Urban Labs: Potentially Problematic?
Our City of Angels class has ventured out on many excursions over the past few weeks around LA. I have enjoyed every single urban lab and I appreciate the uniqueness of our class’ structure, openness, and flexibility. We interact with local people, enjoy yummy meals, and explore areas in Los Angeles that may be foreign to some of us. Now that we have been divided and organized into our podcast groups, I have been looking forward to our future urban labs which will focus specifically on our respective podcast topics. There is, however, something I have feared with these urban labs that I hope to discuss especially before starting our podcast geared trips.
While I believe the urban lab experience is enriching, I wonder if they contain problematic elements that we may not be aware of. We have many discussions about gentrification and its issues while also visiting the neighborhoods and communities that are directly affected by gentrification. The issue I fear is the concept of “not asking permission.” Most of our urban labs have been planned. However, some of our urban labs consist of us uninvitedly going into neighborhoods, observing, studying, and snapping pictures of communities for educational purposes. As a class, we make our own observations that derive from a privileged standpoint. As a class we understand that gentrification is an issue based on class and race yet we (to a certain extent) infiltrate these communities simply to return to our predominantly white Poly institution and discuss the photos we had taken that day. I am curious to know whether or not we may be reinforcing negative power dynamics as a result of viewing these trips from a “service” centric perspective. Different backgrounds of privilege can create barriers within communities and I fear we may possibly be creating a mindset of authority or superiority without even knowing.
As we move into the upcoming weeks with future urban labs in mind, how can we be more aware of our engagement in different neighborhoods? Especially when interviewing local people and asking for their time, how can we, as students at a school like Poly, reject the “white savior” mindset and instead create a productive exchange between us and the neighborhoods we visit? Is this even possible?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think you bring up a good question. However, I don’t think our trips are from a “service centric perspective.” I see the potential problem in traveling to places with a superior mindset of helping others rather than serving others; however, I think our urban labs are educational. We visit neighborhoods to observe them, not to serve the neighborhood or people in it. That being said, I think it could possibly be a good idea to use what you learned and observed to support those in affected neighborhoods. Additionally, I do think we need to be aware of how we present ourselves in these areas. For example, if we are near a sensitive memorial site, we need to be aware of the pictures we are taking or even just not take pictures at all and purely observe.
ReplyDeleteWhile I personally haven’t had a conversation with anyone yet, I do think conversation is a great way to “exchange” with others. Like Cole brought up, it is important to hold conversations respectfully. I think one way to do this is to talk less and just listen. I also think we can make sure the questions we ask are respectful and worded in good taste. Doing research beforehand is also a good idea otherwise we run the risk of looking like ignorant privileged students.
I also want to go back to Cole’s point of us ”infiltrat[ing] these communities simply to return to our predominantly white Poly institution [to] discuss the photos we had taken that day.” I do see how discussing our “cool and trendy pics” is problematic, but I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with visiting different neighborhoods. I think the issue arises when we lack awareness of how we take pictures and the motives behind taking the pictures. Using Cole’s example, taking pictures can easily come off as rude or exploitative especially when done in bad taste or in inappropriate spaces; however, I do think it is possible to respectfully visit areas, and I don’t think we should altogether stop going to certain neighborhoods. Personally, I think avoiding certain areas would just be taking the “easy way out” rather than acknowledging the complex issue and delving into the gray area for the sake of reaching a potentially new and mutual understanding with those in those neighborhoods. I know it’s hard to do since we, myself included, sometimes don’t realize some of the things we do or say perpetuate a superiority complex, but I think we should make it a goal to be more aware of the ways in which we present ourselves and how we behave in spaces.
Ditto to basically everything Alexis said. I'm glad we're talking about how we interact with the city through Urban Labs and building self-awareness, so I think it's great that we're devoting a roundup to it.
ReplyDeleteI think that in some ways, our footprint could be damaging. Per our many discussions about gentrification in our class, we've talked about the problems of "gentrification tourism" whereby non-residents go to a neighborhood to patronize new/trendy, typically white businesses rather than the older businesses that serve more marginalized community. In our Frogtown Urban Lab, for example, we gravitated towards those very places (Spoke Cafe, Salazar). To be fair, those were some of the only options for food, but I think it's important to be aware of our potential hypocrisy or how we may be contributing to these problems as a class.
