Colegiales/Brooklyn

This page provides a brief history and summary of the cultural and politics of the Colegiales and Brooklyn neighborhoods in Buenos Aires and New York. Click here for an in depth comparative analysis of the two beats.

When looking at the city of Buenos Aires as a whole, Colegiales is certainly understated. It doesn’t have the haunting luxury of Recoleta, or the colorful painted history of La Boca. There’s not the rich nightlife brought on by gentrification that you’d find in its hermana cercana to the south, Palermo, and don’t look for the oldworld, 17th century European architecture that is common of San Telmo, because you won’t find it. Only recently has the northwestern barrio even been deemed a neighborhood of its own, separating from its slightly larger sister, Chacarita. And yet, within this quiet, mostly residential Buenos Aires neighborhood lies a distinct and rich history. Colegiales is, in a sense, a solid brick house, each brick of culture and each reason behind its politics meticulously planned by the history of the bricks that came before it.

(To jump to Brooklyn, click here)

Originally, the area in which Chacarita de los Colegiales stands was a home for Jesuits and their students. The mission began as early as the fifteenth century, when Spanish Monarchs like that of Ferdinand and Isabella, Charles the Fifth, and Philip the Second began to see their newly acquired territories in the Americas as grounds for religious redevelopment, or, in the words of John Lomax, “a precious opportunity to gather whole nations of heathen into the Christian fold.” It was the Jesuits’ job to convert the indigenous tribes that they met in Argentina and other Spanish territories to Christianity. They usually traveled in pairs, a priest and his assistant. Together, these pairs developed entire functioning neighborhoods, creating productive farms, towns, and making trade agreements with other local communities. In Chacaritas de Colegiales specifically, they would meet together with the indigenous people in chacras (small farms) and quintas (country houses)to hold religious retreats, therefore giving the area a name, which translates roughly in English to “little school smallholdings” or “little farm schools.” Over about two centuries, the Jesuits accomplished with few men what often took thousands of conquistadores much longer: they built, more or less, a functioning community.

Little is known about the inner workings of these communities, but it is hard to imagine that they are perhaps as cohesive as Lomax writes. After all, Argentina has a painful history with their native population, and the Spanish have none the better. The Jesuit expeditions happened only a century after conquistadores such as Hernán Cortés and Francisco Pizarro took the famed cities belonging to the Aztecs and the Incas, respectively. And, later on in Argentina’s history, a century after the disappearance of the Jesuits, Julio A. Roca, led the famed “Conquest of the Deserts,” which relocated and slaughtered the indigenous tribes in order to clear the land for settlers. Roca, “portrayed by some as the originator of economic dependency and a murderer of innocent Amerindian women and children” by others, is Argentina’s only concrete example of the country’s interactions with indigenous tribes, and his “conquests” certainly weren’t peaceful ones.

Ultimately, regardless of whether their relationship with the natives were peaceful or not, the Jesuits are now all but forgotten. Those who were against the mission called it a cloak for greed; they complained that the Jesuits were actually working gold and silver mines stolen from the natives, under the guise of spreading Christianity. Under pressure, the crown put an end to the missions, and the Jesuits were deported to Spain in 1767. Still, the Spanish Crown used the models that the Jesuits had created, “approving…constitution[s] based upon the system and methods of the Jesuits,” in an attempt to preserve the communities that already existed. Ultimately, these efforts to preserve community failed; most of the indigenous tribes fled without the assurance of the priests, leaving behind ruins. And yet, the space in Colegiales was clear and domesticated, paving the way for Colegiales’ eventual inclusion into the city of Buenos Aires when new Spanish settlers arrived. They took over, and kept the land maintained for the droves of European immigrants that would settle the land in a few short years.

The first immigrants of this new wave that settled the Chacarita/Colegiales area began to arrive during the 19th century, under the government of Bernardino Rivadavia. During this time,

immigration was a smart move—it was subsidized and completely friendly to Europeans. They enjoyed, even as foreigners in a new land, basic civil rights such as freedom of assembly and the right to vote, and naturalization was encouraged and a fairly simple process. According to, since Colegiales and Chacarita were far away from the working center, towards the northeast  part of the city, the neighborhoods were typically inhabited by wealthier immigrants, such as the Germans and the British.

