The DC Errea...

Quite some time ago, a young lady that works where I work interviewed me for a paper that was due the next day (you know how college students do). What follows is her interpretation of what I said. I think it's an interesting viewpoint at the very least, and it definitely sums up why I am a city mouse...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chad Royce [ed note. "Ha! Chad Royce... sexy] is not what you would expect from a DC resident. With a brazen and yet sophisticated take on the world, he is unafraid of speaking frankly of his experiences in the city, professing such with an ease that makes his casual use of invectives a cultural aesthetic. As a transient DC resident—that is, neither a DC native nor with intentions of staying much longer in the tri-state area—Chad is as much of an outsider as he is a resident of our nation’s capital. “I’m originally from Cleveland,” he avows with great ease, “and I lived there for 23 years.” The tone in his voice is characteristically “Chad,”—carefree, confident—and yet it is almost as though there exists a bittersweet relationship between him and the city to which he pledges loyalty to, of which he does not seem to he, himself recognize. Words resonate within the small, windowless room: “...a city is traffic jams; It’s congestion, pollution…less interpersonal relationships and more individualism.” An arguably negative description of the city is counterbalanced with more connotatively positive adjectives as he continues to identify a the urban environment as “cultural,” “forward-thinking,” and with “a thriving nightlife.” It is as though this ideologically collisioned relationship with the city is characteristically urbanite as city dwellers attempt to reconcile their love for Washington DC with its gross shortcomings. While the push and pulls of city life surely take their toll, the city remains an ever-luring commodity in American society. One must then question what exactly is it that attracts the individual to metropolitan life—particularly that of DC—and what is it that makes it so difficult to leave behind. The first-hand accounts of city dwellers, much like Chad, inherently provide insight into the social constructs that manipulate the city into a more notorious, yet sought-after habitué in contemporary society.

It is interesting to analyze the social constructs of “city.” The implications of a city, as outlined by Lewis Mumford, are endless. Mumford describes the city as a “geographical plexus, an economic organization, an institutional process, a theater of social action, and an aesthetic symbol of collective unity”. What is of interest is what makes the city so alluring and what social constructs allow the city to produce an urban identity. Chad has a personal tie the city: “I can’t have it no other way. I’ve tried country; didn’t like it. I didn’t like the suburbs either…I have to live in a city.” To him, the city spoils the individual, so much so that they become, in a way, corrupted. In this process of spoiling the individual, the rapid pace and convenience of a big city reinforce symbols of power: the automobile, the office buildings, buildings of entertainment. These factors lead to the common sociological notions of what constitutes a city: pollution due to the need of public transportation; diversity in economic and cultural backgrounds due to the rising need of blue-collared and white-collared jobs to sustain the office buildings and their commercial motives; and so on. Ultimately, this situating of power reconfigures boundaries and inevitably segregates the city.

Washington DC is the perfect example for just that. There are racial divides that make it so that the affluent white community commingles with the impoverished black community on a need-based system. When I asked a DC native what she thought of the quintessential “DC-er” she nicely quipped, “My friends and I often joke about this idea of an ‘urban snob.’” Identifying herself as one, she describes the urban snob as one who thrives in city life, visiting museums, the theater, places of fine dining, and who is a liberal Democrat. When asked whether she thought that the forms of entertainment she had mentioned were seemingly limited to upper-class tastes, she agreed. Earlier, she had mentioned that the racial demographics of DC is 80% black. I was baffled that the quintessential DC-er, to her, represented white upper-class. She and her constituency, are what Spain described as the independent woman, “women adrift who provoke envy due to their very lack of domestic responsibilities”. All the same, there is discrepancy in such testimony. While the majority of DC is African American, 60% according to general DC census, the typical Washingtonian is not part of urban culture while white Washingtonians are.

