Final Thoughts...

The major underlying theme of this blog is the effects of wealth inequality in the urban environment. All but the first two blogs, have elements of class struggle in them. Whether it be; poor food options in American inner cities or the displacement of indigenous people in Brazil from their land so that Cargill can plant soybeans or the residents and businesspeople losing Atlantic City to the Casino industry to class bias that erected the border around Temple University to developers and city planners initiating gentrification in working class neighborhoods. These class inequalities manifest themselves in many different and they can seem too overwhelming to address. How can these class inequalities be solved?

Can neighborhood members from the communities surrounding Temple stand up to The University’s front office and the parents of affluent students and demand less cops and more community partnership initiatives that address the reasons for petty economic crime? Can residents of East Kensington take a stand against the rich developers and powerful bureaucrats who continue to gentrify and displace people in working class neighborhoods? Will residents in Atlantic City ever be able to truly benefit from millions of people who visit there city?

Gentrification Fieldwork

For my gentrification fieldwork I have decided to concentrate on East Kensington. Presently I am an intern at the New Kensington CDC in the Economic Development office. Going to school and learning about the potential displacement that occurs as a result of gentrification and working at a CDC whose job it is to bring “development” and capital back into working class neighborhoods is interesting. A question I often ask myself is, can economic development and gentrification be mutually exclusive? My fieldwork reveals that the East Kensington section of Philadelphia is an area in transition, an area the process of being gentrified.

I began my walk at the CDC which is located at 2521 Frankford Ave. I made a right on to E. Cumberland St. As I walk down Cumberland I notice large disparities between the conditions of many of the houses. There are City sealed shells next to homes with completely new windows, a new door and cleaned and refurbished brick work. Building condition consistence seems to be a good way to determine whether or not an area is undergoing gentrification. In East Kensington there is no consistency but the increasing appearance of refurbished homes reveals that a change is going.

I took a left as I reached Coral street. On Coral and E. Hagert St I encountered a local bar. The bar seemed to be geared towards a Latino audience because the sign above the door had the Puerto Rican flag on it. After the bar I finally reached the Coral Street Arts house which is a project that was accomplished by the New Kensington CDC. The Coral Street Arts House offers low income arts affordable apartment and studio space. The picture to the right was taken from a vacant lot adjacent to the arts house. Can artists be considered Urban pioneers? Like the Kardon building in my previous entry about Temple, the Coral Street Arts house is a renovated industrial building. The building’s brick work is so new looking that the building really stands out from the rest of the neighborhood. It seems almost as though this building and all the new fence work and pavement was airlifted into this spot. The building seems to represent the impeding gentrification of East Kensington. I asked a local resident who was passing by me taking a picture of the Arts House how he felt about it he replied, “I’m not to sure exactly what goes on in the Arts house but I know its construction has contributed to a rise in my property value.” While this is a good thing for a homeowner in East Kensington, it certainly is a bad thing for a renter who will almost certainly experience rent increases.

Continuing further down Coral St, I encountered urban juxtaposition. A closed and boarded up row of two houses, right next to a brick building that was being completely gutted and refurbished by a team of at least 8 men. Again this structural inconsistency is an indication that gentrification is actually taking place. Where will people who can longer afford to live in East Kensington?
The final significant thing I encountered during my walk along Coral St. was very close to Coral and Front St. The reason noticed this thing was for 2 reasons, the first was because it was barking at me quite ferociously and the second was because of a conversation I had had with my boss at NKCDC a few days earlier. My boss told me that one indication that gentrification is underway is the way people use dogs and the kind of dogs they own. She claimed that in the later stages of gentrification small dogs are usually pets that live in the house and are walked once a day. In neighborhoods that are still in the early stages of gentrification or ungentrified working class neighborhoods, dogs are usually large, live outside and their primary function is for protection and not pet pleasure. What can one do in the early stages of Gentrification to make sure that too many people are not displaced?

Industry Fieldwork

The areas surrounding Temple University’s campus are an example of post-industrial urban landscape. Before the train tracks at 12th and Berks lies Temple University’s campus which is heavily populated by students, staff and visitors during daylight hours. Walking down Berks toward the SEPTA regional rail stop, I was struck by the row of Temple banners down Berks. These banners seem to demarcate places that Temple University approves of. Everything that surrounds the banners is well maintained and always relatively populated including the public housing develop on Berks.

The first sign of industry I encountered was Philadelphia Management’s Kardon Building. The exterior of this building is in excellent condition. It seems as though it had been rehabilitated recently. What purpose did the Kardon Building serve before it was up-scale housing for college students? I don’t think the surrounding community stands to benefit much from the Kardon Building. The only benefit it could bring is perhaps some jobs to the area. What kind of wages does the Kardon Building pay? What is the living wage for some living in North Philadelphia? I wonder what kind of activities took place inside of the Kardon building and what was the relationship of the business to the surrounding communities?

Continuing down Berks I crossed under the train underpass. Past the underpass there are no more Temple banners, curiously this is also where there are many vacant lots and boarded up row home shells. The next sign of industry I encountered was the PWD building which is right after the under pass. The building is not nearly as old as the Kardon Building, however the style seems similar to my high school which would put it’s erection sometime in the 1960s-70s. Like Temple buildings, the PWD is looks like a small fortress with barbed wire fences, security cameras, and scan card entry doors. The building certainly does not add anything to the neighborhood, again except for jobs. How much skill, training and education does one need to work at PWD?

Across from the PWD compound there are a few row homes and vacant lots. The houses do not seem well maintained and the vacant lots are filled with trash and overgrowth. This kind of blight must be an effect of deindustrialization. What is the mean income of people who live behind Temple University? Where do they work? At the time I was at the corner of Berks and N. 9th there did not seem to be any people walking around except some within the PWD compound. This whole scene contrasts Temple’s campus which is just 2 blocks away. Temple’s campus is well-maintained and heavily populated. This area looks like its maybe even in another country. I am curious as to how the existence of the Kardon building has affected rent prices in this part of the city.

