Despair is Happiness, Segregation is Harmony, Containment is Freedom OBE#4
Caldiera's piece reads like an explanation of the un-planned conspiracy of the rich. The level of security and seperation that the rich folks need in order to feel safe is reminiscent of the sort of control in 1984. There's so much psychology behind these movements. People lock themselves up and away from their fellow residents in order to feel safe because the media and the conforming actions of their peers have them convinced that if they don't, they'll become victimized. It seems to me as though the security industries and the media are the real victimizers. Fear is a strong incentive.
It is well timed in our series of readings, especially after Wilson's discussion of how "class" has become the new "race" in terms of social segregation,from Caldiera's get a great description of an international example, as well as another domestic one. Reading about Sao Paolo, the ridiculous disparities between the classes is glaringly obvious. In comparison to Los Angeles, although Caldiera does not address it, I'm making an educated guess that Sao Paolo's class segregation is less connected with racial separation. That makes it, perhaps a better illustration of what Wilson was saying. Race and class are historically very intertwined and difficult to separate in the U.S. Perhaps that is also the case in Sao Paolo, but not that I'm aware of.
Caldiera's piece also goes into how the great architects' plans for the city get used for very different purposes than their original intents. We saw that picture of Brasilia, which was in Le Corbusier's roster of designs. Now Caldiera tells us just how right we and our concordant social theorists from the 80s were about the exclusionary nature of planned open spaces. Caldiera refers to Brasilia as a "perversion of initial premises and intentions." (pg. 317?)She says that " Instead of creating a space in which the distinctions between public and private dispappear- making all space public as the modernists intended- the enclaves use modernist conventions to create spaces in which the private quality is enhanced beyond any doubt and in which the public, a shapeless void treated as residual, is deemed irrelevant." (That's my kinda sentence.- Also pg. 317?)
The new emperialism/colonialism is something that Caldiera touches on too in a way that we haven't exactly blatantly discussed yet. We sort of covered it in the readings about how the internet becomes it's own community and our discussions of ideas as the newest commodities, going the way of natural resources and such but she directly says that the approval of the 1st world is used in 3rd world countries to sell new ways of doing things to the rich. Her discussion of "Edge City- Life on the New Frontier" is where she makes that clearest.
Caldiera's piece ties in with many of our other readings. Particularly Engels, and his description of the routes that the rich took in order to avoid seeing poverty. If you live in an enclave and you needn't venture outside of it, you're certainly not seeing how the other half lives. She's hinting at some Marxian notions too when she mentions the way that the rich are trusting all these underpaid people to do their most intimate and important tasks for them, while they won't even share the same entrance with them and how problematic that is. Her point about how "the conditons necessary for democracy" include " that people acknowledge those from different social groups as cocitizens, i.e., as people having similar rights," is sort of Marxian as well.
The level of security in Sao Paolo and L.A., or the fortified enclaves is like that of the medieval city and the ancient city. Where else have we read about a "city of walls?" It sounds much like the promises made to the rich in the Masque of the Red Death by Poe, again. It also ties into the idea of poverty as a disease and crime as something that's only committed by the poor, as we read about in the Hotel Homes(Stansell) reading. (Corporate crime and the crime of taking more than you need, inevitably leaving others without enough are not categorized as crime.)
Caldiera's writing was a really great fit for the topics which we've discussed in this class. Through her examples and arguements she brought to light modern examples of problems that seem to have been around forever.
OBE #5 what’s next armed neighborhoods like Iraq? (revised)
Fortifies enclaves misrepresent what an urban environment stands for. Generally speaking, cosmopolitan residents are civic-minded and embrace diversity. The results of Calderia’s ethnographic research on Sao Paulo and Los Angeles illustrate just the opposite. Urban residents build private enclaves for security purposes to hide from the crime they produce. “Private enclaves and the segregation they generate deny many of the basic elements which constituted the modern experience of public life.” (404)
The major problem is the Sao Paulo is that residents conform to crime. At the same time they instigate social inequalities from practicing social hierarchies. On the other hand Los Angeles, also known as “La-la-land,” perpetuates this sort of class segregation by typifying cultures in the media. Although there are apparent cultural differences between the two cities, both appear to produce equal civic harms in their city from spatial segregation.