In 1871, a massive yellow fever outbreak hit the city of Buenos Aires. While the outbreak is better known within the history of San Telmo, because of the devastation if left behind in the then wealthy neighborhood, the disease also gravely affected the Chacaritas de los Colegiales area. Because of the body count of the epidemic, a joint German and British cemetery was built, the famous Cementerio de Chacaritas.  The outbreak of disease and the construction of the new cemetery served to inspire none other than world renowned Argentine writer, Jorge Luis Borges. Borges, in his Textos Recobrados, wrote a poem specifically about the struggles of the barrio . He invokes Chacaritas, calling the neighborhood the drain of Buenos Aires, warning that the neighborhoods which survive are those who are able to overcome death. For Borges, Chacaritas de Colegiales, because of the cemetery, pulled all of Buenos Aires towards it; the residual material from the city caught in the drain but the water escaping outside of the city towards the ocean. His advice to Chacaritas de Colegiales was that if it wanted to survive ‘sobrevives’ then it must get over death ‘sobremueres,’ perhaps meaning that neighborhoods should not focus on staying alive, but rather moving beyond death. While the poem refers to the cemetery, his lines bring into question what factors give a neighborhood a life force, aside from the people who may live there.

Currently, Colegiales is known for being residential and a quiet escape from its neighbors of Palermo and Belgrano. The neighborhood, minus the commercial glamour, has one of the  highest employment rates in the city, over 65%. Yet, surprisingly, Colegiales has one of the highest population densities in the city. You’d never know it walking the streets. The cobblestone streets are shaded by mature trees. The only noises you hear are from schoolchildren and passing cars. And there are many churches, perhaps reminiscent of the area’s Jesuit past or of the droves of Spanish and Italian immigrants who settled in Buenos Aires and spread to Colegiales over the years. There is a flea market held on Avenida Dorrego, towards the southern part of the neighborhood. Ironically, it would stand in parallel to the cemetery, and to Borges’ poem of rebirth, of putting old things to new use, but it never seems to be open. Walking along the tranquil streets next to stylishly designed buildings and elaborate murals, it would almost be easy to forget that Argentina is a country suffering from poverty if not for a homemade housing strip by the abandoned railroad tracks. While clearly new, since only one floor has been built yet, it serves as a reminder that space, even neighborhood space, could be taken over by anyone who makes a claim.

And this effort to make a claim not only extends into the physical space; it extends into politics as

well. In 2001, after an intense period of defaulting on loans from other countries, privatizing industries that were previously owned by the government, and false inflation to match the rate of the US dollar, Argentina collapsed into a financial crisis. Private bank accounts were frozen. The Argentine peso was suddenly useless. People took to the streets in massive, violent protests. The country went through four presidents in the span of two days. It was a turbulent time, to say the least. And yet, the financial crisis seemed to crack open the city, to create unique fusion of the social and the political. As Marina Sitrin writes, “In communities across the country, people greeted one another, kissing on the cheeks neighbors whose names they had never know. They began to ask questions together. This is how the neighborhood assemblies were formed.” One of these neighborhood assemblies, in fact, existed in Colegiales. They grew organically, pulling together a neighborhood in a period of intense panic and anger, creating not only a place to voice political opinions but a place to find shelter from the storm, so to speak.

The neighborhood assembly in Colegiales, along with the other neighborhoods in Buenos Aires, operated on the principle of horizontalism—“creating a space where participants look directly at the people across from them, discuss the things that matter the most, and decide the agenda together. [It] embodies a critique of hierarchy and authority…and creating new relationships.” Horizontalism, in the case of Colegiales, may seem redundant. The neighborhood gives off sense of being very tight knit. There are multiple churches, multiple schools and universities, few businesses. People greet one another on the streets often. However, the financial crisis opened up the doors for political critiques from the point of a neighborhood, and created a support system over a geographical area, rather than through the church or who your direct neighbors were. The economic crisis, though devastating, wove a new layer of mesh over what seems to be a tightknit community.