As I turned the corner onto N. 9th St. and then took a right onto Montgomery St. (heading back to Temple’s campus) I noticed an old Train track which pushed right up against the back of the Kardon building. This piqued my interest even more as to what purpose the Kardon building served when it was actually a functioning warehouse, factory or mill. These tracks like the Kardon building can no longer carry out their intended purpose. It seems that in the post-industrial city there are two options for obsolete structures, like Kardon turn them into housing or entertainment facilities for affluent people or let them rot like the train tracks.

Securing Temple's Ivory (Bell) Tower

When Matt Davis spoke to our class he talked a great deal about the importance of community partnerships. He discussed a future community center project that would be shared by both the students of Temple University and members from the surrounding community. He also discussed the possibility of mixed housing. While I believe these are some of the most important initiatives that Temple University should undertake, these ideas are not conceivable considering the current state of Temple’s main campus. In fact it seems Temple does everything in its power to “protect” the “students, employees, and visitors” from the surrounding neighborhoods.1 Temple officials have fabricated a border around the university using armed “professional law enforcement officers,” “a security division,” “state-of-the-art communications system,” and “an extensive lighting system.”2 Temple claims the purpose of this fortification is to “prevent” crime and to “improve the quality of life [on campus].”3 I believe the border around Temple University’s campus shares many similarities with the militarized border dividing the United States from Mexico. I believe this border is a primary reason why community partnerships and bridge-building initiatives are unfeasible at this point in time.

When surveying the literature released by the Temple University Police department concerning the organization’s raison d’etre one is struck by how much the word “prevention” is used. In fact the police department’s motto is “Prevention, Partnership and Pride.”4 While this entire motto will be broken down throughout course of this essay, “prevention” is the first word that will be analyzed. By using the word “prevention,” the Temple Police assume that the viewer of the “campus safety services” video already has a certain perception of the areas surrounding Temple University’s campus. This of course is a negative and most likely racist/class-biased view that equates the working class neighborhoods surrounding Temple as unruly and very dangerous. When watching the “Campus Safety Services” video one is given the impression that without the armed bike patrol, “state-of-the art” security system, and the “extensive lighting” system a person’s safety on Temple’s campus would be in serious question.

In his extensive book on the US/Mexico border Joseph Nevins states, “Discourse always operates in the service of particular interests of power. As such, discourse can help to construct territories and boundaries and those who belong within, the ‘we’ as well as the ‘they’ or ‘other.’ By establishing binary oppositions between ‘us’ and ‘them,’ discourse reinforces group identity.”5 Instead of focusing its “discourse” on the historical and structural reasons for potential economic crime in the areas surrounding Temple University’s Main Campus and possible solutions to these problems, the “Campus Safety Services” video only talks about how it achieves “safety” for “students, staff and visitors.” The surrounding neighborhoods are not mentioned at all in the video, it can be implied that the surrounding areas are so dangerous that Temple has been forced to establish a militarized boundary around the campus. This discourse establishes Nevins’ “binary” of “us” and “them.” “Us” being Temple’s “students, staff and visitors” and “them” being those people who live in the surrounding communities which are thought to be very dangerous. Temple can be viewed as a nation-state, in order to be a legal citizen you must live, work or study within its borders and of course you must always have your proof of citizenship (owl card ID).

As Nevins also suggests this border discourse also “reinforces group identity.” One can assume that this video production was made with a specific audience in mind. One of the key commentators in this video is Scott Alessandro. Alessandro is the assistant director of the Temple University honors program. Alessandro states with all the conviction and demeanor of your favorite car salesman, “I have no hesitation telling prospective students and their parents that Temple is a safe place to learn.”6 Why would producers feature Alessandro as a spokesman for the University above all others? Most likely the reason is because it is his job to attract “honor students” to the university. A prospective Temple University honor student is a specific kind of student from a particular place. Most people who are in the Temple University honors program enter as freshman. The Temple Honors website states, “Entering first year students are automatically selected for admission to the Honors Certificate Program based on SAT scores and high school GPA.”7 There is a strong class correlation between SAT scores and class status. Harold Berlak asserts, “What standardized achievement tests appear to predict best are parents' wealth and scores on other similarly constructed tests. As reported by Peter Sacks, socio-economic class accounts for approximately 50 percent of the variance in SAT test scores. He estimates that for every additional $10,000 in family income, a person on average gains 30 points on the SAT.”8 It is common knowledge that America’s wealthiest citizens are predominantly white and are overwhelming from segregated suburbs.

By creating a guarded border between Temple (“us”) and the surrounding working-class neighborhoods (“them”), Temple hopes to make affluent white suburbanites feel (as the first male to speak in the security services video states) “more at home.”9 This border “reinforces” most prospective “honor students’” class group identity by making them feel as though it is unsafe where there are no red banners, or where there is not a bicycle cop on patrol i.e. where the poor people live. This perspective is cultivated in the often racially segregated affluent suburbs (or home). The “prevention” in the Temple University police motto can be interpreted as “prevention” of affluent students from not coming to or leaving the university for fear of the surrounding working class predominantly African American and Latino neighborhoods. Aside from similar discourses surrounding the reason for their existence, both the US/Mexico and Temple University borders share “state-of-the art” technologies that were previously only available to the military.


The first time I drew a comparison between the US/Mexico border and Temple University’s campus was during a walk I was taking at night on campus. The campus’ infamous lighting (in the name of security) system reminded me so much of images in my mind from my time studying along the border last year. Soon I began to notice the overwhelming presence of the police especially at night as well as the alarming abundance of surveillance cameras present throughout campus. Armed men, lights and cameras; Temple had its own border it was just on a bit of a smaller scale. Temple uses some of the same technology to police its border as the US Border Patrol. Peter Andreas and Richard Price in their article From War Fighting to Crime Fighting believe that the line between law enforcement and the US military is blurring. One of the examples they cite regarding this phenomenon is the use of “military hardware and technology for police use.”10 Andreas and Price state, “Technologies previously off-limits to law enforcement are now being converted for border control tasks. For example, The Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Office of Technology has worked with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to use ‘face trace’ technology, which allows the Border Patrol to identify individuals by scanning their facial structures and matching them to out standing warrants.”11 The Temple University police website claims that Temple University detectives use, “facial composite software to help identify offenders.”12 All the officers, lights, cameras and “state-of-art technology” used to defend the 500 yard radius around Temple University campus does not solve the problems of the surrounding community that lead to petty economic crime. The same is true for the US/Mexico border, all the billions of dollars the government spends on technology, arms and agents does not address the problems that lead people to cross the border nor does it stop them from doing so.

