Blogging Social Difference in L.A.: Week 2

The following is a comment I posted on Boo's blog post entitled "The City of Angels" which can be found here

Hi Boo, I really enjoyed reading your post, as I can relate to the various distractions in Los Angeles that so often let one forget about all the beauty in and around this large metropolitan area. I think that you conveyed your ideas well, and with my having visited the Grove many times, I fully understand your description of it and the surrounding areas. I distinctly remember driving to the Grove with my mom over the summer, and since she was driving, I was actually able to observe the many surroundings on the way there from South Pasadena (since it is hard for one to concentrate on anything other than driving when trying get to a certain destination in this area). I found it amazing that in just a few miles, we drove through Hollywood, a very popular tourist attraction with some outer "'bad lands' with their submerged regions of poverty, degradation, and disease, and their underworlds of crime and vice" (The Growth of the City, Burgess, 342). Also within these few miles, I observed the extremely wealthy neighborhoods around the Grove. 

I like how you also mentioned the micro-communities surrounding the Grove, and how they "take on the challenge of maintaining a culture that would otherwise be lost to mainstream influence." This is a very interesting idea, and I think it's important that these cultures maintain their original traditions and lifestyles in this very influential city because it can be easy to get wrapped up in the "LA lifestyle" and forget one's cultural roots. It is also important for diversity reasons, because I feel that one of the greatest things about LA is its extreme diversity ranging from prostitutes and drug dealers to entrepreneurs and CEOs. Whether these different types of people are seen as good or bad, their differences are what make LA what it is. 

You mentioned the idea of the set of rings that make up the growth of the city, and how this idea doesn't pertain to LA, but I think that in a way, it is relevant. Even though this 'set of rings' may not perfectly translate to the LA area as a whole, I think there are various places all around LA that demonstrate this idea. For example, the Grove could be defined as the "Loop", which is the (very small) downtown area. Outside of that is loosely the "zone in transition", invaded by business and light manufacture (Fairfax District, Little Ethiopia, Museum Row, and Korea Town). The "zone of workingmen's homes" could be the surrounding neighborhoods of the Mid-Wilshire area, "inhabited by the workers...who desire to live within easy access of their work" (Burgess) and the residential area outside of this ring would be Hollywood and Beverly Hills, of "high-class apartment buildings or exclusive 'restricted' districts of single family dwellings." And finally, the "commuter's zone" would include the suburban areas "within a thirty- to sixty-minute ride of the central business district." Clearly, this example is loosely based on the idea of the growth of the city demonstrated with separate rings, but it shows that the idea is relevant to most cities, including the LA area.

A final thought that you've inspired me to share in your description of The Grove and outlying areas, is the fact that it conjured up in my mind two highly regarded universities. UCLA and USC are situated in the heart of LA and surrounded by interesting environs. I have visited USC a few times, and it's easy to tell immediately that it is surrounded by rough neighborhoods in spite of the high socioeconomic and academic classes it houses on its campus. In contrast, UCLA is surrounded by extremely affluent neighborhoods. It is interesting that two campuses can be so close geographically, and yet so far with regard to places where people live in LA. Again, it is a reminder of the diversity and the 'opportunity' that this City of Angels provides today.