SPACE: The Final Frontier, or the Beginning of Infinite Possibility?

Space is what you make of it.

It speaks volumes of the past, the present, and what is to come.

The space around you shapes who you are, where you are, and what you will become.

If used correctly, the space of Kutztown University can open a doorway...

Will you walk through it?

Read "An Analysis of Space" to avoid the negative space of the Final Frontier.

Trick or Truth

College is supposed to be a time when you make decisions for yourself, but are you really? You as a new student can do whatever you want at your own leisure and discover new paths, but are you unknowingly being set up to fit the mold of the "good" college student? Decipher the tricks from the truths in this fall's thriller "Trick or Truth", coming soon to a theatre near you.

Trick or Truth

College is supposed to be a time when you make decisions for yourself, but are you really? You as a new student can do whatever you want at your own leisure and discover new paths, but are you unknowingly being set up to fit the mold of the "good" college student? Decipher the tricks from the truths in this fall's thriller "Trick or Truth", coming soon to a theatre near you.

the Empty Room

an empty room
mirrors
barres

The dance studio is a place you go to express yourself. It is a fantasy land for nayone who steps in the door. Expressions are being revealed and stories are being told.

"All that is important is this one moment in movement. Make the move important, vital and worth living. Don't let it slip away unnoticed and unused." (Martha Graham)

"The Empty Room" coming to a theatre near you

The Dorm

In a world crowded by over six billion people, very few spaces can be considered truly private anymore. Even our dorms, the one place that may seem like our "home away from home" is a public space that we may not even realize we are a part of. "An Interesting Perspective" is an abstract that even Jane Jacobs could be proud of, examines our dorms, the very places we live, as a public space with vastly different uses than could be expected. Pending printing, the paper will appear in an English Composition class near you very soon.

my title sucks

At a time when adolescents must leave behind everything they know and make a new life in an unfamiliar town full of strangers... the experience can be terrifying, even traumatic. Choosing one of the world's plethora of universities in every imaginable kind of setting and atmosphere forces one to examine what kind of places can feel like home. "Learning to Love Small Towns" focuses on the particular environment of Kutztown University, and why its serene and simple campus can be the perfect place for its students to live, learn, and grow into themselves.

Work Hard, Play Hard

     How does Kutztown University see itself? Does this self-image mirror how the University is actually perceived? Most importantly, how does this affect you in your daily life? We'll take an in depth look at the architecture, landscaping, and maintainance of the campus to answer these questions and more.

-Tonk

A World of Silence

Imagine students being able to break free of the cliche that libraries are nothing more than silent asylums in which we are subjected to silence and whispers. Enter a maze of knowledge in Fall 2006. Discover the Rohrbach Library, a confusing network of passages that students utilize for their own benefits. Can you make it from through the long and difficult maze from start to finish successfully? Find out, when A World of Silence hits theatres this October.

!!!!! NEW !!!!!

You should be excited for the future of your education. No more sitting in classrooms with dull contempt. Look to the new face of learning at the end of 2006. You'll be taken on a white knuckle thrill ride through the campus of Kutztown University to discover what everyone's been talking about, the South Dining Hall. Starring you, me, and the South dining hall.

Is Kutztown University Decieving You?

Have you ever wondered if Kutztown University is telling you the truth? Step onto campus and into a world full of lies and deception. How do you know what is real, and what is just a front? In reality does Kutztown even care about you? Learn about this and much more in the upcoming series, "Is Kutztown University Decieving You?" every Monday and Wednesday from 3 to 4:20.

A charming exterior

The mind is a venue of thoughts and dreams. for every predetermined judgment we make there is an opaque exterior with tinted windows, shutting us out from the reveal deep within. But dreams and reality brutally clash and reality slowly takes over. is life a mixture of our dreams come true or the reality that is dealt to us?
A Charming Exterior Fall 2006

A Good Book

In a world of crazy happenings and even crazier people, how does one person find a quiet place to read. Join the mis-adventures of one person's fight against squirrels, study groups, and screaming cheerleaders in this semester's big hit, The Reader .
Coming to a Comp. class near you.

Campus Truths

In a world where the students don't study and the janitors don't clean
... Chaos runs amuck.
And there is only one man that can bring these people together...
Maury Povich
Come read this falls next biggest action adventure "Campus Truths" brought to you by Elena Castilla. Featuring guest appearances by John Fiske and Jane Jacobs.

A Must See!!!

From a small unheard of Mennonite high school…

an easy decision

leads to Kutztown University

Surprising similarities

Continuous additions

Places other than classrooms

None are better than others

Opportunity

Giving it your all

Dwindling grades

Stupid decisions



Will you be open to values that will provide you with the experience of a lifetime???


Values Imbedded At Kutztown

Shattered Truths...

In a World as horrific and scandoulous you can imagine, lies the secret that has stopped the very gears of a campus...
This physcological thriller will have you strapped to your seat as you uncover the deadly thruths...
..."No, you musn't go!...
...and the mind twisting secrets of...
..."You know what foul creatures hide there..."
..pulse beat..
..."You can't stop it..."
..pulse beat..
..."You can only accept it."
..pulse beat..
..Bright flash, screen clears..
Shattered Truths

Secret lives of buildings, wheee.

Buildings are usually just scenery, but what if that was wrong? What if there was actual meaning and secrets behind the construction?

Well, guess what! There is!

"Kutztown's Design and the Buildings Therein" is coming to select theaters soon to tell all about a few key points of the campus that you, too, may have wondered about! For example, why does Old Main have all that white trim anyway?

You know you wanna know.

Is your school a mullet?

One wouldn't think that a college could be compared to a haircut.
One wouldn't think it proper to compare Kutstown University to a mullet.
Fact is, the two are almost the perfect metaphor.

On first impression don't they both stand for business?
Isn't it sensible to say they both have a party side?
Is "Businness up Front, Party in the Back" really true of both Kutztown and the mullet?
Could it be possible that an out-of-date haircut represents the things that we love about Kutztown?

It is more then possible, find out how in the story that dares to compare the incomparable.

Feeture Presentation: walk the walk

A quite campus not unlike many others you have seen. . . but upon closer examination, everything is not as it seems. Normally social students have been replaced with glassy-eyed zombies who walk the campus paths past one another without even a word of acknowledgment. Is the art of communication truely dead? Has the KU campus become the breeding ground for the new Generation X or is there more here than meets the feet?

New Kids On The Block

(I kind of made a real looking movie trailer for mine, because I was bored, so click the link to go to it.. :) Thanks!)

New Kids On The Block

Where Do I Go???

6 Billion Plus People in the World....

9,800 of Them at Kutztown University...

Where Do They All Go???

Discover this in and more in Untitled...a paper by Kelly Bender

"How the h*** do I get out?!"

The dark rough-textured walls close in… dim lights flicker… footsteps echo emphasizing the emptiness…... locked doors jeer at lost students… don’t judge by appearance look deeper into the shadows… Find “Values in Unexpected Places” and the secrets of Old Main’s basement…

Coming to a theater supposedly near you, but actually fifty miles away… See it

You in KU: The Individuality Feeding

As you casually stroll from class to lunch do you have a feeling that someone is looking over your shoulder? As you find a spot to eat under the trees outside, you get that same goosebump feeling. You look up from your baloney sandwich but you can't see anyone aroun you. This hidden entitiy stays in the shadows, observes and feeds off of your every move. KU is stalking you and your individualism...Find out who really want the YOU in KU and why. Coming this September 26th to a local theatre near you.

WHAT(Z)TOWN

RAPE! DRUGS! SUICIDE! THE SEAMY UNDERBELLY OF KUTZTOWN IS EXPOSED..... OR IS IT? WHAT IS IT?...... how and why are WE a part of it? Are WE sucked in mindlessly.... Or can WE fight it? Do WE fight it? Intentions...clear and unclear......a struggle between good and evil........ENDING AND UNENDING................ horse and buggies...drunken boys...bubble gum encrusted garbage cans........... KU GETS HARDCORE ANALYZED BY COCO G. FALL 2006.

Only the Strong and Adventurous Survive

This fall, experience the thrill of CLIFFHANGERS, SAVAGE WARFARE, and FIERCE COMPETITION as you discover how to fight the forces of evil and boredom all within the confines of a weekend spent on campus. "Very well crafted!" raves Chris Tonkinson of ctonk.com.
ONLY THOSE LEFT BEHIND CAN LIVE TO TELL THE TALE OF...

Silent Campus

Rated PG-13 for intense action; starting October 9th in select cities.

Visit our website at www.SilentCampusTheMovie.com for more

Boredom is the DEBBIL!! ~Cajun Woman

chill out, Fiske.

This was the first reading I've done for this class that almost completely failed to inspire any kind of response from me. As many others have pointed out, his writing style was very dry, and it was tedious to have to read through so many statistics and facts to reach his points, which sounded like common sense to me anyway. I also disagreed with the way he portrayed malls, as consumer fortresses full of tension and struggle between classes, full of intoxicated, rebellious teenagers trying to wreak havoc. In my experience, the teenagers that hang out at my local malls are simply bored and in need of a place to go to pass the time. If they didn't have malls to hang out at, they could be getting into much worse trouble elsewhere. And I don't think that there is tension between those who come to malls with the intention of purchasing something and those that don't-- malls are set up to encourage that sort of behavior, with large walkways and benches and plenty of places to go even if you're not buying anything. Window shopping and just hanging out aren't crimes, and I don't really understand what about it upset Fiske so much.

