Wednesday, July 7, 2021

A Suburban Mindset Has Taken Over

A Suburban Mindset Has Taken Over Life in America


Jason Diamond on the Sprawl of Suburban Culture Literary Hub

I’m suburban; I’m of the suburbs. I’ve spent my entire adulthood in cities, but I still get nostalgic when I smell freshly cut grass. It brings me back to the malls of my youth, to the food court at Town Center at Boca Raton, the mall we used to go to whenever I visited my grandparents in South Florida, or the old tobacco store in some forgotten shopping center in the middle of the country. I love grilling meat on a Weber grill I spent an hour trying to light, and by God, I miss not having a never-ending stream of cars honking outside my window.

It took me a long time to admit any of that. I was, at best, ambivalent about where I come from, but filled with pure hate is more like it. Whenever somebody asked, I always told them I was from Chicago. That’s the way most people do it, right? If you’re from Round Rock, Texas, you’ll say you’re from Austin. If you grew up in Fountain in a house with four bedrooms, a two-car garage, and a big backyard, you just tell people “Colorado,” because they won’t know your hometown. If you’re from Long Island, ran on the cross-country team, and lived in a quiet little subdivision but moved away to college and never looked back, you’ll tell anyone who asks you’re from New York—which isn’t wrong. You just hope they assume you mean Manhattan and not Hicksville, which is over an hour away.

Yet getting to a place where I could clearly and honestly tell people yes, I grew up in suburbia, in neighborhoods up and down Lake Michigan, took a long time. I left as a teenager and immediately started telling people I was from Chicago. I never looked back—until I did.

After an adulthood spent mostly in two of America’s biggest cities (Chicago and New York City), the suburbs came back into my life in my midthirties. It started slowly: weekend trips to my in-laws’ house outside Hartford, Connecticut, in a whimsical little town called Avon in the shadow of Talcott Mountain. From their backyard, you can look up and see Heublein Tower, the “castle” A.1. sauce and Smirnoff vodka manufacturer Gilbert Heublein built his wife in the early 20th century. You can walk barefoot around my father-in-law’s immaculately green grass and gaze at the hawks as they circle or watch the woodchucks scatter about. It’s country quaint, but it’s suburbia, no doubt. Drive five minutes and there’s a Chili’s, an antiques dealer/coffee shop, a hotel bar I sometimes sneak away to for a quiet drink, a few car dealerships, some elite private schools, a couple of local farms that sell pumpkins and cider, and a golf course—then another golf course, and another. It’s Gilmore Girls cozy with a deliberate small-town feel baked into the city plans, even though the population reaches over 18,000, and the bulk of the housing is from the 20th and 21st centuries. It’s all thanks to that postwar boom; the place jumped from 1,738 residents in 1930 to 11,201 fifty years later, in 1980.

We have so many ideas of what we think suburbia is, yet we don’t realize how suburban we’ve become, whether we live in a suburb or not.

I hear a lot of debate over what is and isn’t a suburb. My general rule of thumb for including somewhere in the “is” category tends to be when the population of a place has increased since World War II, but industry hasn’t been added to lure people there. So when houses and grocery stores and coffee chains and places of that nature pop up in locations where things were traditionally made or grown, that generally is a sign that a place is suburban. It’s not always the case, but people moved to the little town of Avon, for example, to work in nearby cities, such as Hartford, a fifteen-minute drive away. Avon became a suburb out of necessity.

There isn’t all that much to do in this small suburban town, and frankly, that’s nice to me. It’s still and quiet. I don’t have to worry about getting on the subway and dealing with people coughing on me or some guy clipping his fingernails between taking bites of a burrito (yes, I’ve actually seen this). There aren’t sirens and jackhammers and people yelling outside my window. When I go to my in-laws, butterflies flutter around in the summertime and there’s a fireplace to sit by in the winter. In the city, there’s the dirt-and-god-knows-whatever-else-covered snow, and rats, lots of rats. That all said, I think I’ll spend the rest of my life in cities. The suburbs are nice to visit, but at this point, more of my life has been lived as an urbanite than not; everything else feels like a vacation. I’m part of that group of younger Generation Xers and older millennials who moved back to cities after our parents and grandparents left to build a better life, with backyards and places to park their station wagons. And I’m pretty sure I’m staying put.

But who knows?

The American suburbs were the great promise to the baby boomers. If you were white and middle class, a little piece of the postwar pie was yours for the taking in the years after World War II. Suburbia was the idea of the good life, something humans had been looking to attain for centuries but only the wealthy could afford: a place outside the city. After the war ended, that dream became more attainable, especially—and this needs to be repeated—if you were white. The Federal Housing Administration, starting in 1934 and all the way until 1968, graded neighborhoods from A to D. Areas with large black populations usually received the lowest grade, and those same black people who wanted to make a change were shut out of attaining loans to help them afford housing in newer, nicer, safer areas. This is enough to make any sane person want to rebel against the idea of the suburbs, a place that actively kept groups of people out. But as I’ll show, there’s more that has colored our view of what the suburbs are and aren’t. We have so many ideas of what we think suburbia is, yet we don’t realize how suburban we’ve become, whether we live in a suburb or not.

The suburban way is taking over our lives. Walk down Bedford Avenue in Brooklyn’s Williamsburg neighborhood, and you no longer find mom-and-pop stores or Spanish and Yiddish speakers outnumbering English speakers; you find an Apple Store, a Whole Foods, and banks where independent businesses used to be.

