My comment this week was in response to James Lee's post about Koreatown. He did a great job in depicting the social difference he saw on his way to Koreatown. It was very similar to what I wrote about in my previous blog post therefore I could relate my observations to his.
http://jimmyinlosangeles.blogspot.com/2012/10/blogging-social-difference-in-la-week-4.html?showComment=1351909947173#c8233621634510183901
I enjoyed reading your blog post about your bus ride to Koreatown. I too, took a trip there last week on my way to Korean BBQ and saw the rough conditions of the neighborhood, but also the contrast of neighboring Beverly Hills. You made a good point that Koreatown developed as a commercial place because it is still pretty industrial and has many commercial shops. From this information, it is easier to understand how this area is underdeveloped compared to Beverly Hills. I also thought it was interesting how you identified the type of architecture in the area and how it is important to see this as a prominent aspect of social difference in close metropolitan areas. What most caught my attention about your blog is your statement on how Koreatown is not just concentrated with Asians, but many Latinos as well. Contrary to what I previously thought, I was surprised to see Latino people in the restaurant and Latino businesses next to all of the Korean shops, but race did not seem to be very important, at least with my experience.
Although Koreatown may seem to follow the Chicago school model, I think the borough relates more to the post-metropolis idea. The postmetropolis in the fourth urban revolution consisted of more segmented centers. For instance, Koreatown and Beverly Hills each have their centers, therefore it makes sense that these neighborhoods are so different. Transportation networks, such as automobiles, buses, and subways help to connect these parts of Greater Los Angeles and makes social difference more evident than a centralized model would.
No comments:
Post a Comment