Chicago: A City of Immigrants

        Any individual that has ever taken a walk down a major street of Chicago and taken notice of the various restaurants and shops of unique ethnic origin has likely come to the realization that Chicago is a city of immigrants. The same can also be said for an individual, much like myself, who has experienced the unfortunate occurrence of receiving a speeding ticket in the city, and noticed that the payment instructions are offered in not only English, but Spanish and Polish as well.

            To be sure, the idea of Chicago being a city of immigrants is not exactly a new concept, as immigration is a longstanding staple of Chicago's identity. The experience itself is in many ways the same, but it has also changed in a variety of ways. Immigrants still come to Chicago from their respective countries in order to seek out economic opportunities and to be with family, but the jobs available to today's Chicago immigrants as well as the demographical breakdown of these immigrants are different than in the past.

            Indeed, Immigrants and economics in Chicago intersect in a vastly different fashion than before. While Chicago used to be an industrial powerhouse, with a plethora of factories available to workers, this is not as much the case today, as Chicago, like most modern American cities, has a workforce more concentrated in the service industry today. While the implications of this are further reaching than just our immigrants, it should be noted that many jobs in the service industry not only require the ability to speak the English language fluently, but also pay significantly less than factory jobs did.

            In effect, today's immigrants who lack an education as well as the ability to speak English fluently have decreased chances of succeeding in achieving upward mobility for themselves and their children. And much of these predicaments seemingly zero in on today's Mexican immigrants (who are also the largest immigrant group entering into Chicago, as well as the country) as Polish immigrants today are much more likely to be educated and possess professional occupation experience, which is a sharp contrast to Polish immigrants of the past, and many other white European immigrant groups of the past as well. Ultimately, many of the avenues that provided the success for the predominantly white immigrants of the past are either gone, significantly reduced, or altered.

            While today's immigrants face the discrimination that immigrants of the past faced, the discrimination and prejudice is more covert than overt (e.g. "Irish Need Not Apply" signs of the past). Koval and company speak of the resistance from white Chicagoans towards blacks and Latinos moving into once white neighborhoods, and Zorbaugh references the resentment towards "the dark people" (Sicilians/Italians) that came to occupy what became for a period "Little Hell/Italy." After reading this, I cannot help but feel that public opinion has not changed much from mainstream Chicagoans. Despite less overt discrimination, institutional prejudice is a severe road block in the modern immigrants path to success, especially for Mexicans who do not physically blend in with mainstream Americans as white immigrants can and did.

            Koval mentions that the ethnic enclave and the ethnic-based division of labor is dwindling, but this does not make immigrants any less powerful agents of change. In fact, prior to this blog prompt, I created an entire post about the effects ethnic succession can have upon a community on a cultural level (see: Ethnicity and Aesthetics in Urban Regions). Regardless of the struggles that immigrants face and will continue to face, they are an asset to Chicagoans for providing work and culture, even if some are threatened by the latter.

Ethnicity and Aesthetics in Urban Regions

            Throughout the duration of this course, I would have to say that the National Museum of Mexican Art has been my favorite of the fieldtrips. From age thirteen to seventeen, I assumed that my future career would deal with the arts in at least some capacity, but obviously, that did not pan out. One may assume that it is my appreciation for the arts that helped inform my opinion of our visit to the museum, but really I think my positive experience has just as much, if not more, to do with the fact that sociology has dominated my academic interests over the past few years.

            I am infinitely fascinated how Pilsen, an area that was once host to a number of European ethnic groups such as Bohemians for example, could transform into a location with a population nearly 90% Latin/Hispanic. My interest, however, does not lie in how this transformation took place, but rather the effect of this metamorphosis. It seems that whenever an area has a strong ethnic majority, much is done by its population to display the values of their respective culture. The Latin influence really creates an atmosphere and gives a sense of identity to the area.

            The march to the National Museum of Mexican Art provided a chance for the class to observe the area, which proved to be rewarding as soon as this trek began; along a large massive concrete wall near the train station, there is a gigantic mural with numerous historical figures significant to Latin Americans. If the rain weren't pouring on us and if the wind wasn't gusting at us, it would have been enjoyable to spend more time looking at this piece of work.

