Did anyone else happen to see The Garden at Gateway last night? We went to see it and thought it was very well done. Oddly enough, I don't recall this being in the news when it happened, though our ignorance did help us in not knowing how the movie ended...
Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Film
The Garden
[11 posts] [7 contributors]





Rate this topic:
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Yeah, I went too. On the bright side, someone told me the organization that ran the urban farm just received a thirty million dollar grant, so hopefully they can buy land all over the city now?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Mercurius wrote >>
Yeah, I went too. On the bright side, someone told me the organization that ran the urban farm just received a thirty million dollar grant, so hopefully they can buy land all over the city now?So was I looking too much into it if what I took from the rationale/motivation behind the landowners to be pretty much racism, i.e., getting the Latinos off their land and using the soccer field as an excuse?
Posted 1 year ago # -
jarsloth wrote >>
Mercurius wrote >>
Yeah, I went too. On the bright side, someone told me the organization that ran the urban farm just received a thirty million dollar grant, so hopefully they can buy land all over the city now?So was I looking too much into it if what I took from the rationale/motivation behind the landowners to be pretty much racism, i.e., getting the Latinos off their land and using the soccer field as an excuse?
That was certainly part of it - but I think more than racism, at least at first, it was related to tensions of two separate historically impoverished under represented communities striving for influence and living on the same land. I don't think it was let's kick the Latinos off as much as it was, let's do something with this that will benefit the African Americans more. I'm not sure about the anti Semite thing that outraged the developer so much towards the end though?
Posted 1 year ago # -
i was hoping this thread discussed sex toys...damn.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Mercurius wrote >>
That was certainly part of it - but I think more than racism, at least at first, it was related to tensions of two separate historically impoverished under represented communities striving for influence and living on the same land. I don't think it was let's kick the Latinos off as much as it was, let's do something with this that will benefit the African Americans more. I'm not sure about the anti Semite thing that outraged the developer so much towards the end though?Yeah, I was wondering about that anti-semiticsm issue, they didn't really cover it, except for that one line near the end. The film maker, at least, portrayed him as being influenced by the councilwoman and the community activist. My take was the farmers called his bluff on the selling price, so there had to be another reason for not wanting to sell the property back to the farmers. Claiming anti-semetic remarks was enough reason to give without having to explain himself further. Then again, they really didn't focus too much on him, so it's hard to say what really happened or what other motives/reasons were involved.
Posted 1 year ago # -
jarsloth wrote >>
it's hard to say what really happened or what other motives/reasons were involved.That's the main thing that I found sort of frustrating about the movie. It starts off with this puzzling decision by the city council to sell the community-garden land back to a developer who's tried to get it back in court three times and failed... and they sell it back to him for the original purchase price, from God knows how many years ago. Weird thing number one.
Then there's an injunction so that we can investigate what the hell was going on in weird thing number one... and the injunction is reversed, under what seem to be odd circumstances (the ruling is not recorded and can't be used as a precedent). At least, it's never explained.
Then the developer says "Fine, I'll sell the land back to these people if they raise three times the amount of money that I just paid for it." And they do. And then he says, "You know what, screw them, I'm not selling it to them at any price. I don't like their attitude." And he bulldozes the land.
What?
(If you didn't see the movie... it really does make about that much sense.)
So they sort of leave the viewer to connect the dots. People on one side were black (and Jewish), people on the other were Latino. There were some shady financial dealings having to do with soccer field development by Concerned Citizens of South Central LA. And the developer seemed to be trying to make a buck, but then walked away from a huge profit at the end. We never really did figure out what was going on with all of this.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Perhaps I had Food, Inc. on the brain, but I was kind of expecting some sort of "here's what you can do" screen/info at the end of the documentary. I was left with an awkward and horrible feeling that racism and pride outweigh ethics in business transactions. To add to that, the bounty of available grant money to protect/create urban green space and support local food systems is probably just being blocked by local politicians that would rather not empower certain people in their communities who may not help them win the next election.
I still have lots of questions, especially - what does the 14 acre plot look like today? Quick Google search isn't bringing up much.
Here's the web page for the South Central Farmers (looks like they are still collecting donations to buy back the land): http://www.southcentralfarmers.com/
Posted 1 year ago # -
Stacky wrote >>
Perhaps I had Food, Inc. on the brain, but I was kind of expecting some sort of "here's what you can do" screen/info at the end of the documentary. I was left with an awkward and horrible feeling that racism and pride outweigh ethics in business transactions. To add to that, the bounty of available grant money to protect/create urban green space and support local food systems is probably just being blocked by local politicians that would rather not empower certain people in their communities who may not help them win the next election.
I still have lots of questions, especially - what does the 14 acre plot look like today? Quick Google search isn't bringing up much.
Here's the web page for the South Central Farmers (looks like they are still collecting donations to buy back the land): http://www.southcentralfarmers.com/2010 sat images of: 41st and S Alameda, Los Angeles shows a vacant lot with tire tracks crisscrossing it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thanks 10sun :)
That's so upsetting - it could have continued feeding 347 families, improving air and soil quality and educating the next generation of community members for the past two years and instead it is still just sitting vacant.Posted 1 year ago #
You must log in to post.



Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus.