More voices from last week’s State of the City post:
Matt:
I was really interested in this line:
“But what drew them was the neighborhoods, the dives, the mystique of Camden’s history and the remnants of its dignity and majesty. What drew them was the quirks and beauty of the city’s neighborhoods and its people.”
I wonder about how much of Camden’s history shapes how ordinary residents think of the city. And, I wonder how that sense of history conflicts with the cherry-picked history that supports the narrative extolled by those in power.
With those thoughts in mind, it would seem that the power players do not care to record some parts of Camden’s history, nor its current story. They do not acknowledge the ‘dignity and majesty,’ the ‘quirks and beauty.’ Maybe they don’t acknowledge that beauty because it’s not in their political or financial interest. But, whatever the reason, I ask: how can Camden’s residents redefine what is dignified and majestic? How can a city push its economic and political leaders to acknowledge all of the beautiful and ugly parts of Camden, which they seem to overlook? How can a city redefine what is noteworthy, meaningful, beautiful?
I think you raise fascinating questions on the relationship of beauty, politics, money, and history.
Joseph:
I was wondering if a “People’s State of the City” would be in order as a kind of response to this event. There are so many voices out there, I bet you could get a great group of people together. And invite all the politicians, Cooper’s Ferry people, to come to it. Bill it as a real honest conversation about the city, outside of the pretense of a fundraising event, which is basically what this was.
Lots of interesting thoughts from these folks and others.
Share it!
