Loading

Gentrification: Urban Uplift or Modern Conquest? Sohum Shah

Abstract

In this essay, I examined whether "Los Dos Developers," Yip and Yap, in Sean San José's play Who Shot La Miguelito are a performance of how gentrification is a modern manifestation of the ethos of westward expansion and manifest destiny. I also used Yip and Yap as an object of study in order to examine whether gentrification proliferates racism by strengthening radicalized social systems.

I first analyzed San José's Who Shot La Miguelito and specifically assessed the interactions that existed between Los Dos Developers, the mission district, and the people who occupy that space. After this, I analyzed Zinn's A People's History of The United States to assess the parallels that exist between gentrification and the ethos of expansionism. Finally, I read Omi and Winant's "Racial Formations" and Bonilla-Silva's "Rethinking Racism: Towards a Structural Interpretation" to see how gentrification, just like expansionism, proliferated structural racism. What I discovered was that gentrification parallels the ethos of expansionism in the way that they both come at a cultural cost for the people who previously occupied the space. Additionally, gentrification proliferates structural inequality just like expansionism once did by creating economic and ideological opposition between races.

How do "Los Dos Developers", Yip and Yap, in the play, Who Shot La Miguelito, represent the forces of westward expansion and gentrification in both American history and contemporary America, respectively, and does gentrification, just like westward expansion, proliferate a system of structural inequality on the basis of race?

Essay

When most outsiders enter the block of the Mission District created by Sean San José in his play Who Shot La Miguelito, they see a "ghost town": "the old cop station, the closed meat packing place, [and] the empty parking lots; however, "Los Dos Developers," Yip and Yap, see a very different picture. What they see is "an empty canvas" that is ready for the paint brush that is their imagination (San José 22). They imagine the old cop station turned into "new mini bedroom apartments" and the meat packing place turned into "the Dog Yoga spot" (San José 22). In this world of their imagination, Los Dos Developers dream of people "Livin La Vida El Dorado", or, in other words, of people living in a gentrified, modern world (San José 41). What makes Los Dos Developers powerful, however, is that not only do they have a dream, but they have a means by which they will make this dream come true: they "buy," fix, "and then sell big" (San José 24). At first glance, Yip and Yap appear to be American heroes: they are turning the old into new and revitalizing the world around them. The problem with this, however, is that they are willing to destroy what previously stood in the space without paying any regard to the opinions of the people who occupy that space. This violates what the character Noctolenel calls rule one: to “give respect to the past and props to those who came before (San José 47).

Rule one- I give respect to the past and give props to those before me. So, I can talk all the shit I want- and you know I do, too - Noctolenel (San José 47)

This notion of having people enter a space and choosing to remodel it in a different, more popular, image is nothing new to America. In fact, the conquest of the western states during the period of westward expansion was exactly the same: settlers chose to remodel the space they “conquered” in the image of what is ideal to the white Anglo-Saxon protestant and they paid no regard to the Native Americans or the Chicanos who had previously occupied the space. For this reason, I believe that Los Dos Developers, Yip and Yap, in Sean San José’s Who Shot La Miguelito are a performance of how gentrification results in the proliferation of structural racism as, at its core, gentrification is a modern manifestation of the ethos of westward expansionism and manifest destiny.

Gentrification is the process by which old buildings in less developed neighborhoods are torn down to create room for newer, and typically more expensive, homes. Above (right) is an example of a gentrification project that was completed in La Mission. As seen, there are no longer any murals or any indication of the diversity that mad the district so unique or culturally rich. Courtesy of enterprisecommunity.org (left) and neighborhoods.com (right).

As seen through Los Dos Developers in Who Shot la Miguelito, gentrification is a modern manifestation of the ethos of westward expansion, or manifest destiny. As coined by the editor of the Democratic Review, John O’Sullivan, during the period of westward expansion, the general sentiment of American citizens was that it was their “manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions” (Zinn 151). The problem with O’Sullivan’s statement, however, is that expansionism was not only not free, but it was also much more than simply a method of population control. In fact, a large part of the ethos of manifest destiny is that it was the United States’ way of “giving the blessings of liberty and democracy to more people,” regardless of whether or not they wanted it (Zinn 154). Manifest destiny, or the ‘free expansion’ came at the cost of the people who previously occupied the space. For instance, when California was conquered by the American armed forces, a prominent naval officer, Revere, held a meeting with the chiefs of the Native-American nations that had for so long occupied and interacted with it in their way. He told them that they must “alter your [their] habits” or “become extinct” (Zinn 163-164). As seen, the so called ‘free expansion’ actually came at the cost of the Native American way of life, or the Native American life.

