works, just in case you don't know:

The CHA (Chicago Housing Authority) is making moves to integrate neighborhoods by tearing down the rundown projects--which are extremely segregated neighborhoods--and buliding new mixed-income housing. One third of the housing is going to be sold at full market price; one third is going towards subsidized housing (Section 8); one third is for public housing. And that's where the biggest problem lies. While it's great that they're integrating the neighborhoods that were so homogenously filled with the projects, they're forgetting that there's a whoooooole lot of people being put out on the street. OK, I take that back. They're not necessarily getting put out on the streets, but there is a big crisis over where the people from the projects are going to go. And that's where this lack of affordable housing comes into play.

With such a low amount of affordable housing, there really is this question about what are these people who aren't going to get one of the mixed-income units--what are they going to do? This issue has been on the table since even before the CHA transformation. I guess they didn't plan things out all the way, huh.

November 14 Readings

Quite honestly, I was definitely expecting both of those readings to be a lot longer. The chronology seemed to cover just the basic basics. And the overview of the redevelopment of the South campus, well, it states exactly what it had planned to do. It was weird for me to read it, though, since everything's been built accordingly. But either way, it made sense.

But when I was looking at the pictures they put there, I was a little put off. Just because in one of the pictures--well, drawing--it shows Maxwell, I'm pretty sure, looking East from Halsted. And it makes the street look so much more friendlier than it actually is and it shows it basically crawling with people. Sadly, that's not the way it is. I mean, sure, the whole thing is really new and maybe they're not completely done with the redevelopment of the neighborhood, but it still threw me off a bit.

As far as what would I add to or subtract from the UIC campus, I have plenty of ideas. No, I'm not crazy and didn't just come up with all of these ideas, but ADH had signs up all last semester about various places on campus and what its pros and cons were as far as its level of friendliness. I remember reading them and for almost every different part of campus that was covered, it was stated in some way, shape, or form that the campus had a cold, dark feeling. It's the high levels of concrete and metal beams and cinderblock walls. One thing that I think would add so much to the campus, and I don't even think it would cost all that much, would be to change the light fixtures. The light poles are so industrial and ugly that it gives the campus such a distant feeling. If they were more "suburban," the campus might feel more like a campus. Sometimes when I'm walking down the sidewalks, I try to picture them lining the walkways instead of those ugly things and it works--the campus instantly gets a new feel. It's strange how something that seems so little can do a lot to change the feel of an entire campus. Of course, we all know that the buildings definitely look like bomb shelters, and that's going to have to be worked on. Especially--especially--the library. I absolutely hate going in there. Not only is it confusing as all get out, but it's just so ugly. It's hideous on the inside and it doesn't even feel like a library. I don't know about everyone else, but I can't do work in an environment that I feel uncomfortable in. The library, along with the streetlights, gives the campus an incredible industrial feel. That's now how a campus should feel like? It seems like the University is working on it though, because Grant Hall is a little bit more like a campus building, een though it does still kinda look like the rest of the lecture halls. It's weird walking through the campus when I've seen the likes of Loyola and U of I. Their campuses definitely have us beat, hands down. Hopefully, while I'm still here, the school can start to feel more comfortable and not so industrial. Even if I have gotten used to it.

Another rant about the CTA

So this public transportation thing is steady proving to be difficult. They postponed D-Day again, but what does that mean? Does that mean that the problem's not really as big as they say it is? Because they seem to be getting emergency funding from somewhere. This second delay of D-Day wasn't even publicized all that much. It kind of surprised me, actually. Because I was definitely expecting there to be a lot less buses as of November 4th. We were talking about it in my English class and about how the importance and urgency of the situation is slowly diminishing since they just keep pushing back the day. Each time they do that, the public just kinda is like "Again?" I mean, I know I am. But then again, it never really bothered me, the fact that they were having all these cuts and raising the prices. Because I have a U-Pass. Does that make me selfish? I mean, yea, it sucks because all kinds of people are gonna be losing their jobs. But, no offense to them, I have other things that I need to worry about. The fact that they're discontinuing a lot of routes, that part does suck because that also means longer waits for different buses. Which kinda makes me wish they did the cuts at the beginning of the summer, because I don't wanna be standing out in the cold waiting for a prolonged period of time. I'll admit, that part does suck.

I was reading the RedEye today when I saw an article about how scientists are linking obesity to global warming. They said that if people didn't drive so much and walked and rode their bikes more often, then they'd be helping to fix this global warming problem. It also said how obese people emit more carbon dioxide than a "normal" person. Maybe that's because of their tendency to drive opposed to walking and such. But I can't help but think that maybe they're also pushing towards using public transportation. I mean, they're printing articles that are promoting NOT driving. And it's getting cold out, so who's gonna wanna walk and ride their bikes. Come on now. So here's what I think: They're printing this article hoping that people will be like "They're right!" and they'll jump on the trains and the CTA crisis will be downgraded, not necessarily diminished. But brought down a level. I mean, it's the RedEye--a Chicago newspaper. It's likely, right?