Malls

Right.... So I struggled to read this thing and nearly fell asleep. I'm not going to go into great detail about the article, because I fear that without a bit of paraphrasing - from some brave, masochistic soul who could dodge Fiske's striking command of the English language to extract real meaning - that I'm not well enough informed as to the contents of the reading to write anything of value. I will however input a little something of my own opinion.

Friske's rampage about how shopping and religion are very deeply similar may be a great metaphor in passing, with a couple lines of supporting detail, however his incessant crusade is far too much. Hanging out at the mall is an activity that any parents I know would approve of over many alternative... we'll say "passtimes"... in which youths are able to partake. Honestly, I go to the mall to get what I need and I get out. But, for some people, they just enjoy being there, I suppose one could feel as if it's the heart of social activity in a young persons life. Friske also makes insinuations that the only mall-frequenters are, supposedly, a striking percentage of unemployed young people, and that there exists a cause-and-effect relationship. One might go so far as to imagine Friske's idea of going to the mall without having to buy something as some sort of pagan tradition; something to be scorned; mocked; punishable. I'd love to see crime and drug rates in suburban areas explode if suddenly malls everywhere closed, then be there with a Lazy-Boy and popcorn to watch Friske scramble for words.

ps - Next time you're at the mall, mentally note the ages of everyone you see. The malls around my area? Bunch of elderly folk sitting on benches people-watching. I know that it's probably not the case everywhere, but my opinion stands: Friske needs to get over himself.

Ugh, big words.

This article? Major disappointment. My head hurt already after only reading the first paragraph, and after the second I feel like I have a migraine. Well, I already have a migraine, but you get my point. Reading other people's responses before I started this piece built it up to be something I would laugh at but in reality, it takes a good couple of reads to get through.

I didn't enjoy how he completely ATTACKED one side. I mean, I've done that in writing, but there was just no need to do that.

His conclusion was not actually a conclusion. The last paragraph felt like just another paragraph into another argument, but it turns out that it was the end.

Aaaaaaaand.. I just didn't like his writing style. It was kind of like what we did in class on Monday, where we talked about superiority and stuff like that. Umm... sorry this isn't more helpful. Being sick = not focusing very well.

Guileful ruse of the weak

I thought this article was kind of funny because it is mostly true. Though I would say that in our society today, Pennsylvania in 2006, most of the people that go to shopping malls actually want to buy something. Except for Friday nights perhaps, when I've seen multitudes of bored young adults roaming around aimlessly. But nevertheless, I think that if mall goers are using their "guileful ruse" to defy security guards and store clerks, as De Certeau says, then they are taking advantage of their own intelligence and not giving in to the constant barrage of tactics that stores use to sell products. People need a place to hang out, and the mall is as good of a place as any if you are looking for entertainment. I think Fiske is correct in saying that "Shopping malls are where the strategy of the powerful is most vulnerable to the tactical raids of the weak." People will hopefully continue to be smart enough to think for themselves when they are at a mall, instead of falling prey to the researched methods that stores use to lure in buyers.

I'd Rather Be Shopping...

So I didn't like this article very much. However, I did enjoy the metaphor, "shopping malls are cathedrals of consumption". I think it's very true to say that products are "icons of worship". How often have you seen something you wanted very badly and focused only on that one thing until you got it... or came to terms with the fact that you weren't going to get it. He then goes on to talk about Pressdee's analysis of the local mall's promotion slogan, "Your ticket to a better shopping world: ADMITS EVERYONE". Everyone can go to a mall, but it's not equal in any sense, because only those with money will be able to buy things. Lastly, he goes into detail about how teenagers use malls incorrectly. He says that teenagers go there to hang out, do drugs, drink alcohol; they don't go with the intention of buying things. In this sense they are just taking up space and shouldn't be there. I agree with this. Even though it is a public space, it should be used by those with a purpose, those who are there to use it in the way it was created to be used. Perhaps those teenagers should get a job; then they could go to the mall with money and the ability to buy things.

Shopping Malls, yay!

I actually enjoyed this article; it was easy to understand and mentioned some interesting facts. Something that stuck out for me was that 90% of new products fail to find sufficient buyers to survive. Okay, now, I understand that there are many products out there that never seem to gather a crowd of buyers (Hello, nose-hair trimmer), but I didn't think that number was 90%. Something else I found humorous was when Fiske talked about the mall being open to everyone equally, when really "equality" translates to "people with money that have the potential to buy something". Oh, America. Then he launched into stuff which we already know, such as the large number of teenagers who hang out at the mall and the fact that "nearly 100% of young unemployed women were regular visitors". The funny thing about it was that the author talked of young people "not buying, but taking up space". I thought this was ironic because of what we are talking about in class. However, Fiske made it seem like teenagers taking up space in the mall was a bad thing, at least that is what I got out of it. Maybe it's due to the fact that he immediately began talking about how kids are evicted from the mall with their drugs, alcohol, and sarcastic comments. Well, I at least thought this was better than Sidewalks. :)

Teens and Shopping Malls

Well if I may say, I was not a big fan of Fiske's writing. I don't really like his style of writing and I didn't really like the way he presented his ideas. I understood where he was going with the whole metaphor of consumerism as a religion(after I read the story like 3 times) and his ideas behind it. However, i don't think it was a very good metaphor and I think any ordinary person reading this would stop after the first two sentences. I also felt as though I wasn't being persuaded to think of things from his point of view, it felt more like I had to think of it his way. He didn't leave any other options for the reader.

With that said ... I understand why it would be annoying to have teenagers go to the mall without intention to buy anything , but at the same time why isn't it annoying the older people go to the mall just to walk around with no intention to buy anything? This is where I think Fiske is being ageist. Its alright for adults to do something but as soon as a tennager does that same thing it becomes a problem. I mean the adults are doing anything illegal but maybe if the mall tended to these teenagers the way they did the adult they wouldn't be. For instance, the provided an exercise area for the mall walkers, maybe if they just set a aside a section of the mall with tables and chairs for the kids to sit and hang out they wouldn't have as many problems as they do.

Rats...I just lost everything I typed didn't I...

So...attempt number two at this...I started out attempting to read John Fiske's article, but found myself slightly distracted by the noises the washing machine was making (woooshwooosh). I don't find it a good sign when I can't keep myself entertained enough to overpower the...wonderful...sounds made by the washing machine. But nevertheless I stuck through it. I didn't find it odd that this didn't appeal to me for two main reasons. First of all I am definitly not the kind of person who would pick up a journal entitled Reading the Popular. Secondly, I am a mall dwelling (Walmart counts as a mall...right?), trouble-stirring teen who enjoys nothing better then rustling a few elderly feathers.

Before i continue I must admit how difficult this is to sit and write with "Fight Club" playing out in the living area...but I will resist...for now at least. I got a few main points from reading this; malls are multi-purposeful, whether or not that is a good thing is arguable; the crowd that mall tends to appeal to is a trouble-stirring, defiant youth; and even old people can abuse the intended use of a mall. I understand though that the intended message was more along the lines of explaining a cultural passtime that doesn't logically make sense. The most represented group at the mall is the jobless teenagers. What attraction a place of consumption...a "cathedral of consumption"...has to the unemployed doesn't make sense...or does it? When there's no where else to hang out...head to the mall, when you have a few bucks to blow on a video game...head to the mall, when your parents are driving you nuts...head to the mall. Our culture is built on places of gathering, from church to malls to restaraunts, people hate seclusion. Malls really have no room to complain, teens do spend money without any realization of how important it will be in their college years. Who doesn't at least buy a soda (and not just to put whiskey in)? Malls are a staple of the American culture and the American economy, and their current uses and purposes aren't changing any time soon. Now to catch the end of "Fight Club."

Teens accomplish nothing? No Fiske that's you! (HEHE)

Throughout this reading Fiske makes it seem as if teenagers going to and being at malls accomplishes nothing. Well, I feel the same way about Fiske’s piece. After reading only the first paragraph I had to step back and really think about what I had just read. Not because it was intriguing, but because it just made me go…huh?! Now being someone with a short attention span this was definitely not the way to catch my attention. This fact really disappointed me because before reading the piece the title really caught my eye and had me excited.

The rest of the piece was not much better at all, actually it wasn’t better. I completely agree with what Kelly B. said, I felt like Fiske was speaking way above my level. He never tried to connect with me the reader…he was kind of just in his own little world talking to himself. A few other people said how this article was repetitious, and I couldn’t agree more. I’m just glad the article wasn’t any longer, so I didn’t have to hear again how annoying, horrible, and tricky teenagers are. Way to make us feel good Fiske!

The only thing I found interesting in this article (the same as “Phillygirl”) was the facts that Fiske stated about the percentage of a new product succeeding. I couldn’t believe that new products have an 80-90 percent chance of failing. That’s just insane! I know that Fiske was trying to get at the idea of space and how we use it, but I don’t feel as if he did a good job of attaining that goal.

Shopping for $500, Alex.

I have to say that the whole metaphor set up by Fiske in his writing “Shopping for Pleasure” is not at all foreign to me. I actually had to endure discussions about it in middle school and high school religion classes, teaching us about the evils of consumerism and about how abstinence from overindulgence was key to our livelihood. But aside from the obvious layer of the message, which has already been ingrained in me by so many theology courses, the other ideas that the reading uses to set up this metaphor is actually very interesting. Who’d have thought that the term “mall rat” could prove to be so correct in terms of people who spend their time in malls?

Fiske spends his entire passage talking about the research from a man by the name of Pressdee, who apparently has a Doctoral degree in shopping, and about all of the observations and conclusions that this man reached in his studies. I want to start off by saying that I thought the tone of this passage, much like that of “Sidewalks…” is very dry and boring, catering to informative ends without necessarily entertaining the reader. Anyway, the whole message he is trying to convey is that those who window shop, or the “mall rats” as we like to call them, cause anxiety and fear on the part of the storekeepers in the mall. In reality, most of these people are simply deceiving these figures of authority simply because they come in numbers.

One of the points that Fiske explains is that in fact none of these people are actually any different from the people who come in the middle of the day, it is simply that they come in much greater numbers. This causes the people who spend their time in the mall to be more anxious at peak hours; Fiske even alludes to stories where security guards check the drinks that people are holding to make sure that they have not been spiked with alcohol. One of the other points brought up this article that really perplexed me were the actual statistics on people who buys things in a mall. I‘ve always known that there are people hanging around doing nothing, but I didn’t expect the numbers to be that high.

Poor Fiske

I loved this essay from the very fist sentence to the last. I loved Fiske's writing style. His use of advanced vocabulary and alliteration in the intro grabbed my attention and kept it. Maybe it's because I'm an aspiring English teacher but his use of literary devices and varied sentence structures just made me go crazy. I have to admit that I was so blown away by the way he wrote the essay, that I wasn't even paying attention to the subject matter. I was so focused on how much I liked the writing style that I didn't even stop to consider whether I actually agreed with Fiske's arguments. How could I disagree with something so well done. So I was very surprised to log on here and see that the majority of people that responded hated it. After seeing this negative response I reread the article and tried to focus on Fiske's points. I can see why many people would be angered that he generalized teenagers but I personally didn't see a problem with it. I didn't see it as him saying that teenagers are bad for going to malls and drinking or breaking the rules. I think his point was that malls are not soley used for shopping any more. I know personally that if I actually wanted to shop I would go by myself to the mall, it would be much more efficient. Instead I go with my friends and socialize. I don't hide alcohol in my soda can but I goof off and if I happen to see something I like then I'll buy it. So I wouldn't be surprised if I get in a debate with some people tomorrow in class but I think that combination of style that Fiske used and the quotes he took made his piece a strong and persuasive one.

Shopping For Pleasure

"The metaphor of consumerism as a religion, in which commodities become the icons of worship and the rituals of exchanging money for goods become a secular equivalent of holy communion, is simply too glib to be helpful, and too attractive to those whose intentions, whether they be moral or political, are to expose the evils and limitations of bourgeois materialism."
Shopping For Pleasure: Malls, Power, and Resistance - John Fiske

I have to be honest; after reading that sentence, I really had no desire to read any further. I highly dislike when authors construct sentences that are so long and complex that by the time you’ve finished reading it, you have to work to remember what the beginning was about. Although I was able to get through that sentence, the rest of the article wasn’t much of an improvement. He had a way of using a lot of words but actually saying very little. The only passages that I found to be of any interest at all were those regarding the failure rates of new products. It is amazing to me that that quantity of new merchandise does not find a consumer base. 80 % is an astounding figure, and he suggested on as high as 90%.

Aside from that tidbit of information, I really didn’t feel as though I got anything out of what he said. He became too bogged down in metaphors for my taste. Beginning with the "consumerism as a religion" and "congregating within these cathedrals of capitalism" metaphor would have been fine if he had simply carried that one through the work, but instead he goes from that to the ticket example to how teenagers rebel against the ideals of the mall creators with their alcohol disguised in soda cans and their loitering. Any one of those "hooks" would have worked fairly well alone, but together, I felt overwhelmed and really learned very little from this piece.

Shopping causes me to make dots at the screen.

I'm finding it hard to care about this article at all. I never was one to hang out at a mall with friends--in fact I'm not even sure where we would have even gone. On the other hand, I'm not much of a shopper either. ...okay, I lie, I like to buy books, but I don't need to go to the mall for that.

It makes sense that the mall owners and tenants wouldn't like having the non-customers there, since they want money, and possibly need extra money to survive as they are. It also makes sense that people would want to come inside of a building instead of staying outside--especially in summer and winter--and would do that with a building that they're allowed to enter (because it's usually loitering that get people in trouble).

Making references and comparisons to religion and warfare seems harsh, but at least they're both equally intense.

The theme? Designers/experts aren't always right, of course. That's pretty obvious. Also, it's what we were talking about in class. I just can't really say anything except that I agree in general but am clueless about this specific situation.

Black Friday Warfare

First off, this story wasn’t very interesting (I never thought someone could actually make shopping boring). This article might be more interesting to someone that owns a business in a mall or to someone interested in economics. I agree with John Friske’s opposition to the metaphor between shopping and religion and his reasoning that the consumer has more power than the slaves to consumerism that they are often portrayed as being. However, I don’t agree with the idea that shopping is “warfare” though (even if Black Friday can get a little violent); both the consumer and the businesses have power, but the power is often used in a beneficial way for both parties. Power can be shared and doesn’t always necessitate a struggle or war. As for the “tricksters,” food businesses should be welcoming those “youths” to the mall, because eventually those teenagers are going to get hungry or thirsty and buy something to eat or drink. Teenagers and pre-teens are only hanging out at malls, because communities often don’t have another place for them to hang out at. Instead of just complaining about teenagers hanging out in the mall, people should be wondering why they are hanging out in a mall. Is this a habit, because there is no where else in the community for teens to go, or because those teenagers happen to find a comforting environment in the mall? If it’s the environment that draws the teenagers creating a similar environment elsewhere could stop this “problem” and creating a recreation center could help if teenagers are in the mall because there is nothing else to do with spare time in that community. As the article states, the way that malls use space is changing. The mall is becoming more considerate of it’s customers with comfy chairs as opposed to only hard wooden benches and adding little park areas for people with small children instead of parents having to drag children around the mall. This change is definitely for the better; the mall is becoming more than just a place to buy things, it is now a meeting place, a place for diner, a place to talk to friends, and a place to people watch. This progression goes along with how our culture has changed since the birth of the mall. Although many people go to the mall to buy the things they need, they can also eat there and sit down and relax for a few moments between all the rushing around. Like in Murphy Davis’s article, the mall should be geared toward the buyer which would also cause higher profit margins for the businesses.

Coco thinks you guys are harsh..!

WOOO! There is a lot of intense raging hate for this article----"Shopping for Pleasure: Malls, Power, and Resistance" by John Fiske----and I say, BOO! It was a nice quick article, compared to some of the others--and I feel I understood it's message. It's a little silly too--The article is like something we recently learned about in Theater--a melodrama--it's taking itself very seriously, while the subject matter is actually very light and trivial. The use of the religion metaphor, as well as the "guerilla warfare" remark add weight to something we don't think about all that often. Who cares about Woodruff Park? That's not my kind of shindig. I'll take the mall. I accept the fact that people use it, and that this use often has "unintended consequences" (something we talked about in my Government class today!) One thing that concerns me though--the fact that Fiske uses huge portions of other writings in with his own---although very nicely cited (heehee)---I made that mistake on my first research paper in ninth grade and wound up getting...well, a 96, but ever since then I've cut down. He needs to cut down a smidge. Other than that, let him go! It was a nice article to read over lunch, and ties in with what we've been doing--discovering "truths," intentions, and space.

Mall Madness and Real Fruit Smoothies

Who would have guessed that it would take a study to find out that teens go to the mall just to hang out? If you didn't realize from that rhetorical question that I did not like this story, then I shall tell you. I didn't like this story. Of course there are people out there who go to malls to actually buy something and people who go to malls just because they have nothing else to do. It seems funny to me how Fiske and Sinclair are stating how very few products survive in the marketplace and how window shoppers could be the cause. If I would go to any store such as Sears or Circuit City, there would be a 100% chance that I would find either an aisle or a bin containing random knick-knacks or an "As Seen on TV" sign on it. Most of these things are random crap that no human in their right mind would buy or believe would work. Since I said "in their right mind", there would also be a good chance that I would see someone buying the stuff as well. There should be another study to find out the success rate of products that are actually worth purchasing or are not extreme luxuries. Let us see how well a $19.99 flourescent desk lamp fairs against a $1499.99 massaging recliner or a $79.95 dog water purifying machine (both are real and the prices are close to correct for what I have seen) in the marketplace. But then again, the study would have to be valid if it were government funded because the results were information that we already know and probably took years for the researchers to figure out. Lastly, of course the suppliers want the window shoppers ("proletarian shoppers" by Pressdee's standards but he just wants to be fancy) to actually buy something because then they would get money. Including that are the teens who just sit around and do nothing or perform by what Fiske called it, "tricky" behavior and mess with the mall cops. There's nothing wrong with stickin' it to the man, especially if you have no money to spend at the mall anyway haha.

