The barrio of San Telmo is an icon of Buenos Aires. It has seen intense changes throughout its history, being the oldest burrow of the city. It is home to iconic parts of Argentine culture, such as tango, the fileteado painting style, and Sunday antique fairs. It is where great writers like Julio Cortázar and Jorge Luis Borges would write for inspiration.
 |
A tango couple performing during the |
On a walk through its narrow streets, visitors have the chance to visit its iconic coventillos. Originally mansions, many wealthy families chose to migrant to greener pastures in La Pampa province. Thus, these unique buildings were left abandoned.
 |
| A coventillo in the late 19th Century |
During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, millions of Spanish and Italian immigrants came to Argentina’s shores. In a unique decision, specific rooms of these mansions housed immigrant families, turning the estates into apartments (coventillos). Still, during the past thirty years, San Telmo has slowly been experiencing its third significant change, and its modern challenge comes with the word gentrification. The conventillo style of living is no more. One can enter these historical buildings, such as Casa de los Ezeiza, and find a different function: boutiques, antique shops, cafes, and bed & breakfasts. 
Inside Casa de la Ezeiza
(Aka Casa Defensa)
 |
| El Mercado de San Telmo |
those who reside there. For example, in the emblematic market area, one could find over 20 butcheries filled with world-renowned Argentine beef inside. Now there are less than three, and these areas are now antique stores. The famous Sunday antique market in Plaza Dorrego has also bothered locals. The overpopulated streets have made it unbearable for many, making them decide to leave and sell their inherited coventillos to multi-million-dollar hotels.
A typical Sunday through Calle Defensa in San Telmo
From my personal experience, porteños love preserving and sharing their heritage, especially those from San Telmo. I remember speaking to a local fileteado painter about this issue in 2018. The problem to him is that the plan for San Telmo is not stable. It is pushing out the people that started the sought-after culture in the first place.
 |
| Fileteado paintings, a unique style started by Italian Immigrants |
He and other San Telmo natives do not mind foreigners living or visiting San Telmo, places are going to inevitably change, after all. The issue is that the community is not involved in the changes. The fears are similar to the documentary “Flag Wars”, telling the story of LGBTQ members moving into a historically black neighborhood in Columbus, Ohio. In the documentary, local leaders of the Black Community feared how outsiders would outprice residents, and change the rich culture that was created there.
The story of San Telmo leads to a question that still needs to be answered, how can a historical space remain authentic to its cultural heritage, while allowing outside influence? One thing is for sure, the local community needs heavy involvement.
Bar Dorrego, a symbol of San Telmo
Sources and more information on San Telmo Gentrification:
https://wp.nyu.edu/artandpoliticsinthecity/2015/08/28/san-telmo-les-history-culture/
Hi Brandon,
ReplyDeleteI thought your post was interesting and enjoyable to read. It’s interesting how the space within the same coventillos has drastically changed throughout history and how gentrification processes are aiding in the modernization of the city and altering the historical context of the space. Gentrification is something that affects many communities and leads to pushing native community members out of their hometown due to rising costs of living. I think it’s sad that San Telmo’s economy focuses more on tourists and those who stay in the area temporarily. The long-term residents who consider San Telmo to be home seemed to not be the focus for the economy and attention is not given to them, even though they are the ones who remain in the area the longest. It’s inevitable that places are going to change as time progresses, however, local community members should have the right to be involved in changes that are taking place within their hometown. Like you mentioned, a main issue with the changing environment is lack of community involvement. The involvement of local community members would help preserve the cultural history and allow for more input about changes regarding gentrification practices. The very last point you mention in your post does make one question how a place can retain its cultural heritage as time progresses even with the addition of gentrification methods and an evolving environment. I agree that community involvement would be a major factor in retaining San Telmo’s history and I think encouragement for community participation would be necessary.
Brandon,
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for your post. I enjoyed how the pictures you shared helped to give a better idea of San Telmo and some of the dynamics developing in that place. I also think you offer a very valuable perspective through your own experience and the connection you make with the documentary we watched in class. As I was reading some additional information -including the links you shared-, I noticed some information that triggered some thoughts. First, the fact that, as in other similar cases that I have seen in Latin America, one of the consequences of this processes is the creation or strengthening of social movements and groups that aim to mitigate the effects of these social dynamics. One of the links mentions the Movimiento de Ocupantes, a movement that have pushed for obtaining permanen housing status. This also related to the social movements originated during the 2001 financial crisis in Argentina, when entire neighborhoods organized to create Worker’s social movements that are now crucial political actors. I can think of similar examples of movements fighting for fair housing in Brazil, or even in Spain, where Podemos, a political party, was created partially by one of those movements after the 2008 financial crisis. On the other hand, after reading more about the current situation in San Telmo, I could not stop thinking that this process has been very similar in the Historic Downton part of Quito, where I am from. Boutique Hotels, expensive restaurants, and other kind of businesses owned by the elite class are part of the historical places of Quito, while the residents there struggle with the incapacity of governments to tend to their basic needs. It might seem that the government does not always foster the involvement of the local community in the dynamics of iconic neighborhoods and other urban spaces. However, such involvement is still palpable. Finally, one reflection I can think of is the long-term impact that gentrification processes have on the local culture. It is ironic to think that, in places that are advertised as touristic and iconic, the local culture is slowly losing value to the globalization and transnational processes as well.
Dear Brandon,
ReplyDeleteIt's a bit ironic; when I first learned what gentrification was, I only learned the bad aspects of it (Athens High School is a rather liberal school with some rather left leaning teachers). So naturally, I was a bleeding heart socialist who saw it in an exclusively negative light. However, after coming to university and seeing a more balanced, more academically rigorous notion of things, I have begun to question just how harmful gentrification really is. That is the irony: in a twist on the old stereotype, a liberal high school boy went off to college and got made into a conservative.
Let me explain. I used to think gentrification was a matter of rich people, who could live anywhere, choosing to live in poor neighborhoods due to their quaintness. Full stop. I didn't think there were any other factors at play (if you've ever seen the "King of the Hill" depiction of gentrification, you'll have a good idea of how I saw it). Then, primarily through this class, I came to realize there were many other factors at play, many incentives of gentrification that actually sound like they should be objectively good things. These include new and improved schools, better parks, bicycle friendly streets, etc. It was difficult for me to reconcile the contrast: on the one hand, you have city planners who legitimately want to improve the lives of their citizens, but on the other you have the all too real consequence of accompanying rent hikes that displace people, robbing them of their access to the amenities that were meant to benefit them. It's very demoralizing: a city official may wish to do good, but there is little s/he can do that won't have negative repercussions.
Towards the end of your post, you lent credence to the best I can make of the situation. When you said
"San Telmo natives do not mind foreigners living or visiting San Telmo, places are going to inevitably change, after all. The issue is that the community is not involved in the changes."
I recognized that that is the fundamental issue. That these changes come from the top down, not the bottom up. A poor neighborhood might love to have a new school or park, but if the residents aren't wealthy enough, they won't be able to defend their stake in that community. The real way to create social justice is not to just give amenities to the poor--in a capitalist economy, these will be appropriated by the rich. In fact, the solution is much more likely to be the allowing of these communities to be left alone and to instigate their own socio-economic change.
To briefly summarize, I believe the root of gentrification is misguided paternalism in a capitalist society. A city planner, which is what I want to become, must understand that he is not a god, he cannot just give out amenities and think he is saving the poor, no matter how pure his intentions.
I thank you very much for your insights, Brandon. You have greatly helped me to try to understand a complex situation.