Government Magazine

Illinois:
Overall--C+
Money--B
People--C
Infrastructure--C+
Information--C+

Louisiana:
Overall--B
Money--B+
People--B
Infrastructure--C+
Information--A-


At first, I was a little thrown off by the overall grades. Mostly because I think that Illinois has a better internal government than Louisiana. Of course, a large part of this perception is because of the hurricane, I know. But that's just because it exemplified the weakness of Louisiana's internal government. It was a mess. Nobody could really get a hold of things and it was just chaotic. But looking at the strengths and weaknesses, Illinois has one strength: Internal Coordination. So I guess that means the people who run the parts of the state are all on the same page? I'm not exactly sure. Louisiana on the other hand, has six strengths: Contracting/Purchasing; Training and Development; Budgeting for Experience; Managing for Performance; Program Evaluation; Electronic Government. OK, so again, I'm not entirely sure what all of those things mean but I'm guessing they're all good, since they're being evaluated in the report card thing.

Festival of Maps

I haven't been to the festival of maps--I'm not sure it would hold my attention for very long. But last semester we did a project on maps and how each one is made to serve a particular purpose, so then contain different information and look completely different, which is why we have so many different kinds of maps around. Sometimes they're confusing and difficult to decipher, other times they're extremely easy to figure out. Usually, though, it all depends on the purpose of the map. As stated earlier, maps are made for different reasons--to suit different needs--so they'll contain different information, even if it may be completely irrelevant to what you need. If that's the case, the map you're looking at is definitely the wrong one.

It is very difficult to map things exactly to scale. Without knowing the exact size of a building or playground, sizing it up on the paper comes as a task. Taking the train—the pink line, more specifically—I have noticed that the map of the rails seems to be a rough sketch. Knowing the streets fairly well, I have noticed that the spacing of some of the stops compared with the spacing of other stops is inconsistent. But people still know where they are going. With that particular map, the spacing and scale is not important. The order of the stops is what is important; that is what the people pay attention to. A map of interstate highways, however, is something that needs to be done to scale. When people are planning on a trip, they sometimes count on the scale-key to determine how many miles they can expect to drive in a given day. Basically, every map needs to be different to suit different needs. Every map has its purpose, and with that different purpose comes different aspects that need to stand out.

The main maps of Chicago that I've seen are the CTA maps and the neighborhood maps. And they tell you exactly what you need to know. I mean, why do you look at a CTA map? To see which line stops where and where it makes its connections and which stations are wheelchair accessible, etc. And the CTA map tells you just that. The neighborhood map gives you an idea of where specific neighborhoods are. It labels various streets--not all of them, just a few--to give you an idea of where each neighborhood is.

Bottom line, when it comes to maps, they usually have a specific purpose; they have something specific that they're trying to show you. It's difficult to look at a single map and have it tell you absolutely everything you want to know about an area. It's highly unlikely, actually.

So maybe the Festival of Maps would be a good idea. See the different ways to look at things. We'll see what happens.

'Of' vs. 'In'

Yesterday in class we talkeda bout Culture of Chicago. Initially, I was kind of confused about the conversation we were having. Because my understanding was that we were talking about the culture of Chicago. But most of the things people were coming up with were what I saw as culture in Chicago. And yes, to me, there's a difference. Here's how I see it:
Culture of Chicago means things that are partial to Chicago, which is why I brought up the Chicago Style Hotdog and the Chicago Deep Dish Pizza. Those are both things that Chicago is notorious for. Maybe people just see them as trademarks of Chicago, but to me, that's part of Chicago's culture. Culture in Chicago is, as people were saying, the neighborhoods, the variety of restaurants we have, etc. And the museums would also fall into that category. Now, were the museums full of things exhibiting Chicago, then it would fall into the "of" category. I know, it's confusing. I was even a bit confused about my classification, but I can't help it--my brain defaults to it.
When Ms. Sherry asked us about what other cities would we say has a lot of culture, I immediately thought of New Orleans (I know, my range of cities is real narrow, but Chicago and New Orleans are the only two cities that I know fairly well). But when I thought about why I thought about New Orleans, I thought about the overwhelming feel of history that just eminates off of the sidewalks, the buildings--everything. The architecture is partial to New Orleans. You can't just up and go somewhere else to find the same style of houses. And Café du Monde, the all-year-round-24-hours-a-day café that overlooks Jackson Square and sits just off of the Mississippi River, that in itself is a huge piece of culture right there. Basically, I started to think about the state as a whole. I feel that Louisiana--and the rest of the South, for that matter--has way more culture than Chicago. Why? Because of the history that that land holds. Over in Vacherie, Louisiana sits Oak Alley, the aboslutely gorgeous plantation house that has two rows of 14 200-year-old Oak Trees lining the walkway to the hill the separates the houses from the river.
So, in that little stream of consciousness, I realized that, in a sense, I measure a place's level of culture based on its historic appeal.

Olympics!

