AY: Blue Collar Grit
When I first moved to Tacoma I instantly fell in love with it’s blue collar grit. I didn’t know this at the time, but it has since become apparent to me that other people share that love – in a strong way. However, somedays I wonder when people tell me they are proud of their gritty city, if they really mean it. In many shapes and forms it seems like we are trying to pour silver yuppie polish all over the city streets and wiping away the grit. What I see shining through is the ambitious love of this city that creates a desire and a drive to make this a better place for everyone to live. I believe in that ambition. I have seen it impressively at work in my short time here in Tacoma. What is it that creates this drive? What message is being sent out that ignites this ambition?
I read an article a while back about how great cities attract ambitious people or vice versa – that ambitious people create great cities. The author of this article made the argument that each city delivers and communicates a different type of ambition. For example; New York’s is being successful and rich, Cambridge is being smart, LA is being famous, Washington DC is its who you know, Seattle is being progressive, etc.
Is this idea of ambition important? I would like to propose, yes, it is. It helps establish an identity and draws certain people to a place. Not to say that this cultural message pigeon-holes a city, but it helps give form to a city’s personality. So, if we follow this thinking, what is the message of ambition that our city sends out? What draws people to our city?
Perhaps we need to begin to ask the questions of what it is that we collectively admire. What do we as a city care about? This message is subtle, it is quiet. How do we begin to hear that message? We can see it when we walk our streets and hear it when we interact with others. We can see it when we are invited into the homes of our neighbors. What foot do we choose to put forward when we first meet people?
My arrival to Tacoma caused me to learn a new language. I still cannot put words to what I have learned. But, I can say what I’ve seen. I have seen a proud people. Yet, a wounded city. A city who wears its uniqueness on its sleeve. It is not an easy task to begin to learn the language of our city, or to recognize our unique dialect. It is even harder when the communities that we interact with may be online communities via e-mail, social networking sites and blogs. But, the messages of our city are all over. It just takes hitting the streets in which we live. It takes living locally and being a part of the fabric that makes up our collective message. Sometimes it takes closing our computers and turing off our cell phones to listen to the community that we live in.
The messages I see being communicated in this community are that people define themselves by their uniqueness, and their relationships. I see a city that attracts people looking for a small town with a big city vibe. But, being new to this city, I want to know what it is that you think this city communicates. We cannot deny that we send out a message. It is hard to not be influenced by the people, businesses and communities around us. Although, in an age of internet, fast media, and individualism it is harder to determine the quiet and subtle messages a city sends. What type of ambition are we after? Do we even have an ambition or a message that we send? What do you hear or see?
22 comments
T Thorax O'Tool February 6, 2009
Some days, I think the ambition is “me too! me too! oh god, don’t forget about me!“. And on other days I think it is “I’m rusty with charm… nice.“ or sometimes it’s even “hey look at this awesome future… wait, I got to be proactive to make it happen?“
That seems to be part of the Tacoma Ambition… it ebbs and flows like the tide. It seems to vary from day to day, changing with the weather.
When it comes down to it, I think we don’t know what we want… even if it slaps up in the face.
T Thorax O'Tool February 6, 2009
Off topic, but inquiring minds need to know:
Does Adam Ydstie = Adam the Alien?
E Erik B. February 6, 2009
I have seen a proud people. Yet, a wounded city.
I think the word describing the condition is angst.
S Squid February 6, 2009
Erik B. nails it. Sad to say, this is not a very attractive quality.
E emilie February 6, 2009
What if angst is an important part of growing up? Not saying that I completely agree with the assessment of Tacomans as an angsty people in general, BUT: When you were 14, weren’t you pretty angsty yourself? You were dramatic, “misunderstood,” wearing the weirdest clothes, trying to figure out how to get noticed for you… maybe all of that is simply an indicator of someone ambitious who just doesn’t know where to channel it yet. The point is: You’re willing to try something, anything to find yourself. Maybe angst is ok… as long as you grow up eventually.
J Jesse February 6, 2009
I have only been here a few years but what struck me about Tacoma was that I could tell it COULD be the prettiest city in the west if only it were taken care of. I think Tacoma sends out a message that it wants to be Seattle or Portland… but I think that’s not what it’s ambition should be. Those cities are great but Tacoma has this great flavor of the past… probably more old beautiful (but not maintained) homes than anywhere in the NW. You can see where the trolley stops were if you use your imagination, some old brick warehouses downtown could be really cool if gentrified (while respecting the past) and the history here is without question the most storied in the NW. I almost think Tacoma should look to the past for it’s future ambition. A great yuppie filled, artist filled, retiree filled, people filled downtown would be great (and I hope I live to see that) but I think connecting wth the past is important in this city. So, I think Tacoma’s ambition is it’s past.
A Adam Ydstie February 7, 2009
@ TO’T
Alas, while I wish I had the rad film making skills of Adam the Alien… I am not the man you speak of.
@ Jesse
I am curious… what is the definition of “gentrified”
I think you are on to something with our past… what does our past tell us?
T TCP February 7, 2009
Gentrification -renovate and improve so that it conforms to middle-class. I’m sorry Jesse but are you dense?! You just completely contradicted yourself with using that term. We don’t want to make this city better by changing it and bringing in “the yuppies”… They can stay in the north end… you know… where the urban community stops at Division and MLK (Thanks Beautiful Angle). I think what Adam was speaking of was a unifying effort of the people already in the city. All supporting one another and building our community into something that is unlike seattle or portland. When I see tacoma in the future I see a community that is known for the collaborative effort in supporting one another.
Yes I think it’s important to look to our past… but as we look we also need to preserve. We can’t just look and then kick those of the past out. Gentrification is a horrible and honestly kills communities rather then supports them. If this was not the message you were trying to portray then I suggest amending your last comment and try again.
J Jesse February 7, 2009
Please view: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentrification for my definition of gentrified.
Gentrification does not necessarily mean knocking down things that already exist. Moving in or just sustaining some people with a decent income (keeping the younger, educated set here instead of a definite flight to Seattle) to support some businesses and live in our downtown. I’d like to see everything we want done downtown but with an average income of $22k in the core —can’t be done.
What is weird about this site is that it seems that everyone is against money moving in to the downtown core… but how will the buildings, businesses, fix-ups, and the like be done without money? Would you like things to change downtown or not? You can’t have both.
T Thorax O'Tool February 7, 2009
@ Adam… thanks! I got myself a little confused since I can’t for the life of me remember ATA’s last name.
@ TCP and Jesse…
Gentrification is a lot like socialism or communism or whatever -ism you like… in theory it works well and all is happy. In practice, it tends to go too far and cause problems. Things get torn down that were perfectly good, progressively more and more expensive properties and higher and higher-end retail go in.
It’s not so much gentrification itself that is the problem, it’s the amount of gentrification that is the issue here. Having some more well-to-do peeps and some more expensive retail is fine, but the line has to be drawn when it just plain becomes too expensive for folks in the mid to lower middle class and they stand no chance to buy or shop… like it or not, but the middle class (though it may be shriveling into the lower class as we speak) make up the majority of people in this city.
That’s the issue. The upper middle and the upper class are rare animals in most places, even here in the Great NW. For every yuppie you see in Seattle, there are like 3 homeless people sleeping in the doorway of the WaMu Tower or under I-5.
My long-winded point being, some gentrification is quite fine, even desirable. But extreme care has to be taken so we don’t “get caught up in it” and end up with a downtown populated only by a handful of the wealthy.
Remember, all those NINJA, Alt-A, Subprime, Pay Option and other exotic loans that enabled middle class folk to encroach on downtown Seattle are now extinct… the amount of folks who really can afford those kinds of costs are becoming less common by the day.
J Jesse February 7, 2009
Agreed Thorax. Anything in EXCESS, even gentrification, is bad.
“Gentrification” is a dirty word to the poor but a blessing to the middle to upper classes.
T TCP February 7, 2009
I honestly think you’re just out to make an people angry jesse. I think Thorax makes a really valid statement to uplift your previous comments, however, you discredit his work by responding with:
“Gentrification’ is a dirty word to the poor but a blessing to the middle to upper classes.”
If you think that allowing the rich to get richer while the poor get pushed aside then you obviously lack basic human emotions and need a swift kick from one of our local “lower” class to snap you back into reality.
If you’re not going to offer anything of substance to promote a healthy community that supports one another then please keep your comments to yourself. No one wants to read what you have to say. You’re exactly the type of person that someone like me fights against.
J Jesse February 8, 2009
TCP@12: I said, “Agreed Thorax. Anything in EXCESS, even gentrification, is bad.”
That means that if there’s too much gentrification, you will harm and push out all the poor. That’s why gentrification is a dirty word to the poor but the new-ness and fixed up downtown is something of new found value to the middle to upper-class. If you read my previous comments, you know I think downtown needs more economic diversity. It takes the middle and upper-class’ money to fix up an entire town. Isn’t that what we’re always talking about on Exit 133; making Tacoma better??
