First a little report about the "The True Library Project" aka. "The Red Box" project:
- on June 24, I found vandalism in the knowledge note book at the Common Ground Coffee House. There were profanity written all over the book and also, the person had vandalized over other people's entries.
- On June 25, I discovered that the pen in GoJava Coffee House is lost. I replaced it with my beloved black ink ball pen.
- On June 25, I discovered that the original pen in Schuler Bookstore was placed outside of the "Red Box", I also thought that it was lost.
Yesterday I went and recorded all the knowledge in the downtown area, then I headed over to Heartside Gallery to hang out with my friends there. After Heartside gallery was closed, I head out North and started my exploring again. Yesterday was a short expedition. It was a very interesting area that I explored yesterday. It was an area with a structure that I never explored before. The area composed of older houses, old factory, raid road track with wild overgrown plants, a Grand Rapids Housing commissioned group of apartments.
I do not want to be judgmental but deep down I know that it is a part of the city that is not as wealthy as any other part of the city that I explored. The mixing of houses and factories in the same landscape seem a bit strange to me. Something crossed my mind as that if houses that close to factories are the one that cheaper and the houses that close to the high rise, commercialized part of the city are more expensive. It seem as though through my exploration that it is true. As I had discussed with you before that downtown of a city is like a place where people go and get what they want, while I now wonder if that the factories district of our city is a place where people go and get what they need (The cheap hourly pay through boring, repetitive, labor intensive works to pay for survival needs like housing, food and cloths), If my thought on the difference between downtown and the factories district is true, then we as a city had placed a higher value on a place where one can gains what one wants than a place where one can earn what one needs. If the city is planned in such a way with such a value, it is going to be hard for its citizens to place a higher value on needs than wants.
Also, a dear friend of mine commented on my last blog entry and questioned what I had said about the city is a place where people go and get what they wants. She is questioning if there really a way that humans can not be selfish while coming together in a communal way. This is what she wrote:
"But it is true that we do it with
selfish intentions. But even "communal" societies do this to, don't
they? They want social capital, so they share things in community. But
they are still looking out for their social lives, which maybe is
selfish. Do you think we can ever live our lives in community without
being selfish? Doesn't a city depend on people meeting their own basic
needs? Furthermore... is that wrong?"
I agree with her that we as humans being can never function without our own intention, own wants, own needs and own selfness, but that does not mean that we cannot try. Restructuring the way our city runs is one thing that we can do to continue our desire to be selfless. If the city around us, the environment we live under, does not helps or even permits to be a better human being... how can we be better. We will not ever able to be selfless, but we can strive for it, and changing the environment around us to a place where it is easier to be selfless is a key step. Imagine with me that if the city was not build on the idea of having people from outside the city come and gain what they needs and wants, instead it is a place where people come and share and form communities. Imagine it is a place not full of companies that want to earn money and shops that thirst for money but a place full of gathering places like parks, museums, ice skating rings, libraries and full of public event like concert, parade and dance parties. What if it is no long a place where we get want we wants but a place where we share what we needs? Now that is a sustainable way of living. No just gaining what we need, but share what we need with our neighbors.
I also want to talk a bit about the concept of shared backyard. The government commissioned housing project that I came across yesterday has a big lawn area that treats as everyone's big backyard. I like that concept in which there is a common, public area that neighbors can meet and gather. City parks were build to achieve such effect too, but the temptation of a safe and comfortable environment in one's own backyard had keep many people confine to their own private land and not the parks. Such shared backyard force people to interact and form community. It forces people to come out of their own confine area and comfort zone and put them on the ground of spontaneous gathering.
Here is the marks that I made on the map:
- 11 fire hydrants
- 1 community garden
- a rocket car
- 13 Crabapple trees
- 3 Mulberry trees
- 1 street side full of wild grapes
- 2 American Hackberry tree
- 8 dumpster
- A government commissioned housing project
Here is some of what I saw on the expedition:
Thank you for reading and your supports
All the best
Patrick
Posts