San Paulo citizens hide from violence and the City of Angels is promoting it, so who’s really worse? Both cities are responsible for breeding ignorance through spatial segregation. People can blame the economy, political transformations or other social events all they want. Truth is that at large residents are responsible for the social organization of their city. This research study did not surprise me. Isolation and gentrification doesn’t medicate the problem, just emphasizes it. After the reading on Sao Paulo’s societal concerns, I wanted to deny that an American city was unconstitutionally diverting back to class segregation. My patriotism was trumped by Calderia sound comparisons between Sao Paulo and Los Angeles; both have huge differences in distributions of wealth, vivacious multicultural populations, and hire domestic staff to advertise elite class status. The two cities practice spatial segregation. Both cities perpetuate crime. The major difference is that Paulista elites unapologetically practice spatial segregation and Los Angeles elites use more discretion. In Los Angeles, pop culture derives from the media’s portrayal of everyday events. Violence continues to be a societal norm because L.A. profits from criminal activities. Overall people are practicing residential segregation from fear of public interaction. Fearing the general public undermines what a true metropolitan citizen. Calderia is suggesting that there is an overall lack of trust between cultures. In addition, creating fortified enclaves is not the ideal solution to poverty. Her argument is that socially homogeneous urban residents are fleeing to secured neighborhoods to protect themselves from the poor. In her words, “isolated community, a secure environment, in which one can use various facilities and services and live only among equals” rejects what a metro environment stands for.”(306)
Calderia addresses an excellent point on misuse of class power. Affluent residents of Sao Paulo abuse class power by literally defining their social status. I feel advertising superiority from the less established is wrong on many levels especially in Sao Paulo’s case example. The community tries to practice social order to prevent contact with inferior classes through spatial segregation. However, how is “separation between two entrances” going to prevent contact? Why would these fortified enclaves employ the very population they fear? Alienation of this kind unnecessarily humiliates the working class and Paulista elites look like a fool for hiring people they fear.
The following is irrelevant to Calderia’s writings on fortified enclaves, but this is bog so I’d like to take a moment and vent. After reading Caldeira’s theory on spatial segregation from societal fear and how Sao Paulo has walled neighborhoods…I started thinking of the Iraqi neighborhoods. Talk about neighborhoods living in fear! Here’s a community that even if they wanted to hide from unruly violence and create their own safe neighborhood, they have U.S. soldiers and in the face dictating how a functioning community operates. Meanwhile back home in the US our cities are being socially segregated through class rather then religion. Maybe we should practice what we war.
valerie, i think that you bring up so many great points. you are right that it is so easy to think at first that america would be the last place to find such drastic (and intentional) class disparities. it is readings like caldiera's that make us think twice about exactly what our society is upholding as its norms. i think that so much of your entry is really telling of something that not many people often realize; the situation of social segregation and stratafication in sao paulo is obviously unacceptable, but in america in cities like los angeles (and many others elsewhere) our society has been practicing this kind of stratification and has permeated it into so many different aspects of our lives that it has become institutionalized, undiscussed and accepted.
Check this architect/philosopher/poet out. He calls for an architecture that effects change instead of stasis and is extremely political.
Smewhere in the city, the life of the favela was eating away the roots of the serene white towers, a transformation that their electronic surveillance systems would never detect. (Lebbeus Woods)
This is Woods's installation for a site at ground zero. He laments "the deeper wound, the trauma itself -- embodied in the fall and its memory -- is examined only in medical and academic quarters, far from public forums and discussions."
Woods wants architects to build catastrophe into buildings, where the order of a building can shift into something entirely different given an external event that forces the original order to disintegrate.
The views and opinions expressed in this page are strictly those of the page author. The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by the University of Minnesota.
March 29, 2007
Despair is Happiness, Segregation is Harmony, Containment is Freedom OBE#4
Caldiera's piece reads like an explanation of the un-planned conspiracy of the rich. The level of security and seperation that the rich folks need in order to feel safe is reminiscent of the sort of control in 1984. There's so much psychology behind these movements. People lock themselves up and away from their fellow residents in order to feel safe because the media and the conforming actions of their peers have them convinced that if they don't, they'll become victimized. It seems to me as though the security industries and the media are the real victimizers. Fear is a strong incentive.
