Donuts and Displacement
I had the experience of walking around Wicker Park in
Chicago last spring. Once rated the 4th
hippest hipster neighborhood in the country, Wicker Park contains the requisite
overpriced coffee shops, used book stores, local brew-houses, and boutique donut
shops. Yet there was just enough of that
distinct urban edge to make it adventurous and not completely “sold out”. Urban graffiti/artwork, relentless hustle,
and a few half-smoked joints littering the ground made Wicker Park seem
comfortably dangerous and unpredictable – enough to energize but not paralyze.
I noticed one thing though, walking around, trying on Levi’s,
then eating at a delicious Mexican restaurant; everyone else there looked like
myself. For being so ‘urban’ and ‘progressive’,
Wicker Park housed mostly college educated young professionals who want close
access to the city but can’t afford to live directly downtown. Next best? Find an up and coming neighborhood
with a cultural tradition inherited from bohemian artists and immigrant
families, then slowly start to escalate the price of real estate, slowly
pushing them out while boasting about “reclaiming” urban areas.
I’m torn. I like
eating my fancy donuts. I love
exquisitely prepared Mexican cuisine.
And I find the environment of hipster coffee shops more appealing than a
generic Starbucks (or worse, Dunkin Donuts).
After all, don’t these things become a fixture of the urban fabric?
Shouldn’t we be celebrating that this neighborhood still has a specific culture
and sense of place? I think the answer
is yes, but not unconditionally.
Sometimes, I think the cost is too high, since it comes at
the expense of the marginalized lower socioeconomic class. At the risk of sounding melodramatic, this
reclamation is the modern urban trail of tears.
Maybe the panacea to the problem of inequality in urban development isn’t
one that can be solved by architecture. Maybe
people that move in have just as much of a right to that part of the city as
anyone else. To some extent, everyone is
prone to the invisible hand of the real-estate market. But as I sit and drink my cold-brew coffee, I
wonder if we as a society have paid a little too much.

I really enjoyed your descriptions of the hipster lifestyle they were far too accurate. I agree there is a strange balance between younger people wanting to live in the city and the problem of gentrification. Who has more right to the city and how can we make sure the balance of old and new inhabitants remain with as little conflict as possible? Or is it just a balance that will work itself out like De Carlo said best:
ReplyDelete"The essential purpose of architecture is to organize and shape space for use, to consign it to individual and collective experience,to expose it to the effects of time: so that it ages, becomes stratified,
continues to be enriched with meanings, until at a certain point it begins to design and redesign itself, seemingly by its own volition, to endure and hand down the most eloquent records of human events."