 |
 |
The tensions between locals and the university in the US are probably influenced most by the geographic location of the university in that a more urban university is less likely to have an entrenched local population. Jeff mentioned UCLA, which is very different than Michigan Tech in that Westwood is really the heart of West Los Angeles (although people in Santa Monica might argue that point). The boundaries between Westwood and UCLA are blurry and the people who choose or chose to live in Westwood are/ were aware that a large student population is going to exist there. Still, the prices for housing there have seemingly helped ensure a different aesthetic than one might find in a traditional college town in the US. In Houghton, MI (a very rural area) Tech students live in houses that look horrible and students have told me that the outside matches the inside as far as condition (and at times safety). There are tensions between locals and students/professors even though the university is the town's largest employer. The city council has been debating an ordinance that would limit the number of non-family members who could live together in one house. This is obviously a move that has been generated by complaints from citizens who don't want student housing on their blocks. Usually these ordinances are discussed in the Summer when 90% of the students are gone (replaced by tourists). What's ironic about these measures is that local people often own the student housing. So the council meetings have really been about which local group (landlords or other residents) can sway the council. Finally, an addendum to my point above about urban universities. The location of the school has a lot to do with the status of housing. Again, UCLA is located in a very affluent part of Los Angeles (as is Loyola Marymount, where I did my BA and housing was very "nice"--and expensive). At the University of South Florida, where I did my Ph.D., the university was located in a less affluent part of Tampa. The area around the university was nicknamed suitcase city because the student population wasn't stable. The housing wasn't as nice. With that said, locals (a term that once again becomes a little more complicated in a large city) didn't live near USF. Thus, the student housing was less of a concern. Out of sight, out of mind. For people who are interested in this subject, I would recommend Mike Davis' "Empty Quarter" from _Sex, Death, and God in LA_. The essay features an interesting discussion about the rents that immigrants pay in Southern California to live in slums. The rents are far higher than those for middle class homes in Los Angeles. While I don't want to conflate the immigrant experience with those of a college student, there are similarities as far as housing quality and price in many college towns. Take care. Daniel ______________ Daniel Makagon, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Communication and Cultural Studies Department of Humanities Michigan Technological University Houghton, MI 49931 (906) 487-3093 http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~dmakagon