I’ve been thinking a lot about the recent outcry for social and racial justice. As a Black man, I’ve lived my own experience in this country — one filled with many blessings, but also many challenges. I want to reflect on some of those challenges, and explore some of the subtleties of being Black in a predominantly white setting — architecture. I don’t have the answers, but I do believe there is a power in story and truth to be found in narrative. This is a story, a picture into a narrative common to many in the profession, followed by some reflections. But at the same time, we know, every person has their own story to tell.
I was the only Black kid in my 10th-grade English class. At some point in the semester, we were assigned The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain. One day, we were reading a chapter aloud, and when the teacher got to one of the many places in the book where Twain uses the term nigger, he stopped reading, looked up from the book, and asked me if it was okay for him to say the word. I honestly don’t remember what I said. All I can remember is how embarrassed I was and how alienated I felt. What’s more, I knew that if I hadn’t been in the class, he would have gone on reading.
There is a scene at the beginning of James Baldwin’s Go Tell It on the Mountain where five-year-old John (roughly based on Baldwin) is recognized for his intelligence by his white principal. “It was when John was five years old and in the first grade that he was first noticed; and since he was noticed by an eye altogether alien and impersonal, he began to perceive, in wild uneasiness, his individual existence,” Baldwin writes. I was one of the top students in that English class, but it seemed that my success was always more “impressive” to everyone compared to other students who I felt did just as well. The gifted Black boy.
...there is a pervading issue that has persisted long before this current upheaval became the thing to be into or the hip trend to get behind
Statistically, if you’re a Black person in architecture, it’s difficult not to be the only person of color in the room. I appreciate the recent push for racial justice, but there is a pervading issue that has persisted long before this current upheaval became the thing to be into or the hip trend to get behind. There has been and continues to be a Black tokenism that occurs in places of architectural practice that alienates team members, making the Black professional into an instrument of atonement for white guilt instead of a valuable contributor to the profession.
In Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man, the unnamed narrator, a student at an all-black college, meets a prominent white man named Mr. Norton, who is a philanthropic trustee of the institution. The narrator is Mr. Norton’s driver for the day. During the car ride, Mr. Norton goes on and on about how the narrator is a part of his fate. “So you see, young man, you are involved in my life quite intimately, even though you’ve never seen me before. You are bound to a great dream and to a beautiful monument,” Mr. Norton says. “If you become a good farmer, a chef, a preacher, doctor, singer, mechanic — whatever you become, and even if you fail, you are my fate. And you must write me and tell me the outcome.”
The pair soon arrive at a Black bar where Mr. Norton and the narrator are confronted by one of the establishment’s patrons. Speaking to Mr. Norton’s view of the Black narrator, the man says, “To you he is a mark on the scorecard of your achievement, a thing and not a man; a child, or even less — a black amorphous thing.” Of course, Mr. Norton is insulted, but the man makes an important point.
The thing about Mr. Norton is that he is too blind to see that the man is right. The narrator is merely an idea to him, a “mark on the scorecard” of his achievement. To atone for his white guilt, Mr. Norton gives money to the narrator’s school and sees himself as a “great white father” to its Black students. He is the exemplary “White Savior.”
It is good that architecture firms want to be more diverse and it is good that there are initiatives and efforts to realize that vision. But, in this pursuit for equity, there are those who are genuine and those who just want a mark on their scorecard. In this context, there are thus two types of firms: the ones who hire a Black person because they can truly thrive, and the ones who hire the Black person because they are Black. And whatever category an organization finds itself in, there exist those who always assume that a person of color wants to participate and speak on every issue and initiative around DEI.
...in this pursuit for equity, there are those who are genuine and those who just want a mark on their scorecard...
Moreover, there are those firms that insist that if you are a Black team member, you need to be involved in every diversity initiative. And, come to think of it, you absolutely should be the spokesperson for it. Even better, you should go to a conference and speak about this initiative and say how inclusive your new place of work is. The diversity hire. This is the fallacy of tokenism: to hire an individual and then task them with promoting (on your behalf) what their hiring should have shown on its own.
