Gentrification has been a national
phenomenon in coastal cities like New York and Los Angeles since the early nineties.
However, it is just now that this 5-syllable word has come into mainstream
recognition. The term was coined back in 1964 by the British sociologist Ruth
glass to describe the process by which the demographics of her neighborhood was
changing. There are many forces that drive gentrification, but the mother of
all of those is capitalism.
When people of a higher
socio-economic status move into an area, they are typically looking to
capitalize on the low market valuation that was caused by years of divestment
and neglect. They also bring copious amounts of resources with them. On the
surface this seems like a good, but reality shows that these people have little
interest in investing in the community that is already present and thriving. It
also does not help that gentrification in the American context is inherently linked
with racism because the communities that usually suffer from neglect and
divestment are poor and working class communities of color.
To make matters worse, when
outsiders bring their resources with them, it pushes the people who are a part
of the existing community out of their homes and strips their communities right
from under their feet. Due to the low property values and its central location,
Memphis is fertile ground for those looking to invest in urban real estate. Years
of De Facto and De Jure segregation have left the city split between the races.
As expected, the communities that are the most blighted and underserved are
Memphis’s black and brown populations who stand to be the next group of Americans
to have their neighborhood spaces recolonized by young urban professionals.
However, one community in Memphis sought
to stand up to the forces of the market and look out for its poorer residents.
The Klondike community in North Memphis gathered in an effort to stave off
gentrification and protect their livelihood from being systematically stomped
out of the area. The main force that threatens to push residents out of this
area was the newly opened crosstown concourse, a massive building that houses
multiple businesses, civic spaces, and luxury apartments. The arrival of this establishment
was a symbol to the Klondike community to gather its resources and protect
itself from recolonization. In my personal experience with the crosstown concourse,
I think that the damage is already done and the neighborhoods around it are
more than at risk.
I attended an art gallery opening
about a month ago, and at one of the most crowded exhibits, I could only find two
black faces other than mine. The types of businesses housed within the building,
like the Curb Market which is the most expensive grocery stores in the city,
are not particularly meant to serve the needs of the community on the outside of
its walls. This ties directly into the black struggle for freedom because
crosstown stands as a harbinger for the uncomfortable discussions on the
dichotomy between race and space to come.
I agree that many of the shops in the Concourse are not geared towards the surrounding community, but I am wondering if the expansion of Church Health was meant to act as a balance or concession to the residents of the nearby neighborhoods or if you see this investment in community-based healthcare as a genuine effort to engage and provide a service for the community? And, in your opinion, if the low-cost healthcare that is provided improves medical care in the surrounding communities , does motivation matter? Just curious how we should weigh the potential costs of developments like Crosstown, especially when the developments are at least creating a facade of cooperation or concern for the communities they are disrupting.
ReplyDeleteI did not realize the term gentrification had emerged so long ago. I think its also important to consider how historically racist loan policies influence this. Because black Americans were less likely to receive a loan, they were renting their homes in the long term much more often than white Americans. The aftermath of these policies can be seen in many historically black neighborhoods where renting is still very prevalent. It is much easier to force a renter out of their home than an owner, so these neighborhoods can be easy targets for those wishing to pursue large real estate developments in a way that a similar neighborhood where families have historically been homeowners are not.
ReplyDeleteCrosstown Concourse has been something I have been struggling with since knowing about its construction. As previously mentioned, Church Health Center is this huge organization in the city that has attempted to serve lower income residents of the city. However, in this particular case, Church Health Center's place in Crosstown Concourse in itself is a cause of concern. I have learned recently that many of Church Health's money goes towards paying rent in this highly gentrified vertical city. Rather than serving the community or its purpose, many of its costs are going towards the space it is occupying.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, Crosstown had initially meant to provide about 10% (maybe more, I must fact check this) of its housing to low-income residents, but Crosstown has not come close to reaching this goal. The whole idea of Crosstown was novel, but it has not reached its original mission in any way, shape, or form. Instead, one goes into Crosstown, and its upscale shopping and restaurants and housing. Although we have not seen the full effects of Crosstown on the community surrounding the area just yet, I am skeptical as to where the residents of these communities are going to be in five or ten years.
We have talked a lot about how stagnant Memphis is in terms of its growth--but it seems that growth is often synonymous with gentrification. How do we grapple with this? Do we want to "grow" in this sense? And how do we combat it to make sure Memphis does not displace its residents across the board.