To echo Alexis's point, I don't see our trips as service-based: they seem mostly for the purpose of observing a neighborhood (like a lab in science). If anything, I think the potential harm of Urban Labs could be with the opposite scenario whereby we "take" from a neighborhood without giving back (eg if we "observe" poverty without doing things in our own lives to help mitigate those problems on a general scale). But, that gets into the whole "white savior" thing as well, so it's definitely tricky.
I also agree with everything that Alexis and Emma said, particularly in that I don’t believe we go with the mindset that we’re in “service” but rather that we’re going in to simply learn more and gain something educationally. I do, however, think that it would be interested and a possible remedy to the problem you bring up to change some of what we do to be service-centric, and maybe once every other urban lab find something that we can do as a class to help a community we’re visiting in some way while still refraining from being the “white savior” for them. This could be done mainly by being able to talk with community members beforehand/research so that we can know what they want and not what we think they want.
ReplyDeleteI do think it’s important that we be aware every time we go into a neighborhood of its surroundings and history so that we don’t come off as taking what is rightfully not ours and “taking photos to simply take back and discuss,” etc... when it could mean something much more to a community.
All in all, I think it’s important that we start to practice what we preach. If all of these issues are happening around us in L.A., then I think we should allocate some time for us to do something about them.
I think that regardless of where we go or what we do on our labs, we are always going to be some sort of intruding presence- simply because we are in a large group, we have the privilege to leave school, and because of the nature of the kind of class space we are lucky enough to have. Like Lux mentioned, it's important to practice what we preach and be mindful of where we go and the impact we make in those areas. I mean, it's not like any area of LA is off limits to anyone, but there are certainly areas where we would seem to "fit in" more than others. This is where I think talking to community members and forming connections with people (not restaurants) would be most beneficial to our learning. Our class has, after all, devoted a lot of our learning to hearing all stories.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I've really noticed (and that I'm definitely guilty of too) is the amount of money we tend to spend when we go on our urban labs. I know that getting food on our urban labs is super fun and is a huge part of what makes our class so different, but I wonder if we enforced a "bring your own lunch" rule how that would change things. We tend to spend a lot of money in the communities where we buy lunch (frogtown!!), and I'm thinking it might not only be cheaper but also just a better way to connect with the community if we aren't spending so much money?? I don't know though because there is definitely value in patronizing community cafes/stores. I'd be interested to see what the group feels about that.
I've also noticed that our group tends to use social media a lot when we go out on our labs...and I think this would be good to discuss and figure out as a class how we want to approach that. Obviously I enjoy taking photos and sharing them when we go on our labs, but at the same time I feel like it's sorta weird when we blow up our social media with very select images of LA that in an of themselves are kinda perpetuating the "booster" image...idk
snaps. to. that. (the lunch thing)
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that we sometimes can create a mindset of authority or superiority when we go into neighborhoods for our urban labs. One way we can be more aware of our engagement and avoid the superiority mindset is by splitting up into smaller groups. This way we can indulge in the same experiences while not seeming like a large, ominous tourist group. In other words, we can portray ourselves as normal people part of that particular society; therefore, we seem less like tourists that are fascinated by their “unusual” surroundings. I feel that when we enter a neighborhood as a group, we are instantly portraying ourselves in a touristy, superior manner because we are trying to experience something that is different to us but not to the residents in that area.
ReplyDeleteOne way we can reject the “white savior” mindset is by changing the one-sided interviews into a conversation. I personally feel that when one “interviews” another person, it creates an authoritative position for the interviewer. I feel that one way we can avoid this situation is by sharing our own insights and experiences to the other person so that they feel included and at equal footing. This will create that productive exchange you mentioned so that both sides of the conversation benefit.