The problem with my teacher asking me if he could say nigger was his preoccupation with his adherence to inclusive behavior — at my expense — not to my inclusion. His decision left my classmates feeling awkward around me for the remainder of the session. As a young high school kid, this only amplified what I already struggled to deal with at that time — that I was the only Black student in most of my classes. I had another English teacher in high school that would talk with me after class and help me with my writing. He would tell me that I should keep writing and would speak to me with respect and dignity. It didn’t feel like he was walking on eggshells when I walked in the room, and when we read books or essays with racially charged language, he would read on — to my relief.
He didn’t have to prove anything to me. I knew he cared about my progress and success. I’ve had the same divergent experiences in the world of professional architecture. There have been the Mr. Nortons who might have the right intentions but went about it in the worst way — they imposed their agenda unto me. I was their pawn. But I have also had mentors like this invested English teacher, whose active participation in my development and interest in my life made it clear that they saw me as more than a mark on their scorecard.
This kind of discussion can elicit a few types of responses. A popular one comes from a white audience and it goes something like: This is not at all what I was thinking when… Another variation goes something like: Well, what am I supposed to do? I am doing my best to help. I am trying to be inclusive. These standard responses focus too much on behavior and declared intent rather than self-reflection. Yes, we need action and we need tangible change, but where the Mr. Nortons of the world fail systemically is in their instinctive trading of deep engagement for expediency. If I do “x” then I will have done the right thing. This is not just an issue of behavior, but also, and more importantly, an issue of the heart. The better alternative could be something more like: Where have I been a part of this problem? Or even: What assumptions underline my perspective on this issue? When one comes from a place of self-reflection, coupled with a willingness to listen and learn, visceral defensiveness can turn into acquiescent humility.
That’s the difficulty with our current situation: we can’t police who is genuine and who isn’t — only time will show that. While addressing the heart might tackle a weed at the root of prejudice, larger reform is not exclusively a matter of individualized inward gazing. Architects, for example, have a history of indifference towards the end user. Take zoning laws, which have harmed communities of color in areas of health, education, commercial growth, etc. How do architects take an additional step and invest in underserved communities?
While addressing the heart might tackle a weed at the root of prejudice, larger reform is not exclusively a matter of individualized inward gazing...
Instead of just an educational facility, perhaps there could be an investment in education through paid internships, community workshops, and open office events. Many firms already do this, and I believe the long-term ripples of this kind of engagement has the potential to alter the relevance of the agency of architecture as a vehicle to engage in social reform. This is one of many approaches to the issue at hand, there are many others. Ultimately, the way we meaningfully reform Mr. Norton is to place him in conditions where Black people are not only his fate, but he is their fate, too.
Sean Joyner is a writer and essayist based in Los Angeles. His work explores themes spanning architecture, culture, and everyday life. Sean's essays and articles have been featured in The Architect's Newspaper, ARCHITECT Magazine, Dwell Magazine, and Archinect. He also works as an ...
49 Comments
Racism is real, but the problem is white people are not exempt from getting shit on. My point is, how do we draw the line between a racist or misogynist and an insecure asshole? To my mind they are one and the same. So while I welcome all well meaning initiatives, I think the best way to fight racism is to vote in representatives who will fight for fairness across the board. Go vote!
Nobody is claiming that white people are exempt from being treated poorly, but it seems like you're missing the point of this piece which is a personal reflection of tokenism, from the perspective of a Black man in our industry. There is no shortage of places to discuss issues of racism, but we'd like to keep the comments here related to the issues discussed in this particular piece.
I thought racism was central to the issue of tokenism, which refers to the immunization of being called racist by those who employ it. Btw, I love Sean's writing and the fact that he's willing to engage on these kinds of issues, but if the dialogue it inspires makes you uncomfortable, I suggest you ask yourself why.
"But white people also experience (fill in the blank)..." has no place in discussions about racial injustice right now.
