Whenever someone asks me where I live, I slip into a comatose state in preparation for the inevitable Q&A session to follow. 45th and Pine. Yes, I go to Penn. No, it’s not dangerous. No, it’s not a long walk. And no, I don’t have classes in DRL (thank god — but not because of the walk).

When I moved into my apartment last July, I spent the rest of the summer exploring the neighborhood: concerts at Clark Park , Thai food on Baltimore, late night jazz at Abyssinia. The feel is totally different than at Penn — it’s like you’re in a neighborhood, a successful experiment in diversity that’s authentic and interesting.

Summer farmers’ market in Clark Park (Caroline New/DP)

So I found yesterday’s article in the DP on posters protesting gentrification (”Penntrification”) particularly interesting. The posters all depict Penn negatively — focusing on the effect of Penn expansion on the pre-existing community. I think Penn should take these objections seriously, especially given its history.

An article last September in Philadelphia Weekly detailed The Black Bottom — the mostly black working class community that existed in the area now occupied by Penn and Drexel. That community was demolished and displaced by Penn. Penn part-time professor Walter Palmer said in PW that “[Penn] started buying up properties and not doing anything with them. They just let those properties sit there deteriorating, creating an eyesore, and then people were pressured to sell. They had the use of eminent domain to hang over the homeowners’ heads, so they could drive the prices down to where they wanted them.” And Penn certainly hasn’t escaped allegations of racism in the Black Bottom situation.

But that was mostly in the 50’s and 60’s — naturally Penn is different now. It’s hard to refute the visible changes in the neighborhood over the past decade. The retail success. The continued construction and improvement. “Penntrification” has increased property values as well as rent.

There’s truth to both sides: Penn has certainly improved the area, but local residents are being forced to relocate due to rent increases. There isn’t an obvious answer. The issue needs to be studied; the University should work with the community in mitigating the adverse effects of development.

Luckily, most of Penn’s future construction will probably take place east — in the recently acquired and unoccupied postal lands.

Buddha reviews his very swanky kingdom at ritzy “Buddakan” restaurant downtown. (www.gophila.com) I>

Philadelphia has an amazing downtown restaurant scene – that’s something I figured out immediately after moving here. Everyone knows the big names: Morimoto , Bistro Romano , Le Bec-Fin , Alma de Cuba (to do injustice to the full list).

For those evenings when you don’t feel like going downtown, University City is home to an exotic assortment of restaurants, though not of the magnitude of Center City. But change is on the West Philly horizon: a recent article in the Philadelphia Business Journal sees West Philadelphia as on the verge of a “restaurant renaissance.”

The article claims that “since 2001, at least eight new upscale restaurants have opened in University City.” This fall, Jose Garces – chef of Amada fame – plans to open a Mexican restaurant in the HUB, the new building at 40th and Chestnut. Farther west at 50th and Baltimore, Dock Street Brewery is set to open this year, offering beer tastings and brewing lessons.

A brewery ten blocks from campus?!? (dinesite.com)

Wharton sophomore Samuel Pierce, a HUB resident who frequented POD — the Stephen Starr restaurant at 36th and Sansom – about five times per week last semester. He commented on the new Mexican restaurant: “I’m optimistic; I hope it’s going to be nice…some place I like to eat.” Pierce said he was uncertain of when the new Mexican restaurant was opening – he heard it could be next year.

A “restaurant renaissance” in West Philadelphia is an exciting notion – an opportunity not only to expand the fine dining selection, but to provide jobs and act as a tangible result of efforts to revitalize the district.

Still, regardless of a “renaissance,” many of us simply cannot afford to drop $60 in one sitting. But if you’re looking for an amazing meal and deal, Center City Restaurant Week begins next weekend. For those unfamiliar with this heavenly program, dozens of restaurants in Center City offer a meal (a minimum of three courses) for $30 per person. The next Restaurant Week begins January 28th and ends February 2nd: reservations are recommended.

Bon appétit.

Congressman Chaka Fattah (www.blackpolicy.org.)

Mayoral candidate and U.S. Rep. Chaka Fattah released details yesterday outlining prospective ethics reform in Philadelphia. If elected, Fattah plans to put an end to no-bid contracts and setup a waste and fraud reporting hotline. The only preferential contracts would be to firms that employ Philadelphians, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer .

More surprisingly, Fattah laid out the ambitious proposal of a weekly relocation of the mayoral office to neighborhoods across Philadelphia–as well as a monthly first-come first-serve opportunity for Philadelphians to meet with the mayor and discuss local issues. These mayoral relocations would certainly be an unorthodox, though intriguing exhibition of open-government, the beginning of what Fattah foresees as “a new era of openness unlike any ever seen in our city.”

This announcement comes after The Committee of Seventy, a non-partisan organization that campaigns to improve the ethical conduct of elected officials in the Philadelphia area, issued a letter to the current mayoral candidates requesting a commitment to an outline of ethics reform. The top issues involved government transparency, integrity, and positive reform.