And where does the real fruit smoothies come into play? Well, you could probably buy them at a mall. It'd be easier to just go to the rec center snack bar though. $3.50 for a real fruit smoothie...not too shabby. So everyone buy yourself a real fruit smoothie, but it in a paper bag and walk around some mall drinking it while it's still in the paper bag so you can be "tricky." Make some use of that "proletarian shopping" while you're at it.

Malls, and Children and Destruction

All three go hand in hand? I did not realize that when a large group of teens enter a mall, the first thing on their mind is to not buy anything, destroy and piss people off, and steal. Sure, people shoplift, others purposely destroy things, and some just go out to anger others...but where does it stop becomeing personal, and where did it get generalized to "all" teens?
Are they really scared of younger people living in the same community? Are the police really afraid that all the children are drinking, stealing, and doing drugs, that they must move in groups and break up others from having fun, just becaue of fear...in a mall?
This is a ludicrous essay, generalizing and stereotying. The allusions to capitalist society, also entailing consumerism specifically, as a church, a being people can relate to, I believe, was the only good part of the essay. Boring and melodramatic from the start, this dry, over compensating essay, spilling over with data from other sources, is a complete turnoff for those who enjoy a good read, and general truth and knowledge, though those can be two different entities.

I remember when I used to piss off the old people at the mall...

Those were good times. This article totally blew, but there were a few things I did like about it. This isn't my type of read, so naturally by the middle of it I lost interest, but the intro definitely sucked me in. I loved the author's churchy metaphors that he used to describe consumerism. I can also understand where he is coming from with his opinions about the weak vs. the strong, and having mallrats f___ up the program for owners and other consumers. Other than that, it was a horrid read. I hate writings with statistics and too many quotes, so that was a definite downgrade. Plus the whole article had that creepy, power-hungry feel to it, and I am not into that either. Power is usually bad, especially when it involves money (which is most of the time). The only good part about this reading was that I got to have fun flashbacks to all of those crazy times at the mall when I used to cause chaos and mayhem. I wish I was 14 again, lol.

WTF Mate?! Do you care about an Australian Mall?

This story by John Fiske is ridiculous. Malls are open to the general public and therefore everyone is allowed in whether or not they intend on buying anything. I fail to see how not buying something makes you weak. If someone sees something they want but don't actually need and they don't buy it they are showing a strong will. It is easy to spend money, saving it is the hard part. If you only let in people that were looking for something to buy then the mall would be a much emptier place and quite impossible because you can't force someone to buy something in every store they go in. Just imagine all the people that go to the mall with no intention to buy anything only to see something they really like and splurge. If these people were cut off from the mall think of how much business the stores would lose. Going back to Woodruff Park think of how making the mall inhospitable for such a large group of people make less and less people want to go there. If the so-called "strong" are so dependent on the "weak" buying from them then maybe they are not as strong as we think.

i can't f***ing stand it

Often finding myself either annoyed or bored with the consumer driven society we live in, this article was of particular interest to me. I recently saw the film "Devil wears prada" and while mildly amused by the birth of a brand new level of chick-flick, i was also mildly nauseated by the concept of anyone caring that deeply for clothing or any other kind of material item. Nothing personally against people in the fashion industry, but what great effect does the color of a sweater you wear have on the world around you? Even after watching that movie, i had no clue myself.
it was an interesting article that while written well was also informative concererning the arguments it made. It never occured to me that i rarely buy things when i go shoppng, but simply observe, try things on, and consider how bad i really do look in capri pants. It's sad that so much of (american) life revolves around consumerism and not the more important things. The point that those people attending shopping malls most frequently are unemployed was quite eye opening. Consumerism is the medicine of the 21st century and it is a completely inadequate remedy. People obsess over what they have and do not have to the point that ownership of meaningless items and the act of consumption have become an unspoken competition among people, even those who do not have the ability to compete. The stress put on materialism equalling social status needs to be removed from the average american mindset in order for the nation to progress outside of the narrow circle of consumption.
What kills me the most is to think that this continual need to replace new with newer is so often more important to individuals than so many more important things in this world. Materialism leads to onesideness and a sheltered life among all of the tragic yet contemporary events of the world outside of a shopping mall. i can't f***ing stand it.

Mall Rats and Statistics...

Well...I don't know...I thought that the writing was rather boring. It didn't really tell me anything i didn't know from my own experience, as far as teenagers hanging out at the mall goes. I know at the mall where I'm from we call friday freak night. This is not saying that all the crazy people come out on friday nights to the mall, but friday nights are over run with gangs of 12-17 yr olds just hanging around. The thing is that these gangs of kids aren't nice gangs of kids..many of them are kind of scary..I know my mom doesn't like going to the mall on friday nights because she's scared. I didn't really see the point of the writing. I don't know if i just didn't read it well enough or what. I got the part about kids just walking around and enjoying window shopping. I do that. I'll walk around the mall with no purpose of buying anything specific, but I don't hang around the mall for hours. I just stay their long enough to go through all my favorite shops.
I don't know why store owners wouldn't want teenagers around their stores because teenagers are usually given a good amount of money from their parents to spend. I could see, however that these young people might heckle older people if the store isn't the kids' genre. I could also see how groups of kids causing a ruckus might make people ike my mom wary about going to the mall and shopping. And this I suppose would scare off buyers.
I think that it's good that people make use of a mall other than actually going there to buy stuff, although i guess the shop owners don't like it very much. But why would you write about it? Malls are made for people to buy stuff in, this is true but there is nothing amatter with people using it for different stuff like walking and just window shopping. When going to buy something at a mall, i'm not bothered by the non-buyers. Non-buyers don't change my mind about buying a certain product.

Shizzoppp 'Til You Drizzoppp

I too felt disappointed in the reading. I was expecting to read a happy story about shopping and I was maybe thinking it was a story about shopping addiction. I was very saddened by his idea that shopping malls are open invitations to trickery and tenacity. Sure kids will be kids, but kids can be kids anywhere they choose to be, its not just in a shopping mall. Not all teenagers are subjected to stealing and what have you.
Although i do believe their are teenagers who like to rebel, good comes along with evil. He presented too many facts for me to even enjoy the reading. He didn't reel me in with his way of writing. Besides the fact that i learned a little more about shopping mall and teenageres, nothing more came out of it.
The beginning was raw and it didn't capture my attention whatsoever, but i must say the ending kinda sorta got me interested. All i can say is i've read better

I just want to shop...

I have to say I was a bit disappointed in the "Shopping" essay. As someone who likes to go to the mall to hang out with her friends and have a good time, I was expecting a fun, interesting read. I should've known better since it was written by a man. Just kidding! I really am. That was low. This piece never fully caught my attention and it didn't leave me wanting more. I'm not quite sure what it was about the article.

Maybe it was the way the author wrote it. It felt too factual for me and it felt like he was talking above my level. I like feeling involved in a story and Fiske never invited me to his party. I think it was great that he researched a place filled with all sorts of culture but it sounded like he was talking about things that he never got involved with.

In class today, we were talking about experience and how important it is to knowledge. Fiske talks like he stood off to the side and just watched people walking by. He just observed what was happening and made judgments about people and issues that he never got to know or experienced. I understand that the main function of a mall is for consumers to go and give stores their money but for many people teenagers in particular the mall is a safe place to gather. I see no problem with that.

Overall, the article was well written but a little too boring for my liking.

Sidewalks and Woodruff Park

I will say that I completely agree with Jacobs statement in that sidewalks and streets of city define what it is. I city would not be what it is without them and the people that use them. They paint the picture for the kind of city, town or suburb one would want to live in or visit as well as the ones we would want to avoid. These parts of the cities that people avoid or state as unsafe is because of us, the people that use them. These streets didn't do anything to themselves to make them unsafe, it is the people that live on them and use them for other things besides their true purpose. It only takes one mishap on a certain sidewalk or street for it to be labeled as "unsafe," do you think that is a fair assumption?

Also, the view Davis takes on the Woodruff Park issue and the issues of Atlanta is one that I would side for. I believe that a city should serve the people that live there and use it's resources each and every day. This park made great use of the land some years ago, but now it is just a pretty picture to look at. I don't agree with "wasting" land like that. Parks are meant for relaxing, kids to play in, and even somewhere to take you pets.

Sidewalks and Woodruff Park

I will say that I completely agree with Jacobs statement in that sidewalks and streets of city define what it is. I city would not be what it is without them and the people that use them. They paint the picture for the kind of city, town or suburb one would want to live in or visit as well as the ones we would want to avoid. These parts of the cities that people avoid or state as unsafe is because of us, the people that use them. These streets didn't do anything to themselves to make them unsafe, it is the people that live on them and use them for other things besides their true purpose. It only takes one mishap on a certain sidewalk or street for it to be labeled as "unsafe," do you think that is a fair assumption?