It is well timed in our series of readings, especially after Wilson's discussion of how "class" has become the new "race" in terms of social segregation,from Caldiera's get a great description of an international example, as well as another domestic one. Reading about Sao Paolo, the ridiculous disparities between the classes is glaringly obvious. In comparison to Los Angeles, although Caldiera does not address it, I'm making an educated guess that Sao Paolo's class segregation is less connected with racial separation. That makes it, perhaps a better illustration of what Wilson was saying. Race and class are historically very intertwined and difficult to separate in the U.S. Perhaps that is also the case in Sao Paolo, but not that I'm aware of.
Caldiera's piece also goes into how the great architects' plans for the city get used for very different purposes than their original intents. We saw that picture of Brasilia, which was in Le Corbusier's roster of designs. Now Caldiera tells us just how right we and our concordant social theorists from the 80s were about the exclusionary nature of planned open spaces. Caldiera refers to Brasilia as a "perversion of initial premises and intentions." (pg. 317?)She says that " Instead of creating a space in which the distinctions between public and private dispappear- making all space public as the modernists intended- the enclaves use modernist conventions to create spaces in which the private quality is enhanced beyond any doubt and in which the public, a shapeless void treated as residual, is deemed irrelevant." (That's my kinda sentence.- Also pg. 317?)
The new emperialism/colonialism is something that Caldiera touches on too in a way that we haven't exactly blatantly discussed yet. We sort of covered it in the readings about how the internet becomes it's own community and our discussions of ideas as the newest commodities, going the way of natural resources and such but she directly says that the approval of the 1st world is used in 3rd world countries to sell new ways of doing things to the rich. Her discussion of "Edge City- Life on the New Frontier" is where she makes that clearest.
Caldiera's piece ties in with many of our other readings. Particularly Engels, and his description of the routes that the rich took in order to avoid seeing poverty. If you live in an enclave and you needn't venture outside of it, you're certainly not seeing how the other half lives. She's hinting at some Marxian notions too when she mentions the way that the rich are trusting all these underpaid people to do their most intimate and important tasks for them, while they won't even share the same entrance with them and how problematic that is. Her point about how "the conditons necessary for democracy" include " that people acknowledge those from different social groups as cocitizens, i.e., as people having similar rights," is sort of Marxian as well.
The level of security in Sao Paolo and L.A., or the fortified enclaves is like that of the medieval city and the ancient city. Where else have we read about a "city of walls?" It sounds much like the promises made to the rich in the Masque of the Red Death by Poe, again. It also ties into the idea of poverty as a disease and crime as something that's only committed by the poor, as we read about in the Hotel Homes(Stansell) reading. (Corporate crime and the crime of taking more than you need, inevitably leaving others without enough are not categorized as crime.)
Caldiera's writing was a really great fit for the topics which we've discussed in this class. Through her examples and arguements she brought to light modern examples of problems that seem to have been around forever.
Posted by Tav at 05:47 AM | Permalink | Add a Comment (1)
Comments
Please imagine that I spelled Caldeira correctly when you read this blog. I am too lazy to change them all. For shame...
Posted by: Tavia | April 25, 2007 09:41 PM
OBE#5 what's next armed neighborhoods like Iraq?
OBE #5 what’s next armed neighborhoods like Iraq? (revised)
Fortifies enclaves misrepresent what an urban environment stands for. Generally speaking, cosmopolitan residents are civic-minded and embrace diversity. The results of Calderia’s ethnographic research on Sao Paulo and Los Angeles illustrate just the opposite. Urban residents build private enclaves for security purposes to hide from the crime they produce. “Private enclaves and the segregation they generate deny many of the basic elements which constituted the modern experience of public life.” (404)
The major problem is the Sao Paulo is that residents conform to crime. At the same time they instigate social inequalities from practicing social hierarchies. On the other hand Los Angeles, also known as “La-la-land,” perpetuates this sort of class segregation by typifying cultures in the media. Although there are apparent cultural differences between the two cities, both appear to produce equal civic harms in their city from spatial segregation.