If you silence other people's perspectives you'll only create the kind of resentment that breeds racism in the first place. And what about those of us who are part black and have felt racism lite? Wanna tell me how to feel about that too?
This is a discussion that elicits many different responses. Thayer-D, to your point on mixed-race experience, I've been thinking about this a lot lately. My 18-month-old son is bi-racial and he will undoubtedly have this mixed experience. Have you read Adrian Piper's essay Passing for White, Passing for Black? A very interesting read.
Here's a link to it: http://www.adrianpiper.com/doc...
God bless you and your family. He will see both sides of the fence, realizing what we all know, that we're all the same people. This in no way minimizes the racism he will feel, but there's nothing like knowing your not alone in this world, and my only point about whites getting shit for being a redneck, awkward, or weird in any is that it will make him feel like racism is a character flaw rather than an all encompassing and at times suffocating aspect of his life. It's about letting him make the most of his life without spending too much of his time on other people's hang ups. Life is short.
As happened to me, he'll get those questioning gazes from some whites as if he's trying to "pass" and he'll those "oreo" comments as well. Obama loved his Grandma even though she used the N words at times because as MLK said, it's always about the content of your character. Thanks for the read, I'll take a look for sure.
"The master's tools, will not dismantle the master's house."
Or words to that effect.
We cannot, cannot, have fairness be the measure, no matter what Dr. King and others have said in the past, until we reconcile our "Original Sin". Fairness? We cannot even deal with racist poll taxes, and disequitable voting, that I would argue are as racist as anything during Jim Crowe.
Fair enough. How do you suggest we atone for our original sin?
The same way Bishop Tutu and Nelson Mandela did; that's the only way.
Or reparations.
Or both.
English Instructors have a challenge that Math and Science do not typically face;Unfortunately they are more likely to screw up more often;mixing their own personal views and biases about life with a need to educate.Such incidents are not isolated;There are cases on record where English instructors who just like in architecture do not reflect the underlying demographics(https://www.recordnet.com/news/20191228/americas-schools-are-more-diverse-than-ever---but-teachers-are-still-mostly-white) and therefore fail to be empathetic to the students that do not share their world view or group membership;
This behavior has translated into architecture school where projects can be graded based on personal studio instructor preferences and subjective observations fuelled by potential ethnic biases anchored in archaic curriculums. Some schools might consider pass/no pass and portfolio based grading which might help.
The problem then persists in the profession where under-represented students navigate a constricted pipeline at the mercy of employers who for most of US history have had nothing to lose by not diversifying their practices.
But as demographics shift and older architects retire a crisis is inevitable;An open system that allowed all groups to flourish in the profession;first as humans(like your mother told you) then as practitioners never existed and does not exist;
AIA,architecture schools and the current crop of licensed architects are to blame;
A representative profession would have forestalled both a social crisis and a professional crisis;Both the military and the medical profession(https://www.statnews.com/2019/...) understood this and have tried to expand their ranks;even though the medical profession was belated and forced but still appropriate.
Architecture must always be for the people and by the people.The first "architects" beyond cave inhabitants were regular folk using rudimentary materials to provide shelter;Only in the last 100 years have things accelerated.So architecture/architectural education as we know it now is still nascent and experimental(FLW and Le Corbu would agree;so would several non-EU architects;Tadao Ando et al);
But the current social failures if not checked will render the profession obsolete like Kodak(Developers are drooling).A healthy profession must be at the forefront of tackling underlying social challenges; currently architecture is "pulling the tail".
The schools must connect with local communities starting with middle school kids at all school districts. Licensing must be shifted to a state mandated professional body away from individual practitioners who have proved to be failures in ensuring equity; The schools must create in-house internship programs; recruit professionals to run the program with regular bias training; bid for projects supplemented by AIA member subscriptions to fund an unbiased and egalitarian licensing pathway while providing opportunities to previously shunned groups. Failure to do so will precipitate a replacement crisis in the profession and perpetuate already existing social fissures.