Cities may be our media hubs, but suburbia makes the news. It’s where horrible violence happens, like the shootings of unarmed black teenagers Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown (Martin in a gated Florida community by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch member once described as being “obsessed with suburban law-and-order minutiae,” and Brown by a police officer in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson). School massacres, from Littleton, Colorado, to Newtown, Connecticut, and Parkland, Florida, seem to almost always happen in places where people tell the news some variation of “this isn’t supposed to happen here.” The suburbs, we’re also told, are the battleground where each and every election will be decided.

The sprawl, to me, is soulless. It’s bad planning, it’s corporate, it’s bland, and it’s spreading. It’s everything becoming one, and not in some utopian hippie love-in way.

Today, over half of all Americans, 55 percent according to one Pew study, live in the suburbs. If we want to live well together in this country, we must gain a better understanding of the suburbs as a concept. Suburbs are places that are made up of white people, African Americans, Mexicans, Chinese, Russian, and Indian people, and just about every other nationality or group you can think of. LGBTQ people live in suburbia. There are churches, mosques, synagogues, and all other places of worship in the suburbs. The suburbs aren’t only Democratic or only Republican. There’s poverty, violence, and drug abuse in the suburbs, and there’s also creativity, passion, and genuine character in these places. The suburbs aren’t one thing or another; we try to pigeonhole suburbia, act like it’s a great big boring monolith of conformity and tract housing, but there’s so much more to it than that, and we need to understand it better. Otherwise, I believe the things we consider to be true about the suburbs, the fears and misconceptions we have about these places, will overtake us.

The title of my book The Sprawl was borrowed in part from speculative fiction writer William Gibson. In his work, notably the Sprawl Trilogy (Neuromancer [1984], Count Zero [1986], and Mona Lisa Overdrive [1988]), Gibson gives us the near-future Boston–Atlanta Metropolitan Axis (bama) megacity. I sometimes see traces of that fictional dystopia as I drive down endless roads lined with strip malls and car dealerships. I’ve seen this sprawl not only in America but also all over the world, from Canada to China. The sprawl, to me, is soulless. It’s bad planning, it’s corporate, it’s bland, and it’s spreading. It’s everything becoming one, and not in some utopian hippie love-in way. The sprawl is building more stuff on top of stuff; it’s design without thinking; it’s building without caring. It’s putting up another golf course or a third home goods store or adding another chain restaurant instead of propping up local independent business. It’s this car culture Americans are still so obsessed with. We get into these things, drive up our wide streets to get on the highway, and our feelings and compassion seem to go out the window the longer we sit in traffic. The sprawl, not the suburbs, is what I don’t like. I want to separate the two to better understand and appreciate these places that are everywhere.

Since I’m from the suburbs, and the suburbs have given us some of our greatest creators of science fiction (from Ray Bradbury to Gibson to George Lucas and Steven Spielberg), I’ll use another analogy: the suburbs are Anakin Skywalker.

Yes, I’m making a Star Wars comparison. But it’s apt not only because the franchise’s creator, George Lucas, grew up in what is often referred to as the “sleepy” California suburb of Modesto, but also because Anakin is a flawed, imperfect, but ultimately good person. He’s seduced by the Dark Side and eventually turned into a masked cyborg version of himself. My aim is to show how the suburbs are Anakin and the sprawl is Darth Vader. We want to find our good side, however flawed and deeply buried it may be, and fight off the evil guy in the cool black uniform.

I can say with certainty that suburbia is an outsider. I’m putting all the designations of the suburbs—the exurbs, edge cities, and commuter towns—under this umbrella to avoid confusion. Schaumburg, Illinois, for instance, is a large, sprawling area with nearly 75,000 residents (74,184 at the time of this writing), malls, and lots of tall glass buildings. It’s home to the North American branch of Zurich, a Swiss insurance company. The Motorola Solutions headquarters was also there for years. Schaumburg sounds like a city, yet it’s a suburb. On the other side, there are parts of Queens, New York, that look like Grosse Pointe, Michigan, or Simsbury, Connecticut, but it’s still a city. Queens, just like its fellow borough of Brooklyn, which could qualify as one of the first true American suburbs, is within, not outside, the city. What makes something a suburb is where it is in relation to a city. The Merriam-Webster definition of suburb is “an outlying part of a city or town.” An outlier, something other than the city. It’s sub-urban; it’s beneath a city. Outsiders are odd; you look down on things that are below you. The suburbs, too, have taken on the status of cultural oddity, something Rod Serling picked up on in some of the most iconic episodes of The Twilight Zone and Shirley Jackson and John Cheever channeled in their very different types of fiction. Matt Groening drew it as the Springfield of The Simpsons; David Lynch and Stephen King placed monsters, human and otherwise, in the suburbs; and even today, acclaimed indie rock bands like Arcade Fire write albums like 2010’s The Suburbs, and filmmakers from Jordan Peele to Greta Gerwig mine suburbia for inspiration.

I look around my Brooklyn apartment, and I see so much influenced by cities: books by New Yorkers Edith Wharton and James Baldwin, records produced in Los Angeles and old Motown lps from Detroit, hats representing sports teams from Chicago and Boston. We know what was built in the cities (industry, commerce, media, political power); what we ignore is just how much the suburbs have influenced our culture. America’s early days were rural, then the urban century sprang up during the Industrial Revolution. Today, we’re still very much in the middle of the suburban century. America has fashioned itself from the suburbs since the end of World War II; so many people are suburbanites, and we’re constantly reminded of how much influence the suburbs yield over the rest of the world. Learning to better understand anything of such importance is vital.

Suburbia’s influence will only grow, not only in America but also throughout the world. On nearly every continent there are places that could be considered suburbs that have populations of over one million. And in the US, while there’s been a lot of talk about the boom some of our once-forgotten cities have experienced over the last decade, the fact is, the suburbs are still growing. According to the Brookings Institute, the 53 major metropolitan areas across the country outpaced suburbia in growth in 2010–11 and 2014–15; but in 2015–16, city growth declined to 0.82 percent. While the suburban growth rate also dipped from the previous year, it was still above its urban counterpart with a rate of 0.89 percent growth.

Cities are great. I live in one, and I wrote the bulk of this book from my apartment in Brooklyn and the library on Forty-Second in the heart of Manhattan. Yet the suburbs are legion, and people argue they’re more livable than the cities. They offer so many of the things I hear my other friends in cities complaining they miss—from more space to less noise—all the time. Yet we keep staying in the city for whatever reason: because our jobs are here, we can walk to the subway or the little restaurant that serves the best fried chicken or the bar that makes the best bloody mary; stuff is happening in cities. As one person told Al Jazeera in 2017, it’s “the culture, the food, the shopping,” that keeps them living in a city and not a suburb. Another said, “There’s just something kind of cool about a big city with skyscrapers and glass windows and, um, kind of the hustle and bustle of downtown living,” adding, “It’s pretty cool.”

I’ve never heard anybody say that about the suburbs.

While every suburb is different in some way, what links them from coast to coast is that undercurrent of strangeness, of bottled-up energy, rage, passion, and creativity—the great suburban exports. As a structured and structuring way of being, suburban sprawl foments a kind of imaginativeness in people that’s both unique to the boring suburban imagination and reflective of an alienating longing for the archetypal urban lifestyle. These emotions engendered by living in the suburbs are consistent over time: anxiety, boredom, and alienation. Understanding how and why the suburbs are this way can help us better understand the present and the future, whether we live in suburbs or not. Because America, by moving farther out of the cities and building new subdivisions filled with single-family households bordered by malls and office parks, created modern suburban sprawl. But in the end, that sprawl reshaped America, became our modern condition, a state of mind: more stuff—more cars, more houses, more stores—and less of what we need.

The suburbs were a smart, practical idea that was put into practice in all the wrong ways, and they deserve to be scrutinized. This book isn’t a celebration of the suburbs as an idea or a way of life. Rather, it examines how the suburbs came to be what they are today, how much they’ve influenced our world, and what we can learn going forward, since the suburbs aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.

______________________

Sunday, July 4, 2021

In Praise of Native Americanism

 

In Praise of Native Americanism Tablet




In Call Me Ishmael, Charles Olson’s magnificent 1947 study of Herman Melville’s Moby-Dick, the American poet writes: “I take SPACE to be the central fact to man born in America.” Using a common alternative title for the 1851 novel, Olson compares it to Walt Whitman’s self-published paean to his country: “The White Whale is more accurate than Leaves of Grass. Because it is America, all of her space, the malice, the root.”

For many years, I took Moby-Dick to be American only by technicality: Virtually all of the story takes place on the high seas, with a multiethnic mix of characters; the voice of the author seems more at home in the broader North Atlantic maritime Anglo-Hibernian realm, which by some measures reaches down from Nova Scotia as far south as Cape Cod, than in the depths of the American continent itself.

Melville’s true epitome of America, it seemed to me, was not Moby-Dick, but The Confidence-Man of 1857. This novel, whose events unfold almost entirely in the cramped rooms of a steamboat on the Mississippi River, is as claustrophobic as Moby-Dick is expansive, and as conducive to contraction and paranoia as its predecessor is to the free-ranging and unbounded assertion of will. The narrative is fractured, the principal character is of an uncertain metaphysical nature—though the reader is at least made to understand that he is vaguely malevolent. Nor is there any question as to the country he represents: America, a nation built up over the long 19th century by glossolalic preachers, carnival barkers, tonic hucksters, and other species of con man on the make.

If Moby-Dick is to be deemed American too, then, we might describe the two modes of American existence they reveal by reference to the two bodies of water that convey them: the oceanic and the riverine. In the one, your freedom of motion is boundless, provided you are not annihilated; in the other, you are seldom in existential peril, but must always worry about hitting the shallows.

Another central fact about life in America, on which Olson does not care to dwell, is that its space is not empty, even if the early theorists of English colonialism, notably John Locke, sought to represent the land inhabited by Native Americans as a terra nullius. Because they have no concept of private property, the philosopher reasoned, neither can they be said to have any property in land of which they might be dispossessed. Yet the ethnic cleansing of a continent certainly leaves its mark on the people who settle there, whether this is present to consciousness or not. For one thing, as Melville puts it in The Confidence-Man, “[w]here the wolves are killed off, the foxes increase.”

And the foxes would learn, too, not just to take advantage of the absence of the wolves, but of the suffering entailed in their elimination as well. Thus, one of the scams in The Confidence-Man is a fundraising campaign for the “Seminole Widows and Orphans Society,” which of course may or may not exist, even if plenty of Seminoles had certainly been widowed and orphaned.

Americans have been so good at do-gooding in part because there is so much harm to be undone. Such opportunistic displays of solicitude for the people we have harmed is mixed up with a deep, one might say metaphysical, conviction that to settle a territory is not so much simply to remove its first inhabitants as to assume their essence. The white-nationalist website Stormfront, for example, devotes significant space to “affirming” the identity of Americans with Native ancestry. My own white-supremacist uncle—radicalized, as far as I can tell, during his years living in Navajo country, though he has long since decamped to Scandinavia—used to insist that the Arkansas side of our family comes with an admixture of Native blood (the ancestry test Henry Louis Gates pressed me into taking proves that it does not).

Part of an explanation for this conviction is that unlike the French coureurs de bois to the north, Anglo-American settlers seldom gave themselves the freedom—and here I hate to use such a vulgar and clichéd expression, but in this case it really is what is at issue—to “go native.” Authors from J.G. Blumenbach in Germany to Henry David Thoreau in Massachusetts looked on the French-Canadians as half-“Indianized,” in terms of their lifeways, their footwear, their adaptation to the American ecology. The English walled themselves off, stressed their difference, and later, when they became Americans, conceived of mixture of blood as the only real path to true indigeneity.

James Fenimore Cooper’s protagonist in 1826’s The Last of the Mohicans, who lives in the woods and masters indigenous ways, insists repeatedly that he is “a man without a cross,” by which he appears to mean that he is of pure-blooded European ancestry. Almost two centuries later, Elizabeth Warren, who remembers at least something of the hybrid folkways of Oklahoma, will claim for her part that she is a woman with a cross. Though they have different strategies of adaptation to the social exigencies they face, both are positioning themselves against the background identity of a continent that is indisputably Native.

It is in the cities that were consciously constructed in the 19th century as American cities, after the massive territorial expansion of 1803, that we see our country’s hybrid identity most clearly. The East Coast, or at least the Northeast, has always in a sense remained a cluster of English colonies, while the region of the Mississippi and its tributaries, rebranded in more recent years as “flyover country,” is the place where things start to get weird—which is to say unmistakably American. It is with an eye to the frontier beyond the Mississippi that Whitman for his part protests against the Old World men of learning and science: “Your facts are useful, but they are not my dwelling.” And it is in a rural cabin in Missouri in the 1850s that the German immigrant Henry Clay Brockmeyer will find himself distracted, in his efforts to read Spinoza’s Ethics, by the sound of squirrels scuttering outside. He throws down the book, grabs his rifle, and rushes out, hoping soon to be able to make some more squirrel broth to carry with him in a portable jug when he goes into town for a regular meeting of the St. Louis Hegelians. This image seems to me to get at something profound about American philosophy: It is at bottom a philosophy of the “good enough,” of “there’s work to be done”, of “you don’t really expect me to learn Latin, do you?”

A defining feature of American philosophy has always been that it is pragmatic, adaptable, off-the-cuff, and blended into the realities of life. One might take this as equivalent to the concession that America simply has no philosophy at all, or that in its westward expansion it loses sight of philosophy at the same time as it loses sight of Europe. Such was indeed Josiah Royce’s conclusion when he wrote from Berkeley to William James at Harvard in 1888: “There is no philosophy in California.” But one might also conclude that this pragmatism is the realest sign of a small-n native American philosophical tradition, which is one that is also unmistakably big-N Native American. This was Scott L. Pratt’s argument in his surprising 2002 book, Native Pragmatism: Rethinking the Roots of American Philosophy, and one that also informs such cross-disciplinary works as the ?ód?-born anthropologist Paul Radin’s 1927 Primitive Man as Philosopher, a study of Oglala Sioux intellectual traditions with a preface by John Dewey.

Friday, July 2, 2021

Living Memory

 Living Memory

Black archivists, activists, and artists are fighting for justice and ethical remembrance — and reimagining the archive itself.

By Megan Pillow GUERNICA


The first time I saw the Breonna Taylor memorial was on a livestream. It was summer of 2020, and I watched a small team of people at Injustice Square shake out tarps and cover the collection of paintings and signs to protect them from rain. The second time I saw it was in person. I walked around it, noticed the nameplates inscribed with the names of the other Black men and women killed by police encircling its edges. There was one painting of Taylor that was massive, vibrant; a sheen of purple glistened in her hair, and a small jewel glittered in her nose. At its base were poster boards proclaiming “Justice for Bre” and “She was asleep.” Around me, protestors shouted out some of those same lines through their masks.

In Breonna Taylor’s city, which is also my city, protestors have gathered at Injustice Square regularly since May 28, 2020. Beginning just three days after George Floyd was murdered in Minneapolis, they occupied that small square of land. Through the summer of 2020 and into the fall, they showed up every day—even after another Louisville resident, beloved local chef and entrepreneur David McAtee, was gunned down by the National Guard just days after Floyd’s death and his body left in the street for hours. Every day, even through colder months that saw protest leaders Travis Nagdy and Kris Smith shot down in the street, becoming part of Louisville’s record 173 homicides last year.

After my second visit to the square, I felt haunted by a question I didn’t know how to ask. I worried that the ink on the posters would run in a hard rain, that people’s memories would degrade. Most of all, I was terrified that the police would attack the very people desperately fighting for justice and preserving Taylor’s memory. At a loss, I turned to Google and typed: How do we save everyone, everything?

A more generative question is this: How will we remember 2020? In the thick of the COVID-19 pandemic, as protests against racial injustice and police violence spread across the country, there was more than one Saturday night where I found myself Googling “pandemic archives.” Enraged and lonely and trying to make sense of why some stories are preserved and others are overlooked, I wanted to know what preservation work was already happening and, crucially, who was doing it. I wanted to know what stories and objects they deemed important enough to save, and what strategies, rationales, and systems they were using to capture them. What I found was a range of organizations attempting to chronicle a monumental and disastrous year while it was still underway.

In between a couple of links to archives of the flu pandemic of 1918 and a host of sites banking medical and scientific information about the virus were a number of crowdsourced projects, some localized, some international. Those projects boasted a wide variety of stories, from a teenager talking about discovering a love of oatmeal to stories of people losing faith in humanity. Many of these crowdsourced projects position themselves as democratic, easy to access, and welcoming all kinds of stories; many are also well-staffed and meticulously organized. But many still have limitations, and their design makes them most accessible to those who have the time and ability to write their own stories.