Large-scale community partnership efforts, making University resources available to community members and bridge building initiatives could in the long run begin to address the problems that force people to petty economic crime. This is not unfortunately the kind of “partnership” the Temple University police are referring to when they use the word in their motto. The kind of partnership the police are referring to is one between themselves and Temple’s students. This thinking can be seen in the “community outreach” section of their website which includes activities like “Coffee with the Cops” in the (ID required) library. This event would be amazing if neighborhood community members were allowed to engage in dialogue with both Temple’s police as well as students. But they don’t, this is just another attempt to “prevent” “honor student” from leaving school.

Building borders by using arms and surveillance around the campus I would assume would eventually create feelings of resentment in community members. However, some kind of survey would have to be devised in order to prove this point. I would imagine the guns, lighting and cameras must not seem too inviting or friendly. Creating a policed border around campus is an effort by University officials to make campus life as “normal” as possible. Temple is situated in a unique area and thus our experiences here should be equally as unique. They are trying to erase the surrounding community instead of embracing it. As mentioned before these efforts “reinforce group identity” which usually means the identity of white affluent students from the suburbs. This means that in some cases their horizons are not broadened and they still maintain a feeling of superiority/fear towards working class people. As Temple GUS/Social Science students we should question the militarized border around campus. We should plead for less funding for “face trace” technology an more for community-bridging workshops, mixed residences and more sharing of our vast resources. Will cops with guns, cameras and all the lights of Las Vegas make any social change?

Author’s Note: There are still many comparisons that can be draw between the US/Mexico and Temple borders. A large research paper which explores things like the history of the Temple Police department, funding, segregation of honors students, Mike Davis' discussion of LA archiechture, community sentiments, and the meaning of “safety” would truly do the subject justice.

The Security Services Promo Video can be seen here: http://css.ocis.temple.edu/about_us/video.aspx

Photo Credits in Acending Order:
1. www.temple.edu.
2. The Sun Never Sets on the British Empire and........ Temple University?
Taken From the security services website: http://css.ocis.temple.edu
3-4. Take from www.borderpatrol.com This is a horrid website. Don't check it out.

Works Cited.
1. "Temple University Campus Safety Services." Temple University. 03 May 2006 http://css.ocis.temple.edu/.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4.Ibid.
5. Nevins, Joseph. Operation Gatekeeper: the Rise of the Illegal Alien and the Making of the US/Mexico Boundary. New York: Routledge, 2002. 159-164.
6. Campus Safety Services.
7. "Honors Applicants." Temple University Honors Program. Temple University. 03 May 2006 http://www.temple.edu/honors/news.htm.
8. Berlak, Harold. "Race and the Achievement Gap." Rethinking Schools 15 (2001). 03 May 2006 http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/15_04/Race154.shtml.
9. Campus Safety Service.
10. Andreas, Peter, and Richard Price. "From War Fighting to Crime Fighting: Transforming the American National Security State." International Studies Review 3 (2001): 31-52.
11. Ibid.
12. Campus Safety Services.

Double Juxtaposition in Atlantic City.

As a non-resident to the mid-Atlantic region, "Atlantic City" are two words I may have overheard my grandmother use once when I was a little boy. I knew absolutely nothing of the place except that gambling was legal. When I first arrived at Temple University one thing that struck me about my mid-Atlantic peers was their unanimous disdain for Atlantic City. Almost every person I came into contact with would either snicker about the place or relay some kind of shocking horror story about their experiences there. To my peers Atlantic City was not a place where people lived and worked but rather "The Armpit of the East", "a good place to lose money" and "a shithole". Apparently Atlantic City had no redeeming qualities and was only worthy of jokes and insults.

Middle class Temple University students are not the only ones who think of Atlantic City in this way. In my research I came across texts which conveyed the same sort of notions as my University peers (though perhaps a bit more eloquently). Ovid Demaris’ The Boardwalk Jungle not only aligns with the "Armpit of the East" mentality it also identifies the characteristics of the city which contributed to this prestigious title. Demaris states,

"After forty years of corrosive decay, this blighted slum of a city is now
called South Bronx by the Sea. Only one block from the Boardwalk, and
just about anywhere one chooses to look, there are burned-out and boarded-up
shops and homes, rubbish-littered parking lots, and beyond them more vacant
lots equally strewn with weeds and garbage. It is one vast, crumbling, burned
out ghetto populated by impoverished minorities." (Demaris 1986)

This account explains the negative attitudes towards the city but it lacks the critical depth to explain exactly which forces made the conditions in Atlantic City a reality. This blog entry will attempt to identify these forces.

My first short day trip to Atlantic City did not allow me to investigate the city as I had hoped. For the most part my day was characterized by loud smoky windowless rooms, watered down coke and Grandma slipping me dimes for the Frank Sinatra slot machine. We did walk on the Boardwalk and it was this place that piqued my interest even more. On the Atlantic City Boardwalk, rows of Disney World-esque mega-structures push up against the beach. While there were quite a few people on the Boardwalk, for a warm mid-May day the beach was pretty desolate. It quickly became obvious that not many people go to Atlantic City for the beaches. I wondered if the beach and the environment as a whole were in the same condition as the surrounding city.

There is a strong link between the gambling casinos of Atlantic City and the poor state of the surrounding city and the potential poor state of its environment. The casinos of Atlantic City cater to 30 million yearly visitors and bring in about $5 billion dollars annually (Simon 2004). With that kind of revenue casinos have a tremendous amount of power not only in Atlantic City but also in New Jersey. The tax revenues alone could easily start many initiatives to rebuild Atlantic City and protect the environment. Yet evidence of a trickle down from casinos to the community and environment is almost non-existent. Is it possible that casinos benefit from the "Armpit of the East" reputation the city has achieved?

