The Historic Neighborhood 

It’s turning out to be “My Day in Pictures” kind of day. 

Klara is at an age where I need to plan out the entire day with tons of outdoors activities if I am to have any peace to cook or read during the day. 

In the morning we visited the town’s oldest neighborhood. This is a place with really old, beautiful trees, small houses whose owners have lived here forever (and some have even been around for more than one generation!), and very broken down sidewalks. These are overwhelmingly blue-collar folks with an occasional college instructor renting a house before he can buy something in a middle-class neighborhood.

I never saw anything but Bernie signs in this neighborhood during the election. 

The funny thing is that the town’s most expensive neighborhood has nothing like this sensational foliage. The rich people’s house’s sit under the scorching sun with no shadow to hide from the heat. Of course, they have swimming pools but no pool can substitute these gorgeous old trees. 


13 thoughts on “The Historic Neighborhood ”

  1. I find it interesting how different our experiences of who supported Bernie were. I knew a few working class people who supported Bernie, but on the whole it was mostly just young people (mostly fairly well off, although young people of every kind loved him honestly) and a few older hippies and socialists. And the irritating social justice crowd loved him, and screeched and moaned when he lost the primary. But I’m in Ohio, where Bernie was deeply unpopular (including in the northeastern factory counties which had the most dramatic red swing.)


    1. We are a weird little town in many ways. In the entire election year, I saw a single Hillary yard sign and not a single Hillary bumper sticker. Ben Carson bumper stickers were ubiquitous. This obviously didn’t reflect what happened around the country.


      1. Ben Carson? Wow. I actually barely saw any Hillary bumper stickers, but she got more votes in my county than Obama did in 2012. There’s a lot of people without cars here, that probably played a role.


    2. Oh, incidentally, I had always wondered why Bernie did so much better in Wisconsin and Michigan than he did here. I found out Ohio is significantly more religious. Remember that article that mentioned how religious primary voters preferred Hillary and less religious ones preferred Bernie? That could be part of it.


  2. About the trees: newer homes are built more quickly, and builders bulldoze trees rather than build around them. In general, older homes have better construction, with less space between wall studs and ceiling joists, and greater use of real wood rather than manufactured board. Of course, a lot of the land around where you are used to be farm, which also explains the absence of trees.

    On religion: yes, it is the opiate of the masses, and the ultra conservative versions all teach that women should be submissive to their husbands — a factor playing against female candidates.

    Odd paradox: GOP strongholds have shorter average life expectancies than do strong Dem areas.


  3. Looks like a nice liveable neighborhood why do junior faculty want to leave? Are there no houses for sale there or are social/class pressures such that living there is not okay?

    The construction peak in the US is, I think, in the 1950-s or 60s when solid construction was the goal rather than adding on empty square footage.

    This looks more 70s (could be wrong)


    1. It is a beautiful neighborhood. The trees are priceless and it’s close to everything. But these houses are only sold when they become empty shells and need complete remodeling. There was one I really liked from the 1920s that was being sold but it needed a fortune to be invested into remodeling. But it was beautiful. Every room was walpapered!

      This is not considered a poor neighborhood where middle-class people don’t live because it’s not prestigious. We have such neighborhoods a little further out. They look very rundown.


      1. Yeah, that’s my Florida bias is acting up again, you’re probably right (not much buidling before the 1960s wher I grew up).

        It was the late 1970s early 1980s that you could see a decline in standards as the houses were being put up. One reason was that “conforming to code” replaced “build it right tomake sure it won’t blow down in winds over 60 mph” as a guiding principle.

        Liked by 1 person

  4. My neighborhood is like this although richer originally I think, those houses look slightly flimsy and slightly plain compared to ours (ours are cypress and more decorated somehow). The reason people move out is that they want one or more bathrooms per household member. That wasn’t needed when these houses were built.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s