I happened to notice this local headline this morning: "Don't call it 'Scarlem' - Scarborough councillors to debate today if area gets fair shake from city".
Scarborough is the east end of Toronto, once a separate town, now incorporated into the city. It has a bad reputation, although there are certainly nice areas in it. Trontonians like to call it "Scarberia," pronounced in withering tones of disdain.
Now, as a New Yorker, I'm all for withering disdain. But is this headline supposed to be a reference to Harlem? The article says: ". . . an invitation to Toronto Life magazine representatives to discuss an article portraying the former city as a bleak, gang-infested "Scarlem.""
Bleak, gang-infested? Harlem??
Scarborough wishes it was as vibrant, happening and desirable a place to live as Harlem! People all over the GTA would be flocking there to buy expensive homes on historic, tree-lined streets, eat at hip restaurants, go to jazz clubs and shop at boutiques.
If Trontonians are ragging on a place by comparing it to Harlem, they need to have their cool meters checked stat. They need to get on a plane to New York and go uptown. There are some bleak, gang-infested areas in New York City, but Harlem hasn't been one of them in, what, 40 years?
Am I reading this wrong? Because I'm ready to explode over here. Time to write a letter.
46 comments:
I don't think it's a reference to crime so much as a veiled reference to race.
Race & crime equals bad news for self-righteous white conservative voters.
I was wondering if it was racist. But that seemed unlikely, given the respective populations of New York and Toronto. Scarborough has a large black population?
(Love the avatar, by the way.)
It's funny you chose to write about this today, as I just read the same article, right before coming here. I too was shaking my head thinking, "what the *$%#%?"
I guess one strains to find an American analogue to the dingy, charmless and car-choked wasteland that is Scarborough. A place where one has all the traffic of a large city, but none of the amenities or buzz. Most similarly situated US burbs tend to resemble Mississauga more than Scarberia. The closest analogies I can think of are certain run down sections of Maryland that run along the DC border.
But I speak for myself. I tend to be allergic to suburbs and the outer-lying sections of any metropolitan area. In fact, if it ain’t the downtown of a very large city, I don’t want to be there. Period. I presently live in Ottawa, which is only about a third of the proper size of a real city. Were I not for my work, which I love, I would never in a million years consider living here.
Still, I know people who actually like Scarborough. Heck, I know people whose hearts swell with civic pride when the words “Hamilton, Ontario” are spoken. Whew!
Yeah, Canadians are stuck in the sixties when it comes to Harlem references, I'm afraid.
Brought to you by the same people who think the melting pot is still a current metaphor for immigration in the U.S., too.
It's just another example of an outdated stereotype. As you suggest, Harlem was once a pretty scary place. Canadians have no idea really about what has happened there, beginning in earnest at least in the 1980s. Don't take it too literally - we Canadians, if you have not already noticed, like to pick any U.S., urban, non-white locale and demonize it. The thing to do to really get the attention of Trontonions is to compare their beloved city with anything American.
I would say it's less a comparison than a cliche. It's weak writing and I hope you do write them and call them on it.
I know people whose hearts swell with civic pride when the words “Hamilton, Ontario” are spoken. Whew!
Ahem...
It's just another example of an outdated stereotype.
Which is also ironically amusing, since Canadians bristle so at American stereotypes of them!
The thing to do to really get the attention of Trontonions is to compare their beloved city with anything American.
Hm. As far as I can tell, Toronto loves to be compared to NYC. No?
It's weak writing and I hope you do write them and call them on it.
I just did. :)
M@, I thought you might have something to say about the Hamilton reference. :)
Yeah, Canadians are stuck in the sixties when it comes to Harlem references, I'm afraid.
Brought to you by the same people who think the melting pot is still a current metaphor for immigration in the U.S., too.
Oh yeah, very true. That one's even more outdated.
As you suggest, Harlem was once a pretty scary place.
