As mentioned in my previous blog the Cabrini Green's and the Hull House had two completely different things to offer for the people however both were taken away in the same way. The Hull House began in 1889 because Jane Adam's wanted to have an establishment that would directly help families in need. The Hull House became a huge resource for immigrant families in their quest to live better lives and immerse themselves into the city life. The Hull House was no ordinary free housing, there were many people who directly work with everyone on a daily bases. The Hull House contained not only families in need but also the "case workers" lived there. This added a completely different dynamic because those who were there to help were able to directly see their struggles and pain, which allowed them to help them more effectively.
Although the Hull House was so effective and beneficial for all involved it was also torn down in the same manner as the Cabrini Green. To replace the Hull House, the University of Chicago wanted to expand their campus, while the Cabrini Green was replaced by nice low rises and dog parks. Neither the UIC or low rises were set in place to serve those whom lived the Hull House or the projects. Although the new buildings were esthetically pleasing for the city, the city failed to find ways to make this transition a benefit for the residents but instead made it a forced transition.
Although I agree that the Cabrini Green needed to be torn down, I do not feel the reasoning behind the destruction had much to do with bettering the residents. As for the Hull House being shut down and replaced by a campus, how in anyway could this have been helpful for those directly involved. What is the goal of the city, to better the people or to better the finances of those in charge?
No comments:
Post a Comment