Emma's Blog

“In summary, improving urban education is both more important now than in the past and more difficult.  It is more important because the economic consequences of leaving school without strong skills are greater than in the past.  The work is more difficult because urban schools lack the human resources provided by middle-class students and their parents, and because they must compete for teaching and leadership talent to a much greater extent than they did in the past.” -Murnane, pg. 277

Throughout the semester’s study of urban issues, I have become increasingly aware of the importance of quality education in urban environments.  This passage from the Education chapter written by Richard Murnane seems to sum up the two-pronged problem succinctly.  First, the consequences of dropping out of school are much higher than in the past.  Second, teachers will often choose safer or more suburban environments to teach in, especially if they are more talented and can choose where they are employed.

The export of blue collar jobs and the resulting joblessness of many poor families mounts pressure for high school students to get their diploma.  In past years, factories, mills and plants were viable options for those without degrees or diplomas.  For instance: my grandfather enlisted in the military right from high school, and when he returned, worked at the steel mill until retirement.  He supported five kids and my grandmother, who never worked a day in her life.   Today, even a high school graduate may have trouble finding work, and the unemployment rate of dropouts spikes tremendously.

Teachers talented enough to make a difference may be less likely to choose such a “project” for a career.  My husband attended Ridgeway High School.  He remembers that his freshmen year, many of the teachers at his school were excellent.  By the time he was taking upper-level classes, most of those great teachers had left due to poor leadership and other frustrations.  Conversely, my sister-in-law attended Harding Academy and was recently hired there to teach second grade.  Many of the teachers that taught her are now her peers.  I do see some incentives working among my peer group, such as Teach for America, or loan forgiveness programs for teachers in Title I schools.

[Read more →]

After reading Vigodor’s chapter on Race and Currie’s chapter on Poverty, I was stumped on what to discuss on my blog post.  This week’s prompt posed questions that are on my mind continuously, especially now in light of recent events.  Racism looks different for each generation, that much is clear.  Is there positive change in sight?  What is standing in the way and how can we alleviate those issues? Most of all, how am I qualified to even speculate?

It seems to me if one is passionate about race issues, Memphis is a perfect place to live and observe.  While so many positive things exist in the city to bring diverse populations together, our city has an inarguable history of racism.  I believe that citizens of Memphis still deal with the backlash of the assassination of Dr. King, Nathan Bedford Forrest’s slave trade and KKK activities, not to mention policies set in place by various members of past city leadership. Disputes over city parks and school mergers have roots in racial inequality issues that can surely be traced back to these events.

Vigdor states on page 220: “Racial segregation had declined substantially in the forty years since the civil rights movement.  Racial inequality has not.”  One thing that I found both fascinating and rather sad was the study of ideal neighborhood diversity according to black and white respondents.  Both groups indicated that about 3-4 African American families out of 14 homes was the ideal balance for a neighborhood.  Even if these choices are not based on racist notions, it is clear that most Americans, black and white, consider an all-black or predominately-black neighborhood to be a liability.  As we have seen in these chapters as well as past readings, much of this is due to issues of poverty, joblessness, and lack of access to various services, education or opportunities.

All the while, we have folks insisting that racial inequalities do not exist, or are simply minor societal issues.  Happily, the Political Cesspool, the radio show who’s founders were elated to be added to racial “hate lists”,  is based in Memphis.  (Does sarcasm come through on blog posts?).  Personally, I think change is feasible, both in Memphis and nationally.  In fact, Memphis could be an example of great change since we have such great diversity.  But progress will never spring from turning a blind eye to inequality issues, nor from uninspired rhymes.

This guy seems awfully pale to be making such a claim. I think I even have more of a tan than this dude.

[Read more →]

While I was reading Rybczynski’s chapter on Urban Design, I read through the lens of a Memphis resident.  At each topic I asked myself, “how does Memphis measure up in this regard”?

One particular topic that I enjoyed was Rybczynski’s discussion of public parks and their importance to the surrounding neighborhoods, citizens and the city as a whole.  I could immediately think of many local parks in Memphis that are well kept and offered a variety of pleasures.  I live very near Overton Park, which is of substantial size and includes well-maintained trails, a dog park, Levitt Shell, and is intermingled with the Memphis College of Art and the Memphis Zoo.  Court Park in downtown Memphis also came to mind, which provides beautiful views of downtown structures, and sits beside my favorite Memphis mall: Main Street.  The dwellings near both parks are very nice and both parks seem well-used.  I was surprised to see the importance green space to housing value in low-income neighborhoods, especially since parks seem to be the first place people mention when they warn new residents about muggings or gang violence.  When I look at a map of Memphis, I do notice that we have a variety of parks in lower-income areas, including North and South Memphis, albeit not as large as parks like Overton Park or Shelby Farms.  If I were a city leader in discussion about expanding the park system in low-income areas, my primary concern would be security.

