Search

This visualization provides an immediate sense of processes of erasure and the cui bono behind it. As a direct quote of Columbia's official discourse, the caption provides a firsthand glimpse into the moral economy guiding the university's plans for expansion. Dog-whistles framing certain character(istic)s and personalities to be ideal (e.g. collegiate, friendly, and sophisticated) reveal the inherent prejudices used to justify the displacement and dispersal of historically situated communities.

I find the direct quote works here as is. There is a certain power in presenting the University's view of its surroundings in its own words. I am left wondering about the context of the image, though. I wonder if one workaround might be to describe the image (who made it, with what intent, what is the text in the background?, etc.) in the introductory caption of the photo essay. 

It seems clear that this is a digitally composed collage, but questions remain as to its creation and intent. The contrast of sepia tone brown stones and old automobiles with the imposing figure of the newly built apartment complex produce a strong sense of historical change. The way the text is only partially legible seems to subject the University's discourse itself to an act of partial erasure, which works for me as an effective form of visually-anchored critique.

My main suggest, which I already mentioned, is to further contextualize the image, perhaps in the introductory caption. Otherwise, this image-text combination seems to me to be really well paired. If I were asked to brainstorm further changes, or an additional collage that might have similar ends, I might suggest overlaying the historic scene with the contemporary one through a play on opacities, so that both old and new constructions can be seen standing in the same spots. 

This visualization foregrounds the detrimental effects of white nationalist urban planning on racialized, economically precarious communities. While the specific theme or notion of toxicity is not explicitly announced, the noxious link between structural, symbolic, and architectural violence is foregrounded in a way that makes sense in conversation with some of the other essays that touch on the more literally toxic (as in chemicals/poisons) topics related to environmental racism.