Religious Studies at UCLA and in the US

I recently read an article in the LA Times (Pearce 2015) that outlines the difficultly of teaching religious studies at schools in the US. In response to the numerous Islamic terrorist attacks that have taken place in the past decade or so, most recently in Paris and San Bernardino, Islamophobia in the US is at an all time high. This has particularly manifested itself in schools where parents fear religious indoctrination in the classroom. The aforementioned article reports on the closure of all schools in Augusta County, Georgia when an angry parent body responded negatively to a Religious Studies assignment where students were asked to copy the Shahada (the Islamic statement of faith) in order to encourage an appreciation of the importance of calligraphy to the religion.

The keeping home of 10,500 students that this caused was, in my opinion, something of an overreaction. I can appreciate parents’ fears of indoctrination in schools where religious studies is taught with an overly dogmatic syllabus. However there is an equal danger that by whitewashing the importance of religion, students will not appreciate both the historical and contemporary relevance it has to the world we currently occupy.

As someone who is not remotely religious, there is little I like less than preaching (this includes the preaching of atheism). I maintain that everyone has a right to their own beliefs and practices and it is not anybody’s duty to change that. In addition to this, and despite going to a secular high school, I feel that religious studies is an essential aspect of gaining a holistic education. Through this I believe students will be equipped to make their own decisions regarding religion and to respect the faith of others. It was in this light that during my first quarter at UCLA I enrolled in a class entitled Judaism, Christianity, And Islam: Interrelated Religious Traditions.

I would like to suggest the model in which this class was taught be used in all schools where parents fear either an over- or under-consideration of religion. Rather than taking an overly theological approach, the three Abrahamic religions were studied through a historical and analytical examination of the texts that dictate their doctrines. Alongside this came a deep consideration of how these religions impacted the development of human civilisation and the tensions that have arisen between the three since their creation. I found the process to be a deeply rewarding and enlightening experience. This was extended by my final research paper which examines the causes, commonalities and differences in fundamentalism across the three religions. Through this I was able to look further at the extremist sects which, particularly in the case of Islam, have been inaccurately generalised to define an entire religion.

It is no surprise that, in a country whose constitution separates Church and State, religious studies is such a contentious issue. Indeed as a geographer abroad, examining this tension has been particularly interesting. Despite the US being a secular country, I have never experienced people (both on and off campus) so deeply entrenched in and proud of their religious beliefs. This surprisingly contrasts with my experiences in the ‘non-secular’ UK where I feel religion, while still hugely important, is not such a visible component of people’s lives. I truly believe that if students were taught about religion in a similar manner to my class last quarter they would have a much more well-adjusted, critical and comprehensive understanding of religion, free of overzealous dogma or cynicism.

A public display of religious expression, not an unusual sight in the US

References

Pearce, M. (2015) ‘Public schools struggle with lessons about Islam amid renewed fears of terrorism’ (WWW), Los Angeles: LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-na-islam-schools-20151220-story.html; 20 December 2015).

Comparing UCLA and UCL class content through IDS 191

A key development critique covered at UCL in last year’s GEOG2014 (Development Geography I) class was the neocolonial argument. Since joining UCLA I have revisited the topic in my International Development Studies 191 class: China’s Trade with Africa: Neocolonial or Win-Win? The class follows a question proposed by Howard W. French in his book China’s Second Continent (2014).

As discussed in a previous post this class aimed to answer the above question by examining and writing a group paper describing China’s relationship with a specific African country, in my case Tanzania. For the sake of brevity I will not delve too much into the details of this paper (which can be found here) other than to say that we found Tanzania, while having an asymmetrical trade relationship with China, not to be dependent on the Asian giant. In addition, while Chinese infrastructure projects in Tanzania may be evocative of neocolonial administrative power, we argue that these should instead be seen as investment projects in response to Tanzania’s promising pool of natural resources. Thus while China can be seen as benefitting from easy access to these reserves, Tanzania also benefits greatly from an efficient and reliable partner to monetise them.

