Much of my childhood was spent in parks throughout Queens. As an avid CYO-league baseball (yes, I played baseball. I was not good. It was still fun.) and soccer (yes, I played soccer. I was decent. I got mad sweaty though) player in my younger years, I got to see first hand the different parks, both the good and the bad. Many parks were very similar in the sense that they featured many of the same amenities, playgrounds, and overall “park-y” feeling. On the other hand, some parks felt outright unsafe, mostly due to the neighborhood. Even as a young pup, I knew when the people and atmosphere at a park seemed unsafe and unwelcoming. Unknowingly, the younger, cuter, more impressionable version of myself was seeing the disparities that New York City currently sees in its current park structure.
I love Parks. My favorite Park has to be Sandara Park, because she’s so darn adorbz, and she speaks Filipino. And she’s got that #confidence + #cuteness to match. I’m also a big fan of Jay Park, because he dances mad good and the ladies love him. So jealous… sorry, I thought this class was “Appreciating Korean Superstars in NYC” for a minute. But back to the action.
What I got out of these readings is seeing the strong relationship between affluence of an area and the quality of its parks. We can look at the “famous” parks in Manhattan, whether it’s Central Park, Bryant Park, and now, the High Line. These parks all appeal, for the most part, to those from the upper crust of New York. These are people that have the free time to just go to the park and enjoy it for what it is. Missing from these parks are the people of the lower class, who may seem too caught up with work, family, or have just too much going on to enjoy these parks for their recreational value. These parks are nice for people to enjoy, but I personally don’t think they play a major role in affecting one’s quality of life. I see them as a luxury of living in a nice neighborhood.
While the park may seem like just a recreational ground for the rich, it may also serve as a negative marker for a lower class community. I remember watching movie’s in seminar 2, where the park was seen as a den for drug addicts, gangs, and the general impoverished. I feel that this image and generality of lower income parks will stay the same, and the only thing that can affect this image is a change in the overall standing and SES of the neighborhood.
Like me with Bruno Mars songs, thinking about the deeper implications of parks brings up many underlying feelings and opinions. Some things that I thought of were the socioeconomics, biology, functionality, structure, economics, community role, political implications, labor involved, ethics, inspiration and meow contributing to the park. However, with Bloomberg’s directives in putting a park “within 10 minutes walking distance” of every New Yorker, I feel that he’s not really doing much to change what one article referred to as the “status quo.” While more parks may mean more opportunities for plant respiration and oxidation, how will it affect the quality of life of every New Yorker? Will it encourage more kids to go out and play, or will they continue to play video games indoors? Those questions may go unanswered for a long time. Deuces.
