5 LSJ Stories from 1964: Effects of what will eventually be I-496

After having Matt Miller visit our class, I took the time to read the 5 short stories on I-496 from the Lansing State Journal from July 12-16, 1964 that he distributed to us to see if they were any use to our project. Initially the first thing that struck me was that the series of 5 articles was written a whole 3 years before the construction even was to begin. This made me curious as to WHY this would be such a huge thing to be presented in the paper at such an early date and I came to the conclusion that it may have been that this was going to be a much bigger project that would affect more people than anyone would realize. As I kept reading some of that was answered in addition to focusing on both the positive and negative effects the new highway would bring to the city.

The first short excerpt dealt with a basic introduction of what the highway would look like and presented readers with the “basic facts.” The article stated that the construction of I-496 would, “provide direct rapid access to the Lansing downtown area from connecting routes on the east, west, and south of the city.” It was also mentioned what highway connections would become present and what interchanges would be included. Overall though the point was that this highway would be the best ROUTE and create EASY ACCESS, no mention at first was negative.

The second article looked at the 900 families that would be affected and have to be possibly re-located. This definitely answers one of our data questions that we brainstormed in class. It also noted how a sum of 815 parcels (of various types) would have to be purchased to construct over. In addition, note was given to how many white and black families the construction would affect being 400 and 300 respectively. One thing non-statistical that struck me while reading was that the NAACP stated that the construction and relocation “provided a rare opportunity for the city to make at least a start toward a model integrated community.” This was big to me because this shows no fight rather that NAACP and other groups thought it may be a good idea to construct such business through this particular community and break it up a little bit. I especially liked this article as well because the last section ends asking a majority of questions that we as a project group asked ourselves.

The third dealt with business relocation and the removal of tax base from the city. These seemed to be of less importance from other things. Article 4 dealt with schools and the uncertainties of staying open or having to close down. These two articles to me were definitely good information to read and to understand what was affected by the highway construction but to me did not seem as relevant to what we need for our project.

Lastly, article 5 dealt with how properties were appraised and purchased, including where to construct the highway and the process of how residential homes were purchased. I sort of already knew this information so was not surprised but it is good information as well but would be even better with detail, but like I said at the beginning, nothing had actually been done yet since this all was written 3 years prior to actual construction.

Anything left out??????? I thought it was interesting that no public opinion of residents was included in any of the articles. All of the comments made were either basic data facts or thoughts and opinions given by significant groups such as the NAACP and school officials. I would have been curious to know what George who lived on Walnut street thought about him home being possibly purchased and being forced to relocate or what big business Ben thought about having his family business demolished after being in business for such and such years.

Formal and Informal Integration Thesis? Useful or no?

As I have finished reading a 1965 thesis entitled, “The Level of Formal and Informal Integration of Negroes in Lansing, Michigan,” I found out lots of interesting information about the population that Lansing consisted of around the time of the construction of I-496. Although this thesis had a focus on the integration of blacks in both the internal and external community of Lansing at the time, little information seemed to be overly significant to our project. Most of the information was related to age, education level, occupation of informants and their families etc. as well as investigated the relationships blacks had with whites, in the areas of jobs, church affiliation and union affiliation. There was no mention of the construction of I-496 or how these people were affected by it, or how means of integration were changed. The only thing that I found to stick out was a table representing how many residents owned/rented their homes. This could possibly give us an idea how many people actually owned their homes and possibly got paid to move. Even so I do not think this is overly relevant either. I will have to see what we narrow our investigation questions down to, to see if we have a major focus on formal and informal integration to see if this thesis is at all useful for us to use.

I-496 Construction: Was it right or wrong?

I never knew that the construction of I-496, the main highway in Lansing/East Lansing was such a big ordeal. I-496 spurred growth in the suburbs, but claimed many streets, homes and businesses in the city in the process. The heart of Lansing’s African-American community was torn out by the freeway’s construction. The construction of the freeway required the demolition or removal or nearly 600 homes, 60 businesses, and 15 farms. This was an incredible amount of destruction. While looking at the photo gallery of I-496, I was sad for those who lost their homes. So many photos were of machines crushing people’s homes. It made me wonder, where did these families move to? Did they move to a home just as nice as this one? Were they forced out of the city or did they move somewhere near? It was such a devastating event for some families and I just wonder how well these people were treated. In Miller’s article he shares a comment from historian Thomas Sugrue stating that the highway construction was steered toward places where people did not have the money or power to put up much of a fight or what Sugrue called “the paths of least resistance” aka. Primarily black neighborhoods (Miller.) This made me wonder, was this area chosen because of this reason? Why was another area composed of primarily whites not chosen? Was it really the location that prompted the construction or was it the composition of people in the area that made for the decision?

I was very appalled at reading the article to find out that many people were basically told they had to re-locate their families and purchase new homes to build the highway. Until now I was completely unaware of what Lansing actually looked like before I-496 was actually built. I never knew that mainly an African American population dominated the area and that many thriving businesses were located in the area and were forced to shut down or move.

I questioned a lot of things while reading and scoping out the websites posted and some of the questions I had were:
1. As families homes were demolished due to the construction of I-496, where were these families re-located? Or were many left without places to live/move (due to lack of funds or segregation)?
2. Why was the specific location of I-496 really chosen? Was it really the best suitable location for creating a highway or was it due to what Miller claimed as “the paths of least resistance?”
3. Since the highway construction cut out a lot of homes and businesses, how did this affect the overall economy at the time? Was it a positive outcome for Lansing?
4. It was said that the creation of I-496 would help in regards to the situations with segregation at the time but did this really happen or is the area still segregated today? At the time were blacks and whites integrated like intended?
5. Were people, whose homes were demolished or purchased, paid a fair amount? How was the amount decided? Were the amount sufficient for these people and their families to re-located and purchase new homes?

Historic Site: Turner Dodge House

The Turner-Dodge House Park and Heritage Center is located in the heart of Lansing on 100 East North Street. This house is the only 19th century residence in the greater Lansing area open to the public and has been used for both recreation and culture. A man by the name of James Turner built the original house on this site in the 1850’s and it was later reconstructed by Turner’s son in law, Frank Dodge in 1905. The house is extremely large and brick and is described to be of the Georgian Revival style. The overall features of Georgian Revival may be described as symmetrical composition enriched with classical detail. You can find the very detailed description of this old house on the Michigan Historical Center Website.

Being a future educator I would definitely take a class of history students to this historical site to visit. Not only does this particular site offer events and lead tours of the old mansion but it also has been restored and kept in its time period. Any student can look in a book and see houses and buildings from differing time periods (19^th century in this case) but they do not get the same experience as if they were able to visually see the house or building up close. They also do not know the back story on why it is important. When visiting a site such as the Turner-Dodge house students are able to visually see, touch and personally experience bring in such a place. In addition, they are able to learn of the importance of the building as well as the people who surrounded it throughout its time such as James Turner and his family. James Turner was a very prominent figure in Michigan history but few people know much about him or even his name. Also, a lot of information about the house is not available online and therefore going to visit the house can give an individual so much more. I think it would be a great opportunity for any classroom of students if they have the chance.

Currently, the house is owned by the City of Lansing Parks and Recreation Department and is used as a museum and cultural heritage center. The site was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1972 and has remained there since.

QUESTION: Would you take your class here for a fieldtrip? Why or why not?

Enola Gay Controversy

Before this week I was one of those students who were completely unaware of what the Enola Gay Controversy even was. While delving into the readings and searching various sites on the internet I was immediately familiarized with the event in which the first atomic bomb was dropped by the United States. I was very intrigued by the fact that this one single event in history was such a controversial topic in regards to being presented in a Museum setting since I believe that so many events that have been portrayed in museums all over with no public controversy. David Thelen, in his article “History after the Enola Gay Controversy” points out that controversy/views were given by so many participants: WWII veterans, the AFA (Air Force Association), the U.S. Senate, the American Legion, and differing curators just to name a few. It was incredible! It was a fight over commemoration versus scholarship in which some though that in-depth research was more valuable and authoritative than veteran’s first hand shared experiences for example. Neither of these should reign over the other, both aspects should be incorporated and shared. Even so, this lead to such an uproar in the designing and implementation of the Enola Gay exhibit at the Smithsonian.

While reading the article written by Richard Kohn entitled, “History and the Culture Wars: The Case of the Smithsonian Institution’s Enola Gay Exhibition,” I came across a statement that I really liked. It stated,

“Do you want to do an exhibition intended to make veterans feel good or do you want an exhibition that will lead our visitors to think about the consequences of the atomic bombing of Japan? Frankly I do not think we can do both.”

No matter what would have been done with the Enola Gay exhibit, some party or parties would have been disgusted, embarrassed or insulted by the material being shared. But isn’t this true for other exhibits, monuments, statues, etc? I do think that even though such extreme events do cause controversy that controversy can be hammered to a minimum with compromise and that is what should have been done with Enola Gay.

I believe that the Enola Gay exhibit should be allowed, even as a possible permanent exhibit somewhere, not necessarily at the Smithsonian, but somewhere where it will be well represented. Just like the 9/11 attack or the Vietnam War, it was an event that changed the world in one aspect or another and is a part of our history whether we want to admit it or not. I do not believe that history should be chosen piece by piece and only those that make us (The United States) look good be represented in a museum or by a monument or statue etc. All historical events, even those that may not build a great representation for Americans should be shared, such as that of Enola Gay. No nation is perfect without stains on their reputation; therefore the U.S. has no reason to hide their wrongdoings.

Now having read about this one single controversy that caused such uproar, I am curious to know if other events that have been portrayed in museums and such have caused similar uproars, even if only to a lesser extent. I would find it hard to believe that this is the only one that has such a strong story behind it.

Nebraska Curriculum Standards

While looking at various states’ Nebraska's Social Studies/History curriculum standards caught my eye. I was very baffled to see that their lists of standards are more or less a broad list of things students should be familiarized with by certain time period/grade level. Beginning in the 2006-2007 school year, Nebraska has enforced the Social Studies Star Standards which stands for “Standards That Are Reported.” The first thing one reads on this page is, “In order to reduce the amount of time and effort needed to assess and report social studies standards, a subset of social studies standards have been designated as STAR Standards for grade levels 2-4, 5-8, and 9-12.” What stuck out to me in this defining sentence were two words: TIME and EFFORT. It specifically states that these standards were set up to “reduce the amount of time and effort needed to assess and report standards.” This is baffling because it treats standards as such a small detail in student learning. To me it almost seemed as if social studies standards were not important and tedious to accomplish but since it is something required, they will list a few broad requirement for students so that they are getting some relevant material but not specifics.

As I continued reading through the list of standards for differing grade levels I realized that standards were not specifically listed for each individual grade level rather they were implemented for grade groups such as standards for grades 2-4, 5-8 and 9-12. There were no specifics stating that 9^th grade students will be required to take such and such history class focusing on American History from 1876 to the present for example. Rather, the standards presented as bullet points with topic headlines. Headlines consist of topics such as United States History, Civics/Government and Economy, Geography, Historical Analysis etc. and listed under each one were short bullet points stating what students should know by the end up 5^th grade, 8^th grade and 12^th grade respectively. I was surprised though to read that the bullet points were so open. For example one of the bullet points stated under what students will develop about historical analysis by the end of 12^th grade stated:

· Analyze documents, records, and data, e.g., artifacts, diaries, letters, photographs, journals, newspapers, and historical accounts.

I though this was good and that students should definitely have introductions to all of these things BUT, I was appalled at how non-specific this list was. I believe that there are a list of specific documents, data, letters etc. that students SHOULD be familiarized with in addition to whatever else a teacher wants to present to her students. If a teacher has this open criteria and is able to present any ole documents he/she wants, they could present some irrelevant piece that he/she may have found interesting but in all reality will not help student’s knowledge in knowing the important/significant pieces of history. Some students could potentially go through all of their schooling and not know what the Declaration of Independence is or who helped to write it etc.

This assignment motivates me to look at other, especially our own to see the differences in standards. Are the standards of other states similar to this and I just never realized it or is Nebraska an exception?