All in all, I think that the infiltration vibe you mentioned can be avoided if we arrive and converse in equal footing as the residents in the area.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alexis- in order to ensure that our visits are respectful, we should be considerate and engaged during our time there but also understand that our visit is not equivalent to a local experience. Because we’re visiting different landmarks or neighborhoods for the sake of learning about them, there’s a temptation to make quick judgements– to characterize and define the neighborhood based on our hour-long immersion there. Yet I don’t think our experiences are at all comparable to those of people actually living there; because we have such limited time and we’re often trying to “observe”, our trips are, by nature, cursory glimpses of entire communities. I noticed this during our Character of a Corner assignment, which required us to extrapolate an entire local identity from our limited experience on a corner. We were supposed to observe the corner then depict it in our writing, requiring us to not only create our own mental image of the area but then proffer this image as the reality of the place. What I mean to say is that, after our experiences, we didn’t really know the character of the corner; superficial observations, visual descriptions, and the statistics we gathered about people coming and going do not a community make. I think most of us have places in our local vicinity that mean something to us, likely because of our sentimental or community associations. If an outsider came and stood on a corner in my neighborhood for an hour than wrote about it, I don’t think they’d do the place justice; it might appear ramshackle, or new, or chaotic, or ordered, empty, or crowded, or any number of other superficial descriptors that don’t get to the heart of the area. I bring this up to say that we should consider how much our urban labs tell us; they are chances for us to experience and engage with the places we read about, making them three-dimensional spaces rather than words in a history book, but we’re not necessarily seeing their identity as a local might. The pictures we take don’t capture that identity perfectly, either. I think there’s definitely a value to visiting these areas, but that comes from seeing it ourselves, creating our own relationships with the area, and contextualizing the history we learn– not from using our observations to discover the authentic identity of the area.
ReplyDeleteI see where you are coming from when you talk about us going into other neighborhoods simply to take pictures and observe other people going about their daily lives, and I can definitely understand why that doesn't sound right. I remember feeling really awkward on our first Urban Lab, as my group stood on the street corner of a small neighborhood in Chinatown, taking notes and observing (though it felt like we were studying) the people in that community. We found ourselves walking into the Thien Hau Temple, and I couldn’t help but feel extremely out of place/ like we were intruding on something- taking something sacred and turning it into a form of entertainment for those of us passing through. However, the more I’ve thought about it since then, I have come to understand that the Temple is open to the public and is there so we can stop in and learn something about Chinese culture. There are people that work there that ask if you would like to take a tour, meaning that this Temple IS special and IS something to be cherished, but why can it not be that and still be something open to everyone to learn about and appreciate.
ReplyDeleteI think Emma said something really important in class today when we were discussing our trip to Olvera Street. She said (I’m paraphrasing) that visiting Olvera Street and supporting local vendors by eating and purchasing a few trinkets shouldn’t be a major problem as long as we aren’t leaving and saying we know everything there is to know about Mexican culture. I think what is really important (so that our Urban Labs don’t feel like we are invading on other communities, or that our dialogues about gentrification feel void and/or hypocritical) is that we continue to be curious about the places we are visiting and the topics we are covering. The problems arise when we go on our Urban Labs and then leave acting as if we know everything about everything. The point of the Urban Labs is to “follow our curiosities,” but if we want them to continue to be a valuable aspect to our class (and something that makes our class so different) our curiosities should not just end - they should make us want to dive further and develop a deeper appreciation for the subject at hand.
I agree with everyone (as do previous comments)! You bring up a good point: it's crucial for us as a group to be aware of the spaces that we visit during urban labs. You mentioned your fear of entering areas without "asking permission." However, like Rachel said, LA isn't off limits, and by avoiding certain neighborhoods we're furthering the segregation of communities (whether or not the areas we visit are considered gentrified). As we've discussed in class, I don't find it beneficial to boycott gentrified communities, especially during labs in an urban studies class. After all, studying and exploring varying neighborhoods is integral to the definition of our course.
