Paying the price for cannibalism

An unforeseen twist to industrial agriculture, from the NYT:

By the reductive logic that rules our food system, cannibalism should be as legitimate a way of eating as any other: it’s all just protein, right? Yet the great unlearned lesson of B.S.E. and other similar brain-wasting diseases is that, at the level of species or ecosystems, it isn’t quite true that protein is protein. Eating the protein of your own species, for example, carries special risks. The Fore of New Guinea were nearly wiped out by kuru, which bears a striking resemblance to B.S.E.; they spread it among themselves by ritually eating the brains of their dead kin.

This Sunday’s Magazine also includes an article on the Farmer’s Diner in Barre, Vt. The December Harper’s carried a (better) article [not online] by Bill McKibben on the Farmer’s Diner and other peculiar Vermont ways of preserving local ways in the face of industrial logic.

Recalling your local TV station

Adbusters mentions one case where a broadcast station’s license was revoked simply because it wasn’t up to par — WHDH-TV in Boston, which was replaced by WCVB-TV. CVB got its license on a promise that it would do better than HDH in providing local programming, and it has kept that promise to this day.

Technically speaking, the airwaves are owned by the public; broadcast stations have the privilege of using them subject to the public’s blessing, and are ultimately accountable to the public. In the case of HDH and later WNAC-TV, also in Boston, local officials were able to convince regulators not to renew licenses based on the quality of broadcasting and overconcentration of local media ownership.

However, the specter of beheading by the FCC apparently doesn’t seem to faze most broadcasters these days. If it did, we would undoubtedly enjoy better broadcasting — better because the stations would put effort into actually providing a service that their audiences appreciate. Similarly, Adbusters points out that corporate charters can, and have been, revoked in the past, and states the obvious conclusion: maybe they should be revoked in the future as well.

Real unemployment: 9%

Bush’s economic policies don’t sit very well with economists working for major banks, it seems. Here, economists for Bank One and Wells Fargo slam the magical mystery of unemployment and “economic growth” figures:

Economists believe the drop in the labor force masks a much higher jobless rate�perhaps as high as 9%, according to Anthony Chan, chief economist at Banc One Investment Advisors in Columbus, Ohio.

“The decline in the unemployment rate is the most misleading aspect of this employment report,” said Mr. Chan. “It’s a sham because of how we got there�the labor force dropped precisely because more people became discouraged…”

“Despite all the hoopla, neither businesses nor potential employees have confidence in the economy. They’re not believing all the stories about a strong and healthy economy given by the economists and the government,” [Wells Fargo chief economist Sung Won] Sohn said.

From Reuters/ChicagoBusiness

Segway user realizes…

‘Paris is a walker’s city, built for sauntering, window-shopping, the sideways topple into the cafe chair. On our final day here, we finally realized that the best way to get around on Segways is to use the bike lane rather than the sidewalk. The ride is fast and uncluttered, and you aren’t constantly giving pedestrians heart attacks. Technically, Segwaying in the street is illegal, but the policemen who stared us down at intersections and in front of President Chirac’s house all seemed to be following the same penal-code decision tree (“Not a bicycle, yet has two wheels and moves in a leisurely manner: ALLOW TO PROCEED”). ‘

From Tad Friend’s Slate travel journal of a week spent Segwaying in Paris. Segway tours this past summer were around $75 a day; rental bicycles (provided by the RATP at stands around town) were EUR8 a day. Hmm.

Building neighborhoods reduces crime

Yesterday’s NYT ran an article summarizing one study drawn from the MacArthur-funded Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods. Dr Felton Earls finds that strong social capital (“collective efficacy,” in the study’s parlance) underlies both the “eyes on the street” and “broken windows” theories on crime prevention. In other words, strong neighborhood social capital creates safe neighborhoods and positive school outcomes:

In a landmark 1997 paper that he wrote with colleagues in the journal Science, and in a subsequent study in The American Journal of Sociology, Dr. Earls reported that most major crimes were linked not to “broken windows” but to two other neighborhood variables: concentrated poverty and what he calls, with an unfortunate instinct for the dry and off-putting language of social science, collective efficacy.

“If you got a crew to clean up the mess,” Dr. Earls said, “it would last for two weeks and go back to where it was. The point of intervention is not to clean up the neighborhood, but to work on its collective efficacy. If you organized a community meeting in a local church or school, it’s a chance for people to meet and solve problems.

Like sugar

Archibald Candy, better known locally as Fannie May (not to be confused with the mortgage underwriter) has announced its plan to shutter its West Loop candy factory and sell the retail outlets to an owner who will likely offshore production. As a result, 625 manufacturing jobs will disappear.

The city points out that Chicago still has over 100 candy and confection-making companies, providing a $4 billion boost to the city’s economy. Brach’s, by far the largest manufacturer, recently completed its shutdown of its giant West Side factory — one of the last major factories in denuded West Garfield Park/Austin. Owner Barry Callebaut has moved production to Mexico, where American sugar price supports don’t artificially raise the price of candymaking. The sugar supports pay off Jeb Bush’s sugar plantation friends in Florida, corn-syrup distillers like ADM, and corn growers across the Plains, so they’re a great deal for Washington; problem is, America gets stuck with icky corn syrup instead of real sugar in everything, and our food suffers for it.

Meanwhile, tea sellers have caught on to the power of sugar. Of all the articles on the tea boom, this is the first I’ve seen which has caught on to the sugaring up of tea thanks to bubble tea and bottled Snapple tea — but also following Starbucks’ charge into the realm of sugar and spice (oh, and a little bit of burnt coffee). None of the various holiday-theme-flavored coffees and Frappuccinos that Starbucks trots out over the course of a year taste anything like coffee, but that’s the point: Trixies and other middle-American consumers guzzle them down, since sugar in copious quantites can hide whatever drug is hiding beneath (caffeine, or, in the case of flirtinis, grain alcohol).

An aside: Paul Fussell, in Class, writes:

The ultimate class bifurcation based on drink… cuts straight across the center of society, unmistakibly dividing the top classes from the bottom. I’m speaking about the difference between dry and sweet… To a startling degree, prole America is about sweet… Sweet alcoholic drinks are favored by the young and callow of all classes, a taste doubtless representing a transitional stage in the passage from the soda fountain to maturity.

The mystery owners behind the unnervingly well-capitalized Argo Tea, plopped right at Lincoln Park’s most conspicuous corner, are exposed with their plan: to convert half-caf-Frap-guzzling Trixies nationwide (starting in Lincoln Park, naturally) to tea with “Carolina Honey Breeze, a blend of honey, tea and lemon, and Tea Squeeze, a mix of hibiscus iced tea and lemonade.” Even the WASPy Yankees over at Nantucket Nectars mix their iced tea with sugary lemonade, creating something vaguely akin to the sweetened Lipton or Luzianne served by the pitcher all over the South. Kudos to the Trib’s ever-astute Susan Chandler for picking up on this.

And kudos too to John Wallace of the local Aion Tea & Antiquities: “I find people are looking for something that isn’t a cookie-cutter franchise environment. The environment is really important.” Sure, but for my buck, I really like the Zen appeal behind Wild Lily Tea Market and TeaNY. Tealuxe ain’t bad, even if I haven’t been to one in years; the East India Tea Company theme is kind of cute, and the brass tables at Harvard Square are a nice touch.

Want to find a tea house near you? Try TeaMap.

Mayor: cars made Detroit fat

From Reuters, via the Chicago Critical Mass list:

“It’s probably something to do with the culture,” [Mayor Kwame] Kilpatrick told local journalists, when asked about a report that Detroit had passed Houston to take the title as America’s fattest city.

“We’re not a walking city,” Kilpatrick said, adding that this was because Detroit is “the automotive capital of the world.”

Detroit’s international auto show, the industry’s biggest yearly event and a celebration of all things automotive, opens on Sunday.

