New Orleans IS Forever
Lots of folks have suggested the idea that maybe New Orleans should be abandoned, or that it
Related posts:
Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2008 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.
AMEN!
While I agree with you that New Orleans should be rebuilt, how do you describe groups of men threatening to shoot refugees who enter the wrong parish as ‘a community’?
Why did members of the ‘community’ not help evacuate the poor residents before the flood hit? Surely some people would have had a spare seat in their cars that they could offer to a community member?
There are some examples of self sacrifice on the part of some of the New Orleans citizens. And the Feds flubbed the relief efforts badly. But I still wonder why there was no concentrated effort made by the local government and/or neighborhood people to help the worst off escape before and after the hurricane hit.
You have to forgive the columnist for his lack of understanding of a community that is not composed of suburban transplants who expect to stay in one place for several years instead of several generations.
I don’t agree that Florida south, east and west of Orlando should be abandoned or that California should be abandoned or that the Midwest’s tornado alley should be abandoned. But maybe New York should be abandoned for 20 years.
Questioning Yankee did not know that we have these threats from hurricanes several times a year with no hits. People leave but they are not panicked.
This cat 4 hurricane did not do a terrific or irrecoverable amount of damage. The levee breach did do a terrific amount of damage.
Venice Italy is constructing “plugs” for its canal entrances to the sea with hollow walls that normally, filled with water, lay flat in the canal until danger threatens. Then the hollow walls are filled with air to raise one end while the other end pivots on the bottom to block incoming water. That way you don’t have to worry where the levee breaches, the source of water is blocked.
New Orleans has been a city in decline for a long time. My grandparents are buried at Lafayette Cemetary, right across from Commanders Palace. I haven’t been able to visit them since my Grandmother died. It’s just too dangerous.
Will N.O. come back? I think it could be better than ever. Many of the criminal gangs who stayed behind to loot are gone and this will give good people a chance to rebuild. It’s up to New Orleanians to rebuild and with the help of all Louisiana it can and will be done.
I just hope we all learn a lesson about corrupt and incompetant politicians. Nagin inherited a mess and was completely overwhelmed. I don’t believe he could have done much more. On the other hand Blano is just plain incompetant. Her main goal is ingratiating your friends and cronies with the state coffers, we shouldn’t expect much from her.
I just hope that we can help N.O. get back on its’ feet and I hope it will be better than ever.
It must be really strange to hear the whole nation discussing your city, when only weeks ago, to many of these same people, the significance of a “hurricane in New Orleans” was nothing more than a tasty way to get sloshed, quickly at Mardi Gras. Now, suddenly everyone is an expert.
Of course the city should be rebuilt. This shouldn’t even be a debate. Rebuild it, better, stronger, safer, more beautiful (if that is possible) than before. It is an opportunity for the best of the city to pull together for change and growth. Seize the opportunity. Nay sayers need not apply.
Transplants?! In New York?! Where?! Where?!
Skeeter,
New York City is built by what you call, um, transplants whether they come from Italy, Ireland, China, Korea, Nebraska, Mexico, Minnesota or Up State. It is a strange city that way and really wonderful. Always has been and probably always will be. In fact, there are very few people who can claim they have lived “generations” in NYC. Usually the second generation wants to get out of the city and pursue the American Dream in the suburbs somewhere. NYC is a launching point for many people. Also, logistically, it is just too expensive for most people to raise kids in the city even if they want to. NYC earned the dubious distinction of being the “only child” city, because one child is all that most people can afford to have here and still live relatively comfortably.
Anyway, me and some of my transplant friends and transplant co-workers are having a benefit tonight in Brooklyn, called “NYC loves NOLA”. All proceeds go to the Red Cross. There will be cajun food, music, booze and probably a lot of transplants hanging out, having a good time and helping out the other city we love on a day that means a lot to New Yorkers, yep, even transplants.
New Orleans, as some other cities in the “New World” is a testimony of resilience. It will be rebuilt with or without help because the roots of people there, poor or rich are just too strong to let it die, otherwise, it would have been abandoned long ago.
It will be rebuilt and tourist will go back in hordes, some would be looking for the party and all that, as always, but others, like myself, will go to pay tribute to its history, culture, music, food and , mostly, its people.
See you there!
I’m so sad; I never saw a city while it was dying,I never thought if and how a city should die.
Please, push pressure to authorities in order to convince them to rebuilt New Orleans ; ok, in another way ; possibly more “liberal” towards Missisippi River, too much compelled and constrained against its willing to be free to go flowing,redefining its course where it wants; not where men want.
Isn’t it possible to find a compromise between Nature (the big river) and human needs ?
I think this is the capital dilemma.
Best regards,
fabcellit alias Fabrizio Celli
fabcellit@yahoo.co.uk
16,th gervasi st I-47100 Forl
Of course it will be rebuilt, new category 5-proof levys and all. However, the key is not to rebuild New Orleans as it was, but as what it can be. NO must evolve into a progressive city: a New New Orleans. I have always loved this city, but unfortunately it’s obsession with tradition has degenerated into an insular mindset where outsiders and innovation are looked down upon.
The worst case scenerio is if NO is rebuilt into a Adult Disneyworld: all the worst parts of Bourbon Street that locals hate amplified. But I believe it would be equally bad if the city would merely achieve it’s former status quo, and not learn anything from this ordeal. When rebuilt, business as usual must die. The economy must diversify beyond tourism and the oil & gas industry. NO should take a page from Austin and become a haven for technology, innovation and creativity.
As Roux mentioned, crime has been another sign of NO’s decline. I would risk my life walking in parts of the city my grandfolks lived in. I have the feeling that after the recent media attention, there will be a concentrated effort to crack down on crime, as well as have zero tolerance for corruption in the police force. This would help many to make NO their home.
In recent decades New Orleans has deteriorated from the
You seem to be missing Garreau’s point about the poor and New Orleans. You claim that once everything is settled they will remember their roots and return. How will they return? To move is a very expensive venture, especially to a place where there is nothing for you to return to. If the houses are razed, then new houses will have to be built. The poor will not be able to afford the cost of new construction. If the homes they left are in any condition for repairs, they won’t be able to afford to repair them. For those who had insurance, the insurance companies are not going to pay out for the flood damages. The reality is that the New Orleans that they will be rebuilt will be more expensive, more exclusive, and less authentic than the New Orleans that had existed. All of the companies that will be involved in the reconstruction will insist on financial spreadsheets that will guarantee that redevelopment will resemble new suburban malls will shiny retail developments, expensive homes, etc. Those who were living paycheck to paycheck, or on government checks will not return because they will not be able to afford either the expense of actually moving, the expense of the new New Orleans, nor the expense of losing the fragile safety nets that they have built in their new host communities.