ReplyDeleteOur dialogue about Olvera St. interested me today. At one point Luke asked if we felt that we were appropriating or exploiting Mexican culture by visiting an "inauthentic" (as we repeatedly described the plaza) rendition of heritage. I don't feel this way for several reasons: as Emma mentioned, purchasing trinkets from Olvera St. vendors benefits Latino shop owners, and truthfully, it's counterproductive for white people to abstain from visiting cultural sites simply out of fear of being perceived as disrespectful. How else will we learn about our city and gain perspectives? This goes back to Cole's point about spacial awareness. As long as you're empathetic, respectful, and willing to learn and listen, I feel like you have the right to enter a public space dominated by another culture (Olvera St., Chinatown, etc.).
Going into our podcasts, as Alexis mentioned, though I don't think that we should shy away from asking important, difficult questions to interviewees, it's important for us to listen, be respectful, and practice spacial awareness. When developing interview questions, thoroughly research topics and your interviewee, and don't ask leading questions.
I do believe being "aware" of our environment is crucial for our group's engagement in the community we're visiting; however, I do think we have done a great job not projecting this "white savior" mentality wherever we go. As we approach this next urban lab, I do believe more than ever we should continue to be as mindful and as accepting of different ideologies and beliefs to ensure we don't create one dominant narrative. Simply telling a story from one perspective would indirectly support this "white savior" mindset, subsequently pushing us further away from the communities and people we want to depict accurately.
ReplyDeleteOn a different note, I would also like to express my confusion regarding Cole's use of the word "service" when describing our perspective on the labs. Personally, I have never viewed these labs as serviced based but rather informative opportunities. I do agree with Cole that we would be reinforcing "negative power dynamics" if we approached these labs from a "what savior" mindset; however, I have always been under the impression we were there to learn rather than teach. Of course, my assumption may be wrong, so I'd like to allocate some time to highlight this confusion during the roundup.
Finally, I don't believe our privilege has created barriers within the communities we visit during our urban labs. Like Sophia and Rachel stated, the city is meant to be explored and used. Our privilege has given us the opportunity to go to places we could never have gone; nevertheless, we are still obligated to "follow our curiosities" in a means to have a balanced and diverse understanding and experience of the community we explore.
I can clarify what I meant about "privilege creating barriers." I meant that we have a lot of privilege going to Poly etc. Some (not all) are sheltered from the rest of Los Angeles. Many of us do not necessarily venture out into lower income communities; consequently, this creates a barrier separating those who are privileged living in Pasadena going to Poly from those who are less privileged and live in inner city communities. A white student in our class has a completely different perspective in contrast to say a Latino student living in Compton. Thus a barrier is created. Sorry for confusion.
DeleteThough many people have mentioned that the urban labs are meant to be educational, I think it's worth talking about what kind of education we are getting from these experiences. Because of time and safety constraints, there are many sides of LA that we cannot be exposed to (especially the more problematic aspects), and I think it is doing ourselves a disservice to believe that we're continually diversifying our perspectives on the city as opposed to rehashing many of the same problems over and over again and going in circles with our observations.
ReplyDeleteI also do think it can be (and often is) very uncomfortable to go into a neighborhood and take pictures/notes before returning to Poly and continuing on with our days as usual. The dichotomy between being exposed to the large city and being confined in our small school is one that is disorienting to say the least. However, I can't think of a way that we might improve this process because the nature of it is jarring and I kinda think we're handling it as best we can.
Personally, I do really enjoy the opportunity to go out and experience the city, not necessarily with any objective but just to feel like a part of such a complex place. I definitely look forward to urban labs because I do think I'm learning (in a very abstract, visceral sense) more about my own place in LA– I just don't know how effective they are in furthering our discussions on many of the more prominent issues that the city faces (gentrification etc).
I agree with everyone's comments. I think that we should continue to explore LA through our urban labs, but be mindful about how we can impact the neighborhood we are visiting, and ensure that we act accordingly. As we discussed today during class, I don't think that visiting Olvera street was bad, as long we made sure that we were respectful of the people there, and conscious of the vendors selling there. As Sophia said, I think that as lone as we are empathetic and respectful, we should be able to visit neighborhoods and observe them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of what has already been said. I don't think we are going in with the purpose of servicing the community, but I do think we act as somewhat a disruptive force as we are a big group and people notice us as different/not from the community. However, our urban labs I think are crucial to this class as they allow us to see LA for what it really is and compare it to how it has been described in literature. Maybe we could try going off into even smaller groups? We have done this a bit already and I think it was helpful in making our presence a little less disruptive. I do think there is something to be said in our use of social media during labs though, and I completely agree with Rachel that it promotes a "booster image" of LA which might contradict what the rest of the community around that trendy photo is like. Maybe it would be best not to post snap stories during labs?