What I didn’t find in these early pandemic archives was Breonna Taylor’s story. And her story—not just of her death, but of her life as an essential healthcare worker and a Black woman, part of a demographic that has been devastated by systemic racism across healthcare, politics, science, and law enforcement—is central to our country’s pandemic narrative. What many pandemic archive projects are missing is something Black archivists across the country and members of the Breonna Taylor justice movement already know. The COVID-19 pandemic and the racial justice movement are not separate occurrences: protest is being enacted and lived through the crisis. The movement for racial justice is embedded in the pandemic, and the pandemic cannot be separated from the United States’ systemic inequalities. The only way to construct a truly representative archive of this pandemic, and of the United States, is by preserving the stories of the people who are most likely to be abandoned in a crisis, sacrificed to uphold those deep inequalities and white supremacy itself: Black people, poor people, and essential workers.

As it has been since the very beginning of this country, the space that Black people in the United States are allowed to occupy in 2021 is both heavily policed and oppressively confined—and this is reflected in the space they take up in the archive of this pandemic. Black people serve disproportionately as essential workers and face injustices and disparities that put them at higher risk of COVID-19—making the documents and processes that are available to preserve their pandemic memories and experiences far harder to come by than they are for white people, and far more illustrative of the pandemic’s reality.

If not for the diligence of the people who cared about her, Taylor’s death might have been overshadowed by the pandemic and forgotten by a country whose systems and industries—from journalism to publishing to the entire Hollywood ecosystem, from films to makeup—are still largely devoted to putting white people in positions of power and memorializing their stories. Despite protests by her family and friends, the news of Breonna Taylor’s death still didn’t make it past the pages of local Louisville newspapers until May, when the horrific murder of George Floyd was caught on video and ignited the 2020 summer protests.

Taylor, and the movement surrounding her, constitute a critical case study in the relationship between systemic racism and the pandemic, a result of Taylor’s intersectional identities and the fact that Louisville protestors pushed her case into the realm of hypervisibility. Because so many details of her case have now been made public, the case, its outcome, and its ramifications are being consistently charted and challenged; in late April, the Department of Justice announced that, in part because of Taylor’s case, it was investigating the Louisville Police Department. Like the deaths of George Floyd, Daunte Wright, Ma’Khia Bryant, and many others who have been killed by police, Taylor’s death is an incalculable loss for her family and community. At the same time, her death has taken on a profound national resonance, driving a protest movement that has become a model in the fight for justice and ethical remembrance, and that is deeply connected to the work and mission of Black archivists.

Together, those archivists, racial justice movement activists, and Black artists whose work often marries memory and social justice are all seeking to capture the stories of the people most at risk of being subsumed by the pandemic. In the process, they’re reimagining the archive. Under their direction, that archive is transforming from physical repository into an intersectional, community-based model that’s upending the profession’s white supremacist practices and preserving the stories of people like Breonna Taylor.

* * *

In June 2020, digital archivist and memory worker Zakiya Collier wrote on behalf of herself and dozens of other Black archivists about why the work she and her colleagues are doing to preserve the stories of Black lives is so essential. That work often involves recovering, affirming, and applying Black cultural memory in addition to preserving it. The only way to “ethically and comprehensively” archive the moment, Collier wrote, is with an approach that “support(s) accountability and historical accuracy” and is rooted in “an intersectional archival practice that also presents a global perspective of Black suffering and the response to it.” Black memory workers must lead the charge, and be given “the space and resources” to do the work.

What Collier doesn’t say is that those efforts are largely antithetical to the way the archive has operated as a science—a blend of theory, methodology, and practice—in the United States. According to the Society for American Archivists, even the word “archive” is somewhat at odds with itself: it has at least three accepted meanings—records themselves, the facility where they are stored, and the organization responsible for both—and at least twelve total under contest. Collier likely doesn’t mention this discrepancy because it’s well-documented that until the early twentieth century, the archive in the United States was scattered, selective, and rooted in white supremacy rather than in the ethical preservation of the stories of marginalized people. Some argue this pattern still persists into the twenty-first century.

In Archives Power: Memory, Accountability, and Social Justice, Randall C. Jimerson writes about Alexis de Tocqueville, who in Democracy in America lamented the country’s early archives: “No one worries about what has been done before him. No method is adopted; no collection is composed; no documents are gathered, even if it would be easy to do it.” Jimerson notes that early Americans had a “reliance on written records” and venerated written documents such as the Declaration of Independence (particularly those that supported binding social contracts) but “seemed to have little concern for their own history or for archival preservation.” In part, the difficulty of creating a safe and fireproof location to place original documents led early Americans to emphasize publication as a way of capturing historical material and “bringing the records to the people.” There were also few organizations or systems in place to manage these materials: No single governmental archival agency was established in the United States until 1901, and the National Archives wasn’t constructed until 1933. Prior to 1901, there were more than 100 historical societies doing some archival work across the country, but most were region- or state-based rather than nationally centralized; they were largely located in the northeast, and focused on preserving the history of the “elite educated class of society” and “white male leadership.”

The result of this disorganization, and the focus on white people, was a glaring archival absence of material from marginalized populations. In addition, archival organizing principles such as the establishing of provenance—the relationship between records and the individuals and organizations that created them—had similar consequences. Provenance was introduced in the US by Waldo Gifford Leland at the US First Conference of Archivists in 1909 to move archivists away from library catalogue methods, but it gave value and import to the records of people who had the power, privilege, safety, and often the money to preserve organizational records or to save them privately and hand them over to an archive later. As a result of practices and principles like these, Southerners, working people, and minorities were hugely underrepresented and often absent altogether from these early archives.

But their absence in the United States archive is more insidious than it is accidental. Scholar Tonia Sutherland points out that, although the personhood and histories of millions of Black people populate America’s past, there is little documentation—and particularly little visual documentation—of those lives in the archive. This assiduous avoidance of the United States’ “difficult past” is what Sutherland calls a “tacit provision of clemency” for those who commit violence against Black people. As a result, Sutherland argues, there is a dire need for practicing archivists to “work actively and diligently against white supremacist bias by documenting white supremacist violence against Black Americans.”

That bias also plays out unintentionally in the way that scholars describe the kinds of archival gaps or absences that Sutherland notes. Scholars such as Carolyn Steedman and Lloyd Pratt use terms like “broken” or “incomplete” to describe sections of absence or space in the archives of marginalized populations. In addition to having ableist connotations, that language also suggests archival or material insufficiency. But that description is misleading. By describing the archival materials of certain groups as incomplete, some scholars perpetuate the belief not only that wholeness is somehow necessary, but also that wholeness of the archive existed in the first place.

That illusion persists in part because white people have largely had the privilege of keeping their historical objects and documents safe and their provenance intact. The idea of wholeness suggests that the histories and materials of marginalized communities are somehow less valid—ignoring the fact that enslavement, oppression, the fracturing of families, and other instances of trauma and dislocation have made it close to impossible for marginalized groups to produce seamlessly cohesive historical materials. When the archives of marginalized communities are cast as incomplete, the relatively intact history of whiteness becomes the gold standard of archival practice rather than what it actually is: the exception.

* * *

During the summer and fall of 2020, protestors at Injustice Square bandaged each other’s wounds and washed the tear gas from each other’s eyes. They planted vegetables and flowers in the park’s garden beds. They hung banners that claim a section of Jefferson Street as the “Breewayy.” In the center of the square they built a shrine to Taylor, filled with photographs and drawings, with words of anger, words of lament, and words of hope. They brought their fellow protestors food and water, meat to cook on public grills, ice cream and popsicles for the children who came to learn about why the police killed an innocent young woman. Like any collective spending large amounts of time together and forced to resolve internal group conflicts under intense duress, sometimes they squabbled; but they also offered comfort, solace, and protection to each other, carefully, constantly aware of the police who patrolled the edges of the crowd and the risk of getting or passing on COVID-19. They kept watch for the white militia groups who return to the city periodically, like water circling a drain. Occasionally, protestors were joined by members of the Revolutionary Black Panthers, who patrolled the perimeters of the park and the marches for protection. From May 2020 through mid-December, right around dusk, the protestors marched or caravanned. They marched even when the heavily-militarized Louisville Police Department—the same department that gunned down Breonna Taylor while she slept—attacked protestors and journalists with projectiles and tear gas, drove them to seek sanctuary in a local church, and arrested everyone from average citizens to some of state’s most prominent officials who stood in protest of police violence.

The protestors in Louisville are a diverse group: moms and business owners; college students and local pastors; a team of livestreamers who chronicle the daily events on the ground and are making their own archive of the collective experience of resistance and resolve. But most of those who have been there, day in and day out, are Black women and men. And when those protestors made their way home at night, sometimes at 1 or 2 in the morning, sometimes after being chased or injured by the police, sometimes after spending the night in jail, they might not have had the time or the energy to take down a record of what they’d been through. They were focused on immediate needs: Sleep. Food. Safety. And always, justice for Breonna.

When winter tightened its grip on the city, things at Injustice Square changed. The memorial for Taylor was moved to the Roots 101 African American Museum. The group of regular protestors shifted to other modes of direct action; most winter nights, Injustice Square was inhabited by a handful of dedicated people who were trying to keep from ceding this one sacred spot back to the city. Now that warm weather has returned, so have the protests; many of the same faces are caravanning and marching again, demanding a justice that still hasn’t come.

Meanwhile, safely tucked away in the suburbs that skirt the city, most of Louisville’s white population spends their nights at home. They make dinner. They tend to their lawns, plenty of which sport Black Lives Matter signs. In the safety and comfort of their mostly-white neighborhoods, they post on social media about cabin fever, about the challenges of online school, about eating in restaurants again. They post vaccine selfies and talk about the promise of the coming summer. And then the white people sleep. Like the protestors, they are afraid of many things. But they are not afraid that if they close their eyes in their beds, a cop will gun them down.

One of the things 2018 became known for, as Ashley Farmer points out in “Archiving While Black,” was the cultural realization that white people in the United States use the police to keep Black people out of presumed-white spaces. What 2020 made more of us realize, especially in cities like Louisville, is that those white spaces are everywhere: not only downtown streets but suburban ones, city parks, the trunks of Black people’s cars. These white spaces can even be the bedrooms that Black people inhabit in their sleep.

Since United States archives have also often been one of these white spaces, it is not enough to simply preserve the materials, movements, and histories of marginalized groups; it is also vital to pay attention to who is doing that preservation work. Who, then, are the chroniclers of Black lives in the pandemic? Who is doing the work of remembering the Black essential workers in the battle against COVID-19? Who is memorializing the history of the people who are fighting for racial justice, and who is doing so in more depth and detail than the small snapshot that I offer here? How are they capturing the stories of people whose lives have been so disrupted by the pandemic and white supremacy that it prevents them from building their own comprehensive history?

Some doing this work are archival studies scholars. People like Ricardo L. Punzalan and Michelle Caswell have outlined the archive’s challenges and proposed including more material from marginalized groups. Among other things, Punzalan and Caswell have suggested finding new ways to evaluate those materials, giving the subjects themselves a say in how the history is documented, and creating broad-based community archives that form a web of materials and information rather than a centralized housing of them. In addition, Caswell and others like her have done considerable work to identify white privilege in the archives and to identify steps for dismantling those privileges. Others, like Lae’l Hughes-Watkins, discuss the necessity of building what they call a “reparative archive” that helps to highlight the lives and experiences of marginalized populations.