The horizontalism of Buenos Aires also brought politics into people’s home domains. As one assembly member said, the point of these popular movements was to “take the idea… ‘closer to where people live.’”15 In doing this, the assemblies did not allow Porteños to forget the active  participation that is required in a functional democracy. Initially, the neighborhood assemblies rejected what seemed to have failed Argentine politics at that time—representative democracy and a capitalist economy. The Neighborhood Assembly of Colegiales (Asamblea Vecinal de Colegiales) tried to boycott the elections of 2003, however other assemblies did not follow and 78% of the electorate voted. The discord between neighborhoods shows that the vehicle driving ideological decision-making was built on a neighborhood level.

The populist assembly movement was also a scramble for control over market forces that were acting autonomously on neighborhoods. One member, from a Palermo assembly, expressed this sentiment well; “What we didn’t want was that the market god imposed on us the neighborhood where we should live. . . . one stakeholder was missing, and that was the neighbors: what kind of neighborhood we wanted to have, what kind of neighborhood we wanted to live in (October 2011).” By using location to organize, these groups made 16 a claim on their neighborhood and used this claim as social capital. These assemblies were formed to give the people in the neighborhood power over how it changes. These assemblies faded away by 2011, either because of divisions within the groups or because members felt that enough of their political demands had been met. Or perhaps the tight knit aspect of their community loosened once there were not long strong, outward, economic pressures that forced everyone to come together. Their momentary place in Argentine political and social life filled a gap left by rampant corruption and exploitative market forces. The Occupy Wall Street movements in the United States in 2011 followed a similar pattern.

Colegiales has seen much over the years. It has gone from being a space of worship to a space of protest, from a bustling, an unfamiliar home for immigrants to a peaceful haven for those who live and walk there.The presence of the cemeteries, the churches, and the flea market show that the past
is present in the neighborhood. During the 2001 crisis Colegiales developed its own distinct identity as people, fed up with the political elite, began to look around at each other, at the people that they share the same space with. Although residents of Colegiales still tend to vote in similar patterns, according to Electoral Hack 2011, this reflects the general anti-Kirchner sentiment of the wealthy rather than the solidarity seen during the 2001 crash. And as proved from this, Colegiales is ever-evolving. It shifts to match the city, as political and cultural aspects of the city change. Though quiet, sleepy, and understated on any tourist’s “Guide to Buenos Aires,”, Colegiales has an incredibly rich history. Over time, it has served as a source of identity and a voice for its people, and though that has faded as the assemblies dissolved, this sense of community, and this ultimate intermingling between the past and the present can still be felt.

Drake

BROOKLYN L LINE

Brooklyn, at present the most populous and second most geographically robust borough in the Greater New York metropolitan area, has been historically and developmentally animated by forces of change stemming from the area’s changing infrastructure and connection to other parts of the city, shifts in local ethnic demographics and sociopolitical dynamics and subsequently in community character, trends in business and industry, and most recently by the effects of gentrification accompanying an urban environment’s emergence as an increasingly global entity (according to Neil Smith’s characterization). King’s County, the area we presently associate with the common label “Brooklyn,” for nearly three and a half centuries was broken into several distinct and semi autonomous towns. Originally named “Breuckelen” by the Dutch (the first Europeans to settle the region in the mid-17th century), the area remained largely open and undeveloped (compared to the Brooklyn of today) until the explosive growth of the city in the early 19th century spread across the East River with the increased accessibility made possible by the development of steam ferry transportation. Originally, Breuckelen served as a way station of sorts, for ferries carrying goods and cargo making their way toward New Amsterdam (Furman 1824). The East River Waterfront’s industrial and shipping sectors in Brooklyn had enormous and sustained prominence because of this original use and location, but eventually Brooklyn’s rapid development demanded the types of housing, goods and services that could support a growing population of permanent residents immigrating primarily from Ireland, Germany, and England, and ultimately those seeking a better lifestyle across the bridges (Brooklyn and Williamsburg) constructed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Wall and Cantwell 2004: 147).