ReplyDeleteLike many have said, I also agree with all the comments above. This topic of intruding or entering without permission is something I thought about when the ideas of urban labs were first introduce. I was excited to explore the areas of LA I had not seen before but I didn't want to emanate an idea of obnoxious privilege. However, like Rachel and Sophia mentioned, there is no part of LA that is off limits, meaning, visiting certain areas is not a problem. I think the problem begins with the way we visit these areas. I don't see an issue with asking difficult and insightful questions as long as we do ask them respectfully. We have to realize we are entering someone else's space and asking them questions about an area or topic that might (most likely will) be important to them. I think it is also important to understand that we are asking them for their story; we should be there to learn, listen, and engage with them. Like Pranay said earlier, in many cases an interview can turn into an authoritative interaction depending on the way you interact with the interviewee. To refrain from creating this dynamic through an interview, keeping the questions conversational to allow the interviewee to excitedly go into depth on a topic important to them is necessary. Overall, I think the main way to keep these urban labs successful and not as intruding as some may seem is to be respectful. To many, respect seems like and easy and simple thing to practice; however, many times we don't realize when we are lacking respect. It may sound cheesy, but if someone was in you neighborhood interviewing neighbors and people around how would you want them to approach you and begin asking questions.
ReplyDeleteThe goals of our urban labs analyze how ideas we talk about in class manifest themselves in locations throughout Los Angeles. When the majority of our focus is directed toward investigating topics from class, it is easy to unintentionally contribute to the problem. For example while capturing noir images I left a footprint on freshly paved asphalt. While it may seem insignificant, I felt guilty of being “just another” privileged person destroying new infrastructure. As we move into the upcoming weeks we should strive to patronize local businesses and place more emphasis on engaging in conversations with people we see within the area. We have not yet enlisted the perspectives of people we see during our urban labs, and I believe that doing so would help provide a complete story of Los Angeles. I do not think the white savior mindset is easy to completely get rid of; however, it can be avoided by being mindful of our impact on the communities or monuments that we visit.
ReplyDeleteWhen thinking of communities similar to Olvera Street, I wonder what they add to Los Angeles. Admiring carts filled with artwork and buying small trinkets makes us feel conflicted. Is it better to commercialize than have no cultural diversity? Olvera Street educates us about an "other" culture in an odd way. Fantasized version?
ReplyDeleteDuring urban labs, we must be cognizant about how we see. We try to take in our surroundings but I feel the implementation of groups cheapens our experience. I feel groups could distract our focus and how we think. Going forward, I wonder if people would be open to independently exploring during our urban labs. When alone, I can more effectively engage with my environment. Could we dedicate a certain amount of time where each of us would explore and critically observe? During this time we could find ourselves in conversation with a local learning about their life. I understand our time is often limited so I don't know how plausible this may be. During our discussion time tomorrow, I want to hear about people's ideas about how we can enrich our time and how we should conduct ourselves while doing so.
Although I don't think our labs are from a “service centric perspective,” I do believe that these labs perpetuate a feeling of intruding. Every time we go on an urban lab I always feel awkward just barging into a neighborhood for the benefit of our class. I always think about the people that live in these places we visit and how they must feel to have their neighborhood be part of a school project. The fact that we even get to go on urban labs shows the amount of privilege we have and how most of us regularly grab food which is most of the time too expensive. I think we need to be conscious of how we behave on urban labs and how we are contributing to the communities we are in.
ReplyDeleteAs for how we can better ourselves and prepare ourselves for our future urban labs I feel we should treat the places we are visiting with respect and the residents as people and not like spectacles. We should treat the people we interview like normal people and , like Alexis was saying, we should listen more and talk less.