It was also once a cultural mecca for the entire US, the "Harlem Renaissance" of the 1920s. Both images are outdated, but only the negative one gets used.
ready to explode? wouldn't that rather be like dressing in body armor to battle a hot fudge sundae? there are things to explode about (war, poverty, violence, renting wombs, etc.) - an outdated ref to Harlem is not one of them.
:)
an outdated ref to Harlem is not one of them
My love for New York City is very intense. It's not just a place I lived for 25 years - it's part of my heart and soul. The reference was like seeing someone I love disparaged. I saw red.
I'm not asking you to share my indignance. :)
M@, I thought you might have something to say about the Hamilton reference. :)
Ah, I'm used to it. But really, it's an example of the same thing as the Harlem reference; the cliche view of Hamilton for Torontonians (and to a lesser extent the rest of the country) is a dirty, polluted city of blue-collar morons. The facts, of course, are far different -- and have been for 30 years. There's a grain of truth in every stereotype, but reality is of course more complex.
But I don't take this kind of thing in the Toronto media terribly seriously -- most Toronto-centred Special Reports can be summed up as "whither Toronto?" or "could it happen here?" On the first subject, at least, Toronto journalists are among the least qualified people to comment.
I can, however understand your reaction. Hope the letter gets printed!
And pre-Renaissance, Harlem was known as THE part of Manhattan for rich white New Yorkers to live.
And lest we forget, someone else also thinks of Harlem as a violent wasteland. Come on, Canada, you don't wanna be on the same wavelength as that moron!!!
But I don't take this kind of thing in the Toronto media terribly seriously
You're right - and I shouldn't either. But damn, it's New York!! :)
Re Toronto journalists and editors, we stopped getting the Star delivered largely because of their silly parochialism.
And lest we forget, someone else also thinks of Harlem as a violent wasteland. Come on, Canada, you don't wanna be on the same wavelength as that moron!!!
Oh shit, I forgot all about that! Thanks for the reminder!! I blogged about it with our favourite expression. Impudent Strumpet wanted to use it on a daily basis, I believe.
By the way, it's true what I said. I really do know folks whose hearts swell with pride at the mere mention of the words, "Hamilton, Ontario." No lie.
;
I clicked to comment only to see the first person, Ryan, said what I was going to: "Don't you get it? Harlem is where black people live. So it's beat up and rundown and crime-riddled." That's just how a lot of people think, and it is infuriating. (They also don't realize that every single citizen of Harlem is not black.)
And then I saw that Peter (albeit with a smiley face) did the thing that makes me "want to explode" the most as a blogger: telling the blogger to not get so upset about something. One time I poured out my soul on some issue, only to have a reader to tell me to "pick my battles." If someone is passionate about something, and spells out why for people to read, especially with something like this which is about a place they're fond of but also about social/racial injustice, that's great. Why would that be less important than sharing one's opinion on the war or poverty?
I clicked to comment only to see the first person, Ryan, said what I was going to: "Don't you get it? Harlem is where black people live. So it's beat up and rundown and crime-riddled." That's just how a lot of people think, and it is infuriating.
Right. I didn't make that connection, because - as far as I know - Scarborough doesn't have a big black population. But even without that, black = run-down, crime-ridden. Sure.
(They also don't realize that every single citizen of Harlem is not black.)
I was once on a bus tour of New York (for the benefit of Allan's grandmother) and the tour guide said, "We're now entering Harlem, where the city's African American population lives."
I'm sure all the black New Yorkers who live in Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, Staten Island (yes, even Staten Island!) and elsewhere in Manhattan would have been very surprised to hear it!
And then I saw that Peter (albeit with a smiley face) did the thing that makes me "want to explode" the most as a blogger: telling the blogger to not get so upset about something.
That's good for me to remember. I hope I've never done that to anyone. If I don't share the blogger's passion about the issue, I hope I could just pass by without comment. Passion is passion. Feeling strongly about something and expressing those feelings can rarely be anything but A Good Thing.