Our group’s beat focuses on three portions of neighborhoods situated along the L Train subway line. So the discussion here of the history, culture, and politics of our fragmented beat (relative to other groups) will be broken up accordingly so we may address the differences present among these locales: in (I) Williamsburg (Bedford Avenue station), (II) in the East Williamsburg Industrial Park (EWIP) and a small portion of Bushwick (Morgan avenue station), and (III) in Cypress Hills/East New York (Broadway Junction / Atlantic Avenue stations).

(I) Williamsburg

In 1792, a city lot grid was laid out by Richard Woodhull, who had purchased land centered about North 2nd Street near the epicenter of what we know today to be Williamsburg. He was hoping to attract residents of New York City to suburban living, but it wasn’t until 1827 that the area was incorporated into a village and granted a proper charter within the town of Bushwick. The early-mid 19th century brought an enormous boom in industry and prosperity to the Greater New York area, inciting many industrially minded capitalists and developers to set down roots in Williamsburg and surrounding areas in Brooklyn. Pharmaceuticals (Pfizer), Sugar (Amstar and Domino), Oil (Astral and Standard), and Glass (Corning Ware) were just a few of the industries and companies that found their start and early footing in this portion of the city. Once the Williamsburg Bridge was constructed in 1903, the floodgates were essentially opened for an influx of new residents to the area, primarily driven by the re-location of many Jewish communities from the Lower East Side seeking better living and working conditions. This specific exodus from Manhattan established the Hasidic communities that presently dominate Williamsburg’s south side.

By 1917, the population of Williamsburg had nearly doubled from its levels at the turn of the century, and had the most densely populated blocks in the entirety of the Greater New York area. In the early-middle portions of the twentieth century, new enormous housing projects would replace the older buildings that failed to support the continuing influx of immigrants seeking work among the burgeoning industrial complexes that had become established along the waterfront. Throughout the 1980s, an enormous set of Hispanic communities began to set down roots in Williamsburg’s south side, a population that remains present today despite the encroachment of rapidly gentrifying (or completely gentrified) real estate markets (Brooklyn Public Library). According to the NYC Department of Planning, between 1991 and 2002, nearly 40% of industrial jobs in Williamsburg and Greenpoint were eliminated (Dept. Of Planning – nyc.gov).

For roughly the past two decades, Williamsburg has experienced the growing pains and aches of gentrification, as upper-middle class populations have effectively forced out many of the lower-income residents who had called the area home for much of the past century. In walking around Williamsburg, many glossy new buildings and re-developed industrial spaces are around nearly every corner, and a series of massive (yet largely vacant!) luxury high-rise apartments are situated at the recently-re-zoned waterfront. Williamsburg was until quite recently a hotbed for creative-types seeking a fringe lifestyle, until a recent second-wave of gentrifying real estate trends have started to price-out the artists and musicians who had originally characterized the area’s most recent demographic shifts.

Despite ethnic and socioeconomic divergences among populations inside and near Williamsburg, voting statistics show that political allegiances are unequivocally Democratic, albeit with below-average voter turnout (nycelectionatlas.com). Walking around Williamsburg today, there is an overabundance of kitschy shops peddling vintage clothing and records, overpriced niche and specialty food items (e.g. The Meatball Shop), and no shortage of street vendors pushing décor and clothing characteristic of the gentrifying populations pushing further east towards Bushwick and East New York. It is bustling with bar-culture revelry and nightlife, however the prominent independent galleries and music venues that once attracted many of the fringe community artists to the area (spaces like Glasslands, 285 Kent, Death By Audio, etc.) have been bought out by large companies like VICE in an effort to expand their footprints in edgy and up-and-coming neighborhoods like Williamsburg.

