When I was 8, my family had a dog named Brewster, like Punky. He was a mut from the pound and he loved us. But he could be aggressive with other people, especially men, especially the little brat boys down the street who bullied everyone and threw rocks at dogs. One day Brewster snapped at Michael, the oldest boy. I don’t remember if he broke the skin or just scared him. But one day after that I came home from school and Brewster was gone. My mom said she gave him away to family on a farm, where he could run more and there were less people around. It was sad and I was young and angry at my mom but Brewster now lived on a farm and was surely a happier dog for it. 20 years later, Brewster comes into the conversation while driving with my mom on a visit home. She says non-chalantly that she actually had Brewster put down all those years ago. It seems to me that she felt that now that I was an adult, I’d understand why she did what she did. But in my mind, she had a problem – a dog with a penchant for biting people who taunted him and threw things at him – and she took the easy way out by having him put-down rather than try to find a better solution for him. She knew at the time that the answer she had chosen wouldn’t have flown with her family, especially her children, but either time or age, she figured would have softened the blow on me, a person who genuinely was attached to Brewster. But why I recount this silly story actually has to do with the offense committed in 1989. She made a decision that she knew was not only controversial but perhaps even recognized was wrong, went ahead and acted upon it even though there were many other involved people with opinions on the subject who had the right to be a part of the decision and were affected directly by it and then lied about the “good intentions” behind the decision as if it were really made in the best interest of Brewster and the children of Elmwood Avenue.This actually has relevance to landscape architecture:
I was in Belgrade a couple of weeks ago, just as an entire street of mature London plane trees (sycamores) was being razed. Citizen groups were up in arms. “Zeleni Srbije”, Green Serbia, had organized protests, using a social networking site to voice their opinions. I guess, after seeing how the powers-that-be “communicate” with protesters (ie – tear apart the canisters that the students set up on Flower Square in Zagreb a couple months ago – I wrote about that a while back), the Serbian protestors figured to get Facebook behind them – I mean, you can’t take the ‘jaws of life’ to Facebook. But even that didn’t seem to faze the Belgrade authorities and they still razed the trees on Bulevar Kralja Aleksandra, saying that the trees were diseased and all 500 of them needed to come down. These trees can get quite massive with age (check out the picture of the tree in Dubrovnik). The Serbian Academy of Architecture (these may be Serbian landscape architects as there is no official landscape architecture organization in Croatia or Serbia as we have in the US, Canada and Europe. Thus all landscape architects are licensed under the Architecture Academy) called this “the biggest tragedy for Belgrade since the NATO bombing of the capital in 1999”. That’s arguably a bit histrionic. Perhaps not. It’s not as dramatic as a bombing. It’s not covered by international news organizations. And true, no one has died as a result. However, the lack of honest public process about decisions that affect citizens and their lifestyles is a mistake that seems to happen over and over again in this neck of the woods. Citizens have learned their roles too – protest perhaps but don’t expect much response. “This shouldn’t have happened without consultation with relevant organizations and experts”, says Dusan Pavlovic from “Green Serbia”. But in the end, “now that the damage is done it is too late to stop and therefore we will try to press authorities to do what they promised to do afterwards, namely plant new trees” (Belgrade Insight – Issue 60, Feb 26-March 11 2010). Citizens have realized that their opinions matter very little in the decision making process. One student in Zagreb who I met apathetically said when we chatted about politicians “we elect them. It’s our fault that they are in power. So who cares if they do things that are wrong. We can’t change anything at that point” (which, at that point, after standing on a tram with her for 4 stops listening to this 20 year old talk with indifferent callousness, I had to get off the tram). All the public seems to be able to do is react. And even then, they are often ignored. 
Massive London plane tree in Dubrovnik:
All of this is being done under the guise of pubic improvement and that’s what seems most irