An Evening at the Nicholas Cage

Last evening proved something that I thought was a hopeful theory. After reading and watching films about gentrification and how horrible of a process it is because of displacement and ignoring the rights of the established community, I witnessed what I believe is a gemstone in development and relations between community and developers.

In my final paragraph of my paper on gentrification, I established my side of believing it can be a positive process if all parties are including in said process.

"Community engagement is key to group struggle, and the more a movement like this is built up, the more attention is derives from the outside. Gentrification and redevelopment can be a positive process, just as long as all parties are willing to work with one another to ensure the stability of the existing community."

When I arrived at the Annex on Oliver St. around 11pm, I expected to encounter a group of artists drunkenly enjoying each others company. I expected to feel slightly awkward, as I usually do in new surroundings with new people, and was worried about latching onto my research partner for social support.

Instead, I spectated the ending stages of a conversation between the residents of the Nicholas Cage (the name of the 3rd floor of the Annex) and Charlie Duff, leading developer of Jubilee Baltimore. I didn't read his description till now, but this guy is pretty big...

"Charlie Duff is an experienced developer and planner and perhaps the greatest living authority on Baltimore’s architecture and development. In eighteen years as Jubilee’s President, Charlie has led a team that has built or rebuilt houses and apartments for thousands of Baltimoreans. Author of the Midtown Community Plan, he has been central in facilitating the revival of Baltimore’s four central neighborhoods. Charlie is a frequent lecturer on architectural history at the Walters Art Museum and the Johns Hopkins University. He is the past president of both the Baltimore Architecture Foundation and the Patterson Park Community Development Corporation. Charlie is a graduate of Amherst College and the Harvard Graduate School of Design."

The conversation seemed to have gone on for hours. They discussed the development of the empty lot across the street, which went into discussions of displacement, public transportation, poverty, and general urban renewal of Station North and especially the survival of the planned-use developments like the Annex, Copy-Cat, and Area 405 building. A big topic was the abandoned Lebow Coat Factory, which is subject to be either demolished or redeveloped. Alex Fox is a huge advocate to save and renovate the building into a music space. There was also a lot of talk about the buildings owner, Abraham Zion, who doesn't seem to care about much except himself and his finances, and wasn't concerned about the building as a space for the artist community.

This cropped the discussion for what the next step would be for these resident artists. Duff simply stated he hoped that the PUD's existed well after his death. He wants the artists to organize and stand up for themselves in order to establish their presence during this redevelopment process. It was incredible to see this, knowing that it was rare to have developers interact with those who will possibly be displaced.

I found it interesting that when asked what will happen to those who won't be able to afford housing in this area, Duff simply stated that these people would end up moving anyway. He also said most black Baltimore citizens aren't poor. He also noted how it was the first community meeting he had been to where there were no black people in attendance, to which the artists responded that there were barely any living in the building. It became apparent that there was an unintentional racial divide in this community.

One artist who is about to move into the building, Katharine, suggested that the empty lot be turned into a community space, which would be more stimulating for creativity and communal efforts. A park or green space would be more conducive and beautifying to their standards. However, Duff knows how the vacancy rate at the moment is at 56% in this area, and better housing opportunities will be more beneficial and also bring a profit to the neighborhood.

Duff suggested that in two weeks they meet again, also with the head of the Baltimore Museum of Art, who is also on a board discussing the redevelopment of the area.

Once the meeting was over, I discussed my research and motives with several of the members, all whom seemed very excited about what I wanted to do for them. Katharine suggested we go into the community to talk to black residents to inform them of the changes happening and to get their opinions. Alex suggested that for the next meeting we had a hidden camera and tape recorder in order to get un-altered facts that can be kept on record. I don't know how I feel about that yet...

The only person who seemed to have a problem with my proposition was a performance artist named Emily. She seemed very skeptical, and wants to have a proposal in hand so she knows exactly what would be occurring. She seemed very shocked by the entire evening, especially because this was the first time she had heard anything about redevelopment. She then incurred why I hadn't brought this up before, and I felt it was more appropriate to bring up my research that evening because the community would be in a better mind-set to discuss gentrification, research, and community organizing than if I was just to pop-up unexpected one evening and change the mood.

I'm excited for the prospects of engaging myself with this group. What I stumbled upon that evening was something organic and spurring. Gentrification is teetering in this area, about to go into stage 2, and those who are new to this area are obviously trying to hold onto it's baby stages, keeping it special and out of the hands of corporate interest. I witnessed my theory come into play, of top hands coming into works with those from the bottom. This is an unfolding story that I now get to play a part in. This is going to be a great learning experience as a documentary filmmaker, because I'm watching something happen before my eyes. More to come!!!

Frozen Time Check

On Saturday, October 17th, I took visited the Load of Fun studios as part of the School33 Art Center Open Studio Tour. On this day, over 175 artists opened their work space and art to the public.

Here is a list of every artist and studio participating that day.
http://www.school33.org/index.cfm?page=events&section=4&subsection=studioParticipants

I had the pleasure of discussing Station North developments with 3 of the artists in the Load of Fun space: Jennifer Berk, Sergio Martinez, and Spoon Popkin.

These are my field notes for each interview...

Jennifer Berk: Oil Painter
-Born and raised in Bolton Hill
-Loves living in Baltimore, feels that the artist community is vibrant for the city
-Thinks that gentrification is a good thing because areas of the city need to draw in talented and productive people to replace abandoned buildings and eliminate crime.
-She believes that there will always be areas to catch those who are displaced
-Their landlord is constantly at the studio fixing up the space to meet codes through is own sweat equity; nothing is done for profit
-believes MICA helps stimulate the community with a constant flow of new artists and through rejuvenating the image of the city with new buildings.
-The accessibility of art studios and venues is incredibly important for local artists to be engaged in the community i.e. areas in walking distance

Sergio Martinez- Wood Worker
-Moved to Baltimore 4 years ago from Washington, DC
-It was the obvious choice because DC was sterile and snooty, did not cultivate his creativity; Baltimore's art community was recognized and he wanted to become apart of it; there's always something going on, very hip city
-He was also at the mercy of incredibly expensive DC rent; Baltimore was much more affordable
-He came to Baltimore and immediately found a space in Loads of Fun; originally he was on the bottom floor, but space opened up on the 2nd floor and was much more conducive for him, especially because of the light
-He plans to buy a home very soon
-He believes that gentrification is benefiting Station North through the reuse of old buildings
-He enjoys the antiquity of Baltimore and its laid back setting, and doesn't believe that new-build should occur in areas around the train station and Greenmount West; it would destroy the authentic look of the area
-No to big developers
-Yes to influx of artists and DIY living style, has his own opinions on displacement and doesn't feel it's a bad thing for the kind of living style they are trying to accomplish

Spoon Popkin- mixed media artist, painter, drawer

-She grew up in North Carolina, came to MICA for college in 1986, and has stayed.
-Feels that gentrification hasn't really happened here since there hasn't been a terribly large amount of redevelopment, only that there has been renovation of existent vacated buildings
-The only instance of displacement she has seen is the closing down of the New York Fried Chicken shop and the check cashing store below her studio.
-Says the neighborhood is a great deal safer since the turn of the century
-Has noticed the great changes that have taken place since the 2002 designation; safer community, more stores, shops, venues and greater accessibility for artists
-Once joe squared opened it was all uphill
-Understands that artists are the shock-troops for gentrification but hopes that new-build does not happen
-Enjoys the accessibility of the neighborhood, the friendly people, and the walkable streets

My feelings on anthropology and the esoteric nature of its studies

I'm being thrown into anthropology head first with my GPA as a safety net. I've only taken three classes prior to this semester, only dabbling in the lingo and mindset. While I try to think abstractly about culture and the forces of globalization and colonization and the effect of our behavior on the planet, I think in my own way. I'd like to think I have an open mind, and I feel understanding of these global forces would help people understand why things are the way they are, and people would be less likely to judge or have an aggressive stance against others.

Also, because of my film education, I understand the power of the media and the messages it can send. Therefore, I have built a thesis surrounding both, and that is why I want to be a documentary filmmaker. I want others to understand causes and effects of things going on in the world to expand tolerance and acceptance. If every American was forced to watch "Sicko" by Michael Moore, I'm sure (or I'd hope), that they'd have some sense of the problems with the health care system and why there needs to be reform.

However, this semester is wearing me thin. I spend 60% of my week trying to get through readings and questions, and most of hte time I'm cracking a dictionary in order to retain some of the vocabulary so I can at least understand an entire paragraph. When I approached Dr. Durington about these difficulties, and how I wish some of these theories and readings were explained in layman's terms, he replied that this is not a study for layman people.

This is where the line is drawn between my intentions and the basis of the study of anthropology. This is also making me question the entire field. I was lying in bed last night, couldn't sleep, and kept thinking about this semester and how much work I had cut out for me. I was also pondering why this field had to be so esoteric. What is the point of anthropology? Why do we study cultures? Who is this research for?? Do we only study so we can share our knowledge with other anthropologists?

In my mind, anthropology should be used for the benefit of our globally imagined society. We are connected on levels that can now never be broken. Our cultures, families, economies, and political ties are now bounded, yet we are constantly fighting and warring over resources, religion, and race. We hold so many stereotypes and thoughts about people we do not even know. Lines are drawn, not just through country and state boundaries, but through institutionalized behaviors and upbringing. Maybe I'm too optimistic of a person, but I believe if there was more exposure to positive culture instead of cable-news exposure and nightly-news broadcasts of terrorists plotting our death, people would have a different perspective of places half way around the world.
This is why I believe visual anthropology can be the answer. If you want someone (this someone being a "layman" who perhaps thinks that Middle-eastern people should rot in hell) to understand life in another area of the world, what do you think will be more effective? Reading a 40-page article of someone's research that will be completely incoherent to them? Or a video of the Pamir, who are of Middle-Eastern descent, yet do not align themselves with terrorist regimes or dictatorships? People relate to video. We live in a visual culture. I believe that a person is much more likely to be sympathetic and accepting of another culture or set of beliefs if it is materialized in front of them.