As well as providing a chance to study a particularly salient issue in Geography, this class has also been an excellent opportunity to explore how Geography is taught differently here at UCLA compared with UCL.

The most interesting difference I came across was the structure and content of the class. In GEOG2014, neocolonialism was contained within a single lecture with Africa being given as a mere case study. IDS 191 on the other hand affords 10 weeks (thirty hours) to examining one question. This is not the only example: UCLA IDS 192 (Africa’s Changing Classes) and IDS 102 (Gendered Development) both focus on themes that are covered by UCL's GEOG2014 in single lectures. I believe this to be an exemplary difference between the two universities. Indeed UCLA IDS is an entire department devoted to studying a field that UCL Geography covers in only two modules. I must also add that, beyond a detailed understanding of Sino-Tanzanian trade, I do not feel this class has offered any more than what was covered in a single lecture on neocolonialism last year.

I therefore believe that, at least when comparing the two universities’ Geography departments, UCL teaches a greater breadth of content at a faster pace than UCLA. While UCLA’s lower division courses do offer more breadth than its higher division classes, for example GEOG 4 (Globalization: Regional Development and World Economy), comments made by students suggest this comes is at the expense of depth. Indeed such classes are mostly taken as a prerequisites for others such as IDS 191.

It is important to state that these observations are limited to this one class, complemented by other class syllabuses and student comments. I hope that next quarter’s GEOG 141 class (Uneven Development Geographies: Prosperity and Impoverishment in Third World) will add further insight into this comparison between the two universities and their Geography departments.

References

French, H.W. (2014) China’s Second Continent, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Grand Canyon: Toponymy versus Topography

Last weekend I took a road trip to the Grand Canyon. While the formation was undoubtedly stunning, I quickly realised that I was more excited by the idea of visiting the Grand Canyon than the visit itself. It was the Grand Canyon’s toponymy rather than its topography that really impressed me.

Duncan Light’s article Tourism and Toponymy: Commodifying and Consuming Place Names highlights the role of names in enhancing or sometimes even creating touristic interest in a place. This is evident in the Grand Canyon which, were it not for its glorious moniker, would probably only receive a fraction of the visits. Indeed, while Light (2014: 144) cites Urry and Larsen’s (2011) point that a tourist site is defined by being ‘in some way, out of the ordinary’, he argues that names play an essential role in highlighting this. 

Thus one not only visits a canyon but the Grand Canyon, along with all the imaginaries its name has assigned it. This inevitably causes a feeling of anticlimax when a place is unable to meet these expectations or imaginaries. Looking back I believe this was the case when visiting other landmarks in the past few months, the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco and Central Park in New York to name just two examples. While each of these sites is of course physically stunning and deeply fascinating, it was more their names that I found myself consuming. This can ultimately be quite unfulfilling when you realise there is little tangibility behind a name.

Contrastingly I found the drive to the Grand Canyon a far more satisfying experience. Without the added pressure of a hyped up name, I was able to enjoy the surrounding beauty for what it was rather than what I or others expected it to be. This has been a valuable lesson and I hope that next time I experience a popular landmark or event I will be able to look beyond its name allowing me to fully appreciate what makes it so special.

References

Light, D. (2014) ‘Tourism and toponymy: commodifying and consuming place names’, Tourism Geographies, 16,1, 141-156.

Urry, J. and J. Larsen (2011) The Tourist Gaze, London: Sage.

View of the Grand Canyon from the South Rim 

Taking in the American spirit on the road

University Pride

This weekend UCLA will take on its local rivals, the University of Southern California (USC), in their biggest football game of the year. The atmosphere around campus in anticipation of the event has been electric with the buildup culminating in a rally held last night to burn an effigy of USC’s mascot ‘Tommy Trojan’. The fire was surrounded by students wearing ’doUSChebags’ t-shirts and chanting ‘fight fight fight!’.