Fill downtown with more homeless, shelter folks, and low income section 8… that’ll really turn this town around!! (That last line was sarcasm)
PS – Stick to the topic.
T Thorax O'Tool February 8, 2009
When I think of “gentrification” I think of Bellevue, most of downtown Seattle, big swaths of LA and what they did to Harlem in NYC.
If I wanted to live in a yuppie wasteland, I would just move to the eastside.
Granted, I would love to see new highrises go up like they have (although the cranes are disappearing and not being replaced now). But I certainly don’t want to live in a place that requires a six-figure income to purchase a single-family home. I don’t want a city where you cannot find a Payless or a K-Mart (if you know where either of those are in Bellevue, please mention it… my gf lives in Kirkland and can’t find either).
I’ve said it before, but I will mention it again for clarity: I’m rather sensitive to the issue of poverty. I grew up dirt-ass poor. And by that, I mean when we weren’t living in the Hill, we were homeless on many occasions. My parents are still poor. My little sister is poor (but marrying a middle-middle class guy) and my other sister is lower-middle class. This far, I’m the only person in my immediate family to move beyond lower and lower-middle class.
I’m not trying to “promote the poor” nor am I calling for commie-block style section 8 apartment highrises to dominate the city.
What I’m trying to get across is that we already have one of the highest cost-of-living areas in the nation. Gentrification, as I mentioned, can be beneficial and can be desirable. It’s also very important to remember that it isn’t the solution to the problem either. The high-paying white collar jobs that are a prerequisite for gentrification are not particularly common ‘round here. Building high-end retail and expensive condos will not bring those jobs.
The jobs bring the incomes to support the gentrification. Yes, I know some spiffing up is good to bring in new companies, etc. But sofar as I can see, Tacoma has done little to bring those jobs here. From my point of view down on the streets, it seems like we’re fighting just to keep those we already have.
What we need, or so it seems to my layman’s eye is thus:
We need to get more higher-paying jobs in downtown… throw up some glass highrises, whatever it takes to lure some new business blood here.
Build retail, and not just high-end stuff. Turning Park Place North into something like Westlake Center. That kind of development would be ideal because it provides both middle and some higher-end retail… so they can get customers other than Russell employees.
There needs to be affordable housing built in tandem with expensive housing. The city ought to create financial incentives (like lower permit costs or permit expedition) to encourage developers to include some affordable housing in their plans… and here’s the kicker: from the outside, the affordable housing ought to be indistinguishable from the expensive stuff… that makes the yuppies happy (their condos aren’t being “devalued”) and the middle-class happy because the affordable housing doesn’t look like the freaking Projects or old Salishan.
You’ll notice I did not mention “low income” housing. What’s already there should get a little of a face lift (Uncle Sam is giving away $Trillions… we could snag a few bucks for some paint and new windows). Yes, low-income housing needs to be addressed. But luring more jobs here will only serve to increase the middle and upper-middle classes… gnawing away at the poverty (hopefully).
In summary: We cannot rely on gentrification to “save” downtown… gentrification practically passed us by during the last huge boom… which does not bode well considering the half-decade plus recession we’re in. The city needs to find ways to lure more jobs here. Build our own equivalent of Westlake… in short, give people a reason to come downtown. With no reason to go there, things will remain the status quo. Which quite frankly is not good enough.
G Guy Fawkes February 9, 2009
So….. very…. tired.
All this bickering is finally forcing me to come out from the shadows where I prefer to lurk, to read these blogs and not get caught in this inane, mindless drivel.
“Will we gentrify? Won’t we gentrify? ZOMG!!! teh peepz d0n’t shoPPxors d-town!!! WTF??? 1t’s teh rich pplz wh0 dont b livin here”
Come on here people. It is this exact same lack of consensus, lack of direction that lead to the fact that Tacoma has no net ambition. All the conflicting ambitions are working against each other, and cancel each other out like pairs of quarks and anti-quarks.
Oh, there is plenty of ambition around. Just from this post alone I see a few folks who are seemingly quite opinionated and seemingly “ambitious”.
But all of that is a deception, intended to give the appearance of wanting to get things done.
You cannot rely on the city to “figure” this out on their own account.
You cannot rely on the benevolence of random developers to give you what you “want”.
You cannot rely on President Nobama’s $900 billion to magically end up here and build your downtown mall.
The People are the power. We are what makes things happen, if we want it. All I see here are folks drawing lines and sticking to sides. Granted, certain individuals are playing both teams, appearing to be reasonable. How reasonable said parties actually are, I can’t say. But that is a tangent to my point.
