...and by a strange twist of fate, many Philadelphians agree.
Here's the article. The gist of the conflict is that New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin visits Philly. He thanks the city of Philadelphia for sheltering those who were displaced by the destruction of Hurricane Katrina out of one side of his mouth, but criticizes the clenliness of the city out of the other.
I was expecting the local media to flip out. I was waiting for the TV stations and the local news rags cry mayday for the PR and tourism departments. the media reaction for this was... well, tepid. I first caught wind of this when one of the morning news shows aired a segment on it. The usual questions came up:
Q: What right does he have to say these things about our city?
A: He's just another person on the outside looking in. It's an obvious observation, at least to us. If it's something so obvious to us on the inside, it's a huge problem.
Q: Okay, maybe he's right. But he shouldn't have said it.
A: Imagine how many tourists say it. The only reason we know about it is because he has some clout with the general public.
Q: He came here exploring ideas to combat urban blight. So does that mean he's being a hypocrite?
A: His city was destroyed by a monstrous hurricane that caused incomprehensible damage to buildings and infrastructure, killing a sizeable portion of the city's population. What's Philly's excuse? If he's exploring ideas to combat urban decay, he's come to the right place. It's everywhere. But, at the same time, he's come to the wrong place becuase if he's looking to compare notes and explore strategies for getting rid of the decay, he wasn't about to find any good ideas here.
At any rate, the general concensus agrees: he's right, but he shouldn't say it. He should spare the truth because God forbid we hurt someone's feelings. Okay, okay... you can replace "feelings" with "PR campaign" and they might have a point. But another question stands out in my mind. Ray Nagin is looking outside the scope of his city to solve a problem. He's asking input from other administrations. Now, if his comments risk the integrity of Philadelphia's image (yeah, right... like the high homicide rates have no influence on our image), why oh why oh motherfucking WHY don't these comments motivate our mayor's administration take a page from Nagin's book and search for solutions outside the city? Why is the city taking offense to these comments instead of using them as a springboard to fixing the problem?
Furthermore, if the topic of urban blight doesn't show up in the mayoral debates, I'm so moving.
harriedpsychmajor posted on Apr 24, 2007
| views: 399
Comments
-
silverwhisper said on Apr 24, 2007....
um...harried, are you sure you wanna be taking any cues at all from nagin given that he'd known the levees required supporting well before katrina hit? :>
ed -
TinSoldier said on Apr 24, 2007....
Hmm. I've never been to Philadelphia (well, except for a flight out -- long story) but I was in New Orleans right after the hurricane.
Maybe I don't exactly know what urban blight looks like except for what I've seen on TV, but it was pretty apparent to me that some portions of New Orleans certainly suffered from it even before the hurricane.
I couldn't believe that some people lived like that, or went to a school that was in the condition that the high school we took over was in.
So basically, I agree with ed. I don't think that Nagin should be the spokesman against urban blight.
-
harriedpsychmajor said on Apr 25, 2007....
Don't get me wrong. I don't believe for a second that Nagin is the absolute authority on this subject either. But he's exploring and collecting ideas for revitalization, and that's a hell of a lot better than what Philly's administration is doing.
John Street, mayor of Philadelphia, launched the neighborhood transformation initiative, but much like similar initiatives it did nothing but displace poor residents, forming more condensed pockets of impoverished areas in the inner-city. Not only that, people who can afford to leave are still leaving, the number of people beneath the poverty line remains the same and there are still parts of the city that still see abandoned buldings, destitude families and high crime. In short, any progress made by the initiative was offset.
So, I'm not really taking a lot of stock from Nagin's actions. The only difference between Nagin and Street is that Nagin is asking other administrations for help. Street is too proud to admit that Philly has this problem, for fear that mention of urban blight (well, pick any issue that major cities struggle with) will damage his PR campaign for the city.
-
The_Ranting_Logician said on Apr 29, 2007....
Hey man I just wanted to stop in and say thank you for checking out my blog. It means a lot every time I get a new reader or comment. I'll be sure to read more of your blog. I hope you enjoy mine. Cool to see a younger person on here.
Oh and I'm glad you like my name hah
-
Boonsketti said on May 04, 2007....
Philadelphia seems to me a soulless dump filled with nasty, cold east coast types. I'm getting out in two weeks! Hooray!
-
harriedpsychmajor said on May 06, 2007....
I wish I could disagree with that, Boon.
Comment on "Ray Nagin calls Philly a dirty city..."
Related Posts:
sheltercrow
posted on Jul 29, 2008
| views: 32
|
Hurricane Katrina: The fight for housing in New Orleans... read entire post