Pilsen

Pilsen is a community based on family and culture. The culture of the area is very prominent, the greatest example of this is the Spanish History Museum. The museum shows not only the history of the Mexican people but what they do for Dia Day Los Muertos. There were people creating handbags and sugar skulls from scratch and decorating them as anyone would like them.

                The family owned shops and the small restaurants further exemplify this fact, by providing a little taste of home so to speak. So why has this little community flourished over the years and become what it is today? It is because of the constant flow of family and immigrants contributing to the community. This has happened more than once in our history of the United States. Another example is the neighborhood of Little Italy in both New York and Chicago.

                The reason I mention this is because I had family that took roots in both these communities over the years when my family first immigrated to the states from Italy. The communities of Little Italy still flourish today, not as well as Pilsen has but they have helped the surrounding communities through the years. But Pilsen is a special case. It was not always a Mexican neighborhood. We mentioned it being Polish before the current residents. So my question is how can such a transformation take place. From one culture to another that is vastly different than the one before hand.  Can anyone think of  other communities that have undergone such a change?

                Pilsen is built upon community and culture. Is this a good way to build a new community? Is Naperville a community built on culture? How about out communities we are doing our research on for Corsino’s class?

Hull House

Hull House is a very interesting building to say the least. But what surprises me is that it is no longer acting in the community as it should be. I don’t think that anyone would argue it was a bad thing from what we learned. Giving everyone jobs, skills, and milk. But it is now just a portion of the size it was all those years ago and why is that? The city once again had to go and ruin something that worked. It wanted a bigger campus for the university  so they had to make room. All because the Hull House did not fit into their “vision” of what Chicago should be like.

                But I wonder why there are no modern day Hull Houses that we know about. I am sure it costs an enormous amount to run, staff, and provide for all the people that would be there.  Because of the nature of a house like this there should be no problem getting funding. Humanitarian groups would donate, if the house did a study like Hull House Sociological societies would give funding, as would anthropological.

                But something like this taking hold in society today would most likely not happen without a fight. Plenty of people would say it’s like a misappropriation of funds and they would be better spent on our roads. Others would say it will fail in a few years, or that no one would use it. I personally think that it would depend on location more than anything else. If we put this in a struggling neighborhood than there is a definite chance that we can change hundreds of lives. Than by piggybacking on this success we can move into bigger areas, eventually into a possible city wide Hull House of sorts? My main question to you guys is can you think of anyone that would have a chance at running something like this?

Cabrini Greens

Last week while seeing Cabrini Greens one major thing came into my mind yet again. The city really needs to get their stuff together and finish what they start. While rebuilding the housing instead of finishing one building and then moving to the next they build multiple at the same time kicking everyone out to rebuild it when they could have made it so much easier to just remove some tenants and relocate a much smaller number. But what really gets on my nerves is the fact that they displaced everyone and never finished what they were doing and ended up with less people than the first time! This makes me feel like the “upgrades” and I say that loosely was through a contractor that someone knew and they were making a friend money. Or the building with the wind tunnel on top that is non-functioning.  

            The Chicago government also seems to enjoy building structures to seem more ornate or to connect different parts of the city. A prime example is the new buildings in Cabrini Greens or the river walk that they are building along the disgusting river. But is all this worth it for the mixed income housing that the city wants in its place? The city has huge plans for everything but they always think of the moment. They don’t think of repercussions that could happen when they start to implement these things.

            While doing our interviews for the SOA 494 class one of our first interviewees had a good point. I asked him what he thought of the mixed housing in the area and he said it was a horrible idea and it would never work. His reasoning is that you have someone paying thousands a month to live there and the others paying close to nothing. He said that these are two cultures that would not get along with each other and that they would not want their kids to see hang with each other. So on an ending note, is he right? Will these two cultures conflict leaving the city out millions and possibly another gang ridden area down the road?   

Gentrification

            The topic of gentrification comes up many times while in all Sociology classes, and one thing I have noticed is how not many people realize that this happens all the time and usually under the radar. When we were in Lincoln Park last week all we saw were big houses, decorative houses, and famous houses. Not many of the houses around us were small, old looking, or cheap. The area was built up in some places with apartments and condos leading the way into the new century.

            What we do not tend to realize is that in order for us to build these houses and high rises that we must kick the old residents out or buy them out. But when they refuse to buy what do we do to them?

            In the paper earlier in the week I found out. A family that had owned the house for many years refused to sell to developers no matter what the price and after an “anonymous” tip police RAIDED the house. The false accusations to which they raided were dog fighting and drug dealing.  All because the son had a pitbull and would hang out with friends on the side of the house. After finding no evidence of either accusation the fire department arrived. And put so many code violations into effect that the house was deemed unlivable and a hazard. They were evicted and since they do not have the money to fix the violations within the time period they are basically forced to sell.

            This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, just because the neighbors do not like one particular family because they do not fit in is in no way right to get them kicked out using loopholes. Granted if they were a threat to the neighborhood I could agree with getting them out. But is this what we have come to? A society that has to do what the rich people want one way or another? Is this how all gentrification works? When you cannot get them out the easy way you resort to tactics that are unconventional?