Until the People can reach a consensus and as a single Body and make what they want happen, you’re just going to be sitting there in a horrible Purgatory while Federal Way and University Place steal away what life blood we still have.
Unite or die.
M Mary February 9, 2009
Guy@15
Yours is one of my favorite holidays!
A Adam Ydstie February 9, 2009
While this whole conversation around gentrification is fun and all… I must agree that this is off topic. Perhaps I didn’t communicate well (which is entirely possible).
I was originally asking what it is that we as city communicate. What kind of ambition do we foster in this city? Etc?
I think the answers are embedded deeply in many of these comments. What I do appreciate is TO’T‘s willingness to share their story. I believe this is something that this city needs to listen for more. Many of the issues we hear about, and are read up on can be given a real face in the stories of our community members. Guy@15, perhaps this is just one thing that can unite us.
G Guy Fawkes February 9, 2009
Thank you, Mary. Remember, remember the Fifth of November.
Adam:
It would be fabulous if we could connect in our empathy for each other, in our desire to make this community better for all of us, not just the wealthy or the destitute.
It seems like what little ambition gets moving is quickly stifled by internal bickering.
I feel Erik is correct. Angst is the exactly perfect word to describe what ambition we do see ‘round here.
M Maria February 9, 2009
Adam, very nice essay. I look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the future.
The word “gritty” is sometimes really annoying to me, in context of Tacoma. I’ve seen it in Seattle magazines, national publications, etc. Sometimes it seems like the default word for this city.
Your essay doesn’t fall into the “gritty city that cleaned itself up” pablum, thankfully. I appreciate your insight and questions.
I do wonder, not about your essay in particular, but the general viewpoint of, whether “gritty” is good or necessary or valuable.
I grew up pretty poor, also, and have to admit I prefer driving a reliable car, having a nice house and having things orderly.
I’m wondering if sometimes the idea of “local color,” of grittyness, of stains on walls and decaying but affordable structures, of local businesses not selling out but barely surving—is this a tendancy of ours to romanticize things?
I do prefer an amazing, delicious cafe, in a rundown venue, to a bland corporate chain restaurant…but is the dirty toilet necessary for the food to be good?
On the other hand, I’ve heard outsiders complain about the lack of culture, lack of hippness, lack of money, lack of an upscale culture here in Tacoma (versus Seattle)—but in many ways, that’s why I prefer Tacoma. I love the working class element…one never has to be ashamed of wearing stained blue jeans here.
How to preserve that sense of informality, the diversity in cultures, the richness of arts…and encourage economic growth also—this can be difficult. Like a chemical reaction, the abundance of one at the expense of the other can lead to unintended consequences.
Just some thoughts…
E Erik B. February 10, 2009
It helps establish an identity and draws certain people to a place.
…
The word “gritty” is sometimes really annoying to me, in context of Tacoma. I’ve seen it in Seattle magazines, national publications, etc. Sometimes it seems like the default word for this city.
The terms gritty is synonymous with “dirty,” polluted or a state of disrepair outside of Tacoma and is almost always used disparaging manner notwithstanding some of Tacomans hopes that somehow the terms is meant to be somehow endearing.
I like to think of the more authentic vibrant era of Tacoma being of the area of 1920s – 1960 rather than the most dysfunctional period of the city 1970 – 1990. Why idealize blight?
A Adam Ydstie February 10, 2009
I know that grit is an interesting choice of words. To be honest, the only reason I used it is because I have heard it used to describe this city in a positive way by many people.
While the 20’s- 60’s were possible more vibrant, I am sure there was still some grit here. I think that we do not honor the character that grit gives to our city when we try to ignore it. I think the idea of grit can be redeemed. Some may think it grit means there is a lack of culture… I think it gives culture. Culture doesn’t just mean fancy and hip places to hang out. It means the customs, arts, social institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people, or other social group. Culture then can contain both silver, gold, and rust. Both polish and grit.
I am glad that this has sparked so much conversation. I only hope that it is constructive conversation. Thanks to everyone who is reading this. I have been learning a lot from all of you.
T Thorax O'Tool February 11, 2009
“Grit” isn’t meant to be used in a positive or negative connotation…. at least when I use it. The word is meant to be used matter-of-factly.
All of us, and municipalities included, have a certain amount of inherent grittiness. In the context that I use it, Gritty refers to the fact that there is an unpolished side, a certain roughness no matter how urbane or gentrified you are.
It’s not about embracing your grit and accepting it as fate; it’s about acknowledging it, when needed, do something about it.
Denial only results in a wasteland of wood and metal shrapnel covered by a thin veneer of pretty (cough, Seattle, cough, cough).