[Laura Kendrick]

Yeah, unfortunately I’ve already realized I will need a backup plan.  As it stands, I couldn’t even find an internship for this summer where I’d get paid relatively cheaply and get no benefits.

[Laura Kendrick]

Cool!  Thanks!

[Laura Kendrick]

Yes–I wasn’t trying to exclude any group in my posts, just point out some of them.  I’m glad to hear the gov’t is doing some good things for Vets now; I’ve heard some pretty terrible stories in recent years (although I think they were all related to funding and mental health–the rate of suicide of vets was disturbing–and not about homelessness).  And don’t worry–I still have the “old” books; I was just hoping to have some new and old thoughts and numbers!

[Laura Kendrick]

Thanks for the newspaper suggestion.  And if I may play devil’s advocate for a moment: I understand the reasoning for your initial point in this post, but isn’t a blanket assumption that all advocacy-type organizations exaggerate or inflate their data (which seems to be what you are implying, so forgive me if that’s not what you meant) also a type of bias?  I’m sure there are some cases where organizations do such a thing, but there are also cases where they have similar data to, as you say, “credible sources.”  For example, one factsheet here from NCH (http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/lgbtq.html) posts similar data as here (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110721163031.htm).  If I can conjecture that you, or your average person, would consider the American Journal of Public Health a reputable source of data, then it might be unfair to classify all organizations such as NCH as inherently incapable of providing accurate data. 

Also, the link from NY Times was interesting–thanks.   It reminds me that it seems the fundamental problem with not just the issue at hand but many that are constantly being argued (especially in the political arena), is that people are trying to decide between 1) helping some people (i.e., creating some type of public service or program) while being aware that there are those who will take advantage of the system and finding a way to deal with the latter, or 2) helping no one because we know there are people who ‘don’t deserve it’ (which I put in quotes because this can be subjective, of course) who will try to get the same help as someone who truly does need it.  I don’t know if there’s a “right” answer to these type of dilemmas–maybe just an answer that we can agree to deal with until another generation comes along and changes its mind–so, yeah, there’s me with my philosopher’s hat on.  Sorry to wander off topic a bit…

[Laura Kendrick]

No problem, Trace, and thanks for your additional thoughts.  I know it’s a touchy subject for a lot of people, so I knew I was taking the chance of getting incendiary comments (although I don’t consider yours such; I haven’t yet read the rest of the posts, so I may yet find some).  Mostly I just wanted to see what things LAs and others have been thinking/doing that’s in any way related to homelessness, and I knew I would also get well-reasoned responses.

[Laura Kendrick]

Well, I’m sure this may, at first glance, sound defensive and rude, but thanks for apparently assuming I don’t know anything.  Of course homelessness is a constant problem in many, if not all, cities.  I didn’t mean is anyone, anywhere doing anything about homelessness.  I meant are landscape architects (and I probably should include those in allied fields too since we all often seem to work together) doing things in their designs to specifically reflect and/or deal with the realities of homelessness.  Because it’s not as if there are as many articles about this topic as there are about stormwater mitigation.  But perhaps my first post wasn’t well articulated, and that’s my fault, so I’ll try to explain more of what I was trying to get at originally. 

Opening up the question to the whole field of solutions to homelessness would be a huge endeavor.  I just wanted to know about LAs in particular.  Which means that I’d like to hear more about your (TraceOne) shopping carts that can become shelters–sounds cool.  Anyway, I don’t think that landscape architecture can “solve” homelessness (but perhaps we can take part in a solution?); the problem is way bigger than just designing public space, of course.  I guess I should have asked things more like: are there things we can to do to mitigate the negativities of being homeless; do designers actively consider the needs of the homeless in urban designs; what are the positives/negatives/implications of that approach?  And of course the answers will vary based on the cities and their individual issues. 

