A 21st century neighborhood is a combination of social interactions and physical characteristics. These two traits combined come together for either the success or failure of the given neighborhood. These neighborhoods are those that inhabitants either deal with their situation or try to make a difference. The trouble with deciding the difference between a "failed" neighborhood or successful neighborhood are blurred in that these neighborhoods generally coincide side by side and often over lap into one another. Sampson wrote regarding Cabrinis ashes (a neighborhood previously known for "gangs, drugs, misery and murder" now essentially "taking back" their community in a slow transition) "already infused with chic dining spots, grocery stores and growing shopping districts. Cabrini-Green is the Chicago neighborhood of the future". This shows how the "slums" are integrating into the wealthier communities.
How tied is it to the past?
Regardless of these neighborhoods integrating Sampsons work shows that there are still and will continue to be unsuccessful neighborhoods due to the fact that instead of fixing the problem on a social level (community awareness, policing etc.) we are just relocating families out of that neighboring leaving it there to become essentially a wasteland/ My thought on this is that if we relocate those individuals that cared enough to want to live in a better environment those that get left behind will continue to let their neighborhood fall and even get worse. Sampson noted several similarities between a given neighborhood past and present.
What will a 22nd century neighborhood look like?
I think that there will continue to be a gap between neighborhoods and the blurred lines will eventually disappear. As I was reading sampsons work I kept thinking to myself that part of the problem is that the "rich" neighborhoods are the ones that get all the attention on a city level, they get the proper police protection, better schools etc. Police often over look the things that occur in poorer neighborhoods because that is just what is expected in that neighborhood. And unless we do something about the inequality between the two different neighborhoods I think that the gap between them is only going to get bigger. The city needs to spend a little more time and money into the poorer neighborhoods. I think that it would give a lot of the people hope for a better future, they would be able to take their children out and show them how to appreciate having a clean low crime environment. I think that it would help to promote a social policing as Sampson mentioned.
Is community dying. thriving, or just bumbling along, about the same now as always?
I think that communities are a little bit of all three depending on where you are looking. I think that (or at least hope) that there are those out there working towards a better future and looking for ways to help integrate society a little better. In this case I think that communities are thriving, I also think that there are those communities that have been "left in the dark" so to speak, they have no help, and at this point are so use to crime and violence being part of the norm. Then there are communities like ours, just bumbling along making changes here and there. Some sides of town thriving some dying but for the most part moving forward as a whole. I know that's not necessarily a straight answer but until someone comes up with a solution that has a base idea that can help all neighborhoods and communities on all levels I think that there will be a variety of neighborhoods experiencing both success and failure.
