This paper looks at how preservationists in Oregon Hill, a gentrifying neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia, appropriated the identity of its working class residents, particularly through claims on a particular cluster of houses. By reframing the meaning of the houses, from homes to sites of historic significance, the preservationists began to “write” themselves into their environment. That is, by engaging the site of the houses both temporally (through narrative) and spatially (by establishing political boundaries), preservationists carved out a space for themselves in the neighborhood. This paper addresses the problems with this process, including the preservationists’ apparent lack of regard for a viable community as anything more than artifact, but also their masking of racial tensions in the neighborhood. Ultimately, though, it shows that preservation is a progressive act, and further, that place, rather than a representation of either progress or preservation, is actually the scene of the dialectic between both.
","abstract_html":"<p>This paper looks at how preservationists in Oregon Hill, a gentrifying neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia, appropriated the identity of its working class residents, particularly through claims on a particular cluster of houses. By reframing the meaning of the houses, from homes to sites of historic significance, the preservationists began to “write” themselves into their environment. That is, by engaging the site of the houses both temporally (through narrative) and spatially (by establishing political boundaries), preservationists carved out a space for themselves in the neighborhood. This paper addresses the problems with this process, including the preservationists’ apparent lack of regard for a viable community as anything more than artifact, but also their masking of racial tensions in the neighborhood. Ultimately, though, it shows that preservation is a progressive act, and further, that place, rather than a representation of either progress or preservation, is actually the scene of the dialectic between both.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Libby, Kelley"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"English","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["David Coogan","Laura Browder","Elizabeth Hodges","John Accordino"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2010,"date_issued":"2010-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2010-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:53:18Z","subjects":["gentrification","identity","displacement","rhetoric","Oregon Hill","progress","preservation","Arts and Humanities","English Language and Literature"],"languages":[],"rights":["© The Author"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/85"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/85","href":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/85","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.25772/MQTS-MX98","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["David Coogan","Laura Browder","Elizabeth Hodges","John Accordino"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Libby, Kelley"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2215-05-14T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["English"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["gentrification","identity","displacement","rhetoric","Oregon Hill","progress","preservation","Arts and Humanities","English Language and Literature"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["© The Author"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://doi.org/10.25772/MQTS-MX98","https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/85"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This paper looks at how preservationists in Oregon Hill, a gentrifying neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia, appropriated the identity of its working class residents, particularly through claims on a particular cluster of houses. By reframing the meaning of the houses, from homes to sites of historic significance, the preservationists began to “write” themselves into their environment. That is, by engaging the site of the houses both temporally (through narrative) and spatially (by establishing political boundaries), preservationists carved out a space for themselves in the neighborhood. This paper addresses the problems with this process, including the preservationists’ apparent lack of regard for a viable community as anything more than artifact, but also their masking of racial tensions in the neighborhood. Ultimately, though, it shows that preservation is a progressive act, and further, that place, rather than a representation of either progress or preservation, is actually the scene of the dialectic between both.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Fighting for Place: The Rhetoric of Preservation in a Gentrifying Urban Neighborhood"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["David Coogan","Laura Browder","Elizabeth Hodges","John Accordino"],"dc:creator":["Libby, Kelley"],"dc:date.available":["2215-05-14T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This paper looks at how preservationists in Oregon Hill, a gentrifying neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia, appropriated the identity of its working class residents, particularly through claims on a particular cluster of houses. By reframing the meaning of the houses, from homes to sites of historic significance, the preservationists began to “write” themselves into their environment. That is, by engaging the site of the houses both temporally (through narrative) and spatially (by establishing political boundaries), preservationists carved out a space for themselves in the neighborhood. This paper addresses the problems with this process, including the preservationists’ apparent lack of regard for a viable community as anything more than artifact, but also their masking of racial tensions in the neighborhood. Ultimately, though, it shows that preservation is a progressive act, and further, that place, rather than a representation of either progress or preservation, is actually the scene of the dialectic between both.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://doi.org/10.25772/MQTS-MX98","https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/85"],"dc:rights":["© The Author"],"dc:subject":["gentrification","identity","displacement","rhetoric","Oregon Hill","progress","preservation","Arts and Humanities","English Language and Literature"],"dc:title":["Fighting for Place: The Rhetoric of Preservation in a Gentrifying Urban Neighborhood"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["English"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:53:18Z"}