Karen, It¹s hard to have one¹s assumptions about the world upturned. Cognitive dissonance, I think is the term. I say this because I know you are a member of the HS, and my impression is that historic preservation is important to you, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I think many people may think I am anti-historic preservation, and that is not the case at all. It¹s just that, in this neighborhood and others, I¹ve witnessed the dynamic that you so eloquently described far too often, and so I am *cautious and suspicious of* historic preservationists, at least in gentrified/fying neighborhoods (places like Center City are a different ball of wax), and in this one in particular. I don¹t assume that historic preservation is an incontrovertibly good thing, and am intensely aware that it is one value that competes with others, and that in that competition it is very much, as you note, a double-edged sword.
I¹m sorry this experience has caused you so much anger and sadness, but glad you had your epiphany. That means others could too. Happy New Year. Kimm On 1/3/08 5:21 PM, "KAREN ALLEN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: [UC] Sound vaguely familiar? From the Washington Times -- >> 11/18/07 >> > Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:34:43 -0500 >> > >> >Stabbing the community in the back through collusion with hypocrites isn't >> >the same as the transparency required in a representative democracy. > > > Thanks to Tom Lussenhop and the "Campus Inn" proposal, I have had a epiphany. > > I now know when Penn says "jump", who the jumpers will be and how high they > will jump (or, if you will, how low they will stoop). > > I have seen the depths of hypocrisy that people can sink to. I have seen how > people and organizations who have publicly supported a purported ideal can > throw that ideal under the bus without hesitation, and can come up with > utterly preposterous, and insulting-to-one's-intellegence justifications for > doing so. Arguments analogous to "We have to save the forests, but until we > get a law protecting them, we're going to help the lumber company destroy the > forests". > > I now know that historic preservation, at least in this neighborhood, is not > an ideal, but a weapon that can be selectively used against certain people or > entities, while others are totally free to do whatever they want, so long as > they are aligned with the "right" people. Whenever I hear "historic > preservation" invoked in the future, I will automatically question the motives > of the people invoking it, why it is being invoked, and for or against whom is > it being invoked. Instead of naively assuming that it is being used to > preserve the past, I will now question whether it is being used to manipulate > the present, or to ensure a bright future for a self-selected few. > > Thanks, Tom, for enlightening me. [That's NOT a solicitation for you to write > to me offlist.] > > Karen Allen > "I went to school at Temple, but I got my education at Penn." >