As much as it pains me to say, New Orleans will not be rebuilt anywhere close what it was before or towards what visionaries would like it to be.
New Orleans will be destined to join other great failed cities of history that were born and died due to unique geographical and resource considerations.
It is instructive to remember that everything that we build or create eventually out lives its purpose or fails to function. Or changing environmental conditions render it useless. On a greater scale, everything does indeed have an end point. Everything from the smallest building to the largest civilization will eventually go belly-up. Most people tend overlook this, but history teaches us otherwise.
In our own country, we have examples of this “undoing” of the urban fabric going on each and every day across our Rust Belt cities. Whole blocks are being abandoned in Detroit, Flint and countless other locations. Nature is reclaiming former factories and surface mines. Google some picture of Flint Michigan; you’ll see forest reclaiming long abandoned lands. All outside of the public eye. Lose 50% of your population due to a natural disaster overnight and you’re worldwide headlines. Lose 50% of your population due to changing economic patterns over a decade or two and only demographers notice.
But back to New Orleans. It won’t be rebuilt, when defined as replacing most or all of what was destroyed. Sure, those sections that remained high and dry may well survive–as they should. But the greater city will be a mere shadow of itself if we are lucky. I blogged about this very subject earlier this week. Other authors have done so for other reasons.
I am a planner by profession and Geographer (with a geological background) by training. To build or rebuild a location you need to have a number of important ingredients or any attempt will result in failure. Chiefly, you need solid land, reliable access to transportation, natural resources, human and financial capital and a favorable economic and legal framework. If you lack one or more of these, you have problems. When you consider these, rebuilding New Orleans just doesn’t make any sense–there are too many strikes against doing so.
* It is legally difficult and economically infeasable. Some of these issues are transitory and others intractable. Bureaucracy has an innate ability to slow or stall progress. With multiple jurisdictions and political agencies involved, each with their own opinion, arriving at a consensus will be difficult. Look at how long it has taken to handle the WTC Groundzero site. Then, who–and how–will they rebuild if they do not have insurance to cover against destruction? What kind of insurance company would rationally insure that area. This alone is major obstacle. Plus, most of those displaced had extremely limited resources to start out with. The only way I could see this happening is if the Feds exempted the area from insurance requirements and cut the checks for every homeowner. But the cost for the feds to rebuild every structure would be astronomical and likely a nonstarter. Not with war and tax cuts raging.
Then we haven’t even gotten to the infrastructure issue…
* It is geologically dumb. My blog focused on this issue. People need to understand that this area is just waiting to be bypassed by the Mississippi and “reclaimed” by the sea. Life on a delta formation is never permenent. Look at other delta civilizations (Egypt comes to mind). Rivers shift course. Sediment is deposited, then eroded, then deposited again. Any human attempt to alter this flies in the face of inevitable geology. And geology always wins. And unlike events such as mountain building, river-shifting can occur seemingly over night.
Comparing New Orleans to California or the remainder of the Gulf Coast is not accurate. A category 5 hurricane or an 8.0 earthquake will damage a lot of structures, but it will not render the land useless. San Francisco did not slide into the sea in 1904. The dirt under most of Biloxi is as buildable as ever. New Orleans on the other hand IS flooded. The water levels present in the city REPRESENT normal conditions. A dry city is abnormal in contrast.
Remember, in order to have a functional settlement, you need to have dry land. If you don’t, you need to be able compensate otherwise (artifical levees, pump stations, flood gates). It has worked somewhat well for the Dutch. But even then, it is a long term strategy, required for the life of the settlement. Stop maintaining it and nature will win. Heck, in many cases you have to keep increasing it in order to stay ahead of the game. Under most circumstances I would say this is possible, if you have the resources (financial and raw) and energy. Unfortunately this is not the case now.
* We won’t have the energy. Plain and simple. Global energy production of key resources (oil, natural gas) are approaching the point of peak production. Coal is not far behind. Alternatives are nowhere near ready. Since fossil fuels are finite, once we’ve used them, thats it. Well, we are hitting that point about now. Look at any oil production curve for a given oil field or country. Its a bell curve. Production rises, levels off and falls, regardless of price. No amount of drilling will alter this fact. $1000 Barrel oil will not induce new supplies. Again, geology–not economics–will triumph in the end. To assume that the next decade or two will be spent rebuilding anew is totally misses the point. We will spend the next decades trying to just keep the lights on, commerce running as energy gets ever scarcer. And we will fail miserably.
Without cheap energy, what will power the bulldozers? Transport the building materials? Pave the roads? How about feeding the people? Paying their wages…
Energy is the killer issue. Everything we do or assume will be done assumes that the energy (gasoline, diesel, electricity, natural gas) will be there to accomplish what we need done. Not to mention supplying the greater economy with the resources for it to continue functioning.
Take away that assumption and nothing will be possible. If anyone is not familiar with this subject, I highly suggest to read up on energy, peak oil, natural gas enough and you will realize that we are in a world of hurt.
Like the existence of the Mississippi River Delta, peaking energy production is a Geological problem, not an economic one.
On a more fundemental level, it is really all about limits. Limits to resource availability, limits to fiscal ability, limits to what we can accomplish as a people, a country and a civilization. Nothing can continue for ever, especially in a finite system. Human innovation can mitigate or postpone inevitable events, whether they are geological or energetic in nature. But we will never win. To argue otherwise implies a rejection of the laws of physics and an ignorance of basic biology.
Rebuilding New Orleans flies in the face of those limits. Best bet is to accept this admittedly bleak fact and move on. Preserve what still works with human civilization elsewhere.
-
UNplanning the future…
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
Random,
How expensive is a greyhound bus ticket? That is the cost of relocating for the people who are in shelters right now. Why would moving present a financial burden considering all they have right now is the clothes on their back? And you seem to forget that most of the metro new orleans area, including the west bank and east jefferson parish are still intact and will be fine while orleans parish rebuilds. there are places for people to go.
also, you’re speaking as if the poor in new orleans actually owned the property that was lost, which demonstrates that you have no knowledge of what’s going on. the vast majority of the poor who stayed in the city were living in public housing, section 8, or were renters. the poor in new orleans don’t usually own their property and they will not be the ones rebuilding. once there are structures for them to occupy, they will be back.