OK, so Chicago is really trying to have the Olympics here in 2016. It seems like forever and a day away, so why are we stressing about it so much right now? Well, apparently, they like to choose the city like 7 years in advance. So the debate has begun. Mayor Daley appears to be intent on getting the Olympics for Summer of 2016. He's a man who loves to publicize Chicago and it's amenities as much as possible. To me, however, it seems as though Daley is looking at this situation through rose colored glasses. Daley has proposed an 80,000 seat venue to be built in Washington Park, turning it into a 10,000 seat multi-use stadium after the Olympics. The way he sees it, the park is big enough to even have that large of a venue built on its ground. But what's more important, having the venue in that neighborhood, it would give countless jobs to unemployed people. My feeling, though, is that the majority of the jobs aren't going to go to the people who live in that area--I don't think Mayor Daley would be too fond of having the Olympic contestants and viewers be greeted by the lower classes of Chicago. Even so, the venue would provide jobs, it's just a matter of to whom.
In class last week, we had a discussion about the Olympics coming to Chicago. I said that I don't think it's a good idea because we have so many internal issues that need to be ironed out first. But someone else said that the Olympics would be good because it would force the city to get itself together, to hurry up and fix these problems. And that's a good point. Because would the city really be working so hard on its public transportation dilemma if they weren't trying to get in shape for the International Olympic Committee? To me, it's more a matter of the Mayor's priorities. If it takes having the Olympics here for him to get himself together, then does he have his priorities straight? Would he really be so passionate about giving jobs to the residents around Washington Park? Would the public transportation crisis weigh so heavily on his shoulders? I'm not so sure, but at least he's doing something about it now.
So maybe having the Olympics in Chicago would be a good thing. It would surely bring in lots of money for the city. Since it would be the Summer Olympics, Navy Pier would be in full operation, and with all the added tourists, it would definitely make a huge profit. The city would benefit greatly, I think. But would it be a case of the rich getting richer and the poor getting porrer? Would the profit of the Olympics be distributed to neighborhoods that need it? The city is more than just downtown and the Loop, but it seems as though that's where all the money goes. The nice places just get nicer while the rundown parts of the city stay as is, usually getting worse. Would Daley be able to get his priorities straight after having the Olympics--that is, if it turns out that way?
Hopefully, things will get better after the Olympics, if we have them. For Atlanta, the 1996 Summer Olympics actually did help the city. The housing used for the competitors turned into the residence halls for Georgia State University, and later Georgia Institute of Technology. The city made use of venues initially built for the Olympics. However, throughout the duration of the Olympics, there was a dire need for better transportation. The city hired bus drivers who didn't know the geography of the city; some of the drivers had no idea where they were going and had to ask Atlanta natives for directions. But in the end, the Olympics are considered a success for Atlanta. Let's hope, if we win the bid, that the results can be similar for Chicago.

Bowling Alone

Today in class we had a discussion about Robert Putnam's book Bowling Alone. Although we didn't have to read it for this class, I liked talking about it. I read a chapter of it for my UPP101 class, so I knew what Putnam was talking about. Basically, we came to the conclusion that back in the fifties and sixties, people were more connected within their neighborhoods through weekly bowling leagues. But nowadays, people are more distanced from each other and don't necessarily require that once-a-week meeting to see each other. Jill mentioned that part of it is the fact that people are more invested in themselves and are too busy dealing with their own affairs to join an organization that meets once a week. I agree with her, but I also feel that today's advancement in technology plays a big role in the decrease of organization membership. People don't need to set aside one night a week for catching up on stuff with friends because they can call, email, text, page their friends within a matter of seconds. It is so much easier to get in touch with our friends that it is no longer necessary to be a part of an organization to see them or talk to them.
Personally speaking, the bowling alley is still very much a place of community. I worked at a bowling alley in Cicero for over a year, also participating in multiple leagues that the bowling alley offered. Although most of the people who bowl there aren't from Cicero--coming in from Humboldt Park, West Lawn, Carol Stream, and many other neighborhoods--there was such a strong community feel within the walls of that bowling alley. I quickly learned that sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles would all come together to bowl in a particular league. It was so easy to get sucked in and become a part of the "Town Hall Bowl family."
Over the years, bowling alleys have shut down and been torn down at an alarming rate, a sign that bowling just isn't as popular as it once was. Furthermore, with the increasing rate of Brunswick Zones, family-owned bowling alleys, such as Town Hall, just aren't able to keep up. But either way, the bowling alley is still a place of strong community, even if it's not as prevalent as it used to be. Today's world is a fastpaced, hectic one and people just don't have the time to devote one night a week to a specific group or organization. Things are done via the internet and quick minute-long phone calls. People are constantly on the run and hardly have any time to sleep, let alone be part of a bowling league. To an extent, Putnam is right, but communities are just being formed and meeting together in different ways is all.

Star Light, Star Bright, WHERE ARE YOU??

If asked what is my least favorite thing about the city, I would probably default to "its lack of cleanliness." But in all honesty, while that can bother me from time to time, I've grown accustomed to not letting my pants drag in certain liquids and steering clear of things that I can't quite make out what they are. So I've adapted. And as far as "a high crime rate" goes, I look at it this way: there's crime everywhere. It's just a matter of a higher population in the city, more crimes committed (even if that's not technically true...) and a matter of knowing you're surroundings.

But what really does bug me, and I notice this happening every time I go outside at night, is the fact that I can't see hardly any stars. I love looking at the stars when I'm at home, and that's hard enough--because the massive amount of light coming from the city washes them out even in Oak Park. I remember one time when I was staying with my cousins out in Yorkville (a waaaaay west suburb), I looked up and it was just amazing. You could see so many stars, I was mesmerized. (See, they were used to that and thought I was slightly crazy for standing there for ten minutes with my neck bent entirely backwards so I could see them. But they know I'm from the city and we actually do a lot of things differently than them, but that's another blog for another day.) The sky was just absolutely gorgeous. And, dare I say I was jealous? But I was! Because, like I said, I can't even see stars when I go home.

