In the New York Times article, “Diagnosis: Battered but Vibrant” by Benedict Carey, a neighborhood along Chicago’s South Side is discussed to explain how factors play major roles to shape a community. Carey talks about Chatham, a neighborhood once known to be a treasure and great for living. However, things changed in recent years. Chatham was scattered with foreclosed homes and the crime rate was rising. This was a result of changing attitudes and behaviors by residents. Nonetheless, one statement I found particularly interesting was that a “neighborhood’s character shapes its economic future at least as much as more obvious factors like income levels and foreclosure rates.”

I agree with Carey that a neighborhood is shaped by the attitudes of its residents. If ill-behaved teenagers loitered around the city, one would certainly see the correlation between behaviors and crime rates. Manners and respect for people and their community would disappear. With these characteristics, a neighborhood develops a bad reputation which would taint its image and prevent potential home buyers from making their purchase. Those who already reside in the changing region would also consider moving out.

I also agree that a neighborhood’s character relates to its economy. As a New Yorker, I have observed various different communities. From Jackson Heights, Queens to Chinatown, Manhattan, lower to middle class residents work around the clock to keep their local economy thriving. Main streets are usually busy with markets, grocery stores and restaurants. In some instances, communities such as these seem economically self-sustainable.

On the other end, wealthy communities such as Manhasset in Long Island and the Upper East Side in Manhattan are less busy and more peaceful. Residents of these neighborhoods are surrounded by luxury stores, restaurants and boutiques. Sidewalks are clean and wide. Homes are less likely to be foreclosed.

Another point I found interesting was how uniformly small buildings in a neighborhood can create an “ecological advantage”. Carey states that small residences such as one family homes can be very beneficial to the upkeep of communities. Neighbors would more likely approach each other if they find something wrong, such as garbage on one’s lawn. As a New Yorker living in Queens my entire life, I find that hard to imagine because there are very little bungalows or one family residences. Block neighborhoods are no where to be found. People in New York are known to keep to themselves, even if they live next door to each other in an apartment. Nonetheless, it would be nice to see that type of ideal community.

E.B. White stated that New York is composed of three groups of people who make New York what it truly is. There are the native New Yorkers, immigrant New Yorkers, and commuter New Yorkers. According to White, commuters are the “queerest” and I agree with his reasoning. As a commuter from Queens myself, I can certainly relate to the point that I “discover[ed] nothing much about the city except the time of arrival and departure of trains and buses, and the path to a quick lunch” (White 27). As a city characterized by so much energy, New York is home to many people who are always rushing and working. We do not slow down and appreciate the activities we can do without scurrying around like subway rats. Sometimes, it is best for us to be unhurried and venture to explore other regions of New York.

I have never thought about this, but I find it so true when White states how well New Yorkers deal with overcrowding issues. It happens on subways, where people are packed like sardines without getting claustrophobic. It also happens on highways and bridges, where cars are clogged. Yet, we find ways to deal with these problems and proceed on with our daily lives. In return, White says that we are given a “supplementary vitamin – the sense of belonging to something unique, cosmopolitan, mighty and unparalleled” (33).

One thing I did not know was that some people prefer to live in villages and small towns compared to the city. I always thought that the majority of people would rather live in the city. However, these individuals think New York is just hustle and bustle, where life did not include close knit communities and neighborhoods. White pointed out that these individuals have the wrong concept, and I agree. New York is actually composed of “tens of thousands of tiny neighborhood units” (34). In fact, most of these neighborhoods are self-sufficient, an area where particular ethnicities cluster. There is a sense of community in certain residential areas such as Flushing, Queens and Jackson Heights, Elmhurst. These places act like cities within the actual city.

White also discussed how despite their busy lives, New Yorkers live with the fear of annihilation. Because of the population density and attractiveness, New York is a made target. Although this work was written way before, E.B. White paints 9/11 in my mind. “A single flight of planes no bigger than a wedge of geese can quickly end this island fantasy, burn the towers, crumble the bridges…” (54). I believe that New Yorkers today certainly have that fear in the back of their minds.

He also mentioned the willow tree, which he described as a symbol of life in New York. I would like to know how he came upon this willow tree and if it has any personal significance to him. I would also like to know if that same willow tree is still alive and present.