USC's mascot 'Tommy the Trojan' on flames

The event has had me asking why UCL, or for that matter any university in the UK, does not take such pride in university sport? Aside from the rare exception, the Henley Regatta being perhaps the most notable, the scale of money and excitement is not a patch on the US. While American sport is flooded with million-dollar sponsorship contracts, sensational fandom and controversy, British university sport is a far more modest affair. Instead it is often limited to a small pitch in the middle of an obscure field, watched by six or seven fans (or more likely passing dog walkers), and sponsored by the local pharmacy whose main obligation is to provide sliced oranges for the players at half time.

UCLA Bruins fans filling the 92,542 capacity Rose Bowl Stadium, larger than London's Wembley Stadium

Having conducted a little informal research, I tried to find out why students in the US are so passionate about college sports. Responses varied from ‘its a great way to meet people’ to ‘because the US is the best country in the world, that’s why!’ However, a frequent reason that I found particularly interesting was that supporting your college team is a great way to express pride in your university. 

Back in the UK university pride is not as rampant and I think this is a shame. Of course rivalries do exist, KCL versus UCL being a prime example, but never has this led to the burning of a foe’s mascot. In fact I don’t even know what UCL’s mascot is, let alone Kings’! 

Walk around campus here and you will see students - or ‘Bruins’ as they are proudly known - wearing an enormous variety of UCLA branded t-shirts, sweaters, and even shoes. Drive around Los Angeles and you will see ‘UCLA Alumni’ license plates. Of course this is great merchandising and a clever form of advertising for the university, but I believe its more than that. At UCLA you feel part of a movement and its a fantastic experience. At UCL wearing university branded clothing is seen as overly keen and even dorky. Perhaps this is a reflection of UK university students trying to appear cool and nonchalant. However it is not reflective of the entire country where, for example, Premier League Football fandom matches college football in the US.

However ‘footy madness’ in the UK is predominantly dominated by men. At UCLA shared college pride brings people together, creating a great sense of community amongst all members of the university. With university life in both countries being a social and academic endeavour, it is interesting to note that in the US 28% of married couples meet at university versus 19% in the UK (Macskássy 2013; TSR 2014). In my opinion this is perhaps because the shared joy and sadness at UCLA’s win or loss in a sports game is a much more valuable bonding experience than drunken sports nights at Loop. 

References

Macskássy, S.A. (2013) ‘From Classmates to Soulmates’ (WWW), Menlo Park: Facebook Research (https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-data-science/from-classmates-to-soulmates/10151779448773859; 24 November 2015).

TSR (2014) ‘One fifth of British students meet the love of their life on campus’ (WWW), Brighton: TSR (http://tsrmatters.com/one-fifth-of-british-students-meet-the-love-of-their-life-on-campus/; 24 November 2015). 

Why I love New York

With time off school last week I was able to take a trip to New York. On my first night I walked from my apartment in Greenwich Village to the infamous Times Square. While others had warned me that I would hate this landmark for its crowds, commercialisation and tackiness, I found myself loving every bit of it. The reason was immediately clear: after two months living in the ‘archetypal automobile city’, it was a relief once again being able to get around by foot or public transport and to be sharing the streets with other pedestrians (Bottles 1992).

Looking at a comparison of the proportion of travel methods in Los Angeles, New York and my hometown London, it is immediately evident that the latter two are far more similar. Clearly I felt at home in a city that offered far greater transport autonomy to non-drivers than my temporary home on the West Coast.

% Method of Transport to Work in Los Angeles, New York and London

Los Angeles, a vastly spread out city with notoriously dire public transport, can only be experienced through the car. With plans needing to be made well in advance in order to find a car and to avoid traffic, the scope for spontaneity is severely reduced. Thus without being able to quickly and cheaply travel to places and events taking place across the city, I do not feel as well integrated into Los Angeles as I did in London and even New York. The introduction of transport and ridesharing companies such as Uber and Lyft have to an extent improved this. However these services, costing an average of $15 per ride, do not compare with the extensive New York Subway or London Underground which cost $2.75 and £2.30-4.70 respectively (UberPeople 2014).