I read through the Men’s Fitness cover story in 2002, when Chicago was declared second fattest. Compared to the Men’s Health copycat cover, the Men’s Fitness story is not only the better researched of the two (which is not to say that the methodology couldn’t be a lot better); it also offers much more pertinent recommendations. Men’s Fitness recommends that cities install bike racks, bike lanes, and bus bike racks to fight obesity — whereas Men’s Health recommends that guys get computer voice recognition software and eat cinnamon. Umm, sure. That’ll help. The latter recommendations absolve government of any responsibility for people’s health, which, I suppose, might help to sell health-related magazines.

The need for economic diversity

A post diagnosing why, exactly, ethnic neighborhood retail streets are often so much more exciting than equivalent yuppie neighborhood retail, even after controlling for factors like residential density. In the end, I’m just channeling Jane Jacobs — although she, not having the luxury of writing after the flowering of postindustrial economic hyper-stratification, possibly mis-diagnosed “the need for old buildings.”

Perhaps my original post was a little shortsighted, but one thing I’ll still cling to is that ethnic neighbourhoods are much more resistant to the kind of negative gentrification that guts a lot of thriving neighbourhoods.

okay, so I’m thinking along the lines of something I just posted in another thread, but maybe this is because of social-class heterogeneity? that is to say, income and wealth diversity may be more important than ethnic or sexual or whatever diversity in terms of making “interesting” neighborhoods. many ethnic neighborhoods are cool because they’re entrepots: there are rich and poor, still intermingling because of language barriers or whatnot. (many immigrant neighborhoods have much higher household incomes than one might think at first glance; about 40% of households in Little Village, a Southwest Side neighborhood usually described as “lower middle class Mexican,” earn more than Chicago’s median HH income — $38K in 2000. yes, the families are larger, too, but there is wealth there.)

the more interesting gay ghettoes, IMO, are those which are socially mixed: girls and boys, for instance, instead of being completely overrun with the Chelsea/WeHo/etc. guppie circuit clone-boy crowd. (“Aberzombie” sadly never caught on.) meanwhile, there are some very wealthy Chinese towns in Southern California — say, San Marino or Diamond Bar — and their strip malls are almost as boring as any in lily-white South O.C.: Starbucks, Sav-On Drugs, Charles Schwab, Cathay Bank, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, a seafood dim sum restaurant, bubble tea, a bakery, an antiquities shop, and Ranch 99 Market (a local Chinese supermarket chain; mildly interesting, but nothing you haven’t seen before*). and time and again, you hear older African Americans saying that the community stuck together during segregation; there were rich and poor shopping on 47th Street or Pettigrew Street, but after integration anyone who could moved away and so did the businesses. 125th Street in Harlem is still really fascinating even though the chains have found it: yeah, there’s Starbucks, but also wig shops.

once a neighborhood is economically homogenous at any level — Southside Homes with its dirty liquor stores and check-cashing shops behind bars; middle-income Rolling Hills Acres with its Mall-Wart and Oldtyme Rural Buffet; or prosperous Society Hill with Crockery Shed and Farstucks — it gets predictable and boring.

I wonder how it would be possible to quantify this. income quintiles are easily accessible from the U.S. Census (Summary File 3), but how do we define neighborhoods or even trade areas — for neighborhoods whose businesses rely on tourists?

or, perhaps there’s a “sweet spot” in terms of neighborhood social capital. too much, as in a small town, and not only does everybody know your name, but everybody knows that you didn’t go to church last week and cluck-cluck, shame on you. that’s boring.

too little social capital, and everyone walks around alienated and ignorant of their fellow man, talking on their cellphones or listening to MP3s, all while compulsively shopping, drinking, and/or popping SSRIs to assuage their spiritual emptiness. that’s also boring.

but in between? that’s cool.
— pc

* Leonard, I know what you mean about how two Chinese supermarkets in two cities can look similar but have completely different products. part of this may be because the importing business is still so highly fragmented (you’re dealing with lots of tiny little suppliers, some of whom you only know because Auntie Grace lives next to so-and-so), so different retailers — because they have different supply chains — will have access to a vastly different array of goods. but once you have a real chain, like Ranch 99 Market, that has centralized buying, you can say goodbye to that variability. case in point: Safeway is the same from coast to coast, but local farmer’s markets all sell pretty much the same thing, right? of course not.

then again, maybe that’s a crucial distinction between interesting or boring neighborhoods: how much of the local business is really local.

** for those paying attention, I’ve covered the following chapters in “The Death and Life”:
Chapter 11, “The Need for {henceforth, TNF} Concentration” — in talking about residential density
Chapter 10, “TNF Aged Buildings” — principally because aged buildings provide for economic diversity, because “I mean not museum-piece old buildings” (p 187). little could she predict the still-to-come fashion of paying a lot to be in an old building.

elsewhere, I’ve mentioned a quirky street grid as one element that keeps an area interesting; that’s Chapter 9, “TNF Small Blocks.” and I think we all take for granted now Chapter 8, “TNF Mixed Primary Uses” — although that may also be a significant contributor. I was just in a party in Little Village, and my, there are a lot of factories left there. today’s gentrified neighborhoods are little more than commuter housing and shopping, just like the pre-Edge City suburbs.

“Retro cities”

A tad polemic and wistful for my tastes, but still spot-on:

Something stranger and even more disheartening to the lover of city life is becoming clear: the new in cities not only isn’t new, it isn’t very urban. Although we’ve resurrected the forms of our cities, we’ve animated them with a culture straight from the suburbs…

Today’s neighborhood is different from the older one that’s supposed to inspire it. For one thing, gentrifiers and loft-dwellers live much less of their lives in their neighborhoods than those who lived there 50 years ago… Like a postwar subdivision, today’s retro neighborhoods lack ethnic clubs, nearby in-laws or grandparents, and merchants who have watched a generation of youngsters grow up. They lack the culture that once provided city neighborhoods with a sense of continuity and identity, and forced people to develop ties over time, across generations, even across ethnic differences…

The car in itself is not suburban. But it is suburban to expect your very own parking space in the city…

By the 1950’s, American cities were losing the vitality that had made them such forceful and creative places for nearly a century. American society today, Marx might say, is about “the suburbanization of everything” — including our retro cities.

Michael Johns in today’s NYT

Speaking of retro cities, Sylvain Chomet, director of The Triplets of Belleville, has this to say about the ’50s in an interview:

From a design point of view, the ’50s were more inspiring. Town planning, cars, clothes were creative and interesting. Drawing and design were an important part of life, on posters, in schoolbooks. It was also a period when people relaxed after the trials of the Second World War. They were less cynical, keener on their freedoms.

(Well, yes, ’50s town planning was “creative,” but “interesting”?)

The film does a marvelous job at portraying both booming, de Gaulle-era Paris and the fantasy of Montr�al reimagined as New York. (Chomet points out that the bridge to Belleville is the Jacques Cartier, from Montr�al, “surrounded by typical Qu�bec architecture”: “we used many details from Qu�bec and Montr�al in trying to show how these cities might have turned into New Yorks.” The fat people, though, are American.)

The plot’s almost nonsense and the style transcends mere caricature, but particular visual moments — RER trains zooming by, a bicyclist dodging a “Mairie de XXIe” bus, meticulously computer-animated spokes whizzing by, ridiculous floats in the Tour de France, a parting shot of the basilica in Marseille, and of course a boy on a bicycle besting evildoers in their cars — make it well worthwhile.

Biodiversity on the ranchette

Today’s Trib reports on conservation easement purchases — on five-acre lots in DuPage County. Turns out that some large-lot “estate” subdivisions, some of them the first-generation septic-tank sprawl (the five-acre “ranchette” lots popular in, say, Montana) that pioneered residential out in farming areas, still act as wildlife corridors. I imagine that’s only because the owners didn’t chop the trees, nuke the grass with Chem-Bomb, and put up “privacy fences,” which any one of them was free to do.

This seems like a dangerous precedent and/or an argument against requiring conservation development; it could be said, though, that many of these subdivisions were developed before conservation development techniques were well known, and that purchasing the conservation easements after the fact is not terribly different than purchasing the conservation easements before selling the lots.