Atlantic City has a double juxtaposition. First, the New Jersey Coast pushes right up against a long strip of high rise resort casinos. Then these casinos push up against miles of urban blight. The accounts of my Temple peers, my accounts and the authors cited above are all reflections on this unique double juxtaposition. Both the ocean and Atlantic City seem to clash against the daunting high rise casinos. I believe that the casinos are having an adverse affect on the coastline as well as are partially to blame for the complete deterioration of Atlantic City.

R.W. Butler states in his widely recognized paper The Concept of a Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution,

"[The] evolution [of a resort] is brought about by a variety of factors
including changes in the preferences and needs of visitors, the gradual deterioration and possible replacement of physical plant and facilities,
and the change (or even disappearance) of the original natural and
cultural attractions which were responsible for the popularity of the area." (Butler 1980)

This "evolution" also known as The Resort Cycle took place in Atlantic City. In mid-1950s and 1960s America many societal changes were taking place and that would have a profound affect on "the preferences and needs of visitors' to Atlantic City. As Butler's theory predicts, these changes led to the deterioration of "the original natural and cultural attractions" of the old Atlantic City.

One of the changes taking place in America around this time was the accessibility of air travel to the middle class. With this new development mid-Atlantic and New England residents that once filled the Boardwalk could now go to resorts all around the country. Arguably the resort that benefited most from the emergence of cheap air travel was Disneyland in Anaheim, California (Simon 2004). Disney revolutionized the tourism industry and around its opening in 1955 tourists had not seen or experienced anything like it. The Disneyland experience was the new preference of the middle class. The businessmen of Atlantic City were left scrambling on the Jersey shore to find ways to salvage the waning flow of customers (Simon 2004). Despite many creative attempts at updating, Atlantic City descended into what Butler labels as the "decline stage" of the Resort Cycle. Butler states a characteristic of the "decline stage" as, "More tourist facilities disappear as the area becomes less attractive to tourists and the viability of other tourist facilities becomes more questionable" (Butler 1980). As the decline stage began to gradually eat away at Atlantic City from the mid-1950s to well into the 1960s, a uniquely American process would guarantee the city's destruction.

The Civil Rights movement forever changed the face of American Society. The movement ended with the adoption of various national legislations which made institutional segregation illegal. For the first time in American history, African Americans would be able to enjoy full equality under the law. One of the unintentional consequences of the Civil Rights Movement was "white flight". "White flight" is considered to be the mass exodus of affluent and middle class white people from the city to the suburbs. This mass movement was fuelled by racist anxieties over the new freedoms now guaranteed to all African Americans.

It could be inferred that by the time Civil Rights legislation took into affect many middle class residents and businessmen were already leaving Atlantic City due to problems resulting from the "decline stage". Bryant Simon talks about in great detail the history of exclusion and segregation in Atlantic City. The following passage reflects the racist sentiments of many affluent and middle class whites around the late 60s early 70s in America.

"The message was clear. Blacks were to blame for much of what
was wrong with the country, for the muggings, murders, riots, lootings,
and fires that plagued the nation's cities. On a day-to-day basis, the
stereotypes turned just about every working-class African American male
into a threat to social order. The message was prescriptive as well.
At home and on vacation, places marked as black were places to be
avoided at all costs. Once Atlantic City got on that list of black places,
it got taken off the map of white middle-class America." (Simon 2004)

The middle class "white flight" mentality crippled much of what was still surviving from the "decline stage" in Atlantic City. According to Simon, those who could leave did both white and black. Those that stayed could do nothing but watch their city decay.
After about a decade in the "decline stage", Demaris described parts of Atlantic City as looking like "Dresden" (Demaris 1986). Those that remained lived in dire poverty and many even had to resort to crime to survive. There is no denying that at this point, Atlantic City was in need of solutions to the many problems that had incurred during the "decline stage" and "white flight". What the city and residents received were even bigger problems with almost no hope for solutions.

Gambling was presented to the residents of Atlantic City as a "panacea", meaning no matter what the problem (unemployment, urban decay or race relations) casinos would fix it (Simon 2004). In 1980, four years after the referendum to legalize gambling in Atlantic City passed R.W. Butler in his famous article on the "Resort Cycle" credited Atlantic City with being "a successful redevelopment" project which "renewed growth and expansion" (Butler 1980). While it may be true that there was "growth" and "expansion" as a result of the legalization of gambling in Atlantic City the initiative was the furthest thing from a "panacea."
Many of the remaining restaurateurs and businesspeople in Atlantic City were eagerly awaiting this answer to their prayers. Most of these people wedded the idea of millions returning to Atlantic City with overflow to their establishments and the return of profits. These people must have been unfamiliar with the industry they had invited to their city. Bryant Simon states, "Bally's architects and their followers deliberately manufactured [a] sense of placelessness, laying out their buildings to make sure no one accidentally stumbled across the ocean, a local Italian restaurant, or a city street" (Simon 2004). It seems that it is against the very nature of casinos to allow the kind of spill over the businesspeople of Atlantic City had expected. After all contained in the casinos is everything one could possibly want on the outside (food, souvenirs etc) plus the added bonus of gambling which has the potential of making one rich.

Ovid Demaris recalls, "Junket bus conductors instruct their passengers not to leave the casinos." "It's dangerous," they say. "It's a rip-off city, it's a jungle out there" "Just getting there can also be hazardous. Buses and cars traveling the Atlantic City Expressway are often ambushed by rock and bottle throwing vandals who live in slum housing near the Expressway" (Demaris 1986). The return of the white middle class to Atlantic City did not mean that they shed the racial anxieties (maintained in the homogenous suburbs) that had originally helped repel them for this “black place”. The above passage proves that casinos must make efforts to tame their customers' fear of "the jungle". Above Bryant Simon comments on how casino architecture is designed to keep people inside of casinos. If this idea is put into dialogue with Mike Davis' discussion of the "Fortress City", it could be argued that it is in the interest of the casinos to keep certain people inside and certain people outside of their establishments. Mike Davis states,

"The 'Second Civil War' that began in the long hot summers of the 1960s has
been institutionalized into the very structure of urban space. In cities on the bad
edge of post- modernity one sees an unprecedented tendency to merge urban design
architecture and the police apparatus into a single comprehensive security effort."
(Davis 1990)

The picture is an example of a "Fortress" Casino in Atlantic City. Notice how every structure is connected so that patrons do not have to step foot on the surface of the Atlantic City "jungle". Also notice that there is no main entrance. In order to enter the Showboat complex (from street side) you must park your car in the far right parking garage and walk to the hotel/casino from there. One can enter the Showboat from the Boardwalk but it is quite a long walk from the street. At the Boardwalk entrance one is greeted by cameras and a security guard (just in case anyone gets any ideas). Also it can be inferred that the sight of security guards at the door and excessive amounts of cameras both inside and outside of the casino may give some the impression that there is something to be feared.

It seems that the nature of "fortress" casinos coupled with the devastating effects of white flight has led to the complete disparity between the multi-million-dollar casinos of the Atlantic City boardwalk and the "Dresden"- like surrounding neighborhoods. It is against nature of the casino industry to let customers roam out and support local businesses. The only element of Atlantic City that may lure customers away from the assumed "safety" of the casinos is the ocean. The casinos of Atlantic City are now starting to expand their businesses to the beach. This expansion does have environmental consequences.

During the summer, one could argue, it would be hard for casinos to keep patrons off the beach. Casinos are aware of this and have extended their operations to the beach in the form of "beach bars". An AP article states, "The seasonal bars, which operate between May 1 and Sept. 30, offer seaside drinking, snacks and live music on the sand. Since their debut in 1999, they have become increasingly bigger and more varied in their offerings" (AP 2005). As a result of this latest trend almost every casino along the Boardwalk has hastily put up beach bars. Coincidentally almost every casino has received serious fines for environmental code violations. Perhaps the most environmentally hazardous was Caesar's who paid $17,500 for not dismantling its entire "Sand Box" bar after last season (AP 2005).
Casinos were wrong for Atlantic City. Communities must learn from the city's mistakes.

All pictures taken by Jordan Catalano under the tutelage of Ryan Petersen. Please feel free to take these pictures. All were taken in early November 2005 for a paper prepared for Dr. James Abbott.

Picture 1. This tile artwork is very deceiving, it depicts African Americans beinheydayve in the leisure activities of Atlantic City during its "Golden Age." Atlantic City during its hayday was a heavily segregated place. African Americans were segregated to one section of the city and along the Boardwalk their only place was serving white people.

Picture 2. This pictures shows the juxtaposition between the Jersey shoreline and the Atlantic City skyline.

Picture 3. This picture shows the juxtaposition between a crumbling vacant Atlantic City school arestaurantridge Hotel & Resort Casino.

Picture 4. This is a picture of a dilapidated hotel and restuarant just off the Boardwalk.

Picture 5. This is a picture of the "Showboat" "fortress" casino. The Showboat is at the end of the Boardwalk. This is also where the development stops. Notice how bare the area that surrounds the casino is.

Picture 6. This is an advertisement for the "Sand Box" beach bar.

Picture 7. This is a picture of sad dead plant foregrounding the large footprint between the Atlantic City convention center and the Tropicana Resort Casino.

Works Cited.

Butler, R.w. "The Concept of a Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution: Implications for Management of Resources." The Canadian Geographer (1980): 5-12.

Davis, Mike. City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. London: Verso, 1990. 221-265.

Demaris, Ovid. The Boardwalk Jungle. New York: Bantam, 1986.

"DEP fines two more Atlantic City casinos over beach bars." Associated Press 13 July 2005.

Simon, Bryant. Boardwalk of Dreams: Atlantic City and the Fate of Urban America. New York: Oxford UP, 2004.

An Environmental Ethical Dilemma That Costs a Dollar.

In the communities that surround Temple’s campus there are very few healthy food choice options. The healthiest option for most of the working class people that live in this part of North Philadelphia probably would be contained in Cousin’s Market at 233 W. Lehigh. Ideally the best foods to buy would be a wide array of fresh produce, lean meat, and whole-grain products. Considering the soaring prices of produce around the country it can by implied that fresh vegetables and fruits are out of reach to many North Philadelphians on a budget. Also lean cuts of beef and pork as well as chicken breast are the healthiest as well as the most expensive meats available. I know as a college student I usually can not afford to eat as healthy as I would like to. I imagine the struggle to buy healthy foods is even harder for those trying to shop with a very limited budget and maybe harder for those with more than one mouth to feed. While shopping healthy at Cousin’s market (a store that in many cases is very far away for a person without a car) would probably be tough for most working class people and families in North Philadelphia, finding cheap food at fast food restaurants is not. Along North Broad Street there seems to be a fast food restaurant every 3 or 4 blocks. From McDonald’s to Checkers to Popeye’s to Wendy’s to KFC almost every major fast food chain has property on North Broad Street. McDonald’s has two restaurants only a few miles apart from each other; one near Temple and one closer to Girard. Doctors Debra Franko and Hortensia Amaro have made connections between limited access to healthy options in working class urban areas, fast food and obesity.

