Blog 5: Working on the Zine and other thoughts



Working on the zine

After our class last week, I am feeling better about the goals and project for the semester.  Focusing on learning about the market is both more manageable and more concrete for a small class.    The zine group is working well and the first zine seems to be coming together.   I am glad that we have Calvin who knows about layout and production.   

We have a general idea for the second zine which is summarizing/highlighting things from the interviews to answer the question “what have we learned?”   We won’t have that information until the interviews, so we can’t do much about content now.  However, once we have the first one completed, we need to think about the schedule for the second one, especially since we have a hard deadline of the event.   This will mean integrating the interview time-line with the zine time-line since the interviews are input to the final zine as well as the podcast.   I don’t have a clear sense of how this lays out. 

Readings this week

The Folklife and Fieldwork reading was very helpful – lots of concrete suggestions about setting goals and organizing fieldwork.  It summarized much of the discussion we have already had with Dr. King and the fellows/assistants, but it was helpful to see it one place – particularly the list of things you (might) need.  
I loved the Baltimore Heritage timelines, particularly the interactive one.   I am glad that we are going to have timelines – both in the zine and whatever Markele is doing – although ours will not be interactive.   I wondered why there were two timelines.  Do they have different goals?  Is there a technical reason not to put the more detailed (picture/newspaper) things on the interactive timeline?  Perhaps we could ask Eli Pousson about this?
            I have just finished reading a 1952 thesis on the history of the Lexington Markey by a graduate student at Penn State.  It makes a compelling case that the origins of the market are not accurately reflected in the popular narrative – John Eager Howard gave the land to the city in 1782 and the original building was built in 1803.  Although Howard apparently set aside space for a market in a plan in 1782, he did not give the land to the city.   In 1803, the state legislature approved purchase of land for a market which was actually purchased in 1804, not from Howard.  Howard did lease an additional piece of land to the city for 99 years in 1804.  The building was not erected until later.  Although the Baltimore Heritage timeline mentions that a historian disputes the 1782 date, it continues to use 1803 as the date for the building.  I was disappointed by this.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog 2 - Draft History of Lexington Market

Notes: ·        This is a draft addressing the history of the Lexington Market.   I was trying to get the basic narrative flow, realizing that it is a bit choppy and needs some more detail in places.     ·        I envision some kind of introductory paragraph explaining why the zine exists and why someone should read it.    This would include identifying some version of the basic question which I see as balancing the needs of the community against the economic/social interests of the city. ·        We haven’t discussed pictures – it would be nice to have at least one of the old market, with stalls etc.   There are some on the web but I don’t know the rules about using them or even how to get one into this piece. ·          I assume that the discussion of the plan will follow this section and I put a header as a suggestion. ·        As an editorial note, I was trying to use uppercase Market meaning the Lexington Market specifically and lowercase market to mean public mar
Read more

Blog 1 – Lexington Market in the Baltimore Sun

      In looking at the historical articles from the Baltimore Heritage list, I was struck by the continuing debates through the twentieth century over how to maintain and finance the markets as patterns of food-distribution and shopping changed.    In the 1920’s much of the discussion related to the need for parking to accommodate automobiles.   After the 1949 fire which gutted the original buildings, the city got a temporary structure in place in 6 months and new buildings opened in April, 1952.    The city took this opportunity to restructure the financial relationship with stall-holders, resulting in lawsuits.   These new buildings were financed by a 25 year $5.7 million bond, managed by an independent authority.   However the market did not generate enough revenue to meet the repayment schedule, and the next crisis was in 1979 when the bonds came due and $3 million of the balance remained to be paid.    The buildings also required major renovation.   After much discussion,
Read more

Blog 3 Reflections to date

Reflections to date Goals of the Project Bring information to both market vendors/customers and developers about: ·        who uses the market and how it supports the neighborhood; ·        what plans are being finalized for renovating/replacing the market; ·        how those changes will impact the market vendors/customers. In particular, we want to amplify the voices of the market customers so that they can be heard in developing and executing plans for the market. Relation of zine/podcast/event : My suggestion is to see them as building on one another rather than in conversation.    The zine would provide information for market vendors/customers about the history of the market, how it is has changed over time and what context and debates are influencing decisions about how to move forward.   That information would hopefully focus interviews for the podcast so that it would reflect voices of the market on specific issues related to the design activity.
Read more