In Naked City: The Death and Life of Authentic Urban Places, Sharon Zukin explores how Brooklyn became “trendy” as a borough. Whereas the East Village had already experienced gentrification and a thriving arts scene, artists and avant-garde individuals sought a new area to express their creativity. Across the East River, they looked towards Brooklyn as a nesting place for their ideas and expression.
Zukin emphasizes that Brooklyn became popular because of its “authenticity” and ruggedness. As a result, Brooklyn was seen as an organic space that contrasted with the established bustle of Manhattan neighborhoods. Moving into Brooklyn seemed like a direct counterculture to residing in Manhattan: “The borough’s slower pace, neighborly interactions, and relative lack of sophistication made it seem more like the rest of the United States than Manhattan was” (Zukin 40). Williamsburg became a place where the creative class (mirroring Florida’s model) could come together and enjoy nightlife, art exhibits, and concerts. Brooklyn had “grit,” as Zukin mentions, and that term has become synonymous with “authenticity, and that is good” (54). Whilst reading this part, I wondered whether the “grit” that the creative class saw is comparable to a modern-day desire to find an abstract “charm” in an area or block.
After exploring the timeline of gentrification in Brooklyn, I sought to find opinions about the ongoing process in the city. In a Ted Talk entitled “What We Don’t Understand About Gentrification,” speaker Stacey Sutton emphasizes that gentrification is commonly described in ways such as the presence of high-rise, modern apartment buildings and quaint cafes. While these institutions may be evident of gentrification occurring, they do not necessarily equate to one another. This is a misrepresentation of how gentrification manifests in cities; rather, it is a product of complex and intertwining economic, social, and business structures. Sutton states that those of higher socioeconomic status move into neighborhoods to first take advantage of cheap property values. By doing so, they displace original residents and change the dynamics of the community (Sutton). She also notes that gentrification and revitalization often get confused with one another, and may be used interchangeably and erroneously. Sutton affirms that revitalization often starts as a grassroots movement that maintains affordable housing, which directly contrasts with the consequences of gentrification. Today, the rent rates in Williamsburg are through the roof, and often necessitate roommates in order to be affordable. Lastly, Sutton states that gentrification is a “social justice problem that can be addressed” – cities must consider populations that are potentially being displaced by this encroaching process, and advocate for them (Sutton). Sutton brings a proactive attitude to combat the disparities of gentrification, which have arisen in Williamsburg, the East Village, and Harlem, among other places.
Works Cited
Sutton, Stacey. (2015, January 15). What We Don’t Understand About Gentrification: Stacey Sutton[Video file]. Retrieved from youtube.com/watch?v=XqogaDX48nI.
Zukin, Sharon. Naked City: The Death and Life of Authentic Urban Places. Oxford University Press, 2011.