Franko and Amaro state,

“Historically, poor people used to be the leanest, by virtue of malnutrition. The modern rise in obesity in poor and ethnic minority groups is due primary to changes in the social landscape. Obesity results from an imbalance between caloric intake and energy expenditure, both of which disproportionately affect urban poor. Quality fruits, vegetables and whole-grain products are more expensive and less accessible than cheap high-fat foods. Advertising dollars also have an impact. McDonald’s alone spent $1.1 billion on advertising in 2001; the government’s budget for a pro-fruit and vegetable campaign was $1.1 million. A recent study found that people in the poorest urban areas have 2 ½ times more exposure to fast-food outlets than people in the wealthiest category.”1

Franko and Amaro make perfectly clear that there are not many healthy options for working class people living in Urban America. I believe one point that Franko and Amaro do not emphasize enough is the lure of cheap food. A Recent New York Times article discussed the significance of McDonald’s “Dollar Menu,”

“The enormous success of the Dollar Menu, where all items cost a dollar, has helped stimulate 36 consecutive months of sales growth at stores open at least a year. In three years, revenue has increased 33 percent and its shares have rocketed 170 percent, a remarkable turnaround for a company that only seemed to be going nowhere 4 years ago.”2

A photograph of McDonald’s dollar menu can be seen to the right. The two token healthy options on the dollar menu are “Apple Dippers” (pictured) and a bottle of Dasani Water. Certainly no one would be satisfied with this as their meal. Despite the obvious health concerns that arise from over consumption of fast food, there is also an environmental ethical dilemma attached to eating at McDonald’s. In order to make food cheaper McDonalds had to make a spending cut somewhere. One of these spending cuts, which could be related to the low prices of the Dollar Menu, came from the Amazon rain forests of Brazil and Argentina in the form of cheap soy chicken feed.

A December 11, 2004 front page article from the Lexington Herald News states,

“A soybean boom is sweeping South America like a gold rush. Farmers with soy fever are plowing by moonlight, speculating in jungles and dreaming of digging new canals to carry their soybeans from the continent’s vast and fertile interior to Atlantic and Pacific ports.”3

In 2001, Cargill the world’s largest private company, announced plans to build two grain silos, a $20 m terminal and its own port on heavily forested land near Santarem, Brazil. This event was the precipitant for the “gold rush” described above. 4 A recent article in London’s The Guardian reports on a Greenpeace study that links Cargill’s initial activities in the Amazon to McDonald’s restaurants in Europe.

During the present “soybean boom” ambitious potential farmers seize public and indigenous lands, then using bulldozers and even slave labor these people plowed “virgin forests” for the purpose of planting soybeans. 5 Cargill provides farmers with seeds and agrochemicals to grow hundreds of thousands of tons of soybeans a year. 6 Much of this soy is trucked to Cargill’s silos in Santarem where it is transformed into chicken feed. This feed is then shipped to Sun Valley (a Cargill subsidiary) which provides chickens to all Mcdonald’s franchises throughout Europe.

The effects of Cargill’s and McDonald’s actions are having disastrous effects on the fragile environment of the Amazon rainforest. Greenpeace states, “The scale of deforestation due to soya expansion driven in part by demand from UK and other European firms is unprecedented… About 14,000 hectares in the Santarem/Belterra areas now produces 34,000 tons of soya a year.”7 Large scale deforestation in a rich ecosystem such as the “virgin forests” of the Amazon Rainforest could spell disaster for the millions of plants and animals. Trees also play an important role in the hydrologic cycle. Such mass deforestation of trees that have existed for thousands of years could lead to all sorts of meteorological and environmental disasters. Many scientists believe deforestation is one of the leading causes of desertification and global warming. Some believe global warming to be one of the factors behind Hurricane Katrina. There are many environmental consequences to a dollar McChicken sandwich.

At the beginning of this essay Franko and Amaro stated that only $1.1 million dollars was allotted to the national “Pro-fruit and vegetable campaign.” The Cargill soybean boom could have prevented money from going to this cause and other non-profit causes which fight to keep kids off fast food by getting more healthy options into schools and working class neighborhoods. The following Lexington Herald-Leader quote reports the effect of the South American soybean boom on American farmers, “Because soybeans have fallen below [the US federal farm support program price], this year [2004] U.S. soy farmers will receive an estimated $1.6 billion in subsidized income support. That could rise to $2.5 billion or more next year [2005] if expected record South American crops drive prices still lower.” 8 America’s soybean farmers will be paid $1.6 billion dollars for doing nothing. Working class people in America’s cities will be forced to eat off the Dollar Menu because there is not enough federal funding to get affordable healthy food to their neighborhoods. In order to keep items on the Dollar menu at a dollar in America, McDonald’s Europe will have to continue to buy cheap chicken from Cargill’s Sun Valley who feed all their chickens with soy feed that is destroying the Amazon rainforest. What are the ways that working class Americans can resist this vicious cycle of multi national corporate globalization?

1. Franko, D., and H. Amaro. "OP-ED- AS YOU WERE SAYING...Obesity's Shadow Looms Large Over Poverty-Stricken Youths." Boston Herald 11 Jan. 2004. NewsBank. Newsbank. Temple University, Philadelphia. 16 Apr. 2006.
2. Warner, Melanie. "Salads or No, Cheap Burgers Revive McDonald's." New York Times 19 Apr. 2006. 21 Apr. 2006 .
Hill, Kevin. "Soy Moves South --- Brazil Overtakes U.S. Production." Lexington Herald-Leader 11 Dec. 2004. NewsBank. NewsBank. Temple University, Philadelphia. 16 Apr. 2006.
3. Vidal, John. "Globalisation: the 7,000 Km Journey That Links Amazon Destruction to Fast Food." The Guardian 6 Apr. 2006. NewsBank. NewsBank. Temple University, Philadelphia. 15 Apr. 2006.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid
8. Soy Moves South: 3.

Picture Credits:

Top Picture of Giant Ronald Balloon: netmeme.org/.../ronald-mcdonald-thanksgiving.jpg

Dollar Menu: Mike Mergen nytimes.com

Deforesation in the Amazon as a Result of Soybean Farming: www.greenpeace.org

Community of the Future or Community of a Snob?

The origins of my present-day community begin in high school. Michel Foucault described secondary school as a “normalizing institution” 1. David M. Cheshier clarifies this idea,

“In part Foucault means that, if only because it is organized around the task of educating vast numbers of children, the secondary school setting is institutional and regimented. Students are segmented into precisely timed classes. The arrangement of many classrooms remains rigidly hierarchical: students face forward, arrayed before an authority figure who stands at the front… [Ultimately] the subtle lessons students internalize after spending so many years in regimented classrooms [are]: obedience to authority, a preference for jumping hurdles rather than actually learning material, and an overly respectful sense of boundaries for appropriate behavior”2.