Failed city? Perhaps you haven’t done all your research.
New Orleans will be rebuilt, not soley because money will be pumped into the city, or levees will be raised, or tourists will visit. It is because America needs New Orleans. Not just for its ports, but its people. It is because the the rebuildling of New Orleans is crucial to the survival of the American psyche. It is because the millions who visited every year to let their hair down, throw caution to the wind, forget their worries, or experience living history, will not let New Orleans sit idle like a rotting apendage. It is because if this country were a body, New Orleans would be its spirit.
But if we want to talk economy, we can go there too. The article below may best sum up why a comeback is not just eminent, but necessary.
-”History, geography and especially economics make it inevitable that New Orleans will be rebuilt
I don’t think anyone feels the city should be abandoned (the question is how big the next NO should be), and I understand that talk of scaling back is like salt in the wound at this point. But at the same time most of the arguments I have heard for fully rebuilding are based more on emotion that any really hard evidence of logic. Your analysis of the plight of the poor is problematic. It is true that there are poor everywhere, but the fact remains that other areas do have (and have for a long time has) more dynamic economic circumstances. And this event creates discrete costs to returning (that our society cannot and should not fully cover lest we encourage the worst kind of moral hazard) that, in light of the limited economic opportunities of doing so, many poor are likely to stay away. More crucially, many of the city’s professional class may decide not to return.
I think NO will return, but as a smaller, more defensible and economically and socially cohesive city. What has happened to NO is not unlike what happened to Galveston a century ago when destroyed by hurricane. Galveston did not disappear, but it was forced to come to terms with the physical possibilities of its location.
This is a turning point in history, and the Washington Post article is very likely correct about the direction. I am a New Yorker by roots who cannot believe that I will never go to the top of the WTC again. I suspect that a similar emotional situation awaits the people of NO. I went there for the first time a few years ago (and loved what I saw) but I cannot help but to think that this is a sad passage, and some of what I remember about NO will be added to the list of things lost and mourned.
There is a fundamental flaw in your understanding of New Orleans if you even think of this area in terms of “North vs. South.” New Orleans has little to nothing to do with the surrounding area. New Orleans is an island of culture in the U.S. which looks more like Europe than any other American city, and you’ll get that opinion from Europeans who have lived here, and I have known quite a few. I am born and raised in New Orleans, and I have many more years of living there left in me, and no stupid levee breach is going to keep me from that. Yes, New Orleans is mostly negative sea level, and yes most of THAT land had to be drained because it was all swamp. It’s not logical, it’s not safe, but it’s a symbol of the willingness of people to live here: we will put up with whatever we have to in order to be in our wonderful city. Yankees don’t understand New Orleans any more than Southerner’s do: New Orleans is unique and will continue to be so. Oh, and for all those wise-asses who talk about the lack of camraderie due to murder rate and the shootings: those are isolated incidents by small percentages of the population and the vast majority of the murder rate is gang on gang violence; which basically means they are bringing that lethal possibility onto themselves and not simply inviting it by living in the city. I lived continuously in New Orleans for 18 years before college and the worst thing that ever happened to me after hanging out in the worst areas of town was have a bike stolen when I was 12. Every city has violence, and every city has criminal population, but not every city has the cohesion and culture of New Orleans to pull themselves together. People in New Orleans are proud of what happened 300 years ago, and 200 years ago and 25 years ago. It is all personal, and it is all what defines us as a city. I love my city, it is not merely a fun place to be, and I’ve been saying that and living that way before any sympathy for a natural tragedy occurred.
I’ve wanted to visit New Orleans for a long time but have never been able to. So for very selfish reasons I want to see New Orleans rebuilt. Granted, physically things will be different - but the one thing that will not change is the “soul of a city unlike any other”. And that soul, the spirit of the people, is what will help New Orleans overcome this adversity.
Les bons temps rouleront encore!
“Lots of folks have suggested the idea that maybe New Orleans should be abandoned, or that it
“New Orleans is an island of culture in the U.S. which looks more like Europe than any other American city, and you’ll get that opinion from Europeans who have lived here, and I have known quite a few.” That reasoning is strange. You are not in possession of some kind of random sample and even if you are right the fact that it has European cultural attributes does not by itself settle the present issue. I’m sorry but it doesn’t.
“It’s not logical, it’s not safe, but it’s a symbol of the willingness of people to live here: we will put up with whatever we have to in order to be in our wonderful city.” Probably so, but it has also been a symbol of the rest of country’s willingness to subsidize the expensive measures necessary to allow this. That is, at the end of the day, what is really at issue here: not the determination of New Orleans residents, but the financial willingness of the rest of the country to make the investments necessary to put New Orleans back on its pre-storm track. Does it make sense to rebuild that which, as you point out, had been claimed on a shaky basis to begin with?
Look, take this as well intentioned advice: I do not think that New Orleans political cause is being well served right now by the advocacy of those who love it most. You need to convince the rest of the nation that the city should be fully rebuilt. Being merely dismissive of reasonable questions ins’t going to cut it in light of what will likely be enormous outlays to fully rebuild.
i agree with the last poster. we as a country have been gracious, compassionate and willing to contribute millions, billions of dollars into a rescue and recovery operation. i sympathize with the plight of those who have lost everything. but is it economically sound judgement to rebuild a city in a geographically/geologically unsound location? tax dollars are not infinite. should we, as a country, and i as a taxpayer, be forced to chalk up hundreds of billions of dollars simply because the people of new orleans want to live where they grew up?
it doesn’t make sense…
and i’m sorry, but i don’t “need” new orleans to be rebuilt for my psyche. what i “need” is to believe that logical, reasonable judgement is being used and applied by the government that represents me so that something like this never happens again.
“..but at the same time most of the arguments I have heard for fully rebuilding are based more on emotion than on really hard evidence of logic.”
Peter,
This may be true. There is certainly truth, logic and hard evidence in Garreau’s article, however it lacks the emotion and humanity that is required when speaking of a city where people are born, live, work, die and are buried.
The reality of rebuilding will involve both science and emotion.
Is it logical to rebuild the WTC? Probably not, this particular site has been attacked by terrorists more than once. Is it logical to rebuild what is essentially a target? For that matter is it logical to continue building towering sky scrapers anyhwere in NYC? Is it logical for people to work and live in these vulnerable structures? No, frankly it is not yet new sky scrapers are in constuction all over the city. No one thought twice about rebuilding the WTC and the cries to make it “even larger” were heeded. There were no national debates about it. It was emotion that prevailed over logic and “tax payers money” because rebuilding the WTC became a symbol of triumph over an enemy.
Several American cities were built with an interplay of pure human will and science and logic. New York, Los Angeles, Las Vegas.
Humans fuction as much on science as they do on emotion. New Orleans will be rebuilt with the power of both. Yes, NO will change. The science that keeps the city safe will change, the politics will change, the structure of the city will change and the community itself will change, hopefully all for the better. I have the distinct feeling that no one expects to rebuild the city to exactly what it was before.
Holly, I appreciate what you are saying but emotion cannot and will not carry the day here. The truth is that cities do decline and sometimes disappear. In all such cases they were dear to someone. And the issue here is about the advisability of committing public funds to a rebuild in light of these serious considerations that have been raised. These issues must be addressed first.
By the way, I am not unswayed by emotion: I am arguing about what public priorities should be. As a private person, I have already been moved to give a non-trivial portion of my annual income to storm relief. I do care deeply about what has happened to the people of that poor city.
And I am not, as some have done, passing moral judgment on NO: this is not a moral thing. If NO were not in such a vulnerable position we would not even be having this discussion. But she is. You cannot just slip past that fact.
By the way, even as a native New Yorker, I agree with you about the WTC. But one dumb decision does not justify another.
However, both in tone and in focus, your last praragraph is EXACTLY the tack the advocates for New Orleans should take in coming political debates over the fate of the city.
Hi Peter,
When we speak of rebuilding New Orleans we must speak from a place of logic and science, but also a place of emotion. It is simply human to have an emotional connection to a place. The emotional response we are seeing with regard to the rebuilding of NO is perfectly normal and logical, and as I said, I do not believe anyone labors under the assumption that New Orleans will ever be the same. Of course it will be different, but it will be rebuilt.
There is really little comparison between rebuilding the WTC and rebuilding NO. I only made the reference to point out how logic is often subjigated by emotion and, well, it works. Also, the two subjects were “national issues”. Rebuilding the WTC is far less logical than rebuilding NO, a whole city, yet there was no heated debate about the logic of rebuilding the WTC as there is for rebuilding NO.
In the end, action will speak louder than words for both the WTC and New Orleans. Four years later the WTC is still a vast, vacant, ghost-like space in the center of downtown and an issue of political contention. I have a feeling New Orleans will be a thriving city again before NYC has even begun to rebuild the WTC.
I almost forgot…
Yes, cities do decline, so do towns and villages and neighborhoods and streets and on a larger scale countries. However, when we are given an opportunity to address the problem of decline, to reverse it even, we should take that opportunity and with lessons learned, make the changes needed. I think it would be a failure of science, innovation and human will to simply ignore the challenge of rebuilding NO based on the idea that “cities decline”.
Yes,rebuilt NO…and make her better,and stronger,and safer..and protect her people who return from future hurricanes and floods like this..make plans for evacuation and stick with them..I didn’t see any boats and planes evacuate the poor..the hospitals..that should have been evacuated first on Sunday before the storm.I think all levels of government failed here..city and state…especially Federal….and now we have the chance to build again and do a model city for the future…okay all you architects get your designs ready and to the proper authorities…sponsors..we can do many different communities built by different designers and build the housing for the future…now.Clean slate.We will have the old with the French Quarter and then the new with the post Katrina housing and offices..highrises…and condos..with walkways in the sky..modern..and the Garden District..Southern and graceful..why not? We can build for the poor and also for the new and curious who will come and live because of the vibrance that will be in the air after New Orleans gets dry..and building gets started…the energy will be contagious.The tourists will come back..and the cruise ships.and new hotels…a different sort of pioneer…the gay people will come back… and they will build too,and everyone will work together–this is a chance to prove to the world that America really is America…that we stand for freedom..and survival..and that we can all work together,and help each other..and be united.Let’s go!
“…it
Holly,
Sorry for the delayed response.
Though I am on balance opposed to the idea of rebuidling the WTC (I agree with you that it is just too much of a target), the statement “Rebuilding the WTC is far less logical than rebuilding NO, a whole city” is far from proven. Based on some measures (length of existence, cultural presence, numbers affected) NO clearly seems the better candidate for resources to rebuild. On others (eg prior economic vitality and sustainability: the WTC was not in long run decline on the eve of attack but by many measures NO was) the WTC wins. There are always competing considerations for something like this, and an unequivocal ranking is almost never achieved.
I seriously doubt that NO will be thriving before the WTC is built, even with Pataki et al at the helm in NY. NO wasn’t thriving before this and the scale of the necessary recontruction is just incomparably more vast. This is a fools bet and beside the point anyway: we are of one mind about the WTC and speed of recovery should be only a distant consideration anyway in light of the other issues in play.
“I think it would be a failure of science, innovation and human will to simply ignore the challenge of rebuilding NO based on the idea that “cities decline”.” Yes, that is undoubtedly one possibility. Part of my point has been that that case needs to be better made. The debate over the fate of NO certainly should not be decided by the fact that one side had inadequate representation.
On the other hand, Holly, cities do disappear and it is not always a reflection of human failure. Sometimes it is a reflection of the reality of circumstance. Cities usually arise because they had some fundamental economic or strategic justification for their presence. When that disappears there is a limit to how much of society’s resources should be put toward that that cannot survive of its own accord. Which is not to say that all of NO should be abandoned: there is a city in there that is sustainable and defensible. It is probably far more modest that what existed on the eve of the storm.
NO clearly cannot internally generate the financing for rebuilding itself. The question then becomes why our society, in the face of so many pressing needs, should devote resources toward this end. The WTC/NO comparison is a false one in another sense: whatever the bullshit surrounding the WTC rebuild (and yes I am aware of this and it is increasingly angering me), the scope of necessary public commitment is incomparable: NO will require vastly more resources because, as you point out, it is a whole city we are talking about here. My main point is then that in light of these constraints you cannot simply dismiss these serious questions that these various articles raise and/or argue that emotional considerations outweigh them. They have to be satisfactorily and seriously answered. That is a necessary condition for deciding on all but a very modest rebuild.