Also, for the Fourth of July fireworks, my dad would let us up onto the roof of Oak Park River Forest High School (he's the head carpenter, so he has all the keys). Sitting up there for the fireworks was amazing. We saw fireworks from all the surrounding towns--Berwyn, Cicero, Riverside, Elmwood Park, River Forest, Forest Park, various neighborhoods in Chicago--as well as the infamous glow of the city. Sometimes I would look straight up to see what I could see star-wise and noticed a glow coming all the way from the city, even if I was looking slightly west. I noticed that when I was a lot younger, but it never really mattered to me. But now that I live in the city, it's something that bothers me--a lot. I love looking at the stars. It's a type of escape for me, so if I could, I think I'd be a much happier person (Ha).

So, with that being said, isn't there some way that we can tone down the amount of light that the city emits? It would be beneficial in more than one way. I mean, sure, the streetlights are extremely important, but what about other things. Like, do we really need to tops of all the buildings to be lit up every single night? They have their red flashing lights that let airplanes know that they're there, but there's a lot of light that comes off of them that we really don't need. And I'm sure if people sat down and thought about it, they could figure some other things out, too.

Coexisting

So I vaguely remember Bush saying something along the lines of fish and humans coexisting peacefully. And I guess that could slightly apply to this, except I would hope I sound a bit more educated in my statement...

When you drive past the various forest preserves throughout Chicago, do you ever peer in through the trees to see if you can see deer or anything else? Whenever I'm not driving--actually, even when I am driving--I stare down the forest preserve, searching for some form of animal life. Why? Honestly, I'm not entirely sure. I know I'm not looking for proof that they're in there, because I know they are. I guess I just like to get a glimpse of them whenever I can. Because every single time I see a deer, I go crazy, mainly because I'm so used to being in the city day and night. And when I see a deer or two, I instantly feel like I'm miles and miles away from the hustle and bustle of the city. And when I take a step back, it's weird to think that the animals live so close to humans, because I'm so used to them being in secluded forest preserves and prairies that we only venture into when we have an entire day free to drive out there.

About a year and a half ago, my mom and I drove out to Iowa for a quick college visit. Most of the trip was empty country highway, with rows of crops on either side of the road. We past some forestry, but we didn't see any animals really. That's why we both thought it was hilarious that the first deer we saw was right by the 25th Avenue exit on the Eisenhower. There we were, having just driven through all kinds of land not dense with people, but we see the deer just off of a busy expressway, right in the middle of rush hour. The only way he--or she--could have got to where he was was if he crossed the entrance ramp. So not only is he living there in a busy area, but he's venturing over streets that hundreds--maybe even thousands--of cars access every day.

I don't know, it's just a funny thing to me, animals living so so close to the city. I just always kind of had it divided up into two worlds--the city world, the nature world. I mean, yea, I know that animals live in the city, but those are "city animals"--squirrels, pigeons, rats, etc. Deer and bunnies are "nature animals"--animals that are off in their own little world. But I guess I'm allllll wrong.


Oh, and I found the quote:
"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully."

Where would America be without immigrants?

It's a question worth asking. I started really thinking about it after reading Lisa Maggio's entry from October 1st. Basically everyone who lives in America is a descendant of some sort of immigrant. I know I am: my grandpa's family immigrated here from Germany; my other grandpa's family immigrated from Ukraine; my grandma's family from Ireland. My other grandma, however, has been here for a long time--having a long chain of family members born and growing up in the South. Even so, she was half English and half French, so someone would have had to immigrate at some point. Quite honestly, the only thing that makes me American is the fact that I was born here. But when people ask me what I am, I default to: a quarter German, a quarter Ukrainian, a quarter Irish, an eighth English, and an eighth French. No where in there do I say "I'm one hundred percent American," even though I am. And I'm sure, aside from a good handful, that's what everyone else says. Everyone has blood that runs through them that is not American.

I don't understand why people are trash talked so often for representing where they come from. As far as I'm concerned, it's good to be proud of where you come from. I have heard "Americans" say that they don't like the way Mexicans continuously sport the Mexican flag claiming that "This is America. The only flag that should be seen is the American flag." But that's just ignorant, because the essence of America is the conglomeration of all the countries that immigrated and settled here. America has a reputation of being the free world, being a place people can escape to from persecution, poverty, and so many more negative things. Sure, those negative things have been brought to America, too, but some of it just purely ignorance. It's fine to be proud of where you come from--great, even. But the ignorance I see on some Americans' faces makes me ashamed to say I'm American and want to represent my other five countries that much more.

So my question stands: Where would America be without immigrants? Quite honestly, I don't think it would really exist. This country was built off of immigrants and their determination for a better life. That is what inspired so many different movements througout history and what still does. It's the people who come here from different countries that have the determination to hold rallies and every organize parades througout the entire city. I think it's great to have pride in where you come from, because that's a large part of who you are.

Navy Pier.

So today was my birthday and my friend and I went to Navy Pier intending on going on the ferris wheel. But by the time we finished walking up and down the pier, they were closing, so we couldn't go on the ferris wheel. Oh well. But while we were walking, I kinda realized something: that place really has nothing to do with Chicago, the actual city.

