Gentrifier (UTP Insights)

Absolutely loved the book. I saw myself in many of the pages and examples. Described a multi-tool approach to evaluation of the shifts in housing choices in the city. Gave wonderful definitions of the scholarly work in the field which have already been published. I am a relative novice in social study and literature but found it easy to read and logical in organization. It certainly will cause me to give a better analysis of future homebuying choices for me as well as my adult children. Thank you for this wonderful work.IK Carter MD

A slow read. Definitely accurate tho.

Excellent analysis and compelling stories. I don't agree with all of their takes on gentrification, but this was still a unique and valuable contribution.

The term gentrification was coined just 50 years ago by Ruth Glass in London. It described the landed gentry descending en masse into a deteriorating neighborhood. Investing in it, they changed it.Gentrifier is an attempt to describe every conceivable angle and objection to gentrification, by three ethnographers who use their own experience as the basis. This is, of course, never wise. I did like that they distilled gentrification of a neighborhood into a de- phase, followed by a re- phase. That is a lovely, elegant and simple image for anyone to grasp the impact. They have also classified gentrifiers into six stereotypes: Conqueror, Colonizer, Competitor, Capitalist, Consumer, and Curator, which I was not so happy with. There are at least two other obvious possibilities they never consider (possibly because they don’t begin with C). In immigrant communities all over the world, people with similar backgrounds like to congregate. It gives them a sense of support, familiarity and comfort. So if an Indian community suddenly develops in New Jersey, it’s gentrification as blacks and/or whites move out. And two, there can be a (all too rare) sense of excitement being part of something that is building, not just existing. When Soho changed from industrial to artsy, it attracted people who liked that new ethos. It’s not just (or necessarily) wealthier people taking over rundown housing.From what I have seen, gentrification is just a slander of the term redevelopment, like calling public school government school. (I wanted to use “urban renewal”, but apparently I have spent a lifetime misusing urban renewal. The authors narrowly define it as government cleansing in the 1950s-70s, so we can’t use it to describe the rebirth of neighborhoods today.)What Gentrifier skips over is that we go through eras. Cities used to hollow out as suburbs became fashionable, starting with the interstate highway system in the 50s. Now suburbs are déclassé and inner cities are where it’s at. The whole world is urbanizing, so there’s investment going on. Cities are living breathing beings, if you read Jane Jacobs or Ayn Rand. They get ill, they recover, they grow, they die, they re-emerge. Gentrification is one passing phase in the life of a neighborhood. In 25 years, you won’t recognize it. It could disappear like Detroit or blossom like Bed-Stuy. Neighborhoods were never built blighted. Gentrification is just another stage.Gentrifier reads like philosophy: things are both what they seem and not. Everything can be viewed positively and negatively. There is no clear path, it says. In quantum physics, the mere fact a scientist witnesses an event changes its outcome. In Gentrifier, many just want to fit in and not change their new neighborhood. But guess what? Just by being there, they do. And unless we want to live in Amish villages, there will be gentrification, not better, not worse.David Wineberg

3.5 Stars.Gentrifier is an interesting take on the topic of gentrification. The authors are three upper-middle class academics of differing races and childhood backgrounds who all identify as "gentrifiers." This book is an academic text, but I did find it to be written in more accessible ways than many academic writings. The authors sought to tackle the nuances of the topic of gentrification in hopes of starting a conversation and finding ways to deal with a phenomenon that seems to be an inevitable consequence of a class stratified world.The authors make it clear that, while they do believe that gentrification is a complicated issue, they do not seek to dismiss it or excuse its negative effects as a result. I believe they did a decent job of showing the complexities of middle class peoples intentions and decisions as gentrifiers, the different type of systems and choices that govern gentrification, the different belief systems used to describe gentrification, and the different types of people who can be gentrifiers. They also offer several tools and systems to understand gentrification such as a multi-tool of micro-level manifestations of gentrification, a wheel of gentrifier types, a comprehensive breakdown of the "de-s" and "re-s" that form the foundation of gentrification, and others.What I appreciate most in this book is how much it sort of calls out many people, who talk about and fight gentrification, as gentrifiers. Because gentrification is a dirty word, many leftists who are indeed big parts of the gentrification process will refuse to see themselves as such. This book calls on them to identify themselves properly. It describes several levels of gentrification- including early and late gentrifiers. It shows that, due to larger systems of capitalism, classism, and white supremacy, even the most well intentioned of gentrifiers- who almost always think they are not gentrifiers- can be part of creating the same issues that careless developers create. They discuss how many leftist critiques of oppressive systems and gentrification are often at odds with each other such as calling out environmental racism in one breath, then claiming that reducing pollution in a poor community is bad because it will gentrify the community.They bring up something else I had not heard about before which was that Black and other people of color can be gentrifiers intraracially if they are upper-middle class. Many discussions of gentrification I have heard reduce it to white people moving into neighborhoods of color, but this book takes it a step further to discuss how middle class people of multiple races can still serve as gentrifiers. I am a person who constantly wonders where I fit into these discussions because I am under the poverty line, disabled and likely permanently unable to work, trans and queer, but am also white, in my 30s, college educated, counter-culturey looking, and like many things that are considered gentrifying businesses such as Trader Joe's. If I lose my housing due to gentrification in my neighborhood, I am not exactly sure where I could go that I could afford and not also do damage as a gentrifier. This book offers some tools to look at myself and these things that I did not have before reading it due to the more reductive arguments that occur about gentrification.My biggest criticism of the book is that the voices of the people most adversely affected by gentrification were underrepresented. Most of the book seems to center upper-middle class gentrifiers and their struggles to find neighborhoods and housing that work for them. This partially makes sense as the authors are analyzing their own experiences in order to lead by example. Most of the quotes criticizing gentrifiers come from academics or from Spike Lee- who could now be seen as a gentrifier by some of the authors' standards. There were a couple sentence-long quotes here and there from poor people who were displaced or harmed by gentrification, but overall I wanted to hear more from them and understand how they fit into all of this at a more personal level. Otherwise- and I am sure this was not the intention of the authors- it could come off as the gentrifiers being centered in the discussion of gentrification. Given that the end of the book sells us on a transformative approach that specifically involves the people most likely to be harmed and displaced by gentrification, making sure any improvements in their community are to their benefit, it would have made more sense to me that they would have been featured more in this book. I think that because of this flaw, this book can appear to be defending the harm done by gentrification when I believe that is the opposite of what the authors intended to do.Overall this book sheds a lot of light on complicated topics I have wanted a greater understanding of. I think it offers some great tools, breakdowns of terminology, and discussions of arguments surrounding gentrification. I think it can serve as a good conversation piece regarding the topic.