(II) EWIP/Bushwick

The East Williamsburg Industrial Park has been recently overtaken by a wave of gentrifying populations moving east after being priced out of Williamsburg and Greenpoint, seeking cheaper living in recently converted industrial spaces between the Montrose Avenue and Jefferson Street L Train station stops. This movement has caused an enormous shift in both the demographics and population density of this area, as buildings that long stood relatively unused or derelict have quickly filled with this wave of new, almost exclusively white and upper-middle class, residents. The area’s ethnic majority is still securely Hispanic, with the exception of those blocks of the EWIP closest to the intersection of Bushwick and Flushing Avenues (Mapping the US Census). These major intersections typically delineate fairly strict cultural and ethnic boundaries, since historically non-white housing projects and overwhelmingly white gentrifying areas often are situated on opposite sides of major thoroughfares like Bushwick Avenue or Flushing Avenue. As in Williamsburg, despite these demographic divergences, voters in the area together showed support for democrats, albeit at a turnout rate that is significantly lower than average (nycelectionatlas.com).

As a recent New York Times article “The Williamsburg Divide” points out however, the name East Williamsburg, “doesn’t get much traction anymore, now that Bushwick has achieved its own cachet, with an assist from the HBO series “Girls”.” (Williams) The culture changes as you make your way down the path the L train follows. Chris Kiely, a resident on South First Street, notes, ““The south side is like New York in the ’80s,” he added approvingly, “the fire hydrants open, kids playing in the streets.” (Williams) Originally, the two were one, with the Village of Williamsburg being within the Town of Bushwick in 1827, and but it seems the latter is the one that still falls closest to the original Dutch name of ‘Boswijck’, meaning ‘little town in the woods’, from when it was charted in 1661. Bushwick is more of a working class neighborhood, with immigrant waves coming in the order of German, Italian then Hispanic. Early on farming was the main trade; grid patterns of the streets here, “emerged from the years of farm paddocks being gradually urbanized.” (Rauscher and Momtaz, 6) The twentieth century gave way to a more industrial tone, remnants of which are seen today in the many large factory building and garage-sized areas (though many have been converted into shops and bars, or co-working spaces such as the one that houses the artists working under The Bushwick Collective).

There is a large range of housing in Bushwick, to accommodate the variety of immigrants that populate the space. Their presence heavily informed the businesses – evidence of Germans could be seen especially in the aesthetic design and many pretzel stands lining Knickerbocker Avenue. The face of East Williamsburg and Bushwick was hit extremely hard in the 1977 fire though, largely a result of cuts in social services to upkeep residential areas and support the fire fighting organizations. Jerilyn Perine, an urban planner with the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, recalls, “While 31 low income neighborhoods in NYC were damaged in looting that night, Bushwick suffered the worst devastation…one out of every five apartments was destroyed, one third of its population left and half of its businesses were lost.” (Rauscher and Momtaz, 32). The recovery has been a slow one. By the 1980s, 80% of Bushwick’s population was unemployed, in 2002 it was still infamous as one of the poorest sections of the time with 40% of the population still reliant on public assistance. (Rauscher and Momtaz, 30). This portion of our beat exists as the very evident border between new and old Brooklyn.

<img class=”ngg-singlepic ngg-none” src=”https://bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/wp.nyu.edu/dist/4/2424/files/nggallery/haldeman-mike-3/Haldeman-Mike-3_1.png” alt=”Brooklyn Beat, East Williamsburg Industrial Park: Untitled Piece” width=”347″ height=”328″> An untitled piece covers the wall of a boarded-up warehouse in the East Williamsburg Industrial Park

East Williamsburg is where you find the pricey restaurants (Roberta’s) and thrift shops selling clothes at nearly full-priced (Beacon’s Closet), with the passerby’s on the street being mostly white and under 30. Walk a bit deeper, through empty warehouse alleyways, and the more residential Bushwick appears. The sky is noticeable – a local demand from the community in the post-fire Buschwick Action Plan was that no buildings were to reach skyscraper proportions like in Manhattan. Artists have been present since the 1990s, and is making the area quite famed for its prevalence of artistic graffiti. Fifty-plus venues are having open house art shows, drawing in culture seekers from other parts of the city. (Rauscher and Momtaz, 37) The question for the future will be if they will soon price out the residents that were there to rebuild it for them.