OK, what am I talking about? It goes along with my very very first entry about the tourist bubbles and how their only intention is to make money. And I definitely saw that in Navy Pier. There were all kinds of food stands and drink stands and OK, a store with "I ♥ Chicago" tshirts. But what does it really show anybody about Chicago? There weren't any true Chicago restaurants there; there were only franchises there which really don't even try to show the city that they're placed it. If someone didn't have previous knowledge that Navy Pier was placed in Chicago, and they were just blindly dropped there and couldn't see the skyline, they would probably have no idea where they were until they saw the gift shop with Chicago merchandise.

It just blows me how some attractions can be so insensitive to the cities that help them make all their money.

On another note, my family and I are going to Ed Debevic's for my birthday dinner tomorrow night. That's a place that I feel is true to Chicago, being a Chicago restaurant and definitely something tourists will remember as a Chicago thing.

Crazy Taxi, Indeed

So you know that video game called Crazy Taxi? Basically, you're a taxi driver in some city and you have a quota you need to meet of a certain number of people. But there's really no boundaries as to where you can drive; you can drive on the sidewalk, through sidewalk cafes, etc. At least, that's how I think it works. Either way, it truly is a crazy taxi. Ha. (Last time I played it was like five years ago, at least.) Anyway, I had to take a cab today up to the place I was babysitting. (My brother's girlfriend's sister's house--she has the most adorable son. I consider him my nephew.) Granted, we were driving north on Halsted--which isn't the smartest thing to do at 5:45 on a Friday afternoon--I definitely feared for my life a couple times. And I was inside the car! This guy was clearly irritated once I got in the car and I found myself wishing I would've caught a different cab. But oh well. I was stuck in his. Blehh. Anyway, I watched him weave in and out, sometimes even being in the completely wrong lane--facing oncoming traffic completely. I was like "OOOkkkkkkk buddy." Not too much fun. But then there were also times when I felt bad for a pedestrian. There they are, completely unprotected, unlike the driver, but he still got right up on them. I found that more annoying than anything. Why? Because I've definitely had a cab do the same thing to me. I was walking across the street and he started slowing down like he was going to let me go in front of him. But as I watched him, to make sure he would stop so that I don't get hit (because I've been hit by a car before and I wasn't trying to let it happen again) I put one foot that was clearly in front of him, so half of my body was in front of his car. But tell me why he kept on rolling closer and closer and was obviously not going to stop. So I basically almost had my foot run over by the guy, who really didn't seem to care.

Bottom line, it's like I said: "It's a city full of buses and taxis and pedestrians who don't have the right-of-way." Everyone has to be on their toes at alllll times, especially when crossing the street. But in a world of cell phones and headphones and just straight up oblivious people, crossing the street is risky business.

Peek Shures.

So I went to those sites that were on the sheet and they were pretty cool. Quite honestly, I don't think they were anything special. Sure, they're good for people who already know the city and who are working with the city. But if someone who didn't know Chicago was looking at them, I think they'd be slightly bored. Except for the first website: www.revealingchicago.org. I actually liked the pictures on that website. The pictures to me were more engaging. And then for some of them, they gave a little background. For example, the picture of the boat dying the Chicago River green, there was a little paragraph telling the story about how that tradition was started, and even how it was altered a bit. And the picture with the Chicago Correctional Facility, it gave a little tidbit of information I didn't know: it's built in a triangular shape so that the halls that need to be patrolled aren't too long. That website was fun for me to look at; I kept anticipating the next picture. The other websites were boring to me and I just sped through the pictures, basically.

If I were to take a whole bunch of pictures of the city, I would want to take more pictures of the people--people interacting with each other and with the city. I think it's so interesting to see how people act differently even if they're in the exact same spot, you know? It kind of goes along with what one of my classmates said in class (I don't know her name...sorry!!) about watching people and thinking about What's that person's situation?, What's it feel like being that person walking down that street?. When she said that, I was in total agreement; I do the same thing all the time. So I would've liked to take pictures of that because it would enable me to hold onto those observations. The pictures of the building specific to the city are cool, so I'd probably do some of that, too. But to me, the people are always the essence of a neighborhood, so I would be sure to capture that.

Familiarity is Key

I just finished a discussion with my friend about how safe/unsafe she would feel if dropped in an unfamiliar neighborhood. It was based off of something that happened way back at New Years. It's about one's familiarity with a particular neighborhood and how safe they feel in said neighborhood:

On New Years, my friends, Mike and Stevie, and I were going to go our another friend's, Stephanie's, house. I was at Stevie's house picking him up when I got a call from Mike telling me that he wasn't going to go. When I asked him why, he said that somebody told him that Stephanie didn't live in the best neighborhood, so he thought it better to just not go. This made me mad, because I knew he was just being a lame. She lives near Central/Fullerton; Mike lives near Lombard/Pershing. I've been to both houses numerous times and would definitely say that I feel safer near her house than I would his house. I had a little argument with him telling him that things would be fine at her house, that'd we'd be inside anyway, so what does it even matter. But he's one for taking the safe way rather than doing anything that might be a little risky (aka: BORING). Anyway, I dismissed it and told him I'd call him at midnight--and let him know that I was fine.

