Ghettos and Wirth

After learning about Wirth and his writing on ghetto's, it really was different from what I thought a ghetto actually was. As individuals in the ghetto accumulate capital, that these individuals will eventually try to leave the ghetto. The model goes as follows: 1.) The subject starts in the ghetto which eventually wants to get out due to economic lifts which then moves to step 2. 2.) Next, the subject moves out of the ghetto and begins to assimilate and the people begin to get integrated. Finally, after this the subject moves out from the second step then he/she finds their way to the suburb in all different directions. This is an enclave according to Wirth. This generational model moves to assimilation then to a melting pot which is known as the city and eventually to a suburb.

There are a few differences between ghettos and enclaves.


Ghettos Enclaves

1.) Dually segregated 1.) Doubly diluted
2.) Negative 2.) Positive
3.) Enforced 3.) Voluntary
4.) Expand 4.) Residual
5.) Real 5.) Symbolic
6.) Threat 6.) Touristic


Wirth believes that the ghettos are an institution, "which represents a prolonged case of isolation." Wirth's ideas seem to go hand in hand with one another for the reasons that one will end up in a ghetto and the reasons why it occurs.
We often hear the stories of ghetto's through WWII with the Jews all together.
"Jews were to be found in every part of the city, but predominantly in the Northern part, with many apartment houses and certain streets inhabited exclusively by Jews. In 1935 the city limits covered an area of 54 square miles with a population of 1.3 million people. On the eve of World War Two the Jewish population in Warsaw numbered 337,000 about 29% of the total population of the city, this figure rose to 445,000 by March 1941" (http://www.thoughts.com/Holocaustresearchproject/blog/the-warsaw-ghetto-230704/).
In conclusion, ghettos still exist outside of just WWII and I believe it is because of the isolation of one and also their economic status.

Modernism and Post Modernism

As Americans, most of our grandparents and their parents were around during the modernism period. It wasn't until about the 1970's that it was believed cracked the modernism period and moved to post modernism. In the modernism period there was order and there was alot expected of the people during this time. There was almost a strict schedule and lifestyle that seemed to be followed by everyone and anything that existed behind closed doors was considered private. In the 60's is where the very first folks started rebelling against order forming many memorable times such as the hippie era where experimentation took place with drugs, music such as, rock and roll and the other rebel activity that took place.

It was very interesting to also read about the post-metropolis which consisted of six steps according to a sociologist named Soja. These six steps were:

1.) Flexcity.
2.) Cosmopolis where things like diverse population exists and globalization and glocalization.
3.) Exopolis where things like edgecity, exurbs-50 miles outside of city, and multipolar city takes place.
4.) Metropolarities.
5.) Corceral Archipelagos- how places have changed where you are being atched from the outsidea and inside, through these jail type communities.
6.) Simcity- times square is a great example.

Today in places we are seeing high poverty take place in tiny cities or large towns depending on what your qualifications are in places like Dover or Rockaway, New Jersey compared to where we used to see a high amount of poverty taking place in the inner city areas. Its surprising to find out that just because we may not see the poverty in our town, it can be happening in the town next to us.

I pulled a blog up that had some data from a few years ago showing some of the highest crime rates in New Jersey and even after a few years it is amazing to see how much has changed.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/new-jersey/11488-worst-towns-nj-7.html

Urban Sociology

After learning in class about Mike Davis and his thoery of the Ecology of Fear, I really liked his perspective because it was more modern and it was a closer time to when I was born. I was born in 1988 and Davis' thoery is from that time period. It stated that we needed to retain the danger and fear, and some things that were considered dangerous during this time were the minorities, immigrants, lower class, and the homeless.

Mike Davis goes to Los Angeles and the Fortress City. During this time period things were getting changed where flat benches were then being changed to benches that were like tube style. The reason these benches were being changed was because they wanted to get rid of the most feared people in this area, the homeless. So, by changing the benches so that they were not flat, it would remove the homeless from laying on them. Tube benches are not comfortable and are very uncomfortable to stay on for a long period of time.

Class warfare 1960's, there was on level architecture, spacial confinement, and danger according to Davis. This was not the way that cities should have been according to Davis. He saw the 1960's cities being problems because of the architecture, spacial confinement, and the danger that occured because of that. These problems were later observed by Davis, and he identified the problems.

Mike Davis wrote many different articles and had alot of different ideas on cities. It was very appealing to read some of the other articles that he wrote and opinions on those topics through blogs.

http://www.planetizen.com/node/30414

Urban Sociology

Jane Jacobs, the author of, "The Death and Life of Great American Cities," compared the city to an ecosystem. Before going in and quickly trying to adjust it and put massive amount of work in, it first has to be studied. There has to be community/planning, meaning it would be a very good idea to go into the community and talk with the people there and observe the way that they're living. This is how the observer could get a sense of that community and the way communication takes place and the form and sense of community.
The neighborhood is the basis of America social fact. The approach of the neighborhood may be different from city to suburbs. Some may feel that a neighborhood is just the fact of walking to your neighbor's house and being comfortable with them and conversating with them whereas others are fine with just saying a simple hello or a wave.
There is a modernist approach formed by Wright where Paternalism is intertwined and it is a physicalist fantasy, where specialists and professionals are needed to observe the city and neighborhood in order to understand it. In contrast this is different then the new urbanism approach where people should talk with others in the city community before letting specialists come into the picture and intertwine with changing the city.