The rest of my trip in New York was brilliant. In just a few days I was able to see a huge amount of the city with highlights including the Museum of Modern Art and the Guggenheim, a stroll through Central Park and the Upper West Side, a walk through the Meatpacking District along the recently redeveloped High Line, and coffees and dinners at numerous cafes and restaurants across the city. Thanks to marvellous transport links and close proximities this was all done at relative ease and little expense with each day planned at very short notice.

In addition to making it easy to see the city, New York’s transport and layout also forces people onto the streets. With Times Square epitomising this, everywhere is packed full with pedestrians which I loved. Indeed, the urban theorist and activist Jane Jacobs (1961: 107) states that while ‘streets in cities serve many purposes besides carrying vehicles’, so too do sidewalks ‘serve many purposes besides carrying pedestrians’. While she goes on to discuss the implications of busy or empty streets in creating a safe or unsafe environment for pedestrians, I believe walking through the bustling New York also allows you to feel a part of the city as you unconsciously interact with everyone around you. This experience contrasts heavily with Los Angeles where wide empty sidewalks and crossings make travel by foot an isolating experience.

Times Square buzzing with late night pedestrian visitors

A typically enormous yet empty pedestrian crossing in Century City, Los Angeles

A year abroad is a fantastic opportunity to experience new places and to learn how you react to them, either positively or negatively. There are many things I love about Los Angeles, as well as many I did not like about New York. However this trip to has highlighted to me that any city I settle in must have an accessible and extensive public transport network, as well as a layout that encourages people to walk around the city. I believe these two features, certainly present in London and New York, make it far easier to become part of the local milieu of the city around you.

References

Bottles, S.L. (1992) Los Angeles and the Automobile, Berkeley: University of California. 

Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York: Random House.

Office for National Statistics (2013) ‘Method of Travel to Work in England and Wales Report’ (WWW), Newport: Office for National Statistics (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/method-of-travel-to-work-in-england-and-wales/art-method-of-travel-to-work.html#tab-Commuting-by-public-transport; 18 November 2015).

UberPeople (2014) ‘What's your average fare?’ (WWW), UberPeople (http://uberpeople.net/threads/whats-your-average-fare.1174/; 18 November 2015).

U.S. Census Bureau (2012) ‘2008-2012 American Community Survey’ (WWW), Suitland, U.S. Census Bureau (http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk; 18 November 2015).

U.S. Census Bureau (2013) ‘Commuting/Place of Work/Travel Time’ (WWW), Suitland, U.S. Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/hhes/commuting/data/commuting.html; 18 November 2015).

Here are a few pictures of the many sights I got to see in only a few days in New York:

Upwards view from Times Square

The Lake in Central Park

The Guggenheim Gallery

View of Upper East Side across the Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis Reservoir in Central Park

Premium real estate shooting up in the now trendy Meatpacking District

Street art from the High Line

A typical water tower equipped apartment building in the Upper West Side

Geography meets Film History: Urban economics in the early Hollywood era

I recently wrote about how the multidisciplinary nature of Geography encourages an exploration of other fields of study and the building of synoptic links between them. One such example is Film History. While film can itself be a method of geographical investigation, the film industry is also a particularly fascinating topic of study within the field of urban economics. This is something I have looked at in a recent piece of coursework.

In this paper I argued that vertical integration and localisation economies of scale, which characterised the Hollywood studio system, enabled much faster and more widely adopted innovations in the film industry than when it was centred in New York. This was done through a comparison of the swift and widespread incorporation of sound into cinema during the Hollywood era - in the space of a year, films went from being almost all silent to entirely spoken - with the more disparate and localised advancements that occurred on the East Coast.

