« Daisuke Mania Manifest in Fenway | Main | Poem of the Week »
"We Were Dismayed?"
Dismayed in the Summit!
The Summit answers criticism in the East Side Moanthly.
We were dismayed? How so, Summit?
I got a big kick out of Alan Tears’ letter to the editor in this May’s East Side Monthly. Bold Headline: “ ... SNA responds to last month’s letter” “Last months’ letter”? Was there only one?
Does anyone in the Summit have the cojones to address the person who wrote the letter they are responding to? Was it written by anonymous? No. It was written by a man named Maurice Methot. But nowhere in the letter by Alan Tate is Maurice’s name mentioned. Is that meant as a joke? Or is it just gutless? I guess it is open to interpretation.
And in the Community News section an anonymous Summit author goes on to say,
“We were dismayed by last month’s Letter to the Editor about our actions with regard to the library’s request for a zoning variance.”“Last month’s letter to the Editor”? Com’on, is this a crass case of editorial cowardice in the Summit? Is the entire SNA afraid to say the name, Maurice Methot?
In his letter, Mr. Tear says,
“. . . SNA’s goal is to sustain the residential fabric of the neighborhood that gives Summit its unique and vibrant character.”
Don't you just detest that type of hyperbole, or is it self-deception?
Whoa! I didn’t know Summit had a “unique and vibrant character”. I didn’t think Summit had any character at all. Certainly the SNA has no character if it cannot even bring itself to name the name of the person who it is attempting to argue with. This reminds me of the weak ploy of Patriot coach Bill Bellichick who tried the same impotent antic when asked about his relationship with his former assistant and new head coach of the Jets, Eric Mangini.
As I recall Mr. Methot’s letter, he made a concise, point by point critique of the way the Summit Neighborhood Association went about the business of opposing the library sign.
But the Summit’s answer, by Mr. Tear, does not offer a point by point rebuttal of Mr. Methot’s argument but rather deals in generalities and a defensive smoke and mirrors ploy about the “transparency” of their methods.
Truth be told, the power of the SNA, like most neighborhood associations in Providence, consists of a few elites who find the time and energy to shape the political discussion in their immediate environs. They try to force their agenda down the throats of unwitting residents by creating hysteria about petty things such as a sign on the library or a strip mall on Hope Street consisting of a cleaner and a restaurant ( they lost that one) that serves the needs of the community. They want to be the arbiters of taste: signage, architecture, businesses. Trouble is, their taste is not everyone’s taste – their methods not appreciated by everyone. Thus Mr. Methot’s eloquent objection.
Mr. Methot’s letter, that Mr. Tear refers to, can be found in this website’s March archive.
Maybe Summit is afraid. Maybe Summit has no vibrancy, no character except in the imagination of the SNA. If Summit had any strength of character they would have long ago stood shoulder to shoulder with their neighbors, the good citizens of Mt. Hope, to fight against the street level drug dealing and criminality inherent to Mt. Hope (which Mt. Hope exports to the Summit in the form of criminal house break-ins, car break-ins, and property crimes, a direct outgrowth of the illegal drug trade allowed to operate with impunity in Mt. Hope.) And the Summit would have volunteered to take some of the subsidized housing so clustered in Mt. Hope and offered to build affordable/subsidized housing in the Summit.
I’d like to see how the Summit’s SNA would deal with a problem like Mt. Hope’s Pleasant Street project. How they’d deal with drug dealers in their parks. How would the SNA deal with drug dealers on the corner of Hope & Rochambeau if the drug dealers suddenly moved from Camp & Cypress in Mt. Hope to that Summit location. There'd be some hue and cry rising from the Summit, I believe. But they tolerate it in Mt. Hope, as if it isn't their problem.
The truth is the SNA has never offered any community solidarity to Mt. Hope. They look down on Mt. Hope. Like the rest of the East Side neighborhoods they are embarrassed by Mt. Hope, and they don’t know how to deal with it. They turn a blind eye. They are afraid to deal with Mt. Hope because in Mt. Hope it always comes downs to race. Ouch! Like the City government they wish to contain Mt. Hope’s problems in Mt. Hope, isolate the drug dealing and contain it there, but Mt. Hope already has exported its problems to the Summit for years and years and will continue to do so. That much is obvious.
John Twomey
Posted at April 29, 2007 03:40 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://alexandria51.2mhost.com/~mthopep/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/58
John,
Why all the vitriol? I don't know you, you don't know me. If I recall correctly, you weren't at any of the discussions about the library sign. You're free to say what you like, but it seems like you're capable of a higher level of discourse from the other examples of your blog.
I didn't flame Mr. Methot in the ESM because he is a neighbor. I might not agree with his point of view, but he's welcome to it. Putting that aside for a moment, his retelling and recollection of the events, causalities, and outcomes were inaccurate. It wouldn't have served any purpose to pick his presentation of the issue apart, point-by-point, except to make me feel better. I chose to present the actual event timeline from someone who had participated in them. Calling the letter "hyperbole" and "self-deception" sounds a little, well, hyperbolic.
Look, I agree with what I perceive you are saying, that the library sign is a non-issue, a triviality in a sea of more worthy and pressing neighborhood and cross-neighborhood concerns. I don't buy the rest of your storyline, the whole elites, and solidarity thing. That sounds like it comes from something deep, predating my time and place in this neighborhood.
As a bunch of volunteers, we've got enough bandwidth to focus on a couple of things a year. This year its North Main redevelopment, where we again share common interests and concerns with Mount Hope. That opportunity focuses the conversation about crime, affordable housing, and creating a neighborhood that is inclusive. Those meetings are open to all, and the planner that we've hired has a specific requirement to integrate Mount Hope into the conversation and visioning.
Posted by: Allan Tear at May 9, 2007 11:15 AM