Sean! Brilliant man, brilliant. My favorite book of the 20th century is Invisible Man. I've always wondered why no one has made this into a film. I suspect that the complexity of the protagonist is hard to place in some measure of two hours or less. He always seems to be critiquing "racism" but not always in the linearity that one would expect, but in the way Ibram X. Kendi does in his book. As well as trying to construct a narrative of autonomy in a world seemingly trying to make him wear a suit of their making.
Yeah! Invisible Man is probably my favorite novel. I just have to not want to quit writing when I read it. Ellison’s mastery is staggering to me. I agree, I think it would be a great movie. I think Hulu was trying to make it into a series. But the main character is so complex and his own journey is one of becoming more “woke” for lack of a better term. He is pretty whitewashed in the beginning of the book.
I really enjoyed this piece as it reflects on some issues I am struggling with. I think there is a lot of tokenism going around which fails to address the systemic underlying issues. The piece addresses how to reach the talent latent in minority communities to open up a path to architectural education. Then, secondly, being an architect is not enough, in the sense that it is not the same as having a seat at the table where decisions get made. There needs to be a discussion about power and distribution of resources to accompany the discussion about race. Race and class are always used as a foil to keep people from having power and access to resources. The accessibility and expense of quality education is a racial issue.
There is another interesting character in 'invisible man', that of the black dean Dr. Bledsoe, who assimilates so much to the white, predominant power structure that he loses sight of his identity. Sean rightfully argues that integration only works when you do not have to contort yourself, and when there is a genuine interest in you, your history and your views. The problem with that, of course, is that the responsibility for change lies with those who have benefited most from the system of oppression, and are often not aware that they have.
It is regrettable, therefore, that the comment section starts with some white resentment stuff and that it is proposed that voting alone would get to the extent of the problem.
The profession has brilliant people and must look within itself to solve underlying social issues
Thanks Thomas! Excellent thoughts. Totally agree. And yes Bledsoe is a super interesting character. It took everything in me not to go on a tangent with all of the great commentary in the novel. Plus, I think bringing up Bledsoe in this context would have created more challenges for me rhetorically because is character’s psychology is so complex. Thanks for reading
The trap we fall into all the time when we talk about racial justice/injustice/inequity is no mater what side of the discussion it is about or who the speaker is the issue remains race. When we can begin to not address things by identifying race as a factor in one’s life, we might begin to make progress.
Not to negate the individual experience or the issues unresolved how we describe one another should not need to include the racial or ethnic or religious background of someone to make a decision about the other and yourself. We choose people as friends by many means and we all have preferences about who & what we like. But these are made on an individual basis.
Should I like someone because they are Hispanic, Black, Asian? Not because of this, but maybe. People need to be pleasing to one another on the most visceral level at first. Once we get past that initial assessment, good or bad, we may become friends and/or colleagues, or not.
Systemically to change things maybe has to be unnatural and overt in its method or process. Civil Rights, Affirmative action, non-discriminatory, community outreach, or helping hand. But it was a start. That we have been discussing this for a few centuries throughout the world is a sad commentary on our humanity or lack thereof…
I too have no solution except it needs be answered individually in order to succeed.
"How do architects take an additional step and invest in underserved communities? Instead of just an educational facility, perhaps there could be an investment in education through paid internships, community workshops, and open office events. Many firms already do this, and I believe the long-term ripples of this kind of engagement has the potential to alter the relevance of the agency of architecture as a vehicle to engage in social reform."
Great article, thank you for your writing. And I found the above quote especially resonant; when we architects embark on visionary endeavours, we often fail to truly imagine and fully internalize or that we're are only one small, molecular element in bigger matrices of power and influence. I think recognizing that, and rescturcting the architectural imaginary around processes of inclusion and agency -and not almost solely on finished designs, published books, gallery exhibitions, getting the right diversity hires, etc.- could really do something to help the profession be more inclusive and regain some of its lost agency in the eyes of the public.
Great article, written from the heart! Success and enjoy raising your son! Going to re-read some books now...