Just like O’Sullivan and most expansionists saw the west as a place for ‘free expansion,’ gentrifiers such as Los Dos Developers view working neighborhoods in metropolitan areas in the same light. When Yip and Yap go to visit the building, they don't see the city block where so many immigrants worked to build themselves the 'American dream'. They don't see the city block that has survived racial struggles. They don't see the city block in which the youth paint and dance to keep their culture alive. What they see is “a building abandoned” and a city block that produces to capital and accumulates no wealth (San José 38). In essence, although Los Dos Developers' expansion into the block may seem like 'free expansion' to them as it destroys very little monetary capital, the expansion does destroy an immense amount of cultural capital. Just like how the Native Americans paid the price of ‘free expansion’ by giving up their culture, the people of the block are paying by “sign[ing] off on selling this [their] past” (Sean José 24).

I can’t. I just can’t do this now. Not with the Ding Bat Twins flapping around here. I can’t talk to those real estate flies. Sign off on selling this past. My grandparents, dzer tsavy tanem (San josé 24).
Above is a mural in the Mission District that highlights the diversity of the area and represents the willingness of the people of the district to stand up for themselves and break the chains that have previously held them down. Courtesy of the New York Times.

Furthermore, as seen through the play, the selling off of peoples’ past that comes with gentrification ends with the structural proliferation of racism. While most people believe that racism is the “dogma that one ethnic group is condemned by nature to congenital inferiority and another… to congenital superiority”, Eduardo Bonilla-Silva at the University of Michigan contends that racism is purely the result of “racialized social systems” (Bonilla-Silva 465; Bonilla-Silva 469). In other words, Bonilla-Silva argues that racism is the result of “subordination and superordination between the races” and “practices of opposition… at the economic, political, social, and ideological levels” (p. 472). In the case of gentrification, these racialized social systems stemmed from the same practices of opposition as during the period of westward expansion. During the period of westward expansion, it was believed that by the “power of her [white America’s] idas,” and “the pressure of her [white America’s] commerce” the “wretched people, wretched in their origin” would eventually “[yield] to a superior population” (Zinn 157; Zinn 154). As witnessed in Who Shot la Miguelito, a similar mindset of racial opposition exists in the minds of gentrifiers. When Yip and Yap enter the block of the Mission District, a district characterized by its Latin-American roots, they comment on how hideous the murals are and they look around and say “It’s just a little - I don't know. Blue collar-ish. Blue like a bruise” (Sean José 23). In other words, they see a subordinate racial group that they hope to force to yield to any economic or social opposition that they may bring in with new construction and an influx of money. In other words, Yip and Yap are contributing to “the sociohistorical process by which racial categories are created, inhabited, transformed, and destroyed” (Omi and Winant 55).

It’s just a little - I don't know. Blue collar-ish. Blue like a bruise (Sean José 23).
The top two maps (top left courtesy of the US Census and top right courtesy of Revolution Analytics) show the ethnic breakdown of the city of San Francisco. As seen, the city is highly segregated in terms of race. When this map is corroborated with the gentrification map (below, courtesy of PropertyShark), it is shown that areas that are more white see more appreciation in their home values, while areas that are more Black or Latino see less appreciation or even depreciation. Yip and Yap in San José's Who Shot La Miguelito reinforces what is seen in these maps, as when they enter the primarily latin neighborhood, they comment on how dilapidated and 'bruised' the neighborhood is.

Through Yip and Yap in San José’s, Who Shot la Miguelito, it is demonstrated how gentrifiers, with their new construction and new money, are not only analogous to the expansionists from America’s era of westward expansion, but also how gentrifiers structurally proliferate a system of racism through economic and ideological opposition. Additionally, as a whole, San Jose's inclusion of Yip and Yap in the play goes to show that performance in America is a commentary on the current state of affairs in the United States. As Bonilla-Silva wrote in his essay, “The only way to ‘cure’ society of racism is by eliminating its systematic roots” (p. 476). As seen through the inclusion of the characters of Los Dos Developers, this elimination of systematic roots can simply be achieved through Noctolenel's rule number one: to give respect to the past and props to those who came before.

The only way to ‘cure’ society of racism is by eliminating its systematic roots (Bonilla-Silva 476).

Works Cited

  • Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. "Rethinking Racism: Towards a Structural Interpretation." American Sociological Review, vol. 62, no. 3, Jun. 1997.
  • Omi, Michael, and Howard Winant. "Racial Formations." Racial Formation In the United States. Third edition. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2015.
  • San José, Sean. Who Shot La Miguelito
  • Zinn, Howard. A People's History of the United States. New York: Harper & Row, 1990.

Process Reflections