Also, the visual allows the subject to have more control over how they are perceived. Yes, the lens refracts reality, and a subject may act differently than they would without the camera there. However, a research paper does not let a person speak for themselves. The researcher is speaking for them and analyzing their culture and behaviors through strictly the lens of the researcher's eye. The visual equalizes power. Editing can be a tricky factor, as that manipulates any sense of reality, but at least the subject is given power by representation of the material self.

In conclusion, I'm at a crossroads with my studies. I want to create films that can expand consciousness of reality and spread tolerance. If anthropology is not about that, and if it's only meant for a particular audience, then maybe this is not the field for me. Or perhaps, it is a signal that I should start a method of my own.

In and Out of Africa and Video Cannibalism

This morning I watched two more ethnographic films, In and Out of Africa and Video Cannibalism.

I enjoyed both, as they each had their own framework focusing on two very distinct non-Westernized cultures. In and Out of Africa analyzed the art market of the Hausa tribe and the dynamics of trade between Africa and Western countries. By the end of the film, you understand the values and distinctions of art to different cultures, and how artists can use those values to their benefit, even if it is not considered "authentic." For example, African artists know that Westerners like "authentic" African art, so they age the wood they use to make it seem like it could be old and used for ceremonial purposes. In fact, the wood is brand new, and is made that way to both support the African economy and appease Western taste. However, to Africans, money doesn't seem to be the single desire to their fortune. As described, children are the most important thing to them. In my own opinion, their art may at one time been a form of cultural and artistic expression, reflective of their ceremonial practices as well as the colonialism that has taken over the entire continent. Because Westerners have become exposed to their culture through colonialism, they are able to connect and consume said culture through art. The Africans are able to take back from these Westerners what their ancestors took from them, and market this art to their taste in order to support their children.

Video Cannibalism was a direct study of visuals in the isolated village of the Enauene-Naue Indians. In a culture where sexuality is not stigmatized, these villagers, especially the men, were not afraid to play around with the camera and show off their genitalia. The women, however, were much more embarrassed of being seen on camera without clothes on. This was interesting, considering that was the norm of their culture. Perhaps they knew people not associated with their culture would be viewing this video? Or as the video put it, they were afraid that when the video would be seen later that evening in the tribe, the men would make fun of them. I find it very interesting that the element of the image would create this kind of torment, whereas reality would not bring this about. Their detachment from the outside world becomes apparent when they view what I think was "Dances with Wolves", given it was a Kevin Costner film. They didn't realize the film was being acted out, believing that the Indians murdered in the scenes were actually being killed. This gives them the inspiration to create their own battle scene, that in which they basically direct themselves. Given this was their first attempt at expressing themselves on camera "in character." they do a fantastic job even though there is still a level of reflexivity. This video shows that even in the most remote of villages where technology has yet to grace, electronic media still has similar psychological effects that it does on those who are socialized in a visual culture.

Home Economics and Number Our Days

Today I had the pleasure of viewing two more ethnographic films: Home Economics and Number Our Days.

Home Economics examined the lives of housewives in a new suburban development in California. They went from discussing personal decorating styles, to traffic, to racial tensions in the neighborhood, and to the problems of raising children and holding a marriage together in the suburbs (just to name a few). The conversations were very natural. The women were incredibly honest and unashamed. I was taken aback when one woman discussed how the community fought against a low-income housing unit to be built in the neighborhood, and then said how they were people who haven't "realized the American Dream" yet. Another observation I found intriguing was that one mother felt that children were becoming autonomous in the household. This supports the idea that the suburbs are alienating and isolating, not just from urban and cultural centers, but from the nuclear family.

Number Our Days was the documentary short Oscar winner in 1974. Barbara Meyerhoff spent time with an elderly Jewish community in Venice Beach, California to learn about the older generation of her roots. Most of these people were alone, and this community was all each other had to support themselves. What I gathered most from this illustration of aging, especially with this demographic, was their rapid displacement. First, most of them fleed Europe because of discrimination against the Jews. Second, they age in a community where the elderly are not widely accepted. Third, the tourism hiked property values, and many cannot fend for themselves past a certain age, so many are forced to give up their homes for elder care or for inadequate apartments. It saddened me to think that many were ending up so lonely and unhappy. However, this community engagement on behalf of the gentleman running the program was integral in ensuring the elderly that their heritage, and most importantly, their lives, were not forgotten in the quickly developing beach culture of Venice.