Fattah expressed his support for these comprehensive principles, yet didn’t commit to the specifics developed by The Committee of Seventy. All of the declared mayoral candidates claim to support at least the overarching principles of The Committee of Seventy.

Fattah’s announcement today, however, demonstrates a conception of community outreach from the mayor’s office that, if practiced, would be unprecedented. Imagine the accessibility of a mayor whose office could easily be around the corner from your home. The potential for understanding the concerns of Philadelphians–by hearing it not from an aide, but from the citizens themselves.

Fattah’s initiatives point in the right direction. But are they feasible? Could the mayor of Philadelphia, with a convoluted schedule and a tremendous work-load, make the time to meet with Philadelphians and discuss the issues? Is it logistically reasonable to operate virtual City Halls all around the city?

These are just a few questions Fattah can expect. As for now, it’s refreshing to see that ethics reform is a priority for the Congressman, and that he’s willing to articulate the details of how he plans to take on such a task.

This week, Penn Law student Kate McMahon brought the issue of the death penalty closer to home. In her article in Philadelphia Weekly, she detailed the pattern of death by discrimination in Philadelphia.

For example, a 1998 study by professors David Baldus and George Woodword concluded that Black capital defendants in Philadelphia were almost four times as likely to be sentenced to death as nonblacks who committed similar murders.

McMahon cited more recent statistics concerning the makeup of 27 inmates sentenced after both the 1997 release of a videotape showing Jack McMahon, at that time a DA candidate, supporting the removal of blacks from jury panels, and the public release of Baldus’ study.

Of the 27 sentenced to death, 24 were black. This suggests ongoing racial discrimination — a slap in the face of justice. But arguments about justice are not likely to attract the attention of legislators. The real way to get their attention is to talk about money.

A Duke University study found that the death penalty in North Carolina costs $2.6 million more for each execution than sentencing a convicted murderer to life imprisonment.

The financial angle may work for state-wide reform: just look across the Delaware. Members of the New Jersey Legislature are planning to abolish the death penalty statewide.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported last week that a 13-member commission — created last year to study the issue — concluded this month that the New Jersey death penalty program is costly to taxpayers. Their report claims housing an inmate on death row costs $72,602 a year, compared to a general population inmate cost of $40,121 a year.

Reform seems less likely here in Pennsylvania. Gov. Rendell supports the death penalty, and the state legislature is generally not in support of abolition. But Rep. Chaka Fattah , who represents Penn’s district in the U.S. House of Representatives, is working on the Innocent Life Protection Act, which requires any State that sentenced to death someone who was later found innocent to abolish the death penalty for at least ten years.

From wrongful convictions to the financial expense, evidence is mounting against the death penalty. At the same time, death row is still expanding. With any luck, Pennsylvania legislators will take a close look at the evidence — including the financial findings of New Jersey’s commission — and decide to move Pennsylvania towards a more humane and fiscally responsible alternative to the death penalty.

I don’t have many heroes. That guy who self-amputated after his arm was trapped beneath a boulder “FDR” Al Green. That’s about it. Oh, except for Stephen Hawking.

Take the mind of your average man — think of it as a star. Now collapse it, expose it to the physical extremes of the universe, and observe with awe the resulting supernova. This is the mind of Stephen Hawking. A stellar emission of creativity and intellect and wit.

He holds 12 honorary degrees, revolutionized the understanding of black holes, and wrote A Brief History of Time — a clear and guiding introduction to cosmology. He also survived amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s Disease), a motor neuron disease that has surrendered virtually his entire body to a state of paralysis (the scrunching of his right cheek is articulated as his voice via a computer system).

Distinguished no doubt — but Hawking wants more. He’s been on the frontier of theoretical physics for long enough; now, he’s looking towards the Final Frontier.

Remember Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic service that charges a mere $200,000 for a trip to the edge of space? The Associated Press reported yesterday that Hawking has chosen Virgin Galactic as his space travel service of choice — rocketting its clients nearly 87 miles above the Earth for the two hour mother of all trips. The proposed launch date is in 2009.

The logistics of such a trip are beyond me, though I imagine it would be difficult to safely transport someone in Hawking’s physical condition to space. Virgin Galactic appears to be taking an ambivalent position of enthusiasm without specificity.

I can’t help it. I so desperately want this man to go to space.
Imagine Hawking’s watering eyes peering through a window in the spacecraft, Strauss’ The Blue Danube playing la 2001: A Space Odyssey, observing the galactic majesty that he’s studied in theory for decades (sans black holes).

With a mind as singular as his, who knows: maybe he’ll come to some startling realization while meditating in zero-gravity. Could the unification of physics be as simple as sending Stephen Hawking to space?

I have no idea.

Stephen Hawking in space is like a paleontologist observing a velociraptor. It”s hilarious and a little frightening, but there’s something poetic about uniting man and an object he has dilligently studied yet never encountered. We’re technologically able to take trips to outer space; we should be technologically able to take Stephen Hawking. This mission is possible.