Perspectives and Positions: With Kim and Samantha
Phillip asked Kim and Samantha if there are “positive and negative effects” to gentrification. Without delay, they both attempted to answer the question by insisting, “It has both.” While Kim believes that all people have a right to place, to live in a place that is “a good environment,” she also believes that the movement towards newness and spatial change means that local residents “who struggle” are being forgotten. Her argument echoes sentiments expressed by residents at tenants’ association meetings that Phillip, Khaleeq, and I attended. (Click here for additional information about tenants’ association meetings in Harlem.)
Scenario #3: Kim and Samantha’s Video Clip (#1)
In forming an ability to critique gentrification, Kim focuses on the theme of struggle: the struggle to live comfortably; the struggle to not “push to the back” those longtime residents of Harlem; and the national struggle to re/define place (and spatial boundaries) as humans learn to co-exist in light of differences, diversities, and power dynamics. Once she viewed her video, she was able to talk about the significance of centering struggle in debates over gentrification and displacement by associating struggle with identity, and by arguing that this association encourages people to think critically about themselves and their actions in relation to other people. Her narrative worked to reveal issues of “inequality” and “inequity,” as she named them, in how some places are privileged over others until those unprivileged places are transformed into desirable living spaces. Thus, Kim reflected on her videotaped arguments to question issues of belonging and sense of place as she sought to value acts of place-making (e.g., performing narratives of belonging; identifying with and interacting in geographic spaces; maintaining, representing, and valuing affordable habitable areas). In her words, “Those living in Harlem see these changes. We’re struggling trying to understand what this means… how this gentrification affects who we are, what we do, you know, our identities and everything.”
In Race, Culture, and the City: A Pedagogy for Black Urban Struggle, Stephen Nathan Haymes (1995) theorized living on the margins and struggle in his assertion that “the city for blacks has been an important site for place making, for producing black culture and black identity… places are significant because we assign value to them in relation to our cultural projects” (p. 111). Place, as connected to struggle (for bell hooks’ (1990) “homeplace”) and identity (raced, gendered, class, etc.), is important for Kim, Samantha, Khaleeq, and Phillip because of its connectedness to feelings of belonging, responsibility, protection, resistance, and rich, shared, lived and literate experiences.
Samantha alluded to these points during her video interview and in subsequent conversations. She feels a sense of belonging to Harlem, but quickly confessed her dislike with the construction of “buildings that people can’t even live in…people from Harlem cannot live in no condos or stuff. You got a lot of people who can’t afford that.” In the process of filming Samantha, she was able to openly describe tensions surrounding newness as “unfair and unjust,” especially “in a community that is mostly filled with minorities.” The price of this particular newness complicates Haymes’ (1995) argument on the importance of place and place-making in relation to “black culture and black identity” (p. 111). In other words, while places like New York City’s Harlem have served significant roles in the lives of black people, the transformation of “safe” spaces (hooks, 1990; Heath & Smyth, 1999) into gentrified, highly politicized “contact zones” (Pratt, 1991) is a growing, painful reality for many. Kim and Samantha are well aware of these changes, and they incorporate techniques in literacy—proposing, taking, or not taking action, asserting a position/a stance—to question them.
Additionally, being filmed encouraged both Kim and Samantha to assert on camera what they did not feel comfortable stating in print. According to Kim, “You think we living like this cause we want to? You think people coming in living in buildings we live in? No, ‘cause they got their condos and clean streets and balconies…all that just a few streets over from where I live.” Samantha agreed before sharing, “There’s nothing we can do about what’s happening.” Making this video affected their feelings about gentrification in that it made them come to terms with existing at the center of the debate as they considered what they want for the community.
Scenario #4: Kim & Samantha’s Video Clip (#2)
Kim and Samantha realized the connections between struggle and identity, particularly when it comes to place and acts of place-making. Although some of their comments may make the women appear hard—such as being tired of beggars and hearing crying cats—they are just as honest as other comments, such as those regarding fixing up the streets and improving schools. While they themselves did not use media texts to document their arguments about community change, identity, and struggle, they allowed Phillip and me to videorecord their honest, unedited reactions to related questions. Thus, the video serves as a tool that captures narratives of belonging, a tool that can help us to acknowledge young people’s feelings about spatial change and struggle. The following video clip supports this point well. Phillip turns to the video camera to talk about perceptions of struggle as connected to success, place, and history. He wonders whether action will result.
Phillip’s “On Struggle” Video Clip
The “how’s” of Phillip’s videotaped argument include: his ability to problematize efforts in gentrification (and newness) by drawing on historical figures such as King and Malcolm X to consider the significance of the community and remember the positive progress that has been made; and his awareness of the need to situate debates in gentrification within an activist agenda that leads to action.