(III) Cypress Hills/East New York

Originally Ostwout, or “East Woods”, East New York has come a long way. Today, walking around there is hardly a tree in sight (other than the many Cypresses and Evergreens – imported by the thousands from the Catskills in the 1800s – that adorn the area comprised of four cemeteries: The Evergreens Cemetery, Salem Fields Cemetery, Cypress Hills Cemetery and Mount Carmel cemetery. The culture of the area is alive and well, however. Gentrification isn’t here…yet. Recent New York Magazine article, “The Red-Hot Rubble of East New York: How Brooklyn’s Gentrification Profiteers Are Expanding Their Boundaries”, talks with local residents about the new community plans to develop “affordable housing” here. According to NYC.gov, an apartment is considered “affordable” if a family spends approximately one-third of its income to live there.

“This is the last chance for the city to get it right,” one resident said of the mayor’s initiative. “Because

you can’t go any further east in Brooklyn.” As recently as 1983, literary critic Alfred Kazin born in the neighborhood of Brownsville, noted it looked, “worse than London did after the blitz,” so it could be supposed East New York has had nowhere to go but up. Will the up be the same gentrification process other parts of Brooklyn has faced? If the movement continues along the train paths as it has so far, maybe. “Squint at a subway map, and you can almost foresee a convergence of the brown and gray strands of gentrification emanating out of Williamsburg, the blue strand running through Fort Greene and Bed-Stuy, and the red strand from Prospect Park and Crown Heights.” Those being priced out of these areas will be first in line for the affordable housing initiatives in East New York, even though the number of applicants to spots available is already astronomically unbalanced.

Additionally, it’s both a political and cultural question of “New homes for whom?” that local resident and teacher Stephanie Reeder poses. Mayor De Blasio recent citywide policy stated the units will go to households making between $42,000 and $67,000 a year. The median income of East New York? $34,000. (Rice) According to an installation artist in Greenpoint, the stereoptypes surrounding the area are keeping this at bay. “”Their perception is that East New York is still dangerous.” (Flynn) Though in all actuality, all you see when you walk around is either the industrial areas and factories left over from the economic boom, or salons, delis, and other business to support the many diverse residents living just a few blocks from Atlantic Avenue. This is supposed to be a crime centric area, but the streets are quiet and less graffiti is present here than at the other two locations. It’s easy to see from the faces on the street East New York still stands strong in its original, local population. Going along the Brooklyn beat, an extremely interesting story is told through the visible tension between the historical and the future of the culture. Will politics change what has been tradition? East New York has essentially the same landscape and base materials as East Williamsburg/Bushwick. Will it remain a tale of two cities, or will there soon be, “20 or 30 other ones, in plain site, with plenty to teach us?” (Dwyer)♦

 