            The walking tour following the visit to the museum provided us additional views of the influence the strong Latin presence has on the area. I can recall seeing Our Lady of Guadalupe numerous times during our visit to Pilsen, most notably outside of the Pink Line, which provoked a discussion of not only the significance of her to the primarily Latino community, but also the issue of whether its being on such a building violates the separation of church and state. Similar to the mural mentioned above, we witnessed several buildings with artwork of famous Latinos (I am not sure if they were paintings or tile designs) such as on schools and hospitals, and I was absolutely blown away by the wonderful detail they possessed as well as the their vibrant colors.

            The fact that the National Museum of Mexican Art is in Pilsen says much about its significance as a large Latino community in just Chicago, but one also to be recognized nationally and perhaps even internationally. It was wonderful to view all of the paintings and sculptures that give insight into the values of these artists as they not only represent facets of Mexican culture, but also speak much of the plight Mexicans are confronted with in both the United States and Mexico.

            The former is exemplified by a lawnmower that a Mexican-American artist modified into a mechanical work of art as it combined the hydraulics of a low rider vehicle (popularized by Latino culture in the southwest) with a vehicular lawnmower, thus creating a comedic homage to two aspects he found important in the identity of Latino culture. The fact that this was addressed calls to mind what Koval and company had to say about ethnic division of labor.

            An example of an artist providing social commentary of issues such as globalization and vacationing in Mexico is found in a painting which depicts the Mayan prophecy of the year 2012. Several gods are shown wreaking havoc upon tourists in Mexico due to the claim that American tourism results in the destruction of several Mayan sites of historical importance.

            There was more I wished to discuss, such as my perception of closeness between those in the population as well as the effects of enclaves in general, but this post is already a bit longer than I had originally planned it to be. I will end this post by expressing that as much as I enjoyed witnessing how much Pilsen's population has influenced its aesthetics, it would have been more profound had I seen pictures of it prior to the boom of the Mexican population in the middle of the 20th century.

Bonus!

In a scenario right out of Metal Gear Solid, I stealthily snapped this photo when the security guards turned their backs. While this wasn't my favorite piece, I enjoyed it quite a bit.

The Hull House

Visiting the Hull House was a very surreal experience for me as it was a location I had heard much about, but never imagined actually seeing for myself, and now that I have finally seen it I can say that I was very pleased with the experience. Upon our arrival, we were treated with a tour around the famous historical landmark which included a look at several key items from the various eras of the Hull House. I feel that discussions of the Hull House are usually synonymous with Jane Addams (or social work), and it was nice to see that our visit to the Hull House and its respective tour showcased the contributions made by her partners and successors, effectively dealing them their rightful position in the pantheon of this monumental settlement house.

            I believe the fact that there were others who wished to bear the torch after Addams is proof that the concept of this brand of highly inclusive philanthropy for immigrants and the poor was not something unique to Addams and her cohorts. And while it is obvious that there are people who want to help the less fortunate, as exemplified by social workers and numerous charities, I have mixed feelings as to whether settlement houses like the Hull House would be effective in modern America, or even just Chicago.

            The Chicago of today is still very much a city of immigrants, and also a city with a plethora of people of lower socioeconomic status, and it is because of this that the need for something like settlement houses is definitely still present in my eyes, as the provision of education, health, and other forms of human and social capital are invaluable in our society. I am aware of social workers and I do not doubt that many of them are people who genuinely desire to improve the greater health of a given area, but settlement houses just seem so much more effective in their inclusiveness.

            The reason why I question whether or not settlement houses would be effective today lies in my belief that there would need to be numerous wealthy eccentric types backing such an ambitious effort. Ultimately, I believe there is a need for settlement houses today as well as people who want to help; the issue is whether there are enough individuals who are willing to help, as well as wealthy enough to command such efforts as there is no chance of settlement houses as inclusive as the Hull House being a reality if such an endeavor would be contingent upon whether or not it would receive government funding; the United States, especially the political right, is in a state of paranoia regarding what they perceive to be socialist policies.

            Those concerned with their community can either focus all of their hope on social workers and programs like Head Start, but really the actions of wealthy individuals with an interest in bettering their communities stepping up to the plate would likely be more effective. Regardless, I believe some sort of change needs to occur for the better of not just Chicago, but all American cities, especially as our population grows exponentially and we need our new citizens and members of the underclass to be equipped with the necessary abilities and resources to better their living situation.