I am in agreement with Foucault, that it is impossible to “end” or “obliterate” the power structure that keeps these “normalizing institutions” going “since power is a certain and unending feature of human interaction”3. However, there are mechanisms for dissent and passive resistance within the American public school system. After only a few months of high school I met Anthony. Anthony and I, through our dress, speech and interests; tried to separate ourselves from norms of our peers. While we never staged a revolution, we pushed right up against the “boundaries [of] appropriate behavior.” The intimate subculture we developed did not alter secondary school’s raison d’être, however it did make the oppressive, mundane and at times bleak aspects of high school more tolerable. Anthony graduated high school 2 years before I did but we remained close friends. While Anthony and my family were the primary tangible members of my community throughout high school, this all changed when I left for college.

My parents granted me the freedom to choose my own path of study and as a result what I learned in college was only limited by what the university offered. I also was granted new social freedoms upon going to college however these were not as easy to manage. Since Anthony and I passively resisted the mainstream culture of high school, making friends with students who had perhaps not taken such a hostile approach towards high school was a bit tough. Many of the people I tried talk to did not seem to appreciate the humor, interests or slang Anthony and I had developed. Many of my peers seemed to form relationships based on college rituals such as drinking or sports. However, I was really not interested in these types of activities. In high school, I was able to communicate and relate to my peers because we were forced to take the same classes with the same teachers. Also in high school all of your classmates are from the same town and many of them have followed you from primary school. In college this common reference point does not exist to out of state students. I believe my situation, in a way, mirrors Emile Durkheim’s theory of “Anomie.” Professor Frank Elwell states,

“Durkheim characterized the modern individual as suffering from social norms that are weak or often contradictory. Durkheim defines anomie as a condition of relative normlessness in a whole society or in one of its component groups. When these social regulations break down the controlling influence on individual desires and interests is ineffective; individuals are left to their own devices” 4.

I do not believe that Durkheim’s theory is applicable to most people. In fact, in the majority of cases I believe his theory is wrong. I believe that most people follow a rigid set of social norms that is instilled in them from birth, K through college and finally into the job market. Yet, in my case I believe Durkheim’s theory works. By isolating myself from most of my peers, rejecting as much of high school institutionalization as possible and by spending most of my time with Anthony in our intimate sub-culture I had unknowingly developed an alternative set of social norms. When I came to college I was “left to my own devices.” In the years before the internet, I feel as though I would have had to bite the bullet and find a way to make new friends or go back home to Rhode Island. Presently, I am doing fine in school and I do not feel as lonely as many would in my position just 9 years ago.

Most of my days are spend alone. My parent’s upper-middle class social class status has allowed me to have my own apartment without any roommates. I live in a large apartment building and there are at least a dozen people who live on my floor. I do not know any of their names and I do not think I would recognize one on the street. Yet, I still feel as though I am part of a small community. Geographically, most of my community with the exception of myself remains in my home state of Rhode Island. How is this possible?

The current state of cell phone and Internet technology has allowed me to maintain strong social bonds to my old community despite the fact that I am physically in a different location. With my cell phone plan I can have long conversations with Anthony as long as it’s after 10 o’clock. Thanks, to the web community MySpace I can now keep close contact with Anthony and other friends without actually meeting them face to face. They can look at pictures of me and we can keep in constant dialogue. My experiences with MySpace are similar to Diana Saco’s discussion of Multi-User Domains (MUDs).

“…all MUDs are basically interactive, multi-user, programmed environments arrayed as a set of ‘rooms’ that a user’s character (virtual persona) can explore and within which one’s character can interact with other users’ characters… The experiences become so rich the ‘real life’ can begin to lose its pride and place, its privilege, in relation to alternate realities MUDs make possible. Put another way, mudding can have ontological and epistemological consequences, helping to foreground the variety of ways in which real life, too, is a construct: ‘[Real life] is just one more window, and it’s not usually [the] best one’ (quote from a mudder) 5.”

Saco’s book was published in 2002 it can be inferred that the technology and literature available to her while writing her book was from the mid to late 90s. It seems that current web communities like MySpace, Friendster and Facebook partially borrowed their format from MUDs (which have been around since the late 80s). Everyone who uses these websites creates a “virtual persona” or character of themselves. On these websites users can present themselves or characterize themselves in any number of ways. Having the ability to control what others see about your personality, is what I like best about MySpace. For my friends there is a certain style to my MySpace page that will allow my friends to recognize it as mine immediately. To someone not from my community the page may seem incoherent. My community map reflects how I am connected to my community through technology as well as my connection to the people who surround me who are not part of my community.

At the center of my map is me living in Philadelphia. Surrounding me are blue circles with blank faces inside of them. These blank faces represent the people that live near and that surround my physical environment. I do not know them personally, I do not know their names nor would I be able to pick them out in a crowd. The red connecting circles represent both the internet and cell phone technology described above. This technology is what holds my community together. The connection in the bottom left hand corner of my map is to my friend, Steve. Steve and I became friends when we studied at Temple University Japan together. Steve and I come from similar backgrounds, enjoy the same kinds of movies and are both social science nerds. Steve is the only member of my community who I actually have face to face contact with on a fairly regular basis since he lives in Havertown. I talk to him on my cell-phone almost every day whether I am at home or walking around campus. We also frequently share MySpace dialogue. In the top right hand corner is a picture of my best friend Anthony. Thanks to this modern technology our relationship is almost as strong as it would be if I were home. In the top left hand corner is a picture of the June Lockheart, Hugh Riley and of course Lassie from 1950s TV show Lassie. This represents my family. While my family is not a part of my MySpace community I do rely on them heavily. With my cell-phone I can call my dad from anywhere in the city. While my community may seem rather sparse, these are the only people I have kindred feelings for.