Let me add, Holly, that the people raising these issues are not intractable “enemies” of NO either. These are people who are clearly laying their concerns as citizens so that NO can understand the political challenge before it and have a fair chance to make the strongest possible case for itself. I am clearly less sure of the merits of large scale funding to rebuild NO that you are, but at the same time I am willing to clearly indicate the kind of concerns that I have as a voter. There are those out there whose minds are made up the other way and will be so fair. It is therefore very important to make the case among those who will listen and offer some realistic chance of persuading them.
Holly,
Sorry, I meant to write “will *not* be so fair. “
Hi Peter, you can’t read. Or at least you can’t read well. I say this because you took my comments completely out of context to examine them, and then dismissed them as illogical. Do you know what your comments appear like, Peter? I’ll tell you, they appear as though you are trying to sound smart and accomplished without actually being smart and accomplished. You know, using words you know to be witty and somewhat more rarely appearing in the lexicon of most Americans without fully appreciating the definition of those same words. I said “New Orleans is an island of culture in the U.S. which looks more like Europe than any other American city, and you’ll get that opinion from Europeans who have lived here, and I have known quite a few,” and then you responded: “That reasoning is strange. You are not in possession of some kind of random sample and even if you are right the fact that it has European cultural attributes does not by itself settle the present issue. I’m sorry but it doesn’t.” Do you know what that conveys to me Peter? It conveys ignorance. Because it shows me that you didn’t read the sentences directly before the sentence you criticized, which stated that I was disabusing people of the notion that New Orleans was just another Southern City, when in fact it’s culture is distinctly European. It shows me you can’t read, Peter. While we are critsizing other people’s opinions and written pieces, let’s talk about your pronoun reference errors. When I was in school, public school in New Orleans, I would receive a letter grade off for every pronoun reference error in my English Essays. You would have received roughly a “J” on the “A” through “F” scale, and that would just be for your post where you responded to my first post. “The present issue?” Which present issue, Peter? There are only about 50 issues just in this comment section, not to mention all of the issues raised by the original post, which you could be referring to. For instance, I had many issues in my posting. Issue number one: New Orleans has a unique culture. Issue number two: New Orleans was a great place to live. Isuue number three: I plan on moving back. Issue number four: everyone else should move back. Issue number five: New Orleans has a strong community. Issue number six: New Orleans is not atypically violent. I could go on, but I think even you get that point, Peter. Now, let’s respond to a substantive issue you raised: your disagreement about whether New Orleans has a European culture, assuming you actually understood that concept since we’ve established that you can’t read. New Orleans was founded by the French in 1718, sold to the Spanish in 1763, transferred back to the French secretly in 1801 and then sold to the United States in 1803. When we wrote our constitution and civil code, AFTER WE WERE A UNITED STATES TERRITORY, we wrote the official versions in French and only the translations in English, which weren’t controlling. We also heavily borrowed from Spanish Law when we drafted our community property law, and for the rest of the law basically adopted in FULL the Code of Napolean, which had only been in existence a few years. My grandfather was born in Louisiana and speaks Cajun French fluently, and his father who was still alive five years ago, spoke ONLY in French. On top of that, I was foreign language major in college and an exchange student in high school and hosted a large number of exchange students in New Orleans and ALL OF THEM said how very European New Orleans was, and that was not even comparing the city to the rest of the United States. So yes, Peter, it is culturally VERY European, because almost a hundred years of New Orleans existing as a city was while EUROPEAN COUNTRIES owned the city. Maybe even you can understand that very complicated principle - I think you’re up to the challenge. As for me being a symbol of huge taxpayers gone to waste because I was living in New Orleans, a city I knew was vulnerable to fllods, where teh hell do you live, Peter? I hope it’s not Kansas or Oklahoma or Texas because tornados happen every year in those states, and damn in taxpayer dollars aren’t paying for new trailer homes every year! What a waste! Or maybe living in California, all those damned earthquake victims living right near a fault! Idiots! Look at all those taxpayer dollars flushed down the toilet. Ooh, or maybe, New York City - terrorist target extraordinaire! Geez, the whole city should just pick up and move, costing us poor taxpayers all that dearly earned money. Then there’s the extreme North with catastrophic blizzards. And Florida with hurricanes. And Mississippi with hurricanes. And Alabam with hurricanes. And New Jersey with hurricanes. And Washington D.C. with gun violence and poor people and all those tax payer dollars flowing to hospitals for all of the uninsured victims of gunfire, damn that EMTALA! In short, Peter, you are an idiot. An idiot. I hope maybe you realize you are an idiot and have a good cry about that, it would make a tiny bit less pissed off that I have to somehow live off of $2,000 from FEMA until they can appraise my house, which is still underwater. Idiot.
I don’t think New Orleans should or will be rebuilt to its previous size. Areas above sea level will be rebuilt. The rest should be scrapped.
I hear a lot of talk of how tourists need New Orleans to let their hair down to relax, but I’m not buying it. People can get liquored up and flash their boobs at alot of other places around the country now (face it, that is what alot of the tourism is about). NO isn’t the sole destinantion for that kind of behavior anymore. Plus the areas of NO that promoted this kind of behavior are still high and dry, so they can still offer that destination as long as essential services exist.
As far as people relocating back to NO, many (not all) probably won’t return. True, currently people are living in shelters and only have the clothes on their back. But when it is 6 monthes down the road, and their house still isn’t repaired/rebuilt because there aren’t enough contractors (it took over a full year for all the damage cuased by Hurrican Andrew to be fixed, and NO will go way beyond that).
People aren’t going to still be living in the Astrodome in 6 months. They will be getting assistance checks and donations. They will be living in apartments, they will have donated clothes and furnishings, and they will have new jobs (if they are able and willing to work). The working poor (or non-working poor) are not know for their drive or ambition. Once settled somewhere else, they will be content to live in the new routine they have established and there they will remain.
I would expect somewhere from 50-70% of NO poor to remain wherever they are ultimately relocated. If the poor make up 50% of NO, then at least 25% of NO population will not return.
They same sort of thing occurs with the working class. As an engineer, I would rather go to work than sit around getting an assistance check for 6 months to a year. I would be looking for a new job. But for an employer to hire me, I will have to be willing to commit to working there for an extended period of time. They aren’t going to hire me if I tell them I will be quitting in 6 months to move back to NO. I think business owners will want to return to NO because that is where their business is located. However, I think you will find alot of professionals (engineers, teachers, nurses, etc.) will remain displaced long after the rebuilding efforts are underway.
I think this will be another big hit to NO population. I’d be confident in saying that at best 50% of NO population will return. It will mostly consist of the rich. They have the money available to rebuild. As sad as it sounds, they will probably get more assistance money than the poor because they have more influence. They also can afford insurance out the wazoo, so they are likely overly insured if anything. The contractors on builders will be working for the rich first, because they can afford to pay the most.
So when NO is being rebuilt, it will be rebuilt in the image that the elite rich want it rebuilt. This will further make it less affordable for the poor and middle classes, which reduces the number of them who return.
NO may see some population growth from the people who do the reconstruction. These people will be down there for a year or more. They won’t want to be away from their families. If housing is available and the money is goood, they will relocated their families there. Maybe even their businesses. Still, I’d say the population post Katrina will be about 50% the population of pre-Katrina. And the rebuily NO will look very, VERY different from the NO of old.
It’s a simple matter of economics, politics, and human nature.
Aaron,
Calm down: you have clearly read into my comments a tone that was not intended to be conveyed. Dwell on what I just said for a moment and then react to the rest.
I am not trying to “appear as though you are trying to sound smart and accomplished without actually being smart and accomplished.” I am both, I take for granted I am both, and also take for granted that my status as such is neither here nor there in terms of the issue at hand.
And my point about culture is not to question whether NO has or does not have this or that kind of culture. It is to point out that the individual cannot make the kind of determinations you are about the relative uniqueness of any city in America: you need a real random sample, not your own subjective experience. That applies to you and me (or anyone). This was probably an unneccessary line of argument in retrospect, but not ill intended: I am an econometrician by training and hence have an intellectual tendancy to gravitate toward such things.
I’m not sure where the point about violence has come from. Since you brought it up, NO is currently a more violent city than average, but I haven’t made a big deal about it. I know, having lived in NYC during the surging crime of the Eighties and Nineties that these things wax and wane in any city. In fact, Aaron, my comment “And I am not, as some have done, passing moral judgment on NO: this is not a moral thing. ” was a swipe AT those who have tried, lamely in my view, to make an argument, however indirectly, that some kind of moral defect in NO should enter our thinking about what to do now. Such judgements applied to any city are just plain silly.
You need to calm down and carefully read what I wrote: the question for me is how we come up with a NO that is defensible (not against my ignorance, Aaron, but Cat 5 storms, which you cannot bluster away). Bluster of the sort you are offering is a disservice to NO at this point.
I am not unaware of the emotional content of this issue (I conceded readily that “talk of scaling back is like salt in the wound at this point”). Such tone as I adopted and you apparently misread was designed to seem dry: I am not interested in coming across as an NO hater, as some have. I readily admit that there wouldn’t be any question here if not for NO’s terrible geographical circumstances.
As for the issue of grammatical errors: that is a cheap shot. Virtually every post, yours included is riddled with them. That is the nature of things written off the cuff.
I am sorry you took offence at what I wrote and I now going to leave this thread because there is no profit in contuining the discussion under these terms.
Oh, by the way Aaron, where I live is in NC, and I have a solid track record of complaining about society’s willingness to continually finance rebuilding on the NC coast, despite a proven record of extreme hurricane vulnerability. I am a New Yorker who loves the city, saw the towers as a symbol of New York, but I agreed with Holly that, in light of the risks, rebuilding them is folly. So, yes, Aaron: I do practice in my own backyard what I preach.
One of the questions I have been thinking about for years, long before Katrina, is what the criteria should be for deciding on whether to rebuild. At what point is the risk too great. In advocating for a reduced (rather than essentially abandoned) NO, I have recognized the differential levels of risk across the city and recognized that it would be silly to apply to the entire city the a risk standard based on its most vulnerable.
I am truly sorry you are out of a home. I wish more help was gotten to you faster, and even if I am against fully rebuilding that does not mean I feel society should cut the people of NO off: we have a responsibility to help those who will not be returning set up a good life in their new home.
And let
Aaron: let me even expand on what I just said. I have been put out of home by a hurricane (Fran) and while I do not pretend to know your circumstance (the worst I had to fear was some tree damage since I live on a hill and the winds had lost a lot of punch by the time Fran got into us), I admit that I was shocked by the pockets of extreme damage in my area. The issue was flash flooding of rather narrow valley areas where the huge rainfall concentrated. Since then it has annoyed the ever living shit out of me that local gov’t has approved commercial and residential development in those places that, in light of Fran, are clearly very vulnerable. Sooner or later NC will be hit by her Katrina. There is a certain terrible determinism to this, as there was to Katrina. The NC coast will be virtually destroyed and there will be pockets of intense flood damage well inland. The people of the US (including those of a hopefully defensibly rebuilt NO) will have the right to question whether they should finance rebuilding in these places. It was our folly and shame that we in NC ignored the verdict of nature. I am not suggesting that the situation in NO is somehow singular: the willingness to publicly support rebuilding rather unconditionally is a national blunder that has led to a massive re-allocation of resources to risky areas throughout the nation, and not just NO. I *readily* concede that this is a national problem, even if NO happens to be in the spotlight right now.
I can appreciate the intolerance of native NOLA-ites even toward sympathetic outsiders. I lived there for 5-6 years, graduated from UNO, met and married my wife there, still have many good friends and family there, still visit. It has been agony to read the “analysis” of carpetbagging hipsters who have recently lived in or visited NO, or of the national commentariat who wield their credentials like a club. Anyone who has actually read Joel Garreau’s books (see “The Nine Nations of North America” for real hokum) or Robert Putnam’s “Bowling Alone” (responses to a question about boxing in Louisiana hardly constitute meaningful “data”) would know better than to take their arguments too seriously, except…
…other people LISTEN to fools like them. The NOLA-ites who are committed to returning need to fight for their right to shape the rebuilding of their city… and expect that there will be disagreement even among native NOLA-ites about what it should look like.
We sincerely hope that there will be some attempt to allow the people who lived there before to not only return but to have a better city that does not sell out its heritage for a Disney-fied and lily-white landscape for the boozji culture-vultures who are currently writing about our city now.
In light of your sincere apology for not meaning to be condescending or belittling towards New Orleans Peter, I accept that was not your intention. However, when you specifically refer to one person’s post, as you did with mine which included quoting me, but you don’t accurately refer to my post, I will get upset. It is what happens. I’m also well educated Peter, I have three post graduate degrees, and I happen to live in the city. There is no “safe” place to live in the world, all places have some inherent danger. For New Orleans, we survived 40 years without a single hurricane causing major damage, and had we received adequate protection by levees before this year, we might have survived another 40 years. This was preventable. That means that it is not a tragedy, it was an accident. A tragedy is a horrific event, usually guided there by hubris, which is absolutely unpreventable. There is no telling now what may have happened had the levees been updated as the corp of engineers requested 7 times and were denied. It may have not been enough, but New Orleans is not now and was not then on cursed ground. It is on defensible ground which was not being defended. New Orleans will come back because our deep water ports service 2/3’s of America for many different industries both import and export, and because that port is necessary. Your argument is not flawless Peter, it is merely an opinion which contains many unresolved opinions which you construe as facts.
This is probably the best inclusion here on this blog that I have seen!
If we lose New Orleans, then we lose all the historical, cultural and scenic values that go with it. Is the nation really ready to lose the Mardi Gras, the cajun cuisine, the beauty of the Garden District? I don’t think so, and if we did, it would make a lot of people very upset.
New Orleans was let down by the failures of the Feds, when the Army Corps of Engineers had their budget slashed a few years back. The Feds also refused to initiate the Coast 2050 plan, for which Louisiana begged for. These things led to the disaster that occurred, the levee break, which rightfully should not be considered a natural disaster. NO never had the chance to rebuild their levee structures nor properly manage the delta. Now they’re flooded; blame can only lie with the Feds for this, and in some part sectors of the state government for squandering what little money they did get for engineering projects. I’ve heard that the state government, in some way or another, proposed a ridiculous project in which they dredged the Red River for barging. This, instead of restructuring levees? I am an environmentalist myself, support water conservation projects and believe that technology, when applied, must work with nature, not against it. New Orleans can not survive without the levee system, because it is so far below sea level, which is not the case for many areas upstream of the Mississippi.
Another twitch in helping New Orleans overcome any economic disaster may be to institute citywide gambling. Some may be against it, and even I have qualms about it, but it has the tendency to insure NO with a good deal of tourist trade in the future. I don’t, however, want to see the city flushed into a mecca of gentrification, over-development and awash in malls and needless stores. It’s strange, though, cause I’ve never been there, and now I’m giving advice on what to do. May sound sort of cynical on my part, but this is how I tend to approach any city, not just NO. And we’re all in this together. NO needs the love of the nation. It needs input from wherever it can get it. And it needs support from wherever it can get it.
NO is going to have to make some very hard choices in the future. That much is a fact. And I just hope it works well, so that I can visit in a few years!
– Ray M –
Also, one more thing …
In terms of rebuilding New Orleans, check out this site:
http://www.habitat.org
Help hurricane victims rebuild their lives! We need more organizations like this right now!
– Ray M –
Petey, you promised to leave the thread in a huff, yet you have failed to honor your commitments by insisting on coming back for the last word like a cranky, tiny little shrew. Let’s be as prudent, rational, and efficient as you counsel, and not be wasteful of our breath.
Cheers
Why to rebuild N.O. ?
1) It’s a challenge and I love american people even because he always accepted to play ;
2) Because if N.O. won’t be rebuilt, how it’s possible people still live in Holland (the polders zone is all above sea level ,just like N.O.
Best regards
Fabcellit alias Fabrizio Celli
Peter,
Not sure if you are still reading, but if you are, here is a quote from an article in this weeks New Yorker magazine, which arrived yesterday. It sums up what I was trying to say about the value of emotion in this particular argument.
“Katrina was so destructive- whole towns and cities were devestated, and their traditions swept away- that anyone who would presume to comment on it has a heavy burden. A disaster of this magnitude seems to demand not dispassionate analysis but simple human empathy.”
-Elizabeth Kolbert, from Storm Warnings, The New Yorker, Sept. 19th 2005
Nicely sums up what I was trying to say. In her article Kolbert does, in fact, analyze the nature of hurricanes but she wisely nods to the human issues, not just the science.
Obviously science and logic and thorough analysis will have to be applied to the rebuilding process in New Orleans, however the very reason for rebuilding at all is human emotion. The two are not at odds. They should work together.
Also, for the record, I am not against the rebuilding of the WTC. I never said so. I simply said it is not logical, that doesn’t mean it should not be done. Some of the WTC buildings are in the process of being rebuilt and I think that is great. Do I think they should build taller and bigger, no, not necessarily, but to not rebuild at all is a shame. I believe structres can be built that both respect the loss of life and look forward to the future.
You seems insistent about the idea that cities (towns, villages etc.) just disappear and that this is somehow the natural process of life, but still I disagree. In these times we live in, the disappearance or total destruction, or even slow but steady decline of a city is often the fault of human failure, not nature. We are a wasteful society, which is evidenced by our inability to preserve and protect what ought to be preserved and protected. Instead we have a tendency to scrap one thing and move on to the next.
It would be an absolute waste to not rebuild NO because of the difficulties that it would involve to do so. Pure laziness and wastefulness.
As I’ve been saying, I think that the human emotion and optimism that we are seeing expressed here and other places is not at odds with science. Both have a tendency to fly in the face of what is accepted. Science seeks answers, but human emotions give us the will to find them.
One more thing…
I think I understand and respect the emotion behind many of the comments here because I have felt that same emotion. I have lived in NYC ten years now. I lived here during the city’s darkest hour and I saw alot. I saw raw human emotion change the city in a way that defied all logic.
Many people left NYC after Sept. 11th for some very good and logical reasons and I do not fault them. Those who stayed did so because they felt a connection to the city that was larger than simple logic.
People are what make any city what it is, not structures, not tourist attractions. NYC is great because the people who live there love it, or they wouldn’t be there. There mettle has been tested. New Orleans is on the cusp of this. I admire each and every person who is willing to go back to NO to make it better than it was before, because this is what a city is. People. People with goals, ideas, plans, dreams and the fortitude to make them happen.
I honestly do think that with people like this, anything is possible. After Sept. 11th NYC had a major black out as I am sure you all remember. At the begining of this black out the cause was uncertain. Rumors flew around that there had been another terrorist attack. People were stranded in tunnels, underground, in pitch black, hot and humid subway cars. Rush hour traffic was stymied by no traffic lights anywhere. People were stuck, some for days, in elevators. The streets were full of people sleeping on the sidewalk…in MID-TOWN of all places. Yeck.
In the end however, there was no looting, no violence, no chaos. Store owners and restaurant owners, in many cases, actually gave away food rather than raising their prices. People started directing traffic, helping each other through the blackened tunnels. People checked on their elderly neighbors to make sure they were okay. In my neighborhood people shared food, water, batteries etc. People opened up there homes to strangers in need. NYC was more than just a city those days, it was a community of caring people. I don’t think any amount of science, analysis or data could have handled the situation better. It was people who cared for others and for their city that ended up saving the situation.
I like to think that this reaction to the black out was a direct result of having lived through and learned from something far more horrible.
New Orleans has the same chance to grow, as a city and as a community of people. They have every right to be excited about this. They will make their city great because they have learned in a way that none of us should ever have to. It is a valuable lesson that defies logic and analysis. It just is.
New Orleans will rebuild & when we finish our great city will be better than ever!!! I believe that with everthing i have in me. New Orleans is just too important to too many people, myself included.
I’ve been reading and writing on this site…for I think 2 or 3 days. I came to it originally because of a link regarding Snowball (the missing dog). I’ve never written anything on sites like these but after reading some of the statements I found I had to respond. That first nite…I cried over some of the things people were saying. By the next nite…I was just plain angry. Tonight after reading what some people have written I feel a combination of amazement and humor actually…which amazes me. Everyone is entitled to their opinions…thats for sure. What I don’t understand is how people who have absolutely no way of knowing what they would do or how they would respond feel the need or the right to sit and put other people down for their decisions. I live in California. We have scares all the time about the “Big One”. Its not that we ignore it…but prepared?? Sure I have my earthquake kit…and my plan. What good will it do when it really hits?? Probably none. As for New Orleans. Sure they knew they were under sea level. They had not had a major problem in what? 40 years??? The storm was not headed for them when they went to sleep that nite. I’m not going into all the facts of why they may have chosen not to leave. I’m not going to try and explain for the millionth time that not everyone in New Orleans is a low-life. You will believe what you choose to believe. As I said…everyone has a right to their opinion…but try tempering those opinions with some research, some compassion, some understanding and maybe…just maybe less ego that you have your entire life under control and can handle whatever comes your way. After you do those things…sure…go ahead and say what you have to say.
The most interesting thing is that while cities are (always) forever, they tend to outlive empires and nation-states, when they fall it’s usually because the empire fell also (e.g. Machu Piccu, Chichen Itza’, etc.) The exceptions in the US tend to be boom towns, which sprung up overnight and withered just as quickly, as such they’re hardly comparable to NOLA. So perhaps another question should be, if NOLA goes down will the country go down with it? Not an entirely idle question given NOLA role as a site for projecting US territorial and commercial expansion westward through Texas to California and southward to the Caribean and Central America.
Hey everybody in New Orleans. I am glad to hear things are more stable than a week ago and I hoep you all are coping as well as you can.
I am a 4th yeard medical student from Chicago that have been somewhat inbvolved in the relief efforts our city provided to the displaced ppl coming up here. I am wondering if anyone knows about any healthcare facility in NEw Orleans that is up&running and have any need for an extra hand for some time. I have been following this from the start and feel I have become a tiny part of it all.
Please let me know by email or (serious inquires) cell me on 312-719-1321.
Ariel
New Orleans is going to be needing a lot of work, to say the least. I think it will recover, over time. For the average joe, however, this will not be fast enough. You will see many people move on to someplace else. Only the wealthy will end up living there in the future. I would think the rebuilding process would take into the account of the past weaknesses of the levys, and make them stronger than ever. Maybe one should consider making the footprint of the city smaller, or somehow fill in the low areas of the city with rock, and gravel. Or, build buildings higher up off the ground, out of concrete. This would facilitate the rebuilding process, in the future, should this calamity happen again. What a mess. Sorry to see this happen to the folks, who lived there. As a former truck driver, I was intimidated by the vast amounts of water, surrounding the city. I heard stories that this would happen, someday. I am glad my relatives who loved the place, did not live long enough to see this happen. Yours, EWJ
Hi all of you there. This is a comment from a non-US person who never even visited any part of the US, neither New Orleans nor any place else. I only know what I heard, read and learnt about you. I knew about New Orleans and jazz (a genre I happen to love) many, many years before Katrina hit. But since that event, and since I read a column in a newsletter, written by a newly homeless New Orleanian who testified his tremendous love for his city, I have been reading and documenting more on New Orleans. And I have to say that I learnt to love this city too - a beautiful place with a beautiful soul - as much as you can love anything from afar (which of course bears no comparison with what someone who at least already visited can feel, let alone someone who lived there). And I am sure I am not the only one in “the rest of the world” who has done so, and feels this way.
I am admirative of the determination of the citizens of New Orleans to rebuild their city, and of the love they feel for it. The future belongs to the determined! So after reading all, and especially this blog, I feel sure that New Orleans does have a future after the storm - this future is obviously in good hands :-)
What worried me more was the fact that due to population shift (a lot of the former population not coming back because they would have built a new life wherever they would be relocated, New Orleans having to change its economic structure in order to jumpstart and survive, undergoing through this a great change in character, and attracting therefore a whole lot of new population but one with a totally different mindset) this city might lose at least some of its beautiful soul. But the more I read from you there on the frontline - from the people “of there” who really know what happens on the field - the more I am sure that such a thing is not likely to happen. The soul of New Orleans is in the same excellent hands as its future, as far as I can read :-)
So I think I am just one of those in “the rest of the world” who learnt to love what you are, and who think somewhere deep within what I am writing loud just now: GO GO GO NEW ORLEANS!!! A lot of people in the world are behind you in thought!
Cheers and lots of positive vibes…
What a beautiful post Jackieh…well said.