Also, the view Davis takes on the Woodruff Park issue and the issues of Atlanta is one that I would side for. I believe that a city should serve the people that live there and use it's resources each and every day. This park made great use of the land some years ago, but now it is just a pretty picture to look at. I don't agree with "wasting" land like that. Parks are meant for relaxing, kids to play in, and even somewhere to take you pets.

where the sidewalk ends.

It was interesting to me to first read Jane Jacobs' article, and then the responses to it that were posted on here. It shows that anything, even something as mundane and unexciting as a sidewalk, can stir up controversy. Of course, exciting or not, sidewalks are important things that can alter the atmosphere of a city or town, they can make the difference between a walk down the street being a pleasant, relaxed stroll or a tense walk home full of suspicion and the worry that your wallet will be missing when you arrive at your destination. I grew up in an extremely safe suburban town, but the neighborhood I lived in until a few months ago had no sidewalks or streetlights. Even though almost every resident on my street was over the age of 70 or otherwise completely harmless, walking down the street at night was always a slightly creepy and uncomfortable experience. I enjoy taking solitary late-night walks, but having to trudge through neighbor's yards on the pitch-black street often made me nervous enough to head home early. At the beginning of this year, my family moved to a new house in the same town. It's only a few streets down from my old house, but the street I live on now has sidewalks in perfect condition and is well-lit at night. My walks have become much more pleasant and I feel much safer in my new neighborhood. Such a small thing as a strip of even concrete and a few well-placed streetlights give my new street a much homier and more comfortable feeling. It's also encouraging to see all the other people out walking their dogs or strolling down the street-- as Jacobs pointed out, a well-used street almost always feels safer than one that is deserted.
Murphy Davis's article addressed the difficult moral issue of rearranging public spaces to discourage homeless people from staying there. It is somewhat appalling that after the difficult lives homeless people live, devoid of the comforts and pleasures that everyone else takes completely for granted, the more well-off can't even condescend to allow them to sleep in our parks. On the other hand, however, most more fortunate people are frightened or made uncomfortable by sharing their space with the homeless. This is an unfortunate prejudice, but not entirely unbased-- the lives of the homeless are very different from ours, and desperation often leads people to commit acts that they wouldn't normally do. If someone was made uncomfortable enough to be in a park where there were always bums sleeping on the benches, they would probably choose not to go there, and so they would effectively be driven out much as the city chose to drive out the homeless. So basically, the problem isn't that we don't want the homeless to sleep in our parks, it's that they are forced to sleep there in the first place. Rather than simply forcing them to leave and hoping that they will go away and not attract the attention of the wealthy, white businesspeople that the city wishes to see frequenting the parks, the government needs to take positive action towards providing the homeless a better place to go, which would improve the lives of everyone concerned.

And then there's the Open Door Community

I couldn't help myself...after all that stuff I posted on Jane Jacobs, I thought I would do a little search on Atlanta's Open Door Community, the organization that Murphy Davis co-founded. Very interesting organization. Here's how they describe their organization:

The Open Door Community is a residential community in the Catholic Worker tradition (we’re sometimes called a Protestant Catholic Worker House!). We seek to dismantle racism, sexism and heterosexism, abolish the death penalty, and create the Beloved Community on Earth through a loving relationship with some of the most neglected and outcast of God’s children: the homeless and our sisters and brothers who are in prison.

They produce a monthly newsletter called Hospitality that could serve as some good primary research material. Getting a sense of their language and politics can also help situate the essay "Woodruff Park and the Search for Common Ground" we read today. I also think the title the newsletter is telling as to the kind of guiding metaphors the organization subscribes to. The Open Door Community has compiled a PDF book of writing from Hospitality, called I Hear Hope Banging on My Back Door available for download (it's 98 pages long!).

Sidewalks and such...

Well, now that I've spent an hour trying to update my Virus Definition file in order to get online, I guess it's time (finally) to post to the English blog! Yeah, if it isn't obvious, I hate Clean Access Agent and all of the network software here at Kutztown....

Personally, I found the writing by Jen Jacobs rather dry and boring. It seemed more like a long list of figures and isolated accounts rather than a flowing narrative, which conveyed the point that was trying to be made by the passage. What I did find interesting about the entire writing though was the view that Jacobs took to the concept of safety on the streets of major cities. I personally always thought that the only way to lower crime in a city was to increase the police coverage of any particular area (this is of course from news reports I’ve seen living in the outskirts of Philly as well as my own personal experience in Sim City… just kidding.) The entire concept that the safety of the streets is enhanced by crowded areas and constant traffic seems counterintuitive when you look at the clichéd crimes in major cities, like pick pocketing, but in reality, when one really thinks about it, is the better way to watch the streets. Having a bust street encourages bystanders as well as people in their homes and businesses watching the streets, as Jacobs pointed out in the story of the old man and the little girl, and can help to stem a tide of crime in any major city.

On the other hand Murphy Davis’ piece on Woodruff Park seemed to have more of an impact simply because of that fact that it was written from a more emotional and subjective standpoint, establishing the idea that it is better to have a well transverse and sociable setting than some kind of sterile environment in the middle of a city that draws people away. This passage brought up an idea that I never would have thought of either, that the city of Atlanta and those responsible for its planning seem more interested in a sterile city, inhabitable to the homeless, than they do in creating an environment which encourages people to spend time outside in the city.

The thing that I found very interesting with these two passages is that the two authors’ views seem to complement each other perfectly. On one hand, you have Davis’ piece about how it would be far more desirable to create an urban environment which is naturally beautiful and encourages people to not just spend time in it, but to actually s inhabit that space. Then you have Jacob’s piece about how an areas, which encourages people to inhabit the space, will create a safer and more pleasant environment in any city. I now understand why we read both of these passages at the same time. Even though they were thematically and stylistically different from each other, their concepts complemented each other and created an overarching concept of what public space construction can convey a message as well as benefit the people that inhabit that space.

sidewalks running away from the streets we knew...

I have to say that i personally did not enjoy reading Jacobs' "The Uses of Sidewalks-Safety". It was equally entertaining as the great act of watching grass grow...in my opinion. The points she was making were very good; saying that sidewalks have a large effect on the town in which they are set but I firmly believe that to make any argument success, there needs to be a method do your progression. In other words, there needs to be a draw for the reader, something they find entertaining and interesting about it, in order to make them actually want to finish the reading. When i first started reading this essay i was bored to tears and found myself flipping through the pages, stopping every so often on a random paragraph. From doing this it seemed to me that the article never truly progressed. It just seemed to get longer and even more boring than the page preceding it. Now i may be critisizing this a tad harshly but in my opinion it is well deserved. People don't care about sidewalks. I mean yes, they may care about them being there, i know i always enjoy them being around and make good use of them when i am in their company. But who cares about reading an article about sidewalks?? Not too many people and i can guarantee that if not assigned this reading neither myself or my classmates would look through the table of contents and decide that "Sidewalks" sounded like a pageturner. Nothing against the assignment itself or the actual topic. What this all boils down to for me is that if an author wants to persuade people to believe something they believe, at least show a little passion for the topic. Make us find a reason to sit down and read it and we will give you a reason to be proud of your piece.

However, the second reading i did find more enjoyable. Davis' writing style is both informative yet mildly satirical. Saying things like " a five million dollar face life" makes the article more entertaining to read, therefore more likely to be read. Although the writing style was enjoyable to read, it did not take away from the serious message in this article. It was not distracting and if anything made the author seem more passionate about her argument than someone who was simply displaying the facts.
It made me sad that the park was geared to make homeless people stear clear of it. I suppose i can understand the perspective of the city on this but at the same time, homeless people are still people; they are still part of our society. By shutting them out of public areas, we are sending the message to the public that homeless people are beneath us. We cannot give birth to a society that breeds poverty and then so carelessly turn our back on those we have poisoned.
The main concept of this article was that, by trying to keep out one type of person you end up eliminating the welcome people from the facility as well. I'm not sure how i feel about this actual statement. My question would be when do people go from being welcome to being unwelcome? Is a child molester dressed in a polo shirt more deserving of a park than a homeless person with no shoes? I suppose my feelings really come down to something other than the actualy article topics. Overall the article was written well with good points made. However it does make me wonder various things about the judgements people places on each other and on society as a whole.

For those who just can't get enough of Jacobs

Hey all,
Given the overwhelming outpouring of love for Jane Jacobs' essay, "The Use of Sidewalks--Safety," I thought I'd let you know that she didn't stop writing with her 1961 essay that we read for today. Jacobs just died this past spring, but many of her essays live on. You can check out at 2002 interview with members of the World Bank here.

To be honest, I was amazed to see how wide her influence extended. A blog was put in to offer memories and reflections of her work following her death...Quite telling what people have to say. I also found some video clips...in particular this interview on her "web way of thinking." There's another interesting interview on "creative cities" here. There is also an interesting program about her and her influence on urban developmen on the Public Radio International (PRI) program Studio 360. This program is interesting because it includes inteviews with her discussing how she came to understand the importance of "sidewalks" and how to approach city planning from a bottom up analysis. You can check out the program here.

Full House? WTF?