Not that I claim to have no naivety, so perhaps some of the points I will bring up next will reveal some, but part of why I posted is because, philosophically, I’m interested in the notion of homeless as a “problem” in the first place.  (Consider the ideas of Daniel Quinn in “My Ishmael”, especially in terms of nomadic peoples, although the only nomadic culture still extant that I’ve heard come up recently is the Irish travellers.)  Yes, homeless people sometimes steal, use drugs, poop on the stairs of Mayors, etc, but that’s not quite what I mean in terms of it being a problem.  I find it interesting that many people seem to be obsessed with the idea that owning a home or wanting to own a home is the only way (or the best way) to live in this country.  (And perhaps that another whole story for another post.  On a social work website.)  I wonder what would happen, how cities would change, if public spaces would be noticeably different if public opinion wasn’t that living without a home was a problem that needed “fixing”. 

On another tack, and one more in line with my original impetus for posting, was the fact that, as far as I can recall learning or reading about in recent years, people who are undereducated, mentally ill, and/or are GLBT youth comprise a disproportionately high amount of the homeless population.  Which is part of why LA obviously cannot be the only solution–and maybe can’t even be a large portion of a solution–because providing quality education, giving proper and effective care to those with mental illness, and keeping bigoted parents from kicking their GLBT kids out of the house are not things LA deals with directly.  But can LA, in some way, assuage the crap that those lacking a home, especially for the aforementioned reasons, deal with daily?  For that matter, can design change people’s minds?  Mostly in the sense of the fear of/disgust with/pitying of homeless people.  LA might not be able even to do a small bit of assuaging alone–it would be prudent, I imagine, for those within the social services, educational, economic, and political arenas that deal most directly with homelessness, to be consulted.  Likely it’s pie-in-the-sky, but could there be public space that offers services to the homeless and provides the comforts and conveniences to the regularly-housed that so many already strive to include in their urban park designs?  Put another way, could an urban space provide for the homeless the things they need, without compromising its other functions, whether it’s envisioned as an interim ‘solution’ to help the homeless while social service and other programs get worked out–funding, paperwork/bureaucracy, all manner of reasons homeless people don’t get services/program they might need to help them get basics needs met–or seen as more permanent?  (And on the ‘more permanent’ side of the question, I’m thinking about how design could possibly address this sort of thing, while ignoring–for the time being–the fact that I’m sure cities/citizens would be up in arms about ‘why do homeless people get a “free house” paid for by the city, they should just get a job and a house like “everyone else” ‘.  I simply wonder how LAs/design firms would consider this in their process if they weren’t being hounded by political pressure and the “fact” that I just mentioned ignoring for the exercise of this question.)

So maybe I am naive.  Or maybe I’m trying to come up with new ideas, such as are referred to in the second response to my post.  It just would be so much more welcoming, as a relative newcomer to LA and this website, to be greeted with intriguing or probing questions or comments (no, I don’t “do anything” for the homeless, in the typical sense of that notion; I’m a grad student living off loans with no money to give to any charity, and I’m going into LA, not social work–so instead I’m trying to “do something” by considering the issue as it relates to the field of my interest, even to wonder, if I was homeless, what would I want, especially if the programs in my area were such that there was no end to my homelessness in sight?  And even “crazier,” what would I want if I chose to be homeless–perhaps here I should say nomadic?–or, in fact, preferred it?), rather than to be assumed to be a simpleton wondering if anyone wants to help homeless people.  As you can see, there’s a lot going into my thought process about this, and I’m sure it was overkill to explain everything I have; perhaps I should not have assumed I could clearly explain my question, thereby eliciting the type of answers I’m interested in without saying more myself to begin with.  Basically, I just wanted to know about things like the ‘roaming roads’ and to open up a discussion for those likewise interested.  If anyone’s still with me after this long ramble, thanks for considering my thoughts!

[Laura Kendrick]

Thanks for the helpful thoughts, everyone!

[Laura Kendrick]

A little late on the uptake here, but I just joined the website… Consider too The Story of B and My Ishmael by Quinn. They really build on the ideas in Ishmael.

[Author]

Posts