Hanssen’s (2010) defines vertical integration as the process by which a business manages its entire supply chain. The Hollywood studio system clearly demonstrated vertical integration from its earliest days. This dates back to 1915 when Adolph Zukor merged the distribution company Famous Players with the Laksy Company and Paramount Theatres and moved to Los Angeles. The business born out of this would manage all three key stages of the film industry: production, distribution and exhibition*.

Localisation economies of scale, as defined by Storper (2013), occur when clustered companies of the same industry experience greater productivity and innovation. Scott and Soja (1996) explain why Hollywood is seen as the archetypal localisation economy of scale. Here companies are able to hire talented and short-term employees from a large labour pool, something of particular benefit in the project orientated film industry. Additionally, companies are able to learn from one another through ‘knowledge spillovers’ which is of particular significance when considering why innovations spread so quickly in Hollywood (Glaeser et al. 1992).

The rapid adoption of sound by the film industry is a perfect example of vertical integration and localisation economies of scale at work. While the technology for sound had been around since the 19th century, a previous inhibitor of this incorporation was the potential magnitude and cost of wiring studios and theatres for sound synchronisation and amplification. Without a guarantee of theatres that could play your films or a steady supply of talking pictures for your theatre, nobody wanted to take the first step (Sklar 1975). However once they owned both the theatres and studios, film companies were finally able to facilitate the transition at both the production and exhibition end. In addition to this, an ability to learn from surrounding companies through localisation economies of scale played a key role in the transition. A salient example of this is the boom microphone, first used to capture Clara Bow’s voice in The Wild Party (1929). This was swiftly adopted by other companies who quickly learned about the technology either through observation, spying or labour transfers (Mayne 1995). Thus, without these processes it is unlikely that the adoption of sound into cinema would have occurred in such a rapid and widespread manner.

To demonstrate this further, I examined the film industry when it was spread around the state of New York. During this time there were advancements in film, prominent examples being increased film lengths, large format film and panning camera shots (Sklar 1975). These innovations do however differ in their nature. Without vertical integration or economies of scale, such advancements were disparate and more locally fixed within the confines of the company that had pioneered them instead of being spread across the entire film industry.

Thus the film industry creates an interesting backdrop to examine the role of urban economics in the creation and growth of businesses in a certain time and space. This further demonstrates the interconnectivity of Geography as a field of study that expands into many others, in this case Film History.

*This ended in 1948 when the US Supreme Court’s anti-trust rule broke down the Hollywood oligopoly.

References

Hanssen, F. (2010) ‘Vertical Integration during the Hollywood Studio Era’, Journal of Law and Economics, 53, 3, 519-543.

Glaeser, E., H. Kallal, J. Scheinkman and A. Shleifer (1992) ‘Growth in Cities’, Journal of Political Economy, 100, 6, 1126-1152.

Mayne, J. (1994) Directed by Dorothy Arzner, Bloomington: Indiana University.

Scott, A.J and E.W. Soja (1996) The City: Los Angeles and Urban Theory at the End of the Twentieth Century, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Sklar, R. (1975) Movie-made America, New York: Random House.

Storper, M. (2013) Keys to the City: How Economics, Institutions, Social Interaction, and Politics Shape Development, New Jersey: University of Princeton.

San Francisco: the fourth epoch of development

In his article Urban Development and Redevelopment in San Francisco, Brian Godfrey discusses the three roughly 25 year periods of development that have shaped the city and its eclectic architectural styles:

- first between 1849-1875 following the California Gold Rush,
- then between 1906-1930 after the earthquake and fire that razed the city in 1906,
- and finally 1960-1985, the era that gave birth to the modern high-rise city.

Early Victorian Row House

The modern high-rises of Downtown San Francisco

Writing in 1997, Godfrey also theorised that the city was entering a fourth stage of development. This would be characterised by rising property prices and a shift in demographics as the countercultural, contrarian and famously gay population that previously defined the city (itself the product of an earlier wave of gentrification) gets replaced by the young new wave of wealthy employees from the nearby budding tech companies. 