Thanks Jere. You rock.
This PC kills fascists.
"I was wondering if it was racist. But that seemed unlikely, given the respective populations of New York and Toronto. Scarborough has a large black population?"
Not neccesarily black, but Scarborough has a large ethnic-immigrant population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarborough%2C_Ontario#Demographics
Oh yeah and I forgot to mention that I've heard many people in Calgary refer to the neighbourhood Forest Lawn as "Forest Harlem."
Incidentally, Forest Lawn has had the highest crime rate, as well as one of the higher poor immigrant population. It's also one of the few places in Calgary with a substantial black population. I'm still convinced it's a race-crime double whammy.
"Thanks Jere. You rock."
Thanks.
You know what else wold be a good experiment? Ask 100 suburbanites (I'd say middle-Americans, but people where I grew up mostly knew nothing about NYC, and that was only like 50 miles away from it) what borough of New York Harlem is in. Give them the five choices, or even give them just two, Manhattan and The Bronx, and I bet at least 70 of 'em say Bronx, because it's another place white people hear and think, "that's where black people live."
We should make a "white people's perceived map of the world." Harlem would be the capital of The Bronx on that map.
This PC kills fascists.
I hope you saw the pic on my blog. I love how "machine" works with a new meaning.
Not neccesarily black, but Scarborough has a large ethnic-immigrant population.
Right. But so do so many places in the GTA. But as you said, there's a reputation for crime, so...
Oh yeah and I forgot to mention that I've heard many people in Calgary refer to the neighbourhood Forest Lawn as "Forest Harlem."
Incidentally, Forest Lawn has had the highest crime rate, as well as one of the higher poor immigrant population. It's also one of the few places in Calgary with a substantial black population. I'm still convinced it's a race-crime double whammy.
Now you've convinced me. The Calgary info makes it pretty obvious, I'd say.
I'd say middle-Americans, but people where I grew up mostly knew nothing about NYC, and that was only like 50 miles away from it
My ex-brother-in-law's family lived 1 mile from NYC - just over the GWB - and new nothing about it.
Give them the five choices, or even give them just two, Manhattan and The Bronx, and I bet at least 70 of 'em say Bronx, because it's another place white people hear and think, "that's where black people live."
I wouldn't bet against you!
When we took cabs home to upper Manhattan - for non-New Yorkers here, we lived considerably farther uptown than Harlem - cab drivers routinely asked, Is this in the Bronx?
I'd say, no, we're still in Manhattan. Manhattan is an island, so if you haven't gone over a bridge or through a tunnel, you're still on the island of Manhattan.
To which they usually replied, But this is the Bronx, right?
One of our friends from the nabe called it "Upstate Manhattan". :)
I'm pretty sure Peter was joking. Seeing that "renting wombs" was one of the four "big" topics he mentioned, I'm assuming he understands L's sense of general outrage.
...
Jere: Try that Harlem test in Boston! Hell, try it among black people in Boston! I'd be curious about the results -- Yo, MF-er, I want some more iced tea! -- but I'd bet the majority of both groups would say the Bronx.
I actually wasn't joking. I put the smiley face because I don't know the blog author - i didn't want to sound too mean - and some folks might not have gotten my sense of humor - which was part of why I used the literary quote - which some people might not have been familiar with. I told the truth, but the smiley face means i tried to do it 'with love'.
Why would that be less important than sharing one's opinion on the war or poverty?
couple of comments like this. umm, how about - because some matters are trivial, and others are not? here's a good rule of thumb in case anyone is not sure what is trivial and what is not. racism, sexism, violence, rape, murder, war, terror, love, relationships, open-heart surgery, death, taxes - uh, these types of things tend towards the 'non-trivial' side of things. much else tends towards the trivial.
listen, i could write a post about how i'm all bent about the NY Times naming the hot fudge sundae the preferred desert over all others, including my favorite - the inimitable Hershey Sundae Pie (HSP).
