Memo 1 Gentrification

Gerard Johnson
Soc 241
Memo #1
Readings: Ruth Glass, “Aspects of Change” (The Gentrification Debates), Neil Smith, “A Short
History of Gentrification” (The Gentrification Debates), Steven C. Bourassa, “The Rent Gap
Debunked” (Library)
Key Concepts from the Readings:
Major Themes:
All of the articles for last week’s reading analyzed gentrification not just through the lens
of redevelopment, cultural change that manifests through economic commodities, and new
neighbors. They also focused on the material and economic process that interlock and exacerbate
housing revitalization revealing how land becomes commodified, taken out of its context as a
home and its value being estimated on the housing market. The gentrification process is parasitic
and can be seen as spreading rapidly like a disease and “Once this process of ‘gentrification’
starts in a district it goes rapidly until all or most of the original working class occupiers are
displaced, and the whole social character of the district is changed”(Glass 23). In the urban
landscape of the twenty-first century, this can be visualized spatially when buildings close to a
central anchor institution start to develop and assume modern characteristics through
monochromatic colors and sleek cubist architecture while across the street there is a brick row
home. The clash of old and new, modern and antiquity, and class struggles all take place on land
and the process and construction, demolition and reconstruction is nothing new. “The emergence
of gentrification can be traced to the post war cities of the advanced cities of the advanced
capitalist world, there are significant precursors”(Smith 31). Friedrich Engles was a keen social
observer and he recognized that there was “the efficient concealment of “grime and misery” from
“the eyes of the wealthy men and women” residing in the outer ring”(Smith 32). Back then,
Engles recognized the two different worlds there were in a city. He noted how people of a higher
economic status would unethically displace residents of lower economic status “wholesale
displacement took place at the hands of landlords, merchants, and wealthier citizens.”
It seems wherever the wealthy averted their gaze and found desirable they could displace
and had more rights than other citizens purely based on their class position and interlocking
directorates. What is unique is that the wealthy seemed to live in the periphery according to
Engles. The process of gentrification now is reversed in that “the dramatic suburbanization of the
urban landscape encouraged a comparative disinvestment at the center”(Smith 35). What is
unique is how the city is at a stage where class and therefore land struggles change over time.
Cities in the United States were once destinations of internal and international migration and
because of industrialization, they were places of economic progress, but when industrialization
left the economic revenue left the city as well. As a result, the upkeep of the city soon fell. Many
major industrial centers experienced disinvestment which caused a range of different social
formations where certain populations followed jobs and moved away from the city as it became
stigmatized and associated with blight.
Cities eventually became attractive again. People began to move into cities because they
were affordable and had well paying jobs. The process is called gentrification and now it
happens when wealthy populations have rediscovered the city and found it desirable. When they
return, they go into neighborhoods that were previously disinvested in and overtime their
presence disrupts the social and cultural fabric of a neighborhood. Once the neighborhood is
deemed as safe and family oriented, then a significant number of the original inhabitants of these
gentrified neighborhoods get displaced due to the raising of rents to unaffordable level, “urban
development in capitalist economies tend to involve a cyclical process of investment ,
disinvestment and reinvestment”(Bourassa 2). This is because late capitalism requires modes of
production that are opportunistic and business ethics that do not intersect with morality.
Looking at the macro causes of gentrification, city governments can become complicit in
the process because one of their main duties becomes trying to sell the city and everything that
comes with city life. For example, “the quality of city life is now seen by many city governments
as a key to sell the city to prospective middle class residents, to lure them back from the suburbs.
This last point is related to the idea of urban government as entrepreneur rather than manager, a
change noted by David Harvey 15 years ago”(Harvey 1989; 59). City governments and
developers have turned cities into commodities open to a free global market which leads to
competition between cities. Because of technological and managerial class advancements, those
citizens who do not fall into the economic bubble associated with affluence are sacrificed for
luxury and the amenities of the financial elites. City governments often overlook the “negative
aspects, with the possible exception of displacement, are often overlooked by those interested in
the benefits of rehabilitation… of all the problems accompanying private market renewal the
most serious is displacement” (Berry 45). When you are displaced you have to deal with the
fourth highest killer in the United States which is poverty. In many cities displacement is
problematic and is often connected to systematic racism because of the racial character of
gentrification. In the interest of capital, developers purposefully target zones with higher
populations of Black citizens and gentrify their communities. The poverty and poor
environmental conditions that Black urban residents are exposed to leads to a number of
challenges and displacement makes things even harder.
Because there is a void of affordable housing, rent laws and fixation this new managerial
class can economically and socially distance themselves in the city and colonize an area through
higher metal gates, hiring security and increased police presence (Atkinson and Bridge 2010).
These new residents of a higher class are listened to by the city government when they make
requests for public amenities or services. This causes cities to be the battlespace of different class
interests. Cities are always looking to increase the amount of money they have available; as a
result, they jump through hoops trying to maintain their newfound middle class that is generating
more revenue for the city (Ley 1994). In doing so, city governments create policies that end up
punishing the poor but at the same time there are no protective or fallback measures in place so it
becomes a lose-lose for poor residents displaced by gentrification because their needs are not
considered.

Memo 1 Gentrification

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Memo 1 Gentrification

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Memo 1 Gentrification

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gerard Johnson

Key Concepts from the Readings:

You might also like