Ok, I am going to attempt to write my thoughts on the reading, but I am becoming more and more distracted by the fact that my roomie is watching Full House and loving it. Who the hell watches Full House anymore? I am so confused... LOL. Anyway, onto the reading. I rather enjoyed "Sidewalks." The way it was written was easy to understand, thought provoking, and it kept my interest. I love her theories about cities having a certain unspoken, intricate code of morals and standards that the citizens follow with or without law enforcement. If you think about it, it's true. If a woman is being mugged in the middle of the street, is the whole town just going to grab a beer, pull up a lawn chair, and watch? No! They are all going to do what they can to help her and kick the bad guy's (or girl's) ass because it is their obligation to do so. Each citizen has a code of justice they are required to follow. I think that's awesome. I also agree with her theory that the way one part of the city looks shapes the overall opinion of the place. If the sidewalks are crappy and there is graffiti everywhere, people are going to think the entire city is a dump. If there are friendly people walking their dogs, kids playing in the sandbox, and old people playing ultimate checkers, then people will think that the city is a friendly, fun place.
Now onto the other thing we had to read. I hated it, haha! I was reading it while listening to Pink Floyd, so naturally my ADD kicked in and I became so bored with it that I was having a laser light show in my head. Nah, that's a lie, but you get my point. The park (or whatever the hell it was supposed to be) sounded like a crap hole. The author's descriptions of the place (how the fountain looked like a rusty tank and the park looked like a fortress from the north) really turned my off not only to the article, but to the place in general. I am a very visually oriented person, so you can imagine my disappointment with this place. The one thing that really stuck out for me while attempting to read this was the part about the Olympic athletes. The author says that in order to house Olympic athletes temporarily, they booted out people from their houses/apartments. I can imagine that happening... our society is so fascinated with fame, fortune, and glory, that of course they would do anything to house a famous athlete. Other than that, I have no other thoughts on this article. I couldn't even finish it. Back to Pink Floyd.

Sidewalks vs Woodruff Park

I agree with the majority of the other people that commented. I thought that The Uses of Sidewalks- Safety was dull and way too long. The author could have easily said what she meant to say in half the time. There is a big difference between repeating a point for emphasis and just putting in extra fluff. Although I did not enjoy Jacobs' writing style at all I did agree with the point she was trying to make. Sidewalks do say a lot about an area. If a sidewalk is wide shows that it is inviting for more people. If it is old and worn it shows that it has received a lot of traffic over the years. When home for this weekend I took a walk around my neighborhood and looked observed the initials and handprints embedded in the pavement back when the sidewalks were originally installed. These personal mementos of years past show that the sidewalks are traveled by a lot of kids and families.

In contrast I really enjoyed Davis' essay. Her essay exhibited a lot of passion which made it a much easier read than the first essay. Her word choice displayed her emotions for the topic and make the reader interested in her topic. Showing a reader your emotions allows you to be much more persuasive. I agreed with her point of view on the issue of the park. It is horrible to think that a city could so easily abandon it's less fortunate citizens and call them "the cancer" of society. And Davis is correct when she says that if make the park uninviting for one group of people you unintentionally make it unwelcoming to the rest of the community. What good is a park as a decoration to outsiders when the people who call that area home can't even put the park to good use?

Woodruff Park......

I'm sorry to say just as others have agreed that I did not like The Uses of Sidewalks-Safety. Although the author tried to present the information in a orderly fashion, it was dull and boring. It was honestly repetitive and too long to stand. I'm sorry I'm being so negative.
The beginning of the reading wasn't all too bad but once I turned the page my head just began to spin. Jacobs uses statistics and dialogue to somewhat liven it up. Such as the statistics on rape in Los Angelos. It was surprising to me the high rate of rape; according to the article it is more than twice as high as the rate of Chicago and ore than four times the amount in NYC.
Jacobs was correct when she explained how people view cities according to its appearance. She had some good points but her presentation could have been better and shorter. I can't really say anymore.
The next reading was just the opposite..i liked it a lot.
The second reading entitled Woodruff Park and The Search For Common Ground written by Murphy Davis was an easy read for me. I loved how he compared and contrasted the characteristics of the old and new parks. He gave specific details which made the story easy to understand. I didnt have to read the story over and over to get what the author was trying to say. He has such strong feelings towards the well being of the homeless and positive interaction within the community and it really shows through his writing.
Davis shares with us his opinion on the newly constructed park and how it completely defeats the purpose of a park. A park is supposed to be inviting welcoming to the people of its community. "While the old park never seemed like a spectacular place to me , its walkways were wide and spacious lined with benches and grass. People walked to and through, stopped and talked together, waved to, and even hassled, one another." The new park is unwelcoming and was built to cease the homeless from temporarily using it as their beds. The city purposely made the benches so the homeless wouldn't have the chance of laying on the benches. Along with the benches the cities stopped the public from being able to use the grass as an area for picnics, lying down, or even the simple task of walking/running.
"The task for those of us who love the city is to transform Woodruff Park into a beautiful, friendly space." A park is meant to be a place of interaction. The community is supposed to be able to get to know one another and share in fun times together. A park isnt a place of tourism, it isnt a place to look upon and not get use out of, or a place to shield from the homeless. It completely defeats the purpose.
The government had the wrong idea when going about trying to isolate the homeless. While doing so they made the problem worse by creating an atmosphere that wasn't welcoming to anyone.

Both readings had relayed the same message; Although government meant to reconstruct the city in a positive way, it ended up making the problem worse than when they began. Both authors agree that the destruction of old buildings and landmarks to make it new and modern is wrong and unjust. They believe there is a better solution.

Elvira Woodruff

I have to say that when I read, either fiction or nonfiction, whether the subject initially interests me or not, by the time I’m a few pages in, ninety-nine percent of the time I’ve found some piece of the material with which I can connect. However, this was not the case with The Uses of Sidewalks – Safety. Not only was there nothing for me to connect with, but I also didn’t like the author’s writing style or the way she presented her ideas. As I continued to read, it seemed as though she was making the same point over and over again. A “safe street” is one with many people on it at all times, all protecting each other whether they are aware of it or not. Though this is true, the idea seemed rather rudimentary. I felt that it was very obvious this would be the definition of a “safe street” since it’s certainly not a dark, gloomy place with a few weird, shady looking people milling around.
Next I read Woodruff Park and the Search for Common Ground and found this to be a much more interesting piece. The message, while saddening, was very true. The author, Murphy Davis, described how the government of Atlanta continuously sought to remove the homeless and poor from the city. What they weren’t realizing was that through their actions they were really just making the problem worse. So why, instead of forcing these people out and making their lives more unpleasant, didn’t the government realize that an easier way would be to spend the money they were currently using in an ineffective and vulgar way, on more productive things, the most important being housing? She answers this question later in the article. They didn’t realize this because they didn’t want to. Instead of caring about all of the people in the city, they cared only about furthering themselves.

Paper or Plastic??

Both Woodruff Park and the Search for Common Ground and The Use of Sidewalks- Safety bring up some relevant ideas. Both readings comment on how ‘improvements’ made to neighborhoods often end up being anything except good for said neighborhood. Although their reasons are different, neither Murphy Davis nor Jane Jacobs like that some areas are being torn down or renovated to create a more modern image. Jane Jacobs mentions that modern apartment complexes make a neighborhood less safe, because the “high-rent tenants... have not the remotest idea of who takes care of their street, or how.” These complexes give tenants the illusion of safety, but it is just that an illusion much like the illusion that visitors are given of Atlanta. The tenants and the visitors alike see the neighborhoods at face-value: they don’t look past any facades to see the real workings of the neighborhoods or the reality of what has happened to create a particular atmosphere. However, Jacobs and Davis don’t’ agree about the relevance of tourists and visitors. Jacobs insists that they are necessary to industry and to keeping streets safe, while Davis notes that a lot of destruction of neighborhoods has taken place in order to make areas seem nicer to visitors and tourists. Both writers have a valid point; tourists are needed to keep industry alive in cities, but gearing a city toward tourists to the point where its residents aren’t happy isn’t a good way to achieve the good image that the people in charge of renovations are hoping to project.

A city must consider its residents, all of its residents when making crucial decisions. Whether Atlanta likes it or not, some of its residents are homeless and must be provided for in a way that hopefully would give them a way to better their positions in life. Atlanta’s Woodruff Park didn’t have to be renovated into a concrete slab in order to keep the park from overflowing with homeless people and changing the park, like Murphy Davis said, doesn’t get rid of the reality of those homeless people. Creating a program to help get the homeless people off the street and out of the park, would solve a few problems at once. If this was done, the city would be happy because the homeless wouldn’t be loitering in public places, the neighborhood could be happy because the parks and other public places could be changed to become inviting and useful again, and the homeless people would be able to help themselves and possibly regain some of the many things they lost with their homes often including self-respect.

Jane Jacobs starts off by explaining that “streets and their sidewalks, the main public places of a city, are its most vital organs.” Although this makes sense, the streets and sidewalks can also be thought of as the arteries and veins of a city. The arties and veins are no less important than the vital organs, except that they like streets and sidewalks are channel that is used for important travel through the city. Antibodies in the bloodstream, much like the residents of a safe neighborhood, prevent harmful affects on the neighborhood.
Jane Jacobs’ streets represent the neighborhood itself, while some of Murphy Davis’s sidewalks represent only the façade. Both of these can be seen in various neighborhoods; there are neighborhoods that look perfect, but are really just plastic like the nice off-white plastic siding on each house parallel to the even sidewalk. Then there are neighborhoods with sidewalks that tell a story. One house might have chalked out stick people smudged onto the sidewalk by some younger children in the neighborhood and another part of the sidewalk might have tiny footprints in it from when that toddler down the street got away from his mother when the cement was still setting. Jane Jacobs reminds us of the feeling of a neighborhood and essentially a small community that looks out for its own and feels like an extended family.

I'm sorry to say that I did not enjoy reading "Sidewalks". I found what the author had to say very repetitive and most of it was basically common sense. However, there were a few things that I thought were worth mentioning in my response. "If a city's streets look interesting, the city looks interesting". Yes, this is true, simply because a city is mostly composed of streets. Streets connect everything in a city, so of course they are a major part. Another point was that once a street becomes unsafe, it gradually becomes worse because people begin to avoid it. She later mentions Roxbury, Boston; it had a high crime rate, people began to avoid the streets at night, and it became rundown.

The author also states that streets can be dangerous whether or not they are in a part of the city that is being rebuilt- it all depends on the people that live and wander about them. On page 327, she talks about Los Angelos and how, even though it is a more spread-out city, it still has one of the highest crime rates. This is because it is "still composed of strangers, not all of whom are nice". Then she goes on to say that a well-used city street is generally safer than a deserted city street. Well, of course it is. She finished up by saying things like "you can't make people use streets they don't have a reason to" and "not everyone takes care of the streets". I guess I just didn't get a whole lot out of this article.

I really enjoyed the "Woodruff Park" article; I thought it said a lot about our culture and society in general. It was almost depressing to read the beginning, especially when the comparison was made between the old park and how the park is now. The old park was conducive to socialization and seizing the day, while the new park sports more narrow streets and benches that are all facing the same direction. In a way, I thought this represented society today- people are much less open and friendly than in the days of "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood". Remember, there was a time when you could pick up a hitchhiker and not worry about him being an axe murderer or a serial rapist. On page 136, the author labels the new park as a "beautiful place to look at", but that it is inhospitable to everybody. To me, it is just a waste of space that could be used to bring people together. This is starting to get quite lengthy, so I'll leave it at that.

...cities need people, okay?

So, after reading the two essays, I'd say both are saying that the people make or break an area. That's more obvious in "The Use of Sidewalks--Safety", but it shows up in the other one too. More on that later, though. In all the examples Jacobs brings up, the people who care for their neighborhood--and the people in it, friend or stranger--are the ones who win out in the end. Of course, she would put in the examples that support her point, because that's how people write, even while trying to be objective--which I think is impossible, but moving on. I've absorbed the idea that the more passion for something you have, the better it'll be, which probably can apply to streets too. Also, here it's the normal people who make the area good or bad. There's not much more beyond that; it's just examples, really.

For the other essay, it's the other way around. The government destroys the areas for people who can't fight back, but still it's people that do it, not say weather or happenstance. At least, they can't fight bac directly and have to resort to things such as this essay to devote people to the cause. This didn't get my attention as much as the other essay did, possibly because I don't know Atlanta. I've never seen the places mentioned, and I don't know the whole story--which the author almost certainly doesn't give--and coming up with an opinion might be a little risky.

Still, the design has something to do with it, to the extent that it attracts people who put an interest into the area. That's what needed first, but the people pick up from there.

Sidewalks, Parks and People

I was surprised that I actually enjoyed “Sidewalks.” It was an interesting read for me and presented concepts that seem so obvious yet I have never thought about. When I think of sidewalks I think of the ones in the neighborhood where I live. They are perfectly paved with perfectly placed trees and well cut grass on the one side. Nice, well built houses sit behind them and the picture screams of the cliché suburb. The other image of sidewalks I have are the ones of New York. They are crowded and filled with people focused on getting to their next destination. When asked which one I’d rather wander on at night, I would have to say the suburban sidewalks like the ones at home would be my choice. Now, I’m not saying that I am suddenly filled with fear for my neighborhood after reading this article but I now know that my decision shouldn’t be made so easily.

It’s true that if streets and sidewalks are filled then the city or town or whatever would assumedly be safe. You have people all around you and that idea reinforces the never walk by yourself in a parking lot idea. I think the author has the right point of view in this selection. I like her writing style as well. It wasn’t lofty or hard to understand. It was on a down to earth level and although it didn’t feel like the author was talking to me, it felt like she thought of me as an equal which I enjoyed.

I also really enjoyed the second reading, “Woodruff Park.” The author’s tone was mostly negative throughout the piece but I felt that made the reading all the more effective. You could tell the author was truly passionate about her viewpoint and that made me more open to her point of view. I agree that beautiful places to look at are usually just for that purpose, to look at. I know personally I enjoy things more when I can get involved in them. I think it’s a shame Woodruff Park was reduced to what it was.

These two pieces to me convey somewhat of the same idea. People make places inviting and welcoming. People make things exciting and fun. Empty spaces are depressing. People want to be around each other and I think both passages try and get that point across. I think both do a very good job of it.

Readings and thoughts of my sidewalks...

Hello all!
Hope everyone's weekend was fab--mine was slightly blase, but ho-hum.
In response to the readings--I found them interesting--especially "The Use of Sidewalks---Safety" by Jane Jacobs. It really got me thinking about Kutzown, and my home. Sidewalks and their "homes" vary so much from place to place, and a lot of what Jacobs says is true. I went for a walk down the Main Street (I don't know if it's actually called "Main Street" but you get the point) with a friend yesterday---what I discovered was surprising. That street, with its cute shops and restaurants intrigued me on my first visits to Kutztown--in fact, it's "cuteness" probably subconsciously told me to pick KU--I felt safe and "at home." Walking yesterday, though, was so ... weird--My friend and I stopped and bought those chocolate chip cookie ice cream sandwiches, and Stewart's Orange Cream Sodas. We tried to find a bench---"There's gotta be a bench somewhere--it's too cute not to have one" I exclaimed. Finally we came across some weird stinkin' table outside some weird stinkin' store--(which my friend now refers to as a "Mafia joint.") Anyway, sitting there, I realized, yeah, it's cute--but in a weird way--I felt like it was the 1950's--two innocent little girls drinking sodas at a table on Main Street USA, but looking up and down the road, I realized it was slightly creepy--guys that walk by and look at you but don't say anything, smashed beer bottles everywhere, tons of garbage on the streets--welcoming at first glance, but I don't know if I'd walk along it at night.
Same with my street back home--It used to be nice, you know, lots of elderly people, etc etc--but has quickly turned into a piece of junk--for instance, the house next to mine, which the mayor rents out, has housed drug dealers, ex-doctors (ex because of drug dealing...) child molesters (not kidding..) and the like. Jacobs reminded me of this when speaking of Roxbury, and "...the once fine Elm Hill Avenue section..." She goes on to talk about the "web of strong street law and order..." and makes me wish my street had one. I'd prefer that quiet, private street that "...city architectural designers seem to find incomprehensible" to one that has a child molester and neighbors that don't talk to each other.

((((I don't think I'm making sense right now, but I don't want to start over.))))

"Woodruff Park and the Search for Common Ground" by Murphy Davis didn't affect me the way the other reading did--and I don't know why, because this seems to be the one that wants to be identified with---Fix this park! Bring the people back! Homeless people enrich it! We need water fountains! Ho Hum, I say--but maybe I'm just not myself today. Places, sidewalks, they can be inviting or uninviting, comfortable or downright scary, but these places can change too--as shown by the transformation of "Woodruff Park." Once warm and comfy, now cold and barren. Interesting.

((((I think Anderson Cooper's memoir is putting me in a bad mood. One minute I'm in the middle of Somalia with starving kids, then in New Orleans and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, then I'm listening to him talk about the death of his father and brother--Yikes. I'm putting it away for a few days.))))

So, that's about it--Sorry if this is like, BLAH STINKIN' BLAH but it's just my current state of mind--! I'll see you all Monday...!
-"Coco"

the readings for monday

The article by Murphy Davis about Atlanta made me fairly angry, mostly because of the inhumanity of destroying so many housing buildings that people depend on. The fact that all the housing was cleared out for reasons such as building dormitories for the olympic athletes and for other trivial reasons just makes it worse. It's as if they just forgot about the people that probably couldn't afford to relocate, just cast them aside and let them deal with it themselves. He does a good job relating this to Woodruff park, how those in charge are more concerned with aesthetics than maintaining an area that's conducive to people enjoying themselves. However, at least some people, like the author of the article, have a better vision and intention. Unfortunately he probably has little influence over those who have been making these decisions, so perhaps the city is out of luck for a few years until some more empathetic people come to power.

Reading "The Uses of Sidewalks-Safety," I started thinking about the sidewalks around Kutztown. Most of campus is like a mini city, except we have sidewalks without streets, which is even better. Along with that, you will probably end up seeing people you know, at least some you recognize, so it's not like walking around a major city with thousands of strangers. However, I still feel like it's a fairly safe place to be , since there are so many people. People will certainly step in if they see a bad situation in progress. On main street in Kutztown, near the businesses, I would say that there is good interaction between the people on the street and the storefronts and apartments. I think that it's also a little different because most of the pedestrians are college students, and about half of them seem inebriated on most nights. During the daytime, however, there is a pleasant vibe and general sense of safety. I think that the sidewalks in the area are in good shape and I'm sure most people feel safe and comfortable while traversing them.

My walk around, because I couldnt print it

Taking a general walk around campus to find an object of inspiration in which to write about led me to only one decision. The South Dinning Hall. Not only is it a gathering place for the students, a place to eat, a recreational center for those who enjoy sporting, it is also a place for relaxation and study. In fact, the best part of the SDH is its exterior: the benchs, the grass and trees, and the stonework.
All of these contribute to the overall feelings of relaxation, peace, and well-being. I find that I cannot go up to my room at night for a sleep if I do not spend a little time outside of the SDH, not only eating, but having a late night cigerette, and talk with my friends. The atmosphere is welcoming, and the purpose of the small courtyard is for the gathering of friends.
Even the architectural designs seemingly welcome a person. The glass façade, streaked with outlines of silver. The words “South Dinning Hall” in a fun, inviting script (red to catch the attention and hunger of people), and the semi-circular exterior drags the eye around the outside. Not only that, but the roof has boggled my mind since coming here and spending these nights staring at the building. I have long since wondered how to get up on to it, to sit in the middle and look up the DMZ, to be participate in its majesty for just a moment, before Public Safety arrested me.
Still, the SDH is the most interesting “truth” on campus…to talk of truths. It coincides with the reading we had. It’s a friendly place, where people can watch each other go about their business. A place to eat, a place to watch others, hang out, smoke, have a laugh.
All in all, it is the quintessential piece of architecture on campus.

outside the south dining hall

This is my page of description from one particular spot on campus. The printers didn't work in the computer lab, so I'm sending it here. Enjoy!

Outside the South dining hall, I find myself sitting at a picnic table with a group of good friends. It feels great outside, the weather is nice for a change, and people are walking around on their own little missions. I look inside through the window and see people eating lunch and laughing, everything looks inviting. The windows sprawl nearly 180 degrees and seem to reach to the sky from my viewpoint down on the bench. The wall of window creates a sense of open space and freedom. It’s as if the people inside and outside are barely separated, yet when you stop and observe, you notice many others doing the same thing. It feels like a shared sense of social interaction, even though most people are just eating. This whole area has a much different feeling than the cafeteria upstairs, where it sometimes becomes a challenge to find a place to sit down.
The fact that there are a few inviting tables outside for people to eat and socialize on tells me that whoever planned the layout for the area was thinking about creating a positive, comfortable place for people to spend their time. Half the time I am sitting out there, I am not eating anything, I am simply talking to other people and having a good time. I think that all the open space out there, including the lawn just beyond the table area, contribute primarily toward the purpose of social interaction. The majority of people on campus come to eat every day, so it is a central location for meeting up with people and talking, relaxing, and having fun.
Overall, I would say that this area outside the dining hall is my favorite place on campus, due to the atmosphere that exists there most of the day, including evenings. It is a focal point of sorts, and if nothing else, a place to refuel.

the readings

I have to admit, the readings interested me only somewhat. I will begin with the first one, "Woodruff Park." I can understand the authors disdain for the governmental process in which the refurbishment of this park was voted on, apperantly without consent of the public. I can understand this for many reasons, including the fact that I'm young, erroneos, and believe I know everything and can indeed run the established government with more ease than those doing it at the moment (albeit they are doing a horrible job). And I understand it on the same level, again because I'm young, and the mojority of wrongs done to a person, I believe, by the government is when they are young. Government meaning anything from parents, school, police, to D.C.

But that does not give any real example of the wrongings done to these people by the refurbishment. Sure, maybe from history one could pull examples of racism in the culture and city, but to adhere to that idea today and proclaim that the beautifying of a park was in fact a way to rid the city of winos and homeless is completely baseless. The fact that these people are homeless is for a combination of reasons, a complex variety of mistakes on there part and wrongs done to them, to purely say because the park was made "nicer" they no longer can sleep there. Well the question is did you really want them sleeping there? I think the truth is really that while they were there, the person was most likely disgusted by the fact that they were there, but once they had to move, all of a sudden a persons liberties are being forced away, an autocratic govt. is taking shape and the common man must fight it. Its just a way for the people to get excited and fight for what is "right."

I do agree though, with the fact that the Olympic site in Atlanta was garrish and ill planned. Indeed, why is the populations of the "transient Olympic visitors more important than the homes for the people of Atlanta." That is a fact that troubles me every summer when the Olympics are set up in a city. The sad truth is that the cities govt. does push out the less wanted society living in the city. Instead of helping the less fortunate, the govt. pushes them away, hides them in the back alleys of the "dangerous streets". Well the only reason the streets are dangerous are because that is how we make them out to be.

Which brings me to the second reading. "The Uses of Sidewalks-Safety" interested me a great deal, because for 13 years, I did live in a city. Paterson, NJ, one of the largest cities in NJ, and consequently a dubious 15 minutes outside of The City, is where I grew up. I can certainly sympathise with the author here. The danger and safety of the streets completely depends upon the persons within. Noone for instance, on my street growing up, raised a finger to dial 911 while my neighbor was being murdered, and everyone on the street knew what was happening. Nobody on my street stopped me from throwing rocks at squirills on the telephone lines, consequently throwing a rock through a sun room in a living room down the road.

It all depends upon the people. Not only that, but the idea that a less frequented street is more dangerous is completely rediculous. Some of the safer streets in Paterson, The City, and Newark are the one less frequented. The idea that an empty street could imply out of sight watchers generally scares people away, including those willing to do harm. Its more dangerous to walk a deserted street, by oneself, in the middle of the night when it is known that the more villinous are more capable of killing or robbing in the dead of the night. It is safe to assume that at night in the city, one is not going to come when help is called for, for fear of ones own life. hence, no 911 call to the dying man next door.

This is getting long, and I'm done. These are just a few of my opinions related to the stories we had to read, maybe we'll read this, maybe not. Either way, this is what I think.

readings for the weekend

so, I just finished reading the articles in the textbook, and I figured since we have this blog and it's part of our weekend assignment to share our thoughts, I'd share my thoughts with all of you on these two readings.

First I'll address "The Use of Sidewalks" by Jacobs. It was a very long but interesting read on her philosophy of street safety, and I agree 100%. She goes on to basically state that public safety is exactly that - safety left up to the public. She uses a lot of experiences and examples to demonstrate her point. Having grown up in Philadelphia and spent a good amount of time within the city limits, I feel like I have a background knowledge to what she says and completely understand everything she says. Like this one time, when I was in 4th grade or something, I was walking home with a friend of mine from some kind of extra-cirricular thing, and these guys started following us [like high school aged guys, I guess about 17 or 18, and that seemed OLD to us then], we got scared because there was no one around until we got to the corner store around the corner from my house, and then the guys inside the store went outside and made sure everything was safe for us. Ok, long story made short, we didn't feel safe because nobody was around. It was 4 in the afternoon and most of the families were still split up, with kids inside doing homework with the doors locked and parents at work or on their way home, and nobody was outside. Similarly, I spent a good amount of nights this past summer walking around South Street and Market Street down in Philadelphia. I don't think I've felt safer in any other part of the city [except I refuse to walk on South Street past 7th going up, it's too dirty] than there, because of how full of life it was. I had gone down with my boyfriend and my friend for cheesesteaks at Jims, because we were bored [I know, lame right?] and even though my boyfriend was being stupid and saying 'hi' to everyone he saw on our way down, I knew nothing too bad could really happen because that part of the city is well lit, well used, and is just safe in all other aspects. I guess my experiences helped me completely understand her article. So, that's my piece on that.

I didn't particularly enjoy reading the other article about the park in Atlanta, and how by trying to make the park unwelcoming to one group [specifically homeless people], it made it unwelcome to all, but it made me think about Kutztown. We talked about in class on Wednesday how the pictures make it look like everyone works together, and the open spaces around campus promote group meetings, but then I also realised that Kutztown is TOO spread apart. It's too far to walk from Lehigh, where I'm typing this wonderful response, to the Student Union Building for a cup of hot chocolate and a meeting for a club. It's too far to walk to the Fairgrounds to get your car and GO somewhere. Even though KU has such open space, I kind of feel like it's too spread out, and it promotes hermitness to a degree. I mean, when I was looking at schools, I liked KU because of it's spreadout-ness, and I didn't like the cramped style of PSU Abington's campus, and I was pretty much going on purely asthetics. However, now that I'm at college, this open space is a pain to cover by foot. Think about it. It is way too far to walk to Taylor and Byrnes to get a coffee or something and study for finals during the bitter December cold weather. It's ten times easier to sit on my computer, make hot chocolate the way I like it in my cocoa machine [auto-shut off... take that, Housing!], and talk on instant messenger with my classmates and discuss finals THAT way. But that doesn't promote true groupwork. Do you catch my drift?

Anyway, so those are just my thoughts, as drawn out and crazy as they may seem. Look forward to reading your thoughts/opinions later tonight/tomorrow before class. !!! Bye!
[ps: does anyone think they might actually do a real word under 'Word Verification' ?]