"suele suceder"
it usually happens. that's something that i heard a lot in reference to chile last night. it usually happens. or at least in santiago. the people who comment most about santiago's downfalls are santiaguinos, the ones who try to explain to you "you see the thing about chile is..." or "no no, the thing about santiago is..." with a downtrodden voice and a lament in their eyes. to critique is to be patriotic, but i don't know if this is criticism or cynicism that's almost a national -- or at least a city-wide trend -- thing.
what usually happens is the destruction of national memory, mostly old architectural wonders of a certain time, to make room for new buildings that make eyesores out of a very historical city. one of the biggest differences i see between a city like new york and a city like santiago is that new york's city planning is reaching outward, a more gentrified burrough (spelling?) as opposed to a more gentrified new york city, since most of its own cultural wonders were the skyscrapers already constructed in the renovations of the 30s and 40s. (people of new york citizenship, please correct me if i'm wrong, and people of boston, washington and otherwise, you guys tell me what you think -- there's definitely rampant construction in washington, but in the sectors that aren't as old, probably something constructed around the 70s, but who's to justify one destruction over another, i suppose) santiago, on the other hand, reaches INTERNALLY and is not satisfied with building on the outside -- which it already is, in the upper reaches of the eastern side called las condes, cantagallo and lo barnechea -- of its own center but WITHIN its center. with that said, there are a LOT of buildings that are historical in that center -- so what happens to it? as soon as the chance to destroy a "monumento patrimonial" (a monument of the patrimony -- basically a cultural-historical monument) is had, it's taken. such is the case, and excuse all the impersonal language here, with the synagogue i just went to last night.
the shul on tarapaca and serrano (i don't even know its name...) is one of the oldest shuls in santiago. the oldest is on avenida matta and carmen, still barely alive and barely functioning. the one on tarapaca had its last wedding recently, and since no major holidays are celebrated here due to the massive migration to the eastern and upper sides of santiago, all the congregation save a few and very few old timers, are gone. they've sold it to who knows what company, and it'll be destroyed, and a shitty (sorry) building will be raised up where something wonderful, historical and cultural was. although the synagogue that people used to occupy is only 60 years old, the other side of the shul is much, much older. when the congregation grew bigger (i can assume, more research is needed, i admit) in the 40s, they expanded it to what's now the main sanctuary. a semi-circle of two levels, wooden benches that hit your butt hard when you sit down, and make your back bend slightly with age, a leaky roof from the six days of rain we just had a little while ago, the aron hakodesh (too dark to see when i went), the shadow of a short bronze gate that went around the aron hakodesh, and window carvings and stained glass windows that did not shimmer in the moonlight, rather the traffic lights and street lamps. i haven't had something wrenched from my chest so hard in a good year or so, since my great aunt died. all of this -- except the stained glass but not the lovely stone carvings that the windows enjoy -- will be knocked down.
honestly it's as if someone is dying inside there. the fact that you can hear one single drop of water in a bucket is a testament to that fact. no one seems to be too sad about it in the congregation, more resigned to the fact that it's going to happen. a couple are angry. the man who didn't even say his name, i suppose i didn't ask, just said rather plainly, "this is what happens to things in santiago...'let's get rid of this old historical building who needs it, we need a mall!'" but what does that mean for the Jewish community? it's this kinda shit i fear about Jewry in the city. is it going to die? not new york, not buenos aires, but what about all the other cities, where flocks of Jews who have the means head out of the city into the upper regions and suburbs. it's already happened in the US, and most of the Jewish community in Washington, DC is on the very outer regions of that city just on the border of maryland. and inside? transient Jews: students; interns; people toying with the new community. flimsy. and yet youthful Jewish renewal is flourishing in a wonderful sense within campuses and otherwise. but where are we headed afterward? where will the shuls go?
i don't like elegies. but i always write them. it's hard not to when something hurts. one hopes that memories survive, but it usually happens that physical memory is hard to keep.
andrew
what usually happens is the destruction of national memory, mostly old architectural wonders of a certain time, to make room for new buildings that make eyesores out of a very historical city. one of the biggest differences i see between a city like new york and a city like santiago is that new york's city planning is reaching outward, a more gentrified burrough (spelling?) as opposed to a more gentrified new york city, since most of its own cultural wonders were the skyscrapers already constructed in the renovations of the 30s and 40s. (people of new york citizenship, please correct me if i'm wrong, and people of boston, washington and otherwise, you guys tell me what you think -- there's definitely rampant construction in washington, but in the sectors that aren't as old, probably something constructed around the 70s, but who's to justify one destruction over another, i suppose) santiago, on the other hand, reaches INTERNALLY and is not satisfied with building on the outside -- which it already is, in the upper reaches of the eastern side called las condes, cantagallo and lo barnechea -- of its own center but WITHIN its center. with that said, there are a LOT of buildings that are historical in that center -- so what happens to it? as soon as the chance to destroy a "monumento patrimonial" (a monument of the patrimony -- basically a cultural-historical monument) is had, it's taken. such is the case, and excuse all the impersonal language here, with the synagogue i just went to last night.
the shul on tarapaca and serrano (i don't even know its name...) is one of the oldest shuls in santiago. the oldest is on avenida matta and carmen, still barely alive and barely functioning. the one on tarapaca had its last wedding recently, and since no major holidays are celebrated here due to the massive migration to the eastern and upper sides of santiago, all the congregation save a few and very few old timers, are gone. they've sold it to who knows what company, and it'll be destroyed, and a shitty (sorry) building will be raised up where something wonderful, historical and cultural was. although the synagogue that people used to occupy is only 60 years old, the other side of the shul is much, much older. when the congregation grew bigger (i can assume, more research is needed, i admit) in the 40s, they expanded it to what's now the main sanctuary. a semi-circle of two levels, wooden benches that hit your butt hard when you sit down, and make your back bend slightly with age, a leaky roof from the six days of rain we just had a little while ago, the aron hakodesh (too dark to see when i went), the shadow of a short bronze gate that went around the aron hakodesh, and window carvings and stained glass windows that did not shimmer in the moonlight, rather the traffic lights and street lamps. i haven't had something wrenched from my chest so hard in a good year or so, since my great aunt died. all of this -- except the stained glass but not the lovely stone carvings that the windows enjoy -- will be knocked down.
honestly it's as if someone is dying inside there. the fact that you can hear one single drop of water in a bucket is a testament to that fact. no one seems to be too sad about it in the congregation, more resigned to the fact that it's going to happen. a couple are angry. the man who didn't even say his name, i suppose i didn't ask, just said rather plainly, "this is what happens to things in santiago...'let's get rid of this old historical building who needs it, we need a mall!'" but what does that mean for the Jewish community? it's this kinda shit i fear about Jewry in the city. is it going to die? not new york, not buenos aires, but what about all the other cities, where flocks of Jews who have the means head out of the city into the upper regions and suburbs. it's already happened in the US, and most of the Jewish community in Washington, DC is on the very outer regions of that city just on the border of maryland. and inside? transient Jews: students; interns; people toying with the new community. flimsy. and yet youthful Jewish renewal is flourishing in a wonderful sense within campuses and otherwise. but where are we headed afterward? where will the shuls go?
i don't like elegies. but i always write them. it's hard not to when something hurts. one hopes that memories survive, but it usually happens that physical memory is hard to keep.
andrew