I do believe that tokenism is a serious problem in our profession. It is manifest in many firms’ and architects‘ insistence on *tradition* being important, the idea that “I suffered through all nighters so you should too!” With that traditional attitude, the impulse is to shape young or Black or those with different backgrounds into reflections of ourselves. But the world is SO different from 50 or 30 years ago and I think it’s plain to see that our discipline is not keeping up. So mentorship of the kind you describe, Sean, in the second teacher, is what old architecture folk like me need to *commit* ourselves to. Not bringing in the Black intern to turn them into ourselves, but to listen to their perspective and allow it to influence how we (as a profession) think, engaged, and design.
I mean, we are architects. Our prime driver is change. We should be excited to encourage change to happen in the best way possible.
I enjoy your writing, Sean. I’m glad you had the teacher who worked with you as a younger writer.
And I appreciate learning some of your story.
Middle aged white guys like me can only imagine how tough this field can be for others. Whatever I lack in empathy, I don’t want to compensate with tokenism. I owe this new insight to you.
Thanks, Collier
“Architects, for example, have a history of indifference towards the end user. Take zoning laws, which have harmed communities of color in areas of health”
It is interesting these two statements follow after each other. Architecture will always be an open question between design and use. Many New Deal era housing projects and 1950s CIAM inspired designs, investments in both black and white communities, still fell into a pre-Civil Rights framework of segregation. How would they look today? It’s too bad more don’t study Sert-Kahn era urban design, but instead a simplistic Corbusian vs Traditional mindset. Hopefully there are better design concepts waiting to be discovered.
Also wonder if Ellison were alive today, would Invisible Man be the same, or perhaps more like Obama’s writing—which didn’t end in exile but with taking up the highest office. Am interested to read his next book, and his response to current issues. Somewhat ironic he isn’t as “cool” as the above books.
It would look more like Coate's Case for reparations
https://www.theatlantic.com/ma...
or, Between the World and Me
https://www.theatlantic.com/po...
or the Water Dancer.
‘Ultimately, the way we meaningfully reform Mr. Norton is to place him in conditions where Black people are not only his fate, but he is their fate, too.” This seems much more constructive of a thesis statement, one that could lead to positive change than Coates legalistic argument. Mr Norton is alive and well in many elite academic institutions of today that seek to essentialize architecture into identity instead of use it to reform politics, media and society.
It’s weird how the suburbs and single fam housing has been now identified by all pop media as racist—instead of being used in racist ways. One productive solution would be to reform real estate to be tied with inherent value instead of outdated systems that devalue based on race. But that’s a system based more on architecture less on historical legacy of racism.
You point referenced President Obama's writing, suggesting that it would be a follow-up to the invisible man. A mild response to this last point is, the problem there is that you are comparing a narrative about common unheard voices to one celebrated for exceptionalism. We all know who Barack Obama, and point to him as a success- which in case a more appropriate comparison from the 50's would be DuBois. If you're looking for a shared voice, Coate's open letter is far more accurate of a comparison to Ellison because the experience is far more shared (including, but not limited to President Obama). A more aggressive point would be that people have been making the same arguments on Mr. Norton's terms for some time, and you can see how well that has worked. Regardless of the location or quality of the school the same phrase it uttered "it's just not good enough." Meaning we won't accept it because
Dammit- my edit was lost. Bottom line- to suggest that catering to "Mr. Norton" is perhaps the better way is false because they only want to deal with exceptional stories after watching everyone struggle in adversarial situations. Also the suggestion that this occurs only at elite institution is false, and needs to be treated as such.
Agree, though I think the Joyner quote above regarding Mr. Norton is more aggressive in its method -- "to place Mr. Norton in conditions" which alluded to further unknown methods to create a shared fate between the two, instead of the Neo-segregation du jour that seems to be popular across political spectrums. This seems to be a more pragmatic and effective approach, to break apart the systems of redlining, education, etc. Not just the one-sided integration approach that Joyner experienced.