So this discussion I just had with my friend, we were talking about if it's the neighborhood's reputation that makes it feel safe or the familiarity. Basically, we concluded that the familiarity reigns over all. We decided that we would feel threatened basically anywhere we go, even it was a super rich, super low crime rate neighborhood; we're still going to be scared that somebody might snatch us into the bushes or something. But if we're at least in a neighborhood that we know, especially one that we know very well, we feel somewhat better. Why? Because we know the streets, we know how to get around, and we know where to go when we feel threatened.

So I guess it's as simple as those three words: Familiarty is key.

Home

What is it that makes us want to "rep our city" ₍₁₎ everywhere we go?
We declare an undying love for our city, sometimes even defending it.
We pride ourselves on where we come from,
Standing by the statement that any other city has nothing on us.
We ignore the fact that maybe we haven't even visited the competition to know for sure--
But we don't have to; our city will always be better.
The El,
Navy Pier,
Grant Park,
the Sears Tower.
It all becomes our back yard, and eventually,
Our background.
It's "who we are, where we come from." ₍₂₎
Its essence rubs off on us and we become branded.
It becomes ridiculously easy to spot the real ones from the fakes,
a.k.a. the residents from the tourists.
We stand out with our accents and our undying love for "Daaaaaa Bears." ₍₃₎
We pride ourselves on our baseball teams,
Refusing to let the cross-town feud die.
"If you didn't know by now, I'm talking about ChiTown." ₍₄₎
We've grown accustomed to the extraordinarily tall buildings,
And the breeze from The Lake.
We've learned to harden ourselves against the harsh wind when we have to.
Braving the cold in the winter while bearing the heat in the summer.
Laughing it off with a 'That's Chicago weather for you,'
But secretly cursing its inconsistency and intensity under our breath.
We're a city full of taxis and buses and pedestrians who don't have the right-of-way.
It's the city of Chicago that makes everyone want to represent it.
We want to make it known where we're from.
Because we're proud,
Because it's "[our] kind of town." <sub>(5)



(1) Petey Pablo, "Raise Up"
(2) Common sports cheer
(3) NUMEROUS episodes of Saturday Night Live
(4) Kanye West, "Homecoming"
(5) Frank Sinatra, "My Kind of Town"</sub>

A suburban girl in a city world.

I've mentioned multiple times before that I grew up in Oak Park, that it's really the only home I've known aside from campus housing. But I sometimes feel like a city girl at heart. I have always felt like I'm in the right place when I'm in the city, but sometimes it seems like it just won't work. I feel like I'm in between: I don't exactly fit in with my suburbanite friends because I'm more city than them; I stand out so much from my city friends because I was raised in the suburbs. It's been that way for as long as I can remember, but it really started to show when I started high school.
Going to a private school in the city, I had to chance to meet people from all kinds of neighborhoods. As is nature for me wherever I go, I drifted towards the "Black group" only because that's who I usually get along with best. I spent the majority of my time with kids from the South side, West side, and even some from the North side. I was speaking thier dialect and "acting black," which I always denied because I was always just being myself. Any friends that I still had in Oak Park felt that I was "acting ghetto," and that started many arguments, causing me to grow farther apart from them--they were just too naïve and sheltered for me.
So the only friends I spent time with were the friends I had made at high school. It didn't really bother me much because I got along with them great. I was drawn to that group of people because that's who I have stuff in common with. But that doesn't mean I didn't run into my fair share of debates and issues. Being a white girl who has always hung around Blacks, Mexicans, and Puerto Ricans, I have had the chance to see things in a different light and encounter all different types of ignorance, in terms of being oblivious to certain things.
Too many times I have had people come after me for me supposedly thinking I'm better than them. Quite honestly, though, I never understood that because if I really did think I was better than someone, I wouldn't be spending my time with them. It just gets me how quickly people are to judge me, sometimes not even allowing a conversation before jumping to these conclusions. I have definitely had to hold my own on more than one occasion because someone stepped to me incorrectly. Since it has happened numerous times, I've learned to hold my own in such situations; I don't back down. I have been threatened by some people, but they never follow through, leading me to believe that they expected me to back down instantly as the "scared white girl" but were surprised when I didn't. And in all honesty, the people who do jump to those conclusions, I do think I'm better than them, but not because of their race. If they're going to jump to conclusions like that without even trying to get to know me, then that just shows how narrow minded and prejudice they are.
I have also seen my fair share of reverse racism. There have been instances where people will just automatically decide they don't like me, and I honestly feel that it's because I'm white. I'm not trying to make myself a scapegoat--I wouldn't be crying wolf if I didn't see one--but when I'm around people, I observe their behavior. And I have seen people push me off to the side while just paving the way for others who are the same race as them. It really helps me put things in perspective because I put myself in a lot of situations that a lot of white people don't usually encounter.
I guess what made me think about this is the article, "Back to the Fortress of Brooklyn and the Millions of Destroyed Men Who Are My Brothers," on page 30 of our book. I could feel for the boy discussed in the article (the main character of the book he's reviewing) because often times, that is me. I become the minority because I am often the only white girl at many functions. It doesn't bother me, but it seems to bother other people, White, Black, Mexican, and Puerto Rican alike. I have learned to turn a blind eye to people's color, and it's too bad that others cannot.
I'll be honest, I have adapted a hardness from being in the situations I have been in. Having to stand up for myself on so many different occasions has given me a tough attitude that my own family doesn't really care for. And I feel like the city, in some part, has contributed to that. But I'm not complaining--I love the edge the city has given me. Of course, deep down, I am that suburban girl and I have my moments of naivete, but that's only expected of someone who spent her first 13 years in a suburb of Chicago.

