April 6, 2006
I am always happy to travel, and if that travel brings me to the District of Columbia, Le Cité Originale du Chocolat (“What’s up, C.C.?”), the green on the Potomac, bring it on. The District has that mix of gentility and grit, vestiges of its storied past, its mix and its mash. Most visitors don’t see much beyond the grand marble museum walls, the regal Capitol, the de riguer destinations; and, like most cities, it really does have a different face for locals and those in the know (former locals and hipsters alike). Now that I am the latter (former local), I remember the Way it Was (never allowed to venture much beyond 16th Street—though I did), and hold both high hopes and deep reservations about What It Can Be. In just over a year, I’m seeing changes for its good and shifts toward its detriment.
In January 2005 I was sitting at a corner café with my brother and a few friends when it struck the only two of us who might have remembered What This Corner Was…that we were actually sitting there.
“Kyle!” I said, sipping my mocha. “Wasn’t this…this…the notorious 7-11 back in the day? You know, the homicides, the hookers?”
“Yep,” said Kyle. “Bad coffee 24/7 and murders weekly.”
When I came upon a corner virtually unrecognizable (it was a garage or paint store; it is now a Wholefoods), I ducked into the barber shop, thoroughly disrupting the twelve people engaged in cultural and social arts.
“Excuse me, but I’ve lost my bearings. Who’s been here the longest?” I asked. To which I was humored down the serried row of chairs and hair:
“Five years.”
“20 years.”
“34 years….”
The man with the longest tenure helped me gain my sense of place, and I was on my way again, down T Street, baby brother in tow. I said to him, “if that barber shop—which has stuck it out through the aftermath of 1968, the detritus of the 1970s and the 1980s crack boom—if it can stay, if it is allowed to be here among the overpriced furniture stores cropping up…then D.C. will have done a decent job of revitalization. I think.” I went on, boring my poor brother to tears, I fear: that barber shop is more crucial to this community than you know, blah blah blah, cultural, social pulse point, etc. etc.
My poor brother always gets an earful of my D.C. Observations every visit back home. Sometimes I bet he wishes I’d notice nothing and just have fun without thinking all of the damn time. No such luck. I have fun thinking.
On my latest trip back—to see him and catch The Pogues’ original lineup and first U.S. tour in 13 years!—there were ever more changes. Seems that now all of the Ethiopian restaurants of our youth have uprooted from High Rentville 18th Street and replanted themselves along U Street. Ah…U Street. Where, in the 1930s and ‘40s the late Gordon Parks documented ordinary lives and everyday living.
I was never allowed on U Street growing up. My father, an inveterate dancer unrequitededly in love with Sarah Vaughan, spent most of his time there. He went everywhere—Howard Theatre, Lincoln Theatre, Tivoli—and swore that no place on earth was peopled with a more stylish, well-coiffed crowd. No sir, not even New York. And now here I was, walking along the fabled U Street corridor, snapping shots of where Louis Armstrong played, the latest old jazz spot reopened, the new condo building called The Ellington…
But for all of the warm fuzziness I felt, there was the reality of what you couldn’t see. I got to talking with a theatre operator who said that, while the barber shop is still holding on, they’re kicking the old folks out. And the two of us, like old girlfriends who might’ve grown up on the same block, lamented how the newest Washingtonians (the babies, the children) would grow up with…no old folks. No grandparent types sitting on porches to survey the scene (including them!). No elderly people to tend to, to make a grocery run for, to chat with. And that got me to thinking: what is urbanity coming to these days? Is it really just a more convenient, inverse suburbanity?—where the mix of a real urban center is replaced with a socio-economically homogenized one? It certainly seems that way; that the new, “revitalized” urban centers are becoming playgrounds for the multimillionaire developers who nurture them. And where are they from?
The Suburbs.
Cities are fluid, ever changing, a geographical language. I don’t discount all of the good change that is taking place (and I understand that the definition of good is subjective here). I know that the clubs in southeast had to be razed for the future baseball stadium and that when the stadium goes in my brother’s place will double in value; that when the drab, overwhelmingly beige wharf is completely renovated, southwest denizens will finally have an identity along the river; people will attend Arena Stage in greater numbers and with greater vigor.
Yet, it seems that all too often—in D.C., in New Orleans even—that when revitalization finally happens, it happens too quickly after decades of neglect—foisted upon those, like the barber shop, who have stuck it out during the worst years. It’s as if the city won the big lottery and could finally start rebuilding. But in its nouveau riche enthusiasm it often loses sense of its history, its culture and ultimately, trades a rich identity for one steeped only in new money.
I’m not losing hope. There’s still a lot of good here. I just think that, culturally, America’s nasty habit of trading in the old for the new model, of worshipping youth over experience and age, has rather insidiously made the thematic leap to its urbanism, too. Perhaps, like a former trophy wife scorned, D.C. will find a way to integrate its greatest assets upon the latest acquisition.