Suburbs and Cities

            In this course, which focuses on the urban and suburban, it is without question that we have spent more time discussing the former rather than the latter, and this is for good reason. There does not need to be extensive field trips or anything like that that since most of us are native to the suburbs, or at the very least have a firm grasp of what the suburbs are like given our enrollment at this small liberal arts college in Naperville of all places. My reason for calling attention to this lies in my interest in how the suburbs relate to the city in the context of the writings and sociological theory we have discussed in this class.

            In several sociology classes I have taken, much has been discussed about the city from a theoretical and empirical mindset, but not nearly as much has been said about the suburbs. Part of this, undoubtedly, has to do with the vast majority of "classic" sociological theorists writing their works in a time long before the suburb would be what it is today. In much of these works, the authors are typically writing from the perspective that the city is a negative deviation from the mechanical solidarity found in a more rural setting, and as a class I believe we agreed with such theorists, but only to an extent.

            Assuming this is true, what does this say about the suburbs? I believe most would consider the suburbs to have much more in common with the city than a rural area, yet it seems that the suburbs are vastly different from both still. I wouldn't say that the suburbs have an organic solidarity system set in place, as people can just as easily go about their life working their job and being with their family, without much other interaction at all. There is no bartering or actual need for individuals to communicate and know one another, but there is, however, an expectation for one to do so.

            I believe that it can be argued that this expectation of social interaction and friendliness is the main difference in social functionality at the level of "homelife." The suburbs are a place where potentially exciting people go to die and become boring, one job promotion and pregnancy at a time, and it is because of these circumstances guiding their being in such a place, that psychologically drives individuals to become acquainted to one another. It can be argued that it is this expectation of friendliness and/or the fact that people raising families in suburban homes are probably more likely to live in their homes longer, and consequently seek out companionship. While, I understand this is just a terse scratching of the surface for a topic so vast, I felt the need to throw in my two cents.

The Chicago Plan

            If there is one major theme to be gleaned from a reading of Carl Smith's The Plan of Chicago¸ it would have to be that Chicago is home to one of the most ambitious efforts ever made in reinventing a city. However, if there is another major theme one could find in relation to the problems that have plagued the city since the plan went into effect, it would have to be that Chicago is a city that is always a day late and a dollar short. Some may criticize this statement as an attack on the city, but that is not my intention as I am proud that I have grown up so close to Chicago.

            What I mean in my usage of the phrase "day late and a dollar short," is a reference to the city's longstanding history of curing whatever may ail the city at a given time, only for its inhabitants to realize that it either wasn't enough or that the problem has been eliminated only for citizens to face a new menace, which may have even been a result of the solution to a former problem!

            Examples of the former are eminently present today; for example, Chicagoans yet again find themselves lacking the necessary space on the road to fit an ideal amount of automobiles. From what I've gathered in my visits to Chicago (related to and unrelated to USS 300) is that it would be impossible to add any new lanes to most streets without tearing down or severely modifying several buildings. And even if this were possible, there would only be a point in executing such an endeavor if the increased space would decreased congestion for more than a decade or two (being generous). To be sure, there are several Chicagoans who don't use the roads at all, or at least, only for public transportation. Nevertheless, I believe this is an issue that deserves to be addressed and unsurprisingly, many of my classmates have!

            In fact, several of my classmates also wrote about topics such as parks, forestry, etc., and while I do agree with their general sentiment that Burnham was onto something positive in his desire for such features to be included in his Chicago, I feel the need to play devil's advocate. If, like most areas, we can expect Chicago's population to continually increase in significant numbers, then maybe the city will reach a point in which parks, forest preserves, and anything that doesn't serve a direct purpose to commerce, transportation, etc., will be considered expendable in favor of making room for more housing and transportation (note: it's a good thing the Civic Center never came to fruition!). Vertical growth could be another remedy to the former problem, but as I recall from our in-class discussion, many find the idea of being blocked off from the sky to be unsettling, and I would be inclined to agree.

            At the end of the day, it seems like Chicagoans are in a seemingly inextricable corner in their quest to solve many of their problems as every decision seems to result in a hurt and heal effect. One thing is for certain, if we are to make changes to our city, the changes should have the future in mind, not just the present.