And if someone smacked me down over it, then good - I deserved it. It's a trivial matter. And trivial matters are part of everyday life and everyday blogs, but it's generally understood that the outraged expressed on those blogs is faux-outrage, because which character got thrown off the island, in the big scheme of things, is just not that important.
Now, if I follow up my post with a comment explaining that I'm _really_ attached to the HSP because it was what my mom fed me every day of the last 7 days of her life, then that would at least shed some light on the reason I was so upset in my original post. And it is after this information is revealed that decent people might let things rest - and just let me get control of my emotions and just look at things more objectively.
So, blog author, I apologize if I hurt your feelings! no harm intended. i had no way to know your history with nyc. that said, i still can't identify with your anger. i'm fond of lots of places i've lived. i _love_ nyc. i'm fond of lots of inanimate objects. etc. but to me, in the big scheme of things, they're all nearly worthless. home and familiarity are a state of mind. people matter to me. places are nice - they can be wonderfully familiar and all that stuff, but they're not people - they don't suffer, they don't express joy, and they don't hug back. someone dissing my old hood doesn't even register on my irritability scale much less my anger scale. should i be programmed differently?
addressing some comments, i like to engage with blogs i read. some people like to lurk, or are afraid to comment, etc. - that's not me. if i feel like someone said something 'wrong' - in whatever sense - i might just share my opinion. it's not a big deal. it's a blog. they have these 'comment' things that let you share your opinion. i say we should all try it out.
as far as all the racism talk goes, check out the innocence project. that's real racism at work.
that many americans remember Harlem for its pre-Giuliani days as a murder/drug haven is not that big a deal. really. as one commenter said, Harlem and the ghettos we all live next to are interchangeable - it's a cliche, now - quite possibly one that doesn't work any more, but still a cliche. Reagan is known today as the ultimate free-marketeer, yet he was the most protectionist president in U.S. history. it might be a misconception i try to correct, but i'm not about to get upset about it. did people intend to slight Harlem or the people that live there now or lived there once? of course, not. Harlem will go on - I promise.
the 'womb renting' was in reference to the recent ny times blog post that referenced the Indian women being used as Margaret Atwood-style baby machines. this is a real story. it should be considered to be in the 'non-trivial' category.
and before anyone writes a letter, we should probably state the obvious - The Star was just reporting on what Toronto Life magazine wrote:
http://www.torontolife.com/features/scarborough-curse/
reporting from the ultra-white Palo Alto, CA...
M@: I don't think Toronto actually thinks about Hamilton at all. I think Hamilton just thinks that Toronto thinks about Hamilton. People who haven't lived in Hamilton don't even realize that this discussion exists.
Jere: But are people supposed to know the neighbourhood geography of other cities, no matter how major the city? I would consider that something you don't need to know unless you're going there.
I don't think Toronto actually thinks about Hamilton at all. I think Hamilton just thinks that Toronto thinks about Hamilton. People who haven't lived in Hamilton don't even realize that this discussion exists.
My experience is that most life-long Torontonians have a set view that Hamilton is a small, dirty, industrial city. When they find out I am from Hamilton, they often inform me that they have this view, usually in a teasing, friendly way (As TheIronist did).
It makes a lot of sense that people hold these views, since they are two large and traditionally independent cities that are very close together. There are long-standing sports rivalries between them, for example.
It's probably true that Torontonians don't typically think of Hamilton. They're too busy worrying about why no one realises they're a world class city and why no one thinks of them as a major world tourism destination. If the Star is anything to go by, that is...
Jere: But are people supposed to know the neighbourhood geography of other cities, no matter how major the city? I would consider that something you don't need to know unless you're going there.
I'll give my answer to this, even though it's meant for Jere. It will be interesting to see how my answer squares with Jere.
People have pre-conceived notions about places, even places they have no personal knowledge of. Those ideas often reflect their own prejudices and biases, and what they see in the media (which in turn reflect and reinforce general social biases, as well).
