I stand with Antonio López.

Two years ago, I really do not think that I knew what gentrification meant. For me, the word had never come up in school, at home, or even on the internet. I have no clue if I was just living in a perfect little bubble or if it just wasn’t being talked about. Flashforward to the pandemic, I started hearing about things like BLM, the #MeToo movement and gentrification. I feel silly and disgusted with myself that I was so blinded by my privilege that I had no idea that things like gentrification even existed. So when learning about Antonio López’s life (https://www.barrioscribe.com/), I am so honored to know who he is and what he has done for his own future, community, and this world. Unlike many of today’s political leaders, López did not have it made for him from the start. He grew up in a low income household, worked hard in school in the Ravenswood school system, and eventually went to Duke, Oxford, and currently a doctoral candidate at Stanford. Not only has his education brought him huge success, but his role in his community as well. López is currently the youngest and newest member of City Council in East Palo Alto, his hometown. With López’s life in mind, it is no wonder why gentrification shines so bright in his poetry. For starters, López’s debut poetry collection, Gentefication, was selected by Gregory Pardlo as the winner of the 2019 Levis Prize in Poetry. From this book, his poem “Letter to the Editor” clearly shows how he breaks traditional borders of English poetry to challenge and resist the politics of gentrification. Written in the form of an actual letter, López calls out a “Ms. Kerr” who seems to be a leader in presenting a new health clinic on the “other side of the Silicon Valley’s tracks.” He asks questions to Ms. Kerr in his letter, saying things like “How come I didn’t have one white friend until I was sixteen” and “Should I unlearn Spanish so I can take the SAT II fairly?” López poses these questions about things in his life that have been pushed on him by racist and political ways. Writing this letter to the (likely white) woman and asking these questions about the circumstances behind his gentrified community shows how López is pushing for a change by speaking out for himself and the sake of his community. Writing this letter as a form of poetry, creates a space where more people like Lópex can use it as encouragement to stand up for themselves as well. In the final lines of “Letter to the Editor” López, in both spanish and english says, “Therefore, how would you feel if you and your colleagues wrote about us, and not just the negative shit?” This line is asking the woman, why aren’t you writing about the people we are, rather than the way that we look and where we live? López shows readers that even when facing political leaders, gentrification is never okay. To me, real poetry is when a poet says the word “shit” and signs the letter “a lifelong resident”. The power that López holds by not signing his name lifts up his community by speaking on behalf of everyone, creating unity, which gentrification tries to push out. People who want to be heard, will not be silenced. For what it’s worth, I stand with you. I stand with Antonio López.

Anne K. Anderson

Voices of the Unheard

Gentrification is when the original community in a neighborhood is changed due to the increase in affluent residents and business. Most locals who were in these certain neighborhoods for generations, have a strong resentment for this new movement. While others believe this is just evolution within the city to make it prosper. Growing up in California that is being gentrified before our eyes, I understand what most people go through just like Antonio López. Since gentrification is a controversial topic, lots of people steer away from bringing up the challenges most residents face when going through gentrification. When a city is being gentrified the cost of living increases and other citizens struggle and eventually have to move out of their hometown. This shift affects most minority ethnic groups and helps rich people more than anyone. Some people see gentrification as an investment while others see it as destruction to their authentic community. 

Most citizens are told to send letters or call their councilmen so real change can happen. In this letter Letter to the Editor Lòpez brought up points that many minorities think when they feel that they have been wronged. In the first paragraph Lòpez talks about how some people cut a ribbon due to a new health clinic opening. The diction that Lòpez used to describe the ribbon cutting, “a measly ribbon”, already sets the tone for this letter. Lòpez then goes on to mock the location they put the health clinic in, “The press bravely announced East Palo Alto as a ‘strategic location’ in the Silicon Valley…” as if he were mad they described East Palo Alto as a “strategic location”. The most impressive part of the poem is when Lòpez listed out five questions that this editor did not mention in her book. The question that was the most effective in my opinion was “4. Should I unlearn Spanish so I can take the SAT ॥ ‘fairly’?”, knowing how hard the SAT is for english speakers like me, I can only imagine how much non-english speakers struggled. However, as López pointed out, the city and state do not care how hard it is, you just need to pass it. Lastly, López ends the poem by asking a question, “Más que nada, cómo te parece if you and your colleagues wrote about us, and not just the negative shit?”. Having to ask someone what the first part meant, they explained to me López is asking, “More than nothing how would you like it if your colleagues wrote about us not just the negative shit”, he is wondering why can’t it ever just be positive, why only negative comments about people in his community. This poem and the rest of his poems not only cross the traditional borders of English poetry but also challenge it, while also challenging politics, politicians, and gentrification as a whole by showing true emotions within the poem. Cussing is not something that is typical for poetry, however, in this poem it brings it to life, and it makes the poem come true seeing how angry people really are about this whole process. These communities face grievances everyday, and they do not need to be burdened anymore then they already are.