Obama comes to mind as he wrote about Ellison in his early early pre-political career as a community organizer and is a more modern example. Coates has stated he is an artist and writer who feels no responsibility towards political pragmatism. I wonder how both Obama and Coates feel about Ice Cube working with Trump on a "Platinum Plan" -- or how future politicians could exploit the issue to create an illusion of reparations that doesn't get at architectural roots that underpin this. As the Covid Stimulus shows, the rich always find a way to game the system.
Break apart systems of redlining? As in break up Wells Fago or refuse to purchase food at any grocery store chains that engage in practices of food apartheid? Immediately address infrastructural or environmental injustices and their decades long periods of impact?
Marc, I've always been curious about how reparations might work. I heard Coate's case and fully agree with every aspect of his historical analysis. In the spirit of advancing racial justice in our country, which god knows needs to happen, do you have a construct in mind for implementation, however rough it is?
Check out the work of Sandy Darity and Darick Hamilton.
Darity says "an $800,000 increase in net worth per Black household could have a dramatic impact on Black health" I see this figure comes from the white average household wealth, which is more influenced by very rich families and does not characterize the typical experience. This method focuses on wealth taxes as means to generate this wealth. Interesting.
But I wonder what urban design will play into any solution. Especially considering that single family houses, the current villain of elite academic conversations, is the prime generator of wealth. Seems like an architect or urban designer should be creating new conversations instead of relying merely on poly-sci or journalist thinkers
"Since a central goal of the Black reparations project is elimination of Black–White wealth inequality, the most effective and direct way to achieve that end is by payments to eligible recipients. (descendants of slavery)" Darity and Mullen This raises three basic questions of implementation: 1 - Does this pertain to other groups that have suffered a wealth gap because of discrimination? 2 - How does one break that down to those who have black blood that isn't part of the North American slave experience (like me)? 3 - How 'black' does one have to be or would it be based on your percentage, and if so are we talking about DNA tests?
These kind of questions are usually dismissed by "critical race" theorists as irrelevant. But any practical solution would have to be easily sold to the public and implemented successfully, unless you hope for a total disintegration of society as a whole. Architecture has been generally dismissed since the 70s as "space without utopia" and we have generally lowered our expectations every decade since Venturi. Buckminster Fuller used to be obsessed with the flow of energy from place to place. I hope that we will relook at how the systems that move wealth, and design cities, be fixed and rethought before we implement any top-down political solutions that will result in lower and lower quality products, buildings and cities for 100x the price.
Darity and Hamilton has expressly said this is a proposal for ADOS, and their work is focused as such. A strategy for 1st nations people would be faaaar more complicated given their very different and deep relationship to the land. Specific to architecture and landscape architecture, imagine writing history to include the built environments and landscape maintenance strategies of 1st nations since 1619. Also the debate about how to define ADOS is complex and active.
But (snark) sure dna, why not, it's already passively used but it would make force other folks to be honest about history and active exclusion of others https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/03/opinion/slavery-rape-confederate-monuments.html .
No snark at all. I want to see racial justice as well, but it won't happen if you dismiss these issues as a "proposal". This is too important an issue to play dodge ball on. If you can't answer these questions, don't make this kind of proposal, it only feeds the flames that gave us Donald J. Trump. Conceptual BS will get you through architecture school, but it don't sell on the street, and this is a fight we must win.
Not following - who's making a proposal here?
I asked how you thought reparations would be implemented and you directed me to the work of Darity. I quoted his proposal. ergo...
Now, I'm clear. Not me proposing things. The Darity/Hamilton proposal isn't analogous to paper architecture at all. It examined by the Sanders campaign and I believe parts were considered. It was also one of the reasons why the ADOS discussion/debate increased. They've been committed to doing work and getting it under the noses of people that can implement those ideas - if there's political buy-in.
But to be blunt- give back the land that was taken from families. Give them the earnings that would be owed to those families for the businesses on that land. Pay the families of people that were descendants of share croppers earning pennies on the dollar as compared to white famers. Give families the equivalent of the equity built into the homes they tried to purchase through the GI Bill which were conveniently rejected.
-- plus interest --
Do not assume you know better and have the right architectural solution that will address the things that were taken from them, because that is condescending and in the end still a form of control.
But but- If you want design related solutions- stop thinking pipeline projects will solve everything. Start teaching everyone how Black and Brown people contributed to the American built environment. Talk about their impact on the development of architecture and agriculture in the south. Be honest and say that the architectural experience of the Americas is not the same as Europe but they are result of modernity/colonialism. Be honest and admit that classical and other architectural styles were/are used to maintain the presence of colonialism and white supremacy. Be honest and say confederate monuments are about marking and controlling space to the disadvantage of others. Tell the full story about why images from Cole and Remington are important in framing a narrative of a North America that needed to be controlled a revalued to the benefit of non-natives.
Say this to everyone- not just Black and Brown students- because they know this. It's everyone else that needs to reconcile themselves with the impact of the canon and traditions while reparations are given.
Their proposal, that you offered as your own, is like paper architecture in the sense that it is unlikely to be done, in part because even you, well meaning et al, have still not answered these basic questions. No one is questioning the crimes committed though, something that's still not taught adequately, just like the depth of cultural contributions you're highlighting. My version of reparations would be to invest in those communities that have been hollowed out by years of racial and money driven politics, including redlining, block busting, toxic dumping, unequal public services, and an unjust criminal justice system. But this must be distributed to all communities, be they whites, Hispanic, Native American, and Asian. While African and Native Americans might predominate, these policies need to be fair to those who by the circumstance of their skin color are not guilty of the crimes of history. Every generation is born innocent and must be treated as an individual human and not be tarred for the circumstance of their birth. It's a nuanced affair, but worth every penny when you consider how much greater the contributions to our society these marginalized populations would be should justice be seen to be more fair and transparent by all .
Never offered it as my own and I wasn't clear that you were asking *me* for a solution specifically- but it's a far more comprehensive plan because of the depth.
But this is also to my point that the conditions are specific and need to be framed with serious consideration. So sure, let's talk about food/retail apartheid in addition to environmental injustices. I'm all for talking about "the opiod crisis" -provided you talk about everyone that has targeted (watch that unravel). Also- consider the following when you talk about who has not benefitted or been impacted. https://socialequity.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Umbrellas_Dont_Make_It_Rain_Final.pdf. Dartiy and Hamilton are involved. The key is to look at the disparates and how some people do benefit from systemic racism despite the appearance of otherwise.
You clearly offered it as your own, but be that as it may, why not do so now? After all this ink, you think you would have been able to at least sketch the outlines of a position you proclaim to be moral and just.
Clearly not given that people reference Darity. I DO find it funny that you worked so hard to make the "they're not all at fault (but they do benefit)," and did NOT directly respond to the my direct landscape/architecture/wealth proposal or long work of education- which would get to some your moral and just goals.
A full urban planning history would help to clarify any future productive solutions. I'm not sure anyone disagrees with the basic premises of inequality or "repair" is needed. The question is how you can actually engineer the solution. "It's everyone else that needs to reconcile themselves with the impact of the canon and traditions while reparations are given." But if the solution doesn't work for everyone, could easily see every rich company leave the US for Canada, while America decends into a Cuba-like downward spiral. That's not going to help anyone in the long run. Why not use everything we know about architecture, history, etc to find something better? Everyone cynically gave up on the built environment in the 70s--it seems like the missing piece in any attempt to redesign society for the better.
The overall lack of vision around these conversations will only end up entrenching another generation into the bitterness of false hope unrealized or worse
Hello Sean,
Great piece, thank you.
I especially appreciate you sharing your experience with both English teachers.
I've been following Michelle Singletary's series on The Post and felt this article was relevant:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
"...Vise said that I was an asset to The Post. I earned the position because of the totality of who I was — my race, gender, economic background, education and work experience. All of those aspects of my identity gave me a perspective on the news that Vise knew The Post needed."
Thanks for reading Andrew! And this Post article looks like an interesting read. I’ll definitely check it out.
It is a healthy sign when charitable contributions can be seen as self-serving. Refusal of them would send a clear message.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.