Last weekend I visited San Francisco, keeping an eye out to see if Godfrey’s premonitions had come to fruition. And, as we came in over the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, we were met with countless billboards advertising jobs to the numerous industry workers who have now come to occupy the city. While this influx of software developers is no big news, another of Godfrey’s predictions appears to have more subtly come true: there does appear to be a decline in the visibility of the gay community. 

Having never previously visited San Francisco I am obviously unable to make such comparative inferences based purely on what I see and, as a visitor, I cannot deduce what is going on behind the scenes. However, data produced by UCLA think-tank the Williams Institute (Gates 2006) and analytics company Gallop (Newport and Gates 2015) show that the LGB community in San Francisco has indeed declined by 2% between 2006 and 2014, now comprising around 6.4% of the city’s population.

While some traditional gay neighbourhoods are still visible around San Francisco, Castro Street being perhaps the most prevalent, the culture seems less authentic and more commodified for tourists like myself. Overpriced restaurants and bars like The Sausage Factory and QBar seem to appeal less to locals and more to outsiders who are visiting the city to consume its famous culture. 

Brunch menu at the famous Red Door Cafe, now a tourist spot known for its gay themed menu

The squeezing out of San Francisco’s gay community appears to have been caused by another of Godfrey’s predictions coming true: gentrification and the consequent rapid rise in property prices as outlined in an article by Adam Hudson (2015). In the past 40 years the value of real estate in San Francisco has risen far faster than state or national averages (Dpaul Brown 2014). This has had a powerful impact on the demographics of local neighbourhoods. For example Potrero Hill, once a hotbed for the LGBT community, now appears to be dominated by upmarket restaurants and shops baring little resemblance to their previous incarnations. Furthermore, the local patrons of these establishments, most accompanied with their families, appeared to be middle-class and heterosexual.

Median home sales price by year in San Francisco, California and the United States (Dpaul Brown 2014)

View of San Francisco from the now gentrified Potrero Hill

I absolutely loved San Francisco. It seemed to be everything Los Angeles is not: a self-contained, pedestrianised city with good public transport networks and (at least in my opinion) a great climate. However, being a city of only 49 square miles, San Francisco is susceptible to widespread changes in very short periods as proven by Godfrey. I hope that the ‘bourgeois consolidation’ that has come to distinguish the current epoch of change does not entirely displace San Francisco’s characteristic ‘nontraditional social identities’ (Godfrey 1997: 310).

References

Dpaul Brown (2014) ‘Mid-Year Review Statistics’ (WWW), San Francisco: Dpaul Brown (http://dpaulsf.com/2014/08/04/mid-year-review-statistics/; 15 October 2015).

Gates, G.J. (2006) ‘Same-sex Couples and the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Population: New Estimates from the American Community Survey’ (WWW), Los Angeles: The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy (http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-Same-Sex-Couples-GLB-Pop-ACS-Oct-2006.pdf; 15 October 2015).

Godfrey, B.J. (1997) ‘Urban Development and Redevelopment in San Francisco’, The Geographical Review, 87, 3, 309-333.

Hudson, A. (2015) ‘With Soaring Rents and a Vanishing Middle Class, San Francisco Becomes a City for the Rich’ (WWW), Sacramento: Truth-Out (http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34031-with-soaring-rents-and-a-vanishing-middle-class-san-francisco-becomes-a-city-for-the-rich; 15 October 2015).

Newport, F. and G.J. Gates (2015) ‘San Francisco Metro Area Ranks Highest in LGBT Percentage’  (WWW), Los Angeles: Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/182051/san-francisco-metro-area-ranks-highest-lgbt-percentage.aspx; 15 October 2015).

Here are some more photos from my trip:

The Golden Gate Bridge

Alleyway in Telegraph Hill 

Muir Woods National Monument

Indian style floating house in Sausalito Yacht Harbour