Joseph Jordan

A Loss of Faith

Both poems written by Natalie Diaz, portray what marginalized people go through every day. Focusing on “Abecedarian Requiring Further Examination of Anglikan Seraphym Subjugation of a Wild Indian Rezervation”, Natalie Diaz, uses imagery in the poem to describe the “Angels” and the power they have over her own people. Usually “Angels” are seen in a positive way, however, Diaz views them as harmful beings. Many people who are discriminated against lose faith in what most people think is a good thing, like an “Angel”. Being a person of color, I understand the anxiety that many marginalized women and men go through, and I understand how it feels to lose your identity. Reading Diaz’s interview, I can relate to her when she says “an American anxiety, whether you are talking about pharmaceuticals and the rise in the number of people being treated for anxiety, or you are talking about our government.” (Diaz). This fear and anxiety has been a common theme for hundreds of years within marginalized groups throughout America.

Diaz’s poem “Abecedarian Requiring Further Examination of Anglikan Seraphym Subjugation of a Wild Indian Rezervation”, uses imagery to create a new meaning when it comes to an “Angel”. Diaz starts of the poem with “Angels don’t come to the reservation.”, when reading that the first two things I thought of were, Diaz is Native American, and why don’t Angels come to the reservation? Diaz pulls you into the poem with the very first line. Then she goes on in the third line saying  “Coyotes, too. They all mean the same thing–/ death. And death/ eats angels, Iguess, because I haven’t seen an angel”, a very negative meaning toward “Angels”, while comparing them to coyotes, bats, owls, and boxy mottled things, and also by furthering it by saying, “And death eats angels” a very deep and dark thought. Diaz then goes to compare a man named Gabe to an “angel” by saying “Sure he had wings” but then said in line 10 “jailbird that he was. He flies around in stolen cars. Wherever he stops”, then showing this Gabe person is a criminal not an “Angel”, but angels may also be like Gabe, criminals. Toward the end of the poem, is where Diaz explains how her people, Indians, were treated by these “Angels”. Diaz uses imagery to describe what an “Angel” is, “ living on clouds or sitting on thrones across the sea wearing/ velvet robes and golden rings, drinking whiskey from silver cups,/ we’re better off if they stay rich and fat and ugly and/ ’xactly where they are—in their own distant heavens.”. Most people think “Angels” are in the heavens with robes on drinking out of silver cups, and are big. Diaz painted a more ugly picture of what a regular “Angel” represents, however explains in the last line why she has such a hatred for “Angels”. In the last line Diaz says “You better hope you never see angels on the rez. If you do, they’ll be marching you off/ to/ Zion or Oklahoma, or some other hell they’ve mapped out for us.”. This is where the ending is, but the beginning actually starts. Diaz is remembering all of the horrible things that happened to her people when these “Angels” came on to her peoples land, and now she can only picture a negative image of an “Angel”.  Many marginalized people have this same view due to all of the horrific tragedies they were put through and still go through. This poem is very relatable within many communities and it accommodates how different social identities may all feel and think. 

Joseph Jordan

A Return to the Body

Natalie Diaz’s poem “My Brother at 3 A.M. is, I believe, meant to be read metaphorically. The way I read it is that the speaker’s brother represents an oppressed minority while his mother represents the majority. The back and forth is the majority not seeing the plight of the minority despite it being pointed out, something that is not uncommon in real life. The sores on the lips represent the injuries the minority has suffered over the years. The ending represents the majority finally waking up to reality and recognizing the horror.

This signals a return to the body in depicting authentic human vulnerability. The speaker describes their brother’s distress in unflatteringly blunt terms and doesn’t sugarcoat anything. For example, “He sat cross-legged, weeping on the steps” creates the image from the beginning of someone who is weak and helpless. Additionally, the poem ends with the brother’s concern accepted and legitimized by his mother, allowing him “to be fully in [his] body”; the mom goes from asking her son what drugs he is on to repeating “O God” with him. Finally, the aforementioned metaphorical meaning accommodates marginalized or silenced peoples by demonstrating that that fact can be challenged and changed; this is a poem about one person or group growing to understand and empathize with another.