I think Jere's survey would not be meant as a test of real knowledge of NYC, but of an indication of those biases.
Separate from that (but related to it), the cracks about people living 1 or 50 miles from NYC and knowing nothing about it is a comment on how insular (thus ignorant) many people can be. The folks I mentioned live 1 mile from one of the world's great cities, but know nothing about it, because they are incurious, boring and too bigoted to go find out. And that's the case for a lot of their neighbours.
umm, how about - because some matters are trivial, and others are not? here's a good rule of thumb in case anyone is not sure what is trivial and what is not. racism, sexism, violence, rape, murder, war, terror, love, relationships, open-heart surgery, death, taxes
This post relates to racism, classism, stereotypes, how people view their neighbours, and other forms of ignorance. If that's not clear, I didn't write it properly.
As I said earlier, I don't ask you to share my emotions. I do, however, think it's impolite to tell someone their emotions are unwarranted.
It's not a big deal, I would not have commented on it myself, but as Jere brought it up, I think it's fine to say I agree with him.
Peter, I did not feel that you "smacked me down" nor did you "hurt my feelings" (quotes from your comment). However, this:
that many americans remember Harlem for its pre-Giuliani days as a murder/drug haven is not that big a deal.
IS OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!!!!
THIS shows a complete ignorance of both the subject in question and the nature of this blog.
Rudy Giuliani, that lying thieving conniving asshole, had NOTHING to do with the revitalization of Harlem. Harlem was thriving under David Dinkins, it was even thriving under Ed Koch. If NYC govt had anything to do with Harlem's most recent renaissance, perhaps Charles Rangel, Ruth Messenger and some much city council members no one outside of NYC has heard of are the people to be thanked. Rudy Giuliani never gave a shit about Harlem. Truth be told, he had very, very little to do with the supposed "comeback" of NYC, which is largely a myth in the first place! (It was never as bad as the media said before, and never as good as after.)
Again, you didn't hurt my feelings, I didn't feel smacked down, I just thought your comment was inappropriate, though I wouldn't have said anything if Jere hadn't. However, come around here saying something about Harlem and Giuliani, you're going to get smacked around and plenty.
By the way, this is not what "americans" remember. The story was in the Toronto Star, and it speaks to what Canadians think of New York City, specifically Torontonians. That's one reason it bothered me, because of the special relationship Torontonians seem to feel they have with New York.
and never as good as after.
To clarify, "good" in this sentence means crime-free.
the ghettos we all live next to are interchangeable
Wow. "The ghettos we all live next to". How do you know where "we all" live? What constitutes "a ghetto"? Buncha brown people?
and before anyone writes a letter, we should probably state the obvious - The Star was just reporting on what Toronto Life magazine wrote
I did write the letter, which the Star has already called me to say they will run. It doesn't matter who they were quoting, because I was not complaining about the Star's use of the expression!
I was complaining about anyone's use of the expression. I was complaining about the existence of such an expression to connote a "bad neighbourhood".
Peter wrote:
the 'womb renting' was in reference to the recent ny times blog post that referenced the Indian women being used as Margaret Atwood-style baby machines. this is a real story.
Damn!
You really ought to blog about this, L! Sounds right up your alley.
Here's my letter. It ran today.
i had no way to know your history with nyc.
you could take the time to read some of the blog and get a feel for who "blog author" is.
...
yeah, good ol' rudy. he loved harlem so much, hated what it had become, hated!, that out of concern for the people who lived there, he made cleaning it up one of his tippy top priorities.
good god, man. stick to writing about hot fudge.
i had no way to know your history with nyc.
you could take the time to read some of the blog and get a feel for who "blog author" is.
Or you could say to yourself, I don't share this person's outrage or even understand what she's all outraged about, but it's her blog, she can write about whatever she wants, and it's her emotions, she feels what she feels. And move on, knowing that your criticism is just and righteous, but best kept to yourself.