Bibliography

• Borges, Jorge Luis, and Sara Luisa Del. Carril.Textos Recobrados, 1919-1929. Barcelona: Emecé, 1997.
• “Buenos Aires Data.” Buenos Aires Ciudad. Accessed May 14, 2015.http://data.buenosaires.gob.ar/.
• Dwyer, Jim. “A Different (and Surprising) Economic Tale of New York City Emerges.” New York Times. New York Times, LLC. 17 Feb. 2015. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/18/nyregion/a-different-and-surprising-economic-tale-of-new-york-city-emerges.html?_r=0/>.
• “Elecciones 2011.”Hack Electoral . N.p., n.d. Web. 21 May 2015.
• Flynn, Gerard.”Is East New York the Next Bushwick?” 22 Jul. 2014. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://gothamist.com/2014/07/22/east_new_york_gentrification_afford.php>.
• Furman, Gabriel. Notes Geographical and Historical, Relating to the Town of Brooklyn, in Kings County on Long-Island. Brooklyn: n.p., 1824. University of Nebraska – Lincoln Digital Commons. Web.
• Gorelik, Adrian. “A Metropolis in the Pampas: Buenos Aires, 18901940” in Cruelty and Utopia: Cities and Landscapes of Latin America, Princeton: Princeton Architectural Press, 2005: 146-15
• “Greenpoint-Williamsburg Land Use and Waterfront Plan – New York City Department of City Planning.” Greenpoint-Williamsburg Land Use and Waterfront Plan – New York City Department of City Planning. p., n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/greenpointwill/greenplan3.shtml>.
• Kamil, Seth, and Eric Wakin. The Big Onion Guide to Brooklyn: Ten Historic Walking Tours. New York: New York UP, 2005. Print.
• “La Chacarita Cemetery.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015.
• Lomax, John. “A Forgotten Realm: Jesuit Rule in South America.” History Today 1 July 1958:48693. ProQuest. Web. 20 Mar. 2015.
• Manbeck, John B. Brooklyn, Historically Speaking. Charleston, SC: History, 2008. Print.
• “Mapping America: Every City, Every Block.” The New York Times. N.p., 13 Dec. 2010. Web. 24 Mar. 2015. <http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map>.
• Mauro, Sebastiá “The Movement of Popular and Neighborhood Assemblies in the City of Buenos Aires, 2002–2011.”Latin American Perspectives March (2015) : 10724. Web.
• Morse, Steve. “Brooklyn Genealogy Information.” Brooklyn Genealogy Information. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://bklyn-genealogy-info.stevemorse.org/index.html>.
• Nouzeilles, Gabriela, and Graciela R. Montaldo. “Splendor and Fin De Seicle.” InThe Argentina Reader: History, Culture, and Society . Durham: Duke University Press, 2002.
• “NYC Election Atlas.” NYC Election Atlas. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://www.nycelectionatlas.com/maps.html>.
• “Pure Information – PLUTO.” Pure Information. p., n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://pureinformation.net/projects/building-age-nyc/#12/40.7392/-73.9651>.
• Pierini, Javier “Colegiales, Buenos Aires GuideAirbnb Neighborhoods.” Airbnb. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015.
• Rauscher, Raymond Charles, and Momtaz, Salim. Brooklyn’s Bushwick – Urban Renewal in New York, USA : Community, Planning and Sustainable Environments. Cham, DEU: Springer International Publishing, 2014. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 25 March 2015.
• Rice, Andrew.”The Red-Hot Rubble of East New York: How Brooklyn’s Gentrification Profiteers Are Expanding Their Boundaries.” New York Magazine. New York Media, LLC. 28 Jan. 2015. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/east-new-york-gentrification.html>.
• SánchezAlonso, Blanca. “Making sense of immigration policy: Argentina, 18701930.Economic History Review 66, no. 2 (May 2013): 601627. Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost. Web. 20 Mar. 2015.
• Sitrin, Marina. “Horizontalism: from Argentina to Wall Street.”NACLA Report On The Americas 44, no. 6 (November 2011): 811. Alternative Press Index, EBSCOhost. Web. 20 Mar. 2015
• Wall, Diana DiZerega., and Anne-Marie E. Cantwell. Touring Gotham’s Archaeological Past: 8 Self-guided Walking Tours through New York City. New Haven: Yale UP, 2004. Print.
• Williams, Alex. “The Williamsburg Divide.” New York Times. The New York Times Company. 25 Sept. 2013. Web. 25 Mar. 2015.
• Williams, Kieth. “Brooklyn’s Evolution From Small Town To Big City To Borough.” Curbed NY. VOX Media, n.d. Web. <http%3A%2F%2Fny.curbed.com%2Farchives%2F2014%2F07%2F24%2Fbrooklyns_evolution_from_small_town_to_big_city_to_borough.php>.
• “Williamsburg History.” Williamsburg History. Brooklyn Public Library, n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2015. <http://www.bklynlibrary.org/ourbrooklyn/williamsburg/index.html>.