Hughes-Watkins herself notes, though, the hazards of the word “reparative.” The root idea of “repair,” as Merriam-Webster defines it, is “to put into proper order something that is injured, damaged, or defective.” And Black archivists like Hughes-Watkins have long known that the reparative process is not simply a process of repair but of liberation and decolonization, which as J.J. Ghaddar and Michelle Caswell note, is also the process of rehumanizing people whose history, culture, and self-worth has been devalued by colonizers. Black archivists illustrate in word and in praxis that the work of the archive should not be simply to order, control, and systematize the objects and materials within it, but to also honor and make sense of what is not there. Reflecting on his decision to leave the archival profession, Jarrett M. Drake wrote that the purpose of the field was “to curate the past, not confront it; to entrench inequality, not eradicate it; to erase black lives, not ennoble them.” What the archival profession must do, Drake suggests, is to open its ranks, focus on inclusivity, and facilitate an understanding of the documents of a diverse population as they are, not make them conform to the systems established by whiteness.

At the end of his piece, Drake noted that he was leaving the profession to do exactly that kind of work: the more “liberatory memory work” that brought him to archival work in the first place. This is, of course, also the work that Hughes-Watkins is doing; later in her own article, she adopts Drake’s term and says that reparative work is really the work of building a liberatory archive. And this, of course, is the work that Zakiya Collier, Tonia Sutherland, Ashley Farmer, and hosts of other Black archivists and archivists of color are doing. Their vision—not just of reconstructing the archive, but of establishing a collaborative practice of identifying and highlighting the overlooked contributions that marginalized populations have always made to our historical knowledge—helps us see the United States archive as dynamic and accessible rather than inert and out of touch.

It’s in great part because of archival whiteness, the myth of archival wholeness, and the tendency of US archives to ignore stories like Taylor’s that the work of Nikole Hannah-Jones and her co-authors in The 1619 Project is so important. The 1619 Project illuminated the obvious ruptures, rather than the cohesion, of the United States archive; in doing so, it illustrated that those ruptures were not a feature of the archives of marginalized populations and their inability to record-keep, but instead a byproduct of white supremacy’s desire to maintain control over a people and their story. As a collective, the project’s authors documented how slavery destroyed networks of Black families, communities, and lives, and illuminated how a brutal system of rape, torture, and genocide made memory-keeping and documentation of family and collective histories nearly impossible.

What makes The 1619 Project so critical—and so connected to Breonna Taylor and the movement behind her—is not just its research but its argument. To understand the United States, the project argues, you have to understand slavery and its consequences, and how the contributions of Black people made the country’s formation and flourishing possible. This understanding goes hand-in-hand with the pandemic and with the United States archive. We cannot grasp either the archive or the pandemic without recognizing how many lives have been destroyed to keep white supremacy intact.

While the archives of marginalized populations may boast fewer objects and documents than white archives, their gaps have become sites of community-building and creative and intellectual reinvention. In Black Gotham: A Family History of African Americans in Nineteenth-Century New York, for example, scholar Carla Peterson chronicles her research into her family at the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture; she frames each chapter as an item or event of importance in relation to her great-grandfather and then, like a scrapbook, lets “the work of memory, history, and archival discovery guide me through my narrative.” She sutures together research into the lives of Black New Yorkers from 1795 to 1895 with anecdotes about her archival trips, with questions that her research generates, and with speculation about what lies outside the tidbits of information she finds.

The result, Peterson explains, is “not exactly a family memoir, but neither is it traditional social history. It is a narrative that lies somewhere in between.” The in-betweenness, writes Peterson, is because of the nature of the process of remembering: “nations and other communities…hold onto memories of people and events they deem historically significant,” she notes. “These memories lay the groundwork for group identity.” As a result, she writes, “we need to think of remembering…as a dynamic process, an act of imagination.”

But scholars are not the only ones chronicling Black lives and memorializing their histories. In Breonna Taylor’s Kentucky, a vast network of Black activists and artists is also engaged in this dynamic archival process. Charles Booker—a progressive Black state legislator who challenged Amy McGrath for the right to take on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and who now is considering a Senate run against Rand Paul—started a movement called Hood to the Holler that spans all of Kentucky’s working class and is enfranchising voters, especially the formerly incarcerated. By protecting Black voters, Hood to the Holler will help document how integral Black lives have always been to Kentucky’s prosperity.

In Kentucky—as in Georgia and across the country—a collective of Black women activists and leaders is heading up the movement for memory and justice. Women like Representative Attica Scott—the only black woman in the Kentucky legislature—are enacting change through legislation: Scott introduced “Breonna’s Law,” a bill proposing the statewide ban of no-knock warrants like the kind that led to Breonna Taylor’s death. Sadiqa Reynolds, head of Louisville’s Urban League, is calling on businesses to push for justice for Breonna. Brianna Wright led the successful District 4 city council campaign for Jecorey Arthur to ensure Louisville’s Black West End has a strong advocate; she now serves as Arthur’s legislative assistant.

Others in Louisville are supporting memory work by applying the principles of Black cultural memory that prioritize communal support during times of crisis. Nonprofits such as Change Today, Change Tomorrow—under the direction of Taylor Ryan, Nannie Croney, and a Black-woman-led Board of Directors —provide a multitude of resources and support to Louisville’s Black community, including two initiatives spearheaded by activist Shauntrice Martin that are bringing fresh food to what has long been a food desert. Activists like Chanelle Helm, who founded the Black Lives Matter chapter in Louisville; Louisville mayoral candidate Shameka Parrish-Wright; and organizer and trainer Talesha Wilson are supporting protestors and moving them forward. As Wilson told the Courier-Journal, “we’re better in numbers. We’re better collectively. We’re better united.”