Upon reading about shopping places, I could not help but picture Overton Square, which is just blocks from my home and frequented often by my husband and I.  Since we have moved to midtown last November, Local on the Square, Chiwawa, and Bar Louie have opened their doors.  In addition, construction is underway: more restaurants and shops are to come.  The revitalization of that small intersection has made a considerable financial impact, and has helped make midtown Memphis liveable and fun.  Living near Overton Square=Major amenity points.

On the other hand, Rybczynski discusses the difficulty in urban shopping areas, which I certainly see as a factor of Memphis living.  It does sound like Memphis is not alone in this struggle, but all cities are affected.  For a midtown Memphis resident, the closest WalMart is in Arkansas.  The closest Target is a substantial drive to the east.  The author also mentions Costco, which also requires a trip on the interstate. I know that due to land costs and general supply/demand principles, large box stores do not generally inhabit urban areas, but are set in the outskirts.  Although I understand why this is the case, it may provide another reason for urban residents to relocate closer to the conveniences of the suburbs.  In that regard, it is rather unfortunate.

[Read more →]

Before I begin, I would like to preface my post with this fact: I have lived in Memphis for less than a year.  I do not claim to understand the city’s budgetary or economical status and certainly do not have any answers regarding a possible solution.

When I first moved here, there were three things that I heard so many times that I wanted to throw a blue suede shoe at anyone who uttered one of the following sentences:

“Oh you are looking for (insert any business name here)?  Yeah, that is over on Poplar.” Oh really?  Is it on Poplar?  Are you sure?

“I would never drink the water in (insert any other US city here).  Our water is amazing.  The best.  Did you know that Memphis sits on an underground aquifer?”

“My (insert family member/friend here) works at FedEx!”

That was somewhat of a digression but my point is this: you cannot live in Memphis for a week and not meet someone who works for FedEx.  When I was new to town I found it odd that while I lived in the heart of the city, I never saw a FedEx building.  In preparation for this post, I pulled up the website for the Greater Memphis Chamber of Commerce to see the city’s top employers and Fortune 1000 companies headquartered in Memphis.  I quickly found that FedEx, International Paper, and ServiceMaster, three of the city’s top employers, were located basically within one block of each other, outside of the 240 loop and barely inside Memphis City limits.  These companies are a mile or less from Germantown, where I suspect many of the employees live.  (On the other side of that coin, Autozone and St. Jude Hospital are solidly within city limits and employ many Memphians.)  While I did not consider the location of the Big Three to be of great service to metro Memphis citizens, the Chamber of Commerce does report an 8% spike in Business and Professional Services employment between 2010 and 2011, the largest growth of any reported field.

As of April 2013, the unemployment rate in Memphis is estimated at 9.3% (Detroit is 9.5%).  I would imagine a large portion of this number can be attributed to the unavailability of blue-collar jobs within the city (as is the case in Detroit), which is also reflected in the chart referenced above.  The chamber also estimates that 483,440 residents of 52 area counties are unemployed but wanting to work.

It seems to me that Memphis does indeed attract many professional employees to the city.  Without an array of colleges in the city, the competition per job is limited compared to, say, Nashville, the “Athens of the South”.  In the chart listed above showing the 8% spike, I notice that the top three area of employment are Government, Professional and Business Services, and Education and Heath Services.  After those professions, which require at least a college degree, the number drops significantly.  While Memphis attracts professionals, there is a much smaller market for the city resident in need of a position that does not require a degree.  In addition, I suspect a large number of professionals will at some point move to suburban areas, providing less economic assistance to the city itself.

[Read more →]

Demise of Public Transportation

The development of the automobile and the subsequent decline of public transportation certainly created an entirely new culture of accessibility and freedom.  With an automobile, each traveler was in charge of his own destiny: he left and arrived as he pleased.  Maybe he stopped for a piece of gum, maybe not.  It is easy to see how the automobile instantly became the desire, perfectly representing the American future.  Paved roads developed with the help of public funding to increase drivability to the suburbs and farms.  All the while, railways, streetcars and trolleys were falling into bankruptcy due to inflation, lack of demand and the inability to increase fare rate.  “Americans taxed and harassed public transportation, even while subsidizing the automobile like a pampered child.” (pg. 170)  The car would became a “prerequisite to survival” in American culture, and it remains so today.  Many modern annoyances stem from the fact that each person has her own car.  I can’t tell you how many times I have declined an invitation to go downtown because I did not want to deal with parking.  I couldn’t begin to list the myriad of colorful words I have uttered during road construction and traffic jams.  Meanwhile, local public transportation still flounders.  Currently, five local MATA routes may get the axe due to lack of public funds.

Local organization protests route cuts

The Persistence of Racial Segregation

The other unavoidable topic in the Jackson reading is the clear desire for racial segregation by the housing authorities. On page 191, Jackson wonders if the American government was “anxious to use its power and resources for the social control of ethnic and racial minorities.” As we read on, we see that he has good reason to wonder.  The Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC) came on the scene in the midst of the Great Depression to assist with urban housing needs.  This organization quickly instituted a very specific method of rating property value.  In the map below (which I felt inclined to color code so I could get a better visual), the city of Saint Louis is divided into sections graded A-D, A being the most “desirable” and homogenous, and D representing neighborhoods of varied ethnicity.

Color coded map of 1937 Saint Louis from Jackson, pg 199. D(pink) are the “least desirable” areas, usually black neighborhoods. C (orange) are declining neighborhoods, B (green) would be considered mostly desirable by the HOLC, and A (blue) represent affluent homogeneously white areas

This map reminded me a great deal of a series of maps I saw within the past year.  For congruency, I will include the map of modern Saint Louis, broken down by racial makeup.

A map showing the segregation currently existing in Saint Louis. Blue represents black households and red represents white households.

In Saint Louis, racial segregation may even be more pronounced now than it was in 1937, with a large concentration of African American households still located near the Mississippi river.

The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) provided mortgage insurance to those purchasing houses,  but were very selective in their choosing.  The organization was very concerned with “inharmonious racial or nationality groups” and therefore would often not insure a black home-buyer in a white neighborhood, and vice versa.  Although the FHA was intended to  improve housing standards, it clearly excluded those most in need, providing a large amount of its services to suburban areas.  With many of these policies existing well into the 1960s and 1970s, we have very little reason to be surprised by segregation of neighborhoods and schools that exists in our communities today.

[Read more →]

In Jackson’s book, “The Crabgrass Frontier”, the author draws attention to the fact that city fringe areas were once reserved for the working class and poor.  Being far away from the center of the city was less fashionable and required more effort to travel to work each day.  Before the omnibus, ferries and railways, everyone walked to work, typically living in a space connected to their family business.  As transportation options increased and city areas grew more densely populated, wealthy citizens began building homes in country areas, seeking solitude and retreat.  Transportation providers partnered with newly developed properties to advertise the easy and short trip to the city.  Row homes inside city limits were seen as starter houses, but homes with a surrounding yard became the ideal.  Suddenly, the “good life” involved living in a home surrounded by grass and a fence, separated from the mayhem and health concerns associated with the city.  It is easy to see how the fashionable lusts of the mid to late 1800’s area citizens gave way to many of the trends we see today, such as “keeping up with the Jones'”.

One thing that struck me as particularly interesting is how the 1850’s ideal family reminded me of that of the 1950’s, just without dishwashers.  Jackson outlines this on page 48: “Between 1820 and 1850, work and men left the home. The growth of manufacturing meant that married couples became more and more isolated from each other during the working day, with the husband employed away from home and the wife responsible for everything connected with the residence.  The family became isolated and feminized, and this ‘woman’s sphere’ came to be regarded as superior to the nondomestic institutions of the world.” As I imagine the flourishing of the original suburbs in the 1800’s, I wonder: could they have happened without a stay-at-home household manager?  Before washing machines, Little Caesars and microwave dinners, could men have lived so far from their employers, leaving an empty home each day to tend itself?  The primary message to women of the day was to stay home and keep a good, clean house for your husband and children. Once women were married, their legal rights were forfeit to their husbands anyway (even in 1960s and 70s women struggled to get their own lines of credit).  Besides, keeping a home was much better than working at a factory or mill.

Clearly defined gender roles helped the suburban system to prosper, and this didn’t just weigh on women.  As women were confined to the home, men were shoved around by employers who knew they were too tied down by a house note to strike.  All these years later, many of these pressures still exist.  Just last month, there was pushback to the notion of mothers as breadwinners. The standard of the absent male breadwinner and the female homemaker does not spring from “science” (as some claim) as much as history.  Because of gender inequality, women were the ones to forfeit their names and legal rights to their husbands, keeping them constricted from upward societal movement.  While the original dichotomy of roles helped suburbs to form, I believe the standard is no longer necessary today. And though the statistics suggest that many agree, I have to wonder: why are we asking the same questions in 2013 that we asked in the 1850’s?

Megyn Kelly questioning Erick Erickson about his quote: “when you look at biology, look at the natural world, the roles of a male and a female in society and in other animals, the male typically is the dominant role.”

[Read more →]

Memphis

[Read more →]