Determination and Concentration

Last Wednesday, we visited Jane Addams' Hull House Museum. It was interesting because I kind of had a slight epiphany.
I've gone through the past year planning on transfering to the college of urban planning and public affairs. I wanted to concentrate on the public schools and community development. But after hearing about everything that Jane Addams did with the creation of Hull House, I realized that that, what she did, was basically what I want to do. She created a place that acted as a safe haven not just for kids, but for the adults, too. She integrated the neighborhood by bringing rich, educated people into an area that did not have much going for itself. Just the fact that she was able to find people willing to do that shows how determined she was to put this plan into action.
After hearing about the ridicule that Jane Addams received for all her work, I realized that doing something like she did was not just brave, but required a constant state of mind that that's what she was going to do. She had to persevere through rough conditions and hardly any help from other people. And with that determination that she displayed, she was able to change an entire community for the better. She gave everyone hope that things could get better. She provided residents with lessons in various fields so they could get better jobs for themselves. She offered a daycare that was always there for parents, whether or not they could pay the fee. She just put the area in a better state of mind, in a way.
And like I said, that's what I want to do. I want to be able to go into a neighborhood that needs help and be that help. I want to be the one who, by incorporating many of the aspects Jane Addams focused on, can go in there and change things, make them better. But I know it's so much easier said than done. And I'm just not sure if I have the same determination and drive that Jane Addams had. She has, in a sense, become someone who I admire and who I shall aspire to be.

Census Tract

For the assignment that we received the third week of classes, I looked at a few different towns/cities. I looked at Oak Park, Cicero, Chicago, and New Orleans. All four a very prominent places; I spend a lot of time in each place. (Less time in New Orleans for obvious reasons...) Looking at the information presented I'm just a little bit surprised how much the facts show in real life. Like, looking at the numbers, I find myself thinking "Yea, that's true." I mean, the only one that's for, I guess, is the Race/Ethnicity. I've noticed it when it comes to the vacant/occupied housing units, also.
Something that I found interesting was the connection I made (whether or not it's legitimate, we'll see) between the amount of high school graduates and the condition of the city for New Orleans. There's a good 75,000 people, age 25 and over who have not graduated high school. And only that many who have graduated college. For anyone who's been down to New Orleans, they can tell you that it's not all Bourbon Street and French Quarter. That area is strictly just that: an area. The majority of the city is very similar to Chicago's South and West Side. And ever since the hurricane, it's been slightly worse. There are a lot more abandoned houses and buildings: old schoos, storefronts, churches, etc. The condition of the city has never really been amazing. (But it is gorgeous and the people are nicer than ever.) There have always been extensive problems with some neighborhoods such as Uptown and the infamous Ninth Ward. And I can't help but make the connection that some of it is due to the only decent graduation rate.
I also did a quick comparison between Chicago and New Orleans. Ever since the hurricane, the housing occupancy in New Orleans is way lower than it used to be. It now stands at a 69.6% while Chicago is 86.4%. The two cities are so similar in so many ways, on paper and in person. I guess that's what I love being in both of them so much.

Growing up in Oak Park

On Monday, September 24, we had a discussion about the Gay/Lesbian population in various towns and if it has an affect on the diversity of each respective town. I mentioned that I grew up in Oak Park, one of the more liberal suburbs. And I guess I just kind of wanted to elaborate.
For those who don't know, Oak Park is a west suburb just outside the city. It's a relatively small suburb encased between Austin Blvd, Harlem Ave., Roosevelt Rd., and North Ave. With the West Side of Chicago on its eastwen border and River Forest on its western border, Oak Park sits between two very different neighborhoods; the West Side is generally on the lower end of income while River Forest is known for its huge houses and upper-middle-class residents. My house sits one block from River Forest in a good, safe area. I've lived in the same house my entire life, apart from living on campus last semester and this semester. Oak Park is the only town that I know as a residence. And I feel that its liberalism has helped me to grow up being as open minded as I am.
My neighborhood has always had a good mix of people. I never felt like I was only being exposed to one race, religion, etc. I guess it helped that my mom ran a daycare because it really helped me to see different households. There were kids who were adopted, with single parents, with a "normal" nuclear family, different races, and some who were even mentally disabled. But the thing is, it wasn't just at my house where I saw this kind of mix. Walking down the streets of Oak Park, you can see such a mix of people.
When I tell people that I live in Oak Park, they often assume that I'm rich. But quite honestly, not everyone in Oak Park has a whole lot of money. For one, my parents bought our house over 20 years ago, so we're not exactly dealing with today's prices. Sure, they've gone up, and I've actually noticed a change in the people who live in Oak Park. But that's not the point I'm trying to make right now. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there's a mix of income within the residents of Oak Park. Like I said in class, we had Section 8 housing directly across the street from my house for years, all up until the lady who owned the three houses decided to sell the land to a developer. And I'm sure those aren't the only three Section 8 housing houses in Oak Park. While those houses were inhabited, I saw a lot of different people move in and out, a new family almost every year. I never really thought anything of it; I always became friends with whoever lived in the houses. To me, that was what a neighborhood was. I've grown up thinking that places are supposed to be integrated, in every way possible.
But I've realized that there's a lot of places lacking. I guess, in a sense, I'm slightly spoiled in that area. Because I'm so used to a mix of people. When I go out to my cousins' houses out in the west-west suburbs, it throws me off completely. Out there, almost everyone has a very similar income; it's so homogenous out there.
But I'm glad that I grew up in Oak Park. It allowed me to have an open mind from the get-go. And I guess that's why I chose to attend this University. I love being in Chicago because of its vast mix of people. It's like a culture shock to go anywhere else.

