Challenging the status quo

We prefer to ignore or displace poor neighborhoods instead of understanding their condition and how to improve it. Gentrifying the urban neighborhoods of lesser socio-economic standing is only natural because there is more money to be made by those who already have the power and money, and there is a demand by those with the capacity to spend it. So who cares about maintaining the spatial justice for the current citizens? But as Mockbee discusses, place matters, and as architects, we are in a position to make a better world. He continues by stating that “theory and practice are not only interwoven with one’s culture, but the responsibility of shaping our environment, of breaking up social complacency, and of challenging the status quo.” (Mockbee, 108) In this case, I don’t believe we are penalizing the “haves,” as much as we are uplifting the “have-nots.” And if we, as a society, have the means to help each other, wouldn’t it benefit us all to do just that?

Turning toward Mockbee’s rural studio and his connection to the poverty stricken in the rural south, I think we can implement his same ideology to our cities. The stratification in equity, or accessibility, will continue to exist no matter what we do, so instead of displacing the condition of the impoverished further into the periphery, we should focus our efforts toward “…a willingness to seek solutions to poverty in its own context, not outside of it.” (Mockbee, 114) And the fact is these projects can be “…inexpensive, sustainable, and innovative in design” and can draw from “regional tendencies” (opposing globalization) while using unconventional materials innovatively. It only makes sense for this process to be open and participatory, and as architects that means we must be “…more concerned with the good effects of architecture than with good intentions.” (Mockbee, 114)

Akron Boy's and Girl's Club | Rural Studio

Windshield Chapel | Rural Studio

We should focus on preserving and enriching these communities by leveraging their sense of place, but instead we continue to deliberately expand our capitalistic profit machines. It is quite sad when you see corporate banks, retail stores, and new luxury residences replacing the local corner bodegas, small businesses, community centers, or nostalgic residences that infuse the city streets with diversity and character. Then we have the novelty of owning a piece of the city, which empowers foreign investors to further dilute our cityscape and pricing out local inhabitants, a practice embraced by the politics of real estate development. As a result, the multiplicity of space interwoven into the fabric of our cities are slowly being torn apart – culture, art, music – while bits and pieces are hijacked for commercialization and mass consumption.

In this instance, we find the authentic and honest architecture losing face. If we continue this reductive process we will become “citizens of no place” where cities are uniform in space and personality. I believe it should be a responsibility for us all to negotiate our concerns with spatial justice because who would say a city without diversity is better?

This scene was never more sobering for me than when I was riding the uptown 6 train one evening. Upon the train arriving at the 96^th street stop, a black man making his way home to East Harlem announced “last stop for white people!” As funny as the truth was, the reality is these invisible borders continue to segregate our cities. I fear we are only now really considering spatial justice because its effects are finally reaching the middle class, as the gap between the wealthy and the “average” citizen continues to increase. Unfortunately for others, in particular minorities, the effects behind the idea of spatial justice have been felt through generations, systematically ingrained within our society to a point of complacency. It’s time to step up and challenge the status quo.