Luckily, when it comes to L's outrage, there is (to appropriate a Blackadder phrase) "an inexhaustible supply".
Luckily, when it comes to L's outrage, there is (to appropriate a Blackadder phrase) "an inexhaustible supply".
:-D
People all over the GTA would be flocking there to buy expensive homes on historic, tree-lined streets, eat at hip restaurants, go to jazz clubs and shop at boutiques.
Oh, so Yorkville is Harlem. :)
Congrats on getting a great letter printed, Laura! Harlem is one area we were unable to explore adequately in our previous trips to NYC -- we might be able to rectify that as early as this spring though. I may even order iced tea from some mofo or other.
Oh, so Yorkville is Harlem. :)
Oh, well played, sir. Well played.
Thanks, M@!
Harlem is one area we were unable to explore adequately in our previous trips to NYC -- we might be able to rectify that as early as this spring though.
Oo, great! Naturally collect info from me before going. I can think of several fun places to send you.
Also, frequently there are walking tours that take in especially historic and/or beautiful Harlem spots, an excellent thing to do.
Laura, I agree with your answers. And I really can't believe some of the things Peter came back with. One of the things I was going to do before was ask Peter to list for us what's important and what isn't. But I figured getting all sarcastic like that wouldn't help the argument. So it's funny to see he actually ended up doing it! Completely ignoring the whole point, which goes beyond dissing someone's hood.
"Jere: But are people supposed to know the neighbourhood geography of other cities, no matter how major the city? I would consider that something you don't need to know unless you're going there."
In general I'd agree with that. If you told gave me a list of Boise's suburbs, I couldn't tell you the difference between them, and I wouldn't bother to look it up unless I had a reason to.
But Harlem is a completely different thing. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with geography. I don't expect anybody to know which train goes to Harlem, but it has a history that's culturally important. I don't know how far Watts is from LA or what direction Selma is from Montgomery. But I'm not going to ignore them just because I don't live nearby.
By the way, this got really confusing when Yorkville came up. I now realize you mean the Canadian one. But when I lived in NYC, I lived in a neighborhood called Yorkville. It's a little south of Harlem. I did NOT expect you to know that.
By the way, this got really confusing when Yorkville came up. I now realize you mean the Canadian one. But when I lived in NYC, I lived in a neighborhood called Yorkville. It's a little south of Harlem. I did NOT expect you to know that.
When I first moved up here, whenever I heard the Toronto Yorkville mentioned, I'd think it was a NYC reference. Is it a measure of my assimilation that when LP said Yorkville, I knew exactly what he meant?
(Then again, I know he's Canadian, and we were talking about Toronto. So maybe not.)
Look, forget about this Peter fellow--I will tell you what's important!
Wait, give me a second. Hmmmm...I'll have to get back to you.
But when I lived in NYC, I lived in a neighborhood called Yorkville. It's a little south of Harlem. I did NOT expect you to know that.
Man, wouldn't it get confusing to have a place called Yorkville in a place called New York? It'd be like having a former city called York next to another city that USED to be called York (that now contains a Yorkville), alongside an East York, not far from a Yorkdale in a place called North York that's south of a region called York, that used to be county that contained them all till the 50s... That'd be crazy. :)
Man, wouldn't it get confusing to have a place called Yorkville in a place called New York?
Heh. It's actually not crazy at all. Just a little neighbourhood called Yorkville.
There's a town in New Jersey called West New York.
And a neighbourhood in Brooklyn called East New York.
It'd be like having a former city called York next to another city that USED to be called York (that now contains a Yorkville), alongside an East York, not far from a Yorkdale in a place called North York that's south of a region called York, that used to be county that contained them all till the 50s...
I guess this is only confusing if you've been in Toronto long enough. :)
To me, Toronto was never called York, there is no East York, and North York is just... North York.
And Yorkdale is a mall. I think.
Comparisons such as the subject one are a reflection of intellectual laziness by the author.
Post a Comment