San Paulo citizens hide from violence and the City of Angels is promoting it, so who’s really worse? Both cities are responsible for breeding ignorance through spatial segregation. People can blame the economy, political transformations or other social events all they want. Truth is that at large residents are responsible for the social organization of their city. This research study did not surprise me. Isolation and gentrification doesn’t medicate the problem, just emphasizes it. After the reading on Sao Paulo’s societal concerns, I wanted to deny that an American city was unconstitutionally diverting back to class segregation. My patriotism was trumped by Calderia sound comparisons between Sao Paulo and Los Angeles; both have huge differences in distributions of wealth, vivacious multicultural populations, and hire domestic staff to advertise elite class status. The two cities practice spatial segregation. Both cities perpetuate crime. The major difference is that Paulista elites unapologetically practice spatial segregation and Los Angeles elites use more discretion. In Los Angeles, pop culture derives from the media’s portrayal of everyday events. Violence continues to be a societal norm because L.A. profits from criminal activities. Overall people are practicing residential segregation from fear of public interaction. Fearing the general public undermines what a true metropolitan citizen. Calderia is suggesting that there is an overall lack of trust between cultures. In addition, creating fortified enclaves is not the ideal solution to poverty. Her argument is that socially homogeneous urban residents are fleeing to secured neighborhoods to protect themselves from the poor. In her words, “isolated community, a secure environment, in which one can use various facilities and services and live only among equals” rejects what a metro environment stands for.”(306)
Calderia addresses an excellent point on misuse of class power. Affluent residents of Sao Paulo abuse class power by literally defining their social status. I feel advertising superiority from the less established is wrong on many levels especially in Sao Paulo’s case example. The community tries to practice social order to prevent contact with inferior classes through spatial segregation. However, how is “separation between two entrances” going to prevent contact? Why would these fortified enclaves employ the very population they fear? Alienation of this kind unnecessarily humiliates the working class and Paulista elites look like a fool for hiring people they fear.
The following is irrelevant to Calderia’s writings on fortified enclaves, but this is bog so I’d like to take a moment and vent. After reading Caldeira’s theory on spatial segregation from societal fear and how Sao Paulo has walled neighborhoods…I started thinking of the Iraqi neighborhoods. Talk about neighborhoods living in fear! Here’s a community that even if they wanted to hide from unruly violence and create their own safe neighborhood, they have U.S. soldiers and in the face dictating how a functioning community operates. Meanwhile back home in the US our cities are being socially segregated through class rather then religion. Maybe we should practice what we war.
Posted by Valerie at 09:54 AM | Permalink | Add a Comment (1)
Comments
valerie, i think that you bring up so many great points. you are right that it is so easy to think at first that america would be the last place to find such drastic (and intentional) class disparities. it is readings like caldiera's that make us think twice about exactly what our society is upholding as its norms. i think that so much of your entry is really telling of something that not many people often realize; the situation of social segregation and stratafication in sao paulo is obviously unacceptable, but in america in cities like los angeles (and many others elsewhere) our society has been practicing this kind of stratification and has permeated it into so many different aspects of our lives that it has become institutionalized, undiscussed and accepted.
Posted by: amber | March 30, 2007 03:36 PM
April 02, 2007
Lebbeus Woods
Check this architect/philosopher/poet out. He calls for an architecture that effects change instead of stasis and is extremely political.
Smewhere in the city, the life of the favela was eating away the roots of the serene white towers, a transformation that their electronic surveillance systems would never detect. (Lebbeus Woods)
Posted by Gregory Narr at 10:36 PM | Permalink | Add a Comment (0)
Woods 911
This is Woods's installation for a site at ground zero. He laments "the deeper wound, the trauma itself -- embodied in the fall and its memory -- is examined only in medical and academic quarters, far from public forums and discussions."
Woods wants architects to build catastrophe into buildings, where the order of a building can shift into something entirely different given an external event that forces the original order to disintegrate.
Posted by Gregory Narr at 10:40 PM | Permalink | Add a Comment (0)