[lit-ideas] Re: I don't know.

  • From: John Wager <johnwager@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 10:41:59 -0500

Andreas Ramos wrote:

The French Quarter is mostly okay, because it was on high ground. In the original city, the wealthy and the businesses were built on high ground.

It's the lowlands that got flooded, and, because that's the floodplains, it was undesirable land. That's what was available to the poor, the slaves, and the underclasses.

The "City" (what the tourists think as New Orleans) is mostly okay and will be restored/rebuilt. But the parts of the city that tourists never saw (the ghetto) could change completely. I can't imagine that Bush would build tens of thousands of houses there. Developers are probably salivating over the idea of "improving" that area, now that the Blacks have been washed away.

Saying this is like saying that a rosebush is OK because some blooms were saved. My suspicion is that New Orleans is not a set of neighborhoods that can be clicked out of each other by governmental rescue plans, but an organic whole wherein the "French Quarter" survives as a real place because of its "roots" in the ghetto neighborhoods. I don't know if this is true, but I further suspect that the only way to find out if it's true is to try to re-open the French Quarter without any of the roots intact and see if the blooms die, or if the only way that the blooms can be "preserved" is by encolsing them in some kind of protective plastic layer.


"Never attribute to malice that which can be
explained by incompetence and ignorance." ----------------------------------------------
John Wager johnwager@xxxxxxxxxxx
Forest Park, IL USA

To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: