The phrase ‘public housing’ insinuates a separation from the rest of the society; if it were included in the bigger scope of society there would not have been a term coined for a living space. When I first heard of public housing, I thought of the government providing cheaper housing for those unable to fit into society’s ability to have their own living space. Heathcott defined the first public housing myth as the separation from “the fate of cities and regions of which they are a part”.

 

I agree that public housing is deeply immersed in the events of everyday life; the “rest of the environment” affects public housing and vice versa. The appearance of the housing with their large towering structures gives that message of being isolated and different from the rest. But the blame should not be fully placed on the architects designated to fulfilling the “dreams” of the housing authorities. Many social, economic, and political factors influence the reason behind why people view public housing as a separate entity. I believe that the surrounding environment and public housing go hand in hand, as in if all is well public housing functions at its optimal, but if the general atmosphere of the community is on the decline, so will public housing. Public housing does not remove itself from current events. It is rather intriguing that such units were built as a means to better society and decrease the slums, however, these buildings contribute to the crime rate especially here in NYC. No one can foresee or plan on certain things happening or going a way other than they pictured.