Basil Chiasson
November 21st 2011
Anth 201-004
Yellow Card
Gang
Leader for a Day: A Rogue Sociologist Takes to the Street by Sudhir Venkatesh.
New York. Penguin Books, 2008, 238 pp US $16.00
In his book Gang
Leader For a Day, graduate sociology student Sudhir Venkatesh performs
research on people living in the Robert Taylor projects located on the South side
of Chicago. In his research, he interviews and observes project tenants
including: squatters, pimps, prostitutes, police officers, local community
leaders, street hustlers and the members of the community who simply try to survive
in the projects. Venkatesh uncovers many truths about the projects that may
never have been told without his research.
Initially,
Venkatesh’s research is traditional surveying of project tenant’s but he soon finds this
method of gathering information ineffective, as many people he talks to openly
tell him that they believe that this method will get him nowhere and that he
should try something else (7-8). After being mistaken for a Mexican spy and
held hostage by members of the local gang the Black Kings, Venkatesh develops a
relationship with the local gang leader J.T. (18-19). Through this
relationship, Venkatesh is gradually exposed to members of the community and
starts to get an understanding of what it is like to be poor and black in
Chicago’s inner-city.
One of the first major surprises to Venkatesh
about project life is that in times of emergency, no one calls the police or
ambulances. This seems to be because there is a belief that the police are uncomfortable
with and apathetic towards the members of the projects. Instead, the members of
the Black Kings will be notified of the emergency and they will seek proper
action. In one instance, a woman living in one of the buildings who was
pursuing a career in modeling was beaten up by her manager. The woman was
driven to the hospital and the man who beat her up was beaten up himself by
members of the gang. This type of conduct was demonstrated again later in the
book at drive-by shootings that occurred at outdoor building parties. Venkatesh
was shocked when no one called the police, but deferred to members of the gang
to retaliate accordingly.
This
was not the only case of members of the Robert Taylor projects avoiding dealing
with the authorities. Instead of calling the fire department or maintenance,
Robert Taylor residents would bring their troubles to the head of the building council,
Ms. Bailey. At first it seemed that Ms. Bailey was performing a valiant service
for her tenants, but as time went on and she allowed more access and
information to Venkatesh, it became clear that this was not the case. Most of
the time, if tenants actually wanted something accomplished they had to bribe Ms.
Bailey, and in some cases had to do so continuously. This included those who
where living there illegally as well as the gangs who wanted permission to sell
drugs on the premises without her interference.
It
also seemed that members of the police were involved in their own kind of
“hustle”. Venkatesh personally saw an officer raid someone’s home and beat him
because he had not given the officer his “cut” of the revenue he made from
selling cocaine (235-236).
Even the members of the projects who tried to obey the law had a hard time surviving. Many groups of women, for example would form networks that exchanged services such as cooking and babysitting for one another(196-197).
Even the members of the projects who tried to obey the law had a hard time surviving. Many groups of women, for example would form networks that exchanged services such as cooking and babysitting for one another(196-197).
Despite the fact that Venkatesh’s findings were
profoundly informative and insightful, it must not be overlooked that he broke
many ethical codes for conducting research to get this information. First,
despite the fact that his professors and advisors told him that he should focus
on the poverty in general of the Chicago projects, he continued to focus
primarily on the gang life of the Black Kings. Second, Venkatesh was not always
direct in his intentions with the people he interviewed and studied. In most
cases he would not tell people much, if anything about who he was other than
that he was doing research for the university (earning him the nickname “The
Professor”). The most questionable case
of misleading his research participants was with J.T., the gang leader who in
many ways was the primary subject of his research. J.T. was constantly under
the impression that Venkathesh was actually writing about him and all of the
supplemental research was just for background about who he was. Although never
outright denying it, Venkatesh never told J.T. the true nature of research.
Finally, since Venkatesh was spending so much time with the gang, he was
invlolved unintentionally in activity that could have gotten him into a lot of
trouble. This included being around when there was conspiracy of explicit illegal
action such as where the “foot soldiers” of the gang would sell their drugs and
even what the retaliation plan was for after a drive by shooting. If Venkatesh had
to testify in court, he would either have to lie, which could spoil the
validity of his research, or tell the truth, which would earn contempt or even
violent action from the gang.
If
not for the above infringements of research conduct however, it is possible
that Venkatesh would not have been able to get such comprehensive data and thus
the true nature of inner-city poverty may never have been fully revealed.