Some in Kentucky are Black artists and writers trained in memory work as a creative process: a memorializing of Black histories, narratives, language, and lyricism. Hannah Drake is a well-established poet, activist, and storyteller who also happens to be Brianna Wright’s mother and whose widely published work has been retweeted by Colin Kaepernick and Michelle Obama. Minda Honey is a professor and writer who launched TAUNT, an alt-indie publication focused on “elevating the voices of the unaccounted.”

One of the state’s most prominent Black artistic voices was also compelled to create a poetry collection about the protests as a way of memorializing the events. Frank X Walker, Kentucky’s former poet laureate, heads the Affrilachian Poets, a collective of prolific Black Appalachians writers such as Crystal Wilkinson (who was just named Kentucky’s newest poet laureate), Nikky Finney, Kelly Norman Ellis, makalani bandele, and NEA fellows Joy Priest and Mitchell L.H. Douglas. Walker told me he wrote his book of pandemic protest poems because he wanted poetry to serve as his own form of protest since “my knees are too bad to march.” It felt necessary, he said, “to document a pandemic that was looking more and more like genocide in real time. It was heartbreaking to watch the news and see what was happening in Black and brown communities due to the multiple pandemics that included state-sanctioned police violence and open season on anyone who dared complain out loud in public.”

The work is critical, said Walker, because it’s capturing the voices that have often been excluded from the historical register. “I hope my historical poetry helps cement important legacies of real heroes that have been slowly written out of history books, if included at all,” he said. “It’s not revisionist history or alternative facts. It’s simply and finally the truth.”

None of these Black scholars, archivists, artists, or activists need the guidance of the public; they are already experts in their fields. But they can do their jobs more effectively if they receive sufficient material support and a growing public awareness that dismantling white supremacy in the United States archive requires both systemic change in archival best practices and a collective urgency to preserve the country’s diversity of stories with the same care we have always devoted to preserving white ones. That support and awareness will make it easier for each of these memory workers to focus on doing what they do best: telling their own stories and the stories of the people who are no longer alive to tell theirs themselves.

* * *

On March 13, 2021, the one-year anniversary of Breonna Taylor’s death, there was a memorial service at Injustice Square. Hundreds of people turned up to pay tribute. Under a large tent, the No Justice, No Peace choir sang; a host of speakers talked about the continued fight for justice, which will take the power of protest and also shift to pushing for policy change. In the middle of the square, the memorial had returned. On either side of the tent, two human-high paintings of Taylor faced the crowd.

When I think of 2020, I think of those paintings. I think of how small pieces of Taylor’s likeness and life have dispersed across the country and into people’s homes. I think of how we’ve heard the testimonials: her family describing her as the star of the show, her teachers saying she was brilliant and fast, a natural born leader, someone to count on. These fragments circulate everywhere: Breonna the loving daughter, the kind sister, the caring friend. Breonna the EMT, the ER tech, the future nurse.

These fragments are both comforting and unsettling. What has made its way into the public memory of Taylor is not the complex person she was, but the broad strokes that paint her as exceptional, saint-like. In a mid-March article in a local indie publication called the LEO, Taylor’s sister Ju’Niyah Palmer talked about her frustration with this very phenomenon. “I don’t like that you only see her in her work uniform,” she said. “I want people to see when she didn’t get dressed up and she would be outside…I want y’all to see that she’s more than this person who worked as an EMT, she was still just an average person.”

In Louisville and across the country, people are still showing up at protests and saying that Taylor’s life mattered. But what they mean is not just that she was valuable simply because she was a human being. They’re saying each of us has an obligation to her. They’re making not a point, but a promise: to do better than has been done for every single generation of Black people and every single marginalized person in the past. Preserving the fullness of Taylor’s memory is one key step in that process.

These days, instead of looking up pandemic archives, I look up the average number of lives that an EMT saves each year. I watch videos of Taylor on her sister’s Instagram, and think of the thousands of songs Taylor would have danced to, the thousands of times she would have laughed and left the imprint of lipstick on her sister’s cheek, the thousands of people that she would have loved and argued with and helped, had she lived. I think about the legacy that Kimberly Drew and Jenna Wortham honor in the introduction of their visual anthology Black Futures: “Blackness is infinite,” they write. “A single book cannot attempt to contain the multitudes and multiverse. This is just one manifestation of a project that spans millennia.” Because of the collaborative memory work of Black archivists, artists, and activists, and their dynamic approach to archive as an ongoing ethical practice rather than simply a repository, the United States pandemic archive can begin to make good on its promise: it can work toward saving a memory of Breonna Taylor for every memory she would have made and every life she would have touched, as well as the legacies of the millions of people like her.

Author’s Note: Several brief sections of research on the history of archives in the United States and interpretations of scholarly approaches and arguments used in this piece have been paraphrased or excerpted from Megan Pillow’s dissertation.


Megan Pillow



Megan Pillow is a graduate of the University of Iowa Writers’ Workshop in fiction and holds a Ph.D. in English from the University of Kentucky. She is co-editor of The Audacity, a new newsletter by Roxane Gay, and founder of Submerged: An Archive of Caregivers Underwater. Her work has appeared or is forthcoming in, among other places, Electric Literature, The Believer, TriQuarterly, and Gay Magazine.

At Guernica, we’ve spent the last 15 years producing uncompromising journalism.