Chad is aware of this discrepancy and tackles the issue more politically. Ultimately, he concludes that there are three different types of DC-ers, none of which he identified himself as. The first is the “Go-Go” Washingtonian. This type of DC-er is predominantly black, rich in urban culture; one who listens to Go-Go music, has distinct flavor in dress, and uses DC idioms. The second type of DC resident is the “person on the Hill.” This person tends to be upper- class, white, and with little interaction with the African American community. The final DC-er is the transient DC resident: one who has moved to DC for their jobs, family, and other sociological factors. They tend to exploit the city for its rich cultural diversity and entertainment venues. They are situated with greater power than the native, impoverished DC-ers who view the city as a place of survival as opposed to a place of entertainment. The transient group is also situated just below the powerful people on Capitol Hill, generally coming for less political motives. They tend to be situated in the Northwest part of Washington DC, away from the more notorious city sector, such as the Southeast, Northeast, and Southwest, where gentrification is well underway.

Perhaps it is this sheltered perspective for transient inhabitants that lures the non-DC native to move to the city? This degree of shallowness that most people experience. Unlike most DC transients, Chad is not concerned with material wealth as much as he is concerned with cultural wealth. His vehicle serves as means of self-enrichment. To him, having a car in means that he can traverse the boundaries of the city and consequently, racial lines. He believes that an ever-increasing dependency upon public transportation such as the metro and the transit system results in less people making the attempt to truly get to know DC and DC natives. This sort of sheltered perspective allows the city to be more luring. The 60% black population is certainly not what people first think of when they get to the city and it is even more certain that it is not what people see when they visit DC. Asides from the typical bum on the corner, most transient Washingtonians have little exposure to the 60% of the DC that remains disenfranchised and disempowered.

This idea of disempowerment is surely a focal point of debate and negotiating racial lines seems to be an area of great interest to Chad. It is obvious, to him as well as to Ulf Hannerz in Soulside, that urban culture does little to aid the advancement of the disenfranchised despite the fact that city life presenting the illusion of opportunity. According to Hannerz, “Ghetto dwellers have much to resent about the way the outside world treats them: poor jobs, unfair practices on part of the employers, inadequate schools, high rents for unsatisfactory housing…” and so on. As Chad describes it, power in the city is stratified in terms of race. The empowered in DC are not the majority, the 60%, and not the poor. It is the rich, the ones on the Hill, and those who oftentimes do not even live in DC, bur rather in neighboring cities in Virginia and Maryland. In a city where the mayor was found ”smoking crack with a prostitute and yet, mayor for life,” the constructs of power are not even applicable by name…they are stratified in terms of race and race relations. As Chad decries, the chief of police in DC once stated that an African American at Georgetown is an anomaly. And such is the concept of power in day-to-day DC life.

The lure of the city is confounding to me. To many, such as Chad, it is the concept of people and the possibilities thereof—that is, networking, cultural understanding and perhaps even cultural intermingling—that allows for the individual to claim the city as his/her home. As the city spoils the individual, making it so that s/he is not cannot appreciate the tranquility of rural life nor the calmness of day to day experience in cities such as New York and Washington DC, the city person is ever nostalgic for the sirens and high-paced life of the city when s/he is not there. As Chad puts it, “I love [DC] because it’s political. Everyone has an opinion, be it uninformed, but everyone has one…and despite the dichotomy of the city, I would have it no other way.” There is a lure to the city that makes it difficult to leave behind. Perhaps the notion of individuality is what makes it easier to cope with. Aware of its shortcomings and yet capable of not facing it on a diurnal basis may be the perfect amount of shallowness that allows for the quintessential DC-er to find refuge. Whatever the case, the typical Washingtonian is in love with city, and yet does not idealize it. “One day, I’ll leave DC” he closes. “Soon, because I can only deal with the city for so long.” Are you going to another city when you move or a more rural area?” I ask. A smirk comes to Chad’s face. “Yes. As I stated before, I love the city and it’s the only place for me. It’s what happening.”