Immigration

I took a look at the Metro Chicago Immigration Factbook and found something to be slightly interesting. I came across the map that sorted out the numbers of foreign born by neighborhood. The darkest blue means there's more people who were foreign born. And to my surprise--or just shocked me, really--was the fact that majority of the map of Chicago was a deeper shade of blue. That means that the majority of the neighborhoods have between 18,500 and 47,906 people who are foreign-born. I find that interesting because I wasn't really expecting that, quite honestly. I mean, I know that Chicago is a very diverse city, but it still caught me off guard. I guess I never really thought of it as people being born elsewhere and then moving. I always kind of thought of it as a place of descendants; I just thought everyone's relatives were from elsewhere and people were born here having international descent. It's kind of stupid of me now that I have it down on paper. Well, computer screen, but written down nonetheless.
Oh! Something else that I noticed was the areas with the greatest immigrant population throughout the Chicagoland Area. I guess I wasn't really surprised with this one, but it's just an observation. The Factbook presents a list of ten places that are ranked "in the top 25 metropolitan areas in terms of both the number of immigrants and the percent of their community made up of immigrants." Cicero was on the list having come second in each category: 37,343 individuals, which is 43.6% of its entire population. Like I said, it's not extremely surprising to me, having worked in Cicero and having a lot of friends who live in the town. It's interesting to see the numbers down on paper.

Gentrification

I went to high school at St. Ignatius College Prep. I started going there when the projects along Racine and Roosevelt Road were still up. There used to be a Boys and Girls Club on the southwest corner of Taylor/Racine, and I watched as they tore that down along with the projects. For a while, the fire station on Roosevelt Road was the only thing left on that entire block. I've watched over the past few years as they have started to change the neighborhood with fancier styled housing and pricier stores and restaurants. They goal: gentrification. They are trying to bring riche, more well-to-do people into a neighborhood that hasn't had much going for it for a long while. That's all well and good, but for some reason, this whole process has bothered me. For one, I was deeply upset when I saw the Boys and Girls Club get torn down and replaced with nothing--I've met quite a few of the children who live in the neighborhood and they have nothing to do and nowhere to go after school. And another thing that has really bothered me is that I feel like the phrase "mixed-income housing" is just a big cover-up. It doesn't seem as though they're trying to integrate the neighborhood. It seems more as though they're trying to change the neighborhood; switch up the predominant demographic in the neighborhood. Another thing that my mom brought to my attention is this: St. Ignatius was founded by Father Damen a long time ago. He chose that neighborhood because he wanted the school--and the attached church--to be a safe haven for people living in a not so great neighborhood. He had intentions of being a place for needy people to go to--there was even a soup kitchen open in the basement of the church all up until an unexpected fire shut it down. With the neighborhood changing, it almost seems as though there's no point for the school/church to be in that neighborhood anymore. To me, it seems like it should move into a bad neighborhood, to help them. I don't know, it's complicated. And nothing I say will change what's happening. I'm just not happy with it. Because it's like I said. The neighborhood is just being changed completely. The people who used to live there are being moved to the suburbs and just the outskirts of the city. That's not how it should be.

A Disenchanted World

Ritzer's article talks about various corporations and such that glorify spending money and being "what's in." While reading this article, it really made me think about something that we talked about in my UPP101 course: tourist bubbles. Tourist bubbles are places created by a city to draw profit. For example, Chicago has Milennium Park and all of its various activities. There's also Navy Pier and the Magnificent Mile. All of these draw tourists from all over the country--and even the world--and the city profits from it. Furthermore, througout these locations, there are expensive restaurants and hotels. Since they are the ones offered in the area of the "bubble" those are the ones that tourists tend to stay in--which brings in more profits for the city. These "bubbles" are advertised and glorified making it seem as though they are what they city has to offer. Often times, tourists are so caught up in visiting all of the "tourist bubbles" that they tend to miss out on the real essence of the city--the neighborhoods, the "mom & pop" restaurants and stores, and everything else.
Ritzer's article talks of Cathedrals of Consumption, and I think this is where I made the connection. I guess I just never got that idea out of my head. Because now that I'm looking through it again, I'm realizing that he's talking about stores and malls and such. Either way, both ideas generally come down to this: their main goal is to make money--and lots of it. Places that sell items in bulk do so in order to charge higher prices and places make themselves glamorous so that people have to pay high prices to go there. It seems as though that's everyone's main motive in life these days: get rich quick.