1. Cheshier, David M. "Foucault and Education Reform." Foucault.Info. 9 Nov. 2002. 14 Mar. 2006 .
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Elwell, Frank W. "The Sociology of Emile Durkheim." Durkheim's Sociology. 2003. Rutgers University. 1 Apr. 2006 .
5. Saco, Diana. Cybering Democracy: Public Space and the Internet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2002.

Horse and Carriage Controversy

Horse and Carriage Controversy

January 2nd 2006 animal rights activists found the perfect opportunity to speak out against a practice they had long opposed. On this day a spooked horse ran into traffic fatally injuring itself and severely injuring the driver. The horse ban group was the one I decided to side with. Our group came up with many arguments against horse drawn carriages in the urban environment. I feel that our strongest points were taken directly from PETA’s website. One point was the inhumanity of horses living a “nose to tailpipe existence 1.” Horse’s noses are 3-3 ½ feet off the ground. In an urban environment (especially uptown and midtown Manhattan) this close proximity to the ground certainly means that horses breathe in automotive exhaust almost directly. Another point our group brought up relates directly to the accident of January 2nd. This is the fairly obvious point that a noisy, chaotic and unpredictable is not a place for an animal with poor vision and the potential cause some serious damage.

While it is true that draft horses historically served many vital purposes (commercial, public transit etc.) in urban America from 1886-1920, in today’s urban America draft horses are a public safety hazard 2. I believe the previous two points make a strong point for the abolishment of horse carriages in New York City and other urban settings. However, the group’s overall conclusion was much more moderate than mine. In consideration of already rigid animal cruelty laws and horse carriage operating regulations the group decided just to further reform the laws in order to prevent anymore car accidents. I believe abolition is the only truly just and humane answer to this problem. The Pro-carriage group used the preservation of the tourism industry as a reason why the horse-carriages should be left as is. I believe the nature of modern tourism put into dialogue with the decline of the draft horse in America truly exposes how senseless, selfish and inhumane horse carriages in a modern American urban environment.

The International Museum of the Horse has this to say about the decline of the draft horse in America, “The market for heavy horses went into a steady decline after World War I. The reduction in the number of domestic draft horses, an increased demand for American grain exports, and the improvements in the gasoline powered tractors combined to hasten the replacement of the draft horse by machines. This was especially true of pure-bred draft stock. In 1920, there were 95,000 registered draft horses in America. By 1945, this figure dropped to under 2,000. By the early 1950s, registrations for all draft breeds dropped dramatically, with many breeders going out of business. The numbers of Shires and Suffolks dropped so low that in 1985 they were listed as ‘rare’ by the American Minor Breeds Conservancy 3.” Despite very low numbers for a significant portion of the 20th century, after 1985 it seems that the demand for draft horses increased. The Draft Horse Journal states, “The flourishing tourism industry has prompted the return of horse drawn trolleys and carriages. They are again commonplace in historic areas and on many big city streets 4.” According to this statement the re-emergence of the draft horse in the modern American urban environment is due to tourism. So, why did historical areas and big cities need draft horses [and carriages] in order to remain popular tourist destinations after 1985? The answer to this seems to be, Disney.

Alan Bryman in his book “The Disneyization of Society,” describes “Disneyization” as, “the contemporary world increasingly converging towards the characteristics of the Disney theme parks. This process of convergence is revealed in: the growing influence of themed environments in settings like restaurants, shops, hotels, tourism and zoos…5.” In a 1967 Disney newsreel, the themed environment that Bryman is referring to is described. “To all who come to this happy place: welcome. Disneyland is your land. Here age relives fond memories of the past, and here youth may savor the challenge and promise of the future. Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams and the hard facts which have created America, with the hope that it will be a source of joy and inspiration to all the [sic] world 6.” In the newsreel, when the sentence “Here age relives…” is uttered it is matched with the image of group of children and adults riding in the back of a horse drawn buggy. There seems to be a connection between “found memories of the past” and horses drawn transportation. For the early Disneyland described in the newsreel, horse drawn vehicles reminded “age” of the simplicity of the past. In today’s Disneyized American culture horse drawn carriages remind tourists of Disneyland or Disneyworld themselves. I believe many modern day American tourists relate being on vacation with going to Disney-esque themed environments. Recognizing this shift in the ideology of the American tourist, businesspeople; like Disney, began to bring elements of the past back to the present. Draft horses play an important role in this transformation process.

Disneyworld and Disneyland are the perfect place for draft horses. Disney has the money to give these animals the best care possible and the militantly controlled and policed Disney theme park certainly brings much of the risk factors associated with Horse and carriage accidents to a minimum. Despite the many business people who may hope for otherwise, historical areas and especially big cities do not share many characteristics with a Disney theme park. Horses do not belong next to busy Manhattan traffic. It is not good for their health and asking a horse to be calm under Manhattan traffic conditions is to ask it to reject its proclivity. I believe the Disneyization of New York City and other big cities and historically significant sites is a grave sin. Why strip places of their present character in the name of Disney-like homogeneity? Should people and animals continue to die and suffer so that a family from South Dakota can have a picture on their mantle from the year they decided to go to New York City instead of Florida? What kind of past are we trying to re-create by Disneyizing cities? Turn of the century Urban America? The America of Jim Crow, utterly detestable industrial jobs and women without the right to vote; is this what we want? I think Urban Entrepreneurs should think outside the box and try to give tourists to their city truly unique experiences. There are places for draft horses such as farms, horse competitions and Disneyworld. This is where these animals belong and I hope PETA is successful in its campaign to ban horse drawn carriages in New York City.

1 http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=135
2 http://www.easterndrafthorse.com/History/drafthorseinamerica.htm
3 Ibid.
4 http://www.drafthorsejournal.com/drafthorsehistory/drafthorsehistory.htm
5 http://www.sagepub.com/book.aspx?pid=10049
6 http://www.waltopia.com/film.html (this is a link to the actual film)
Picture Credits:
Horse drawn carriage at DisneyLand: http://www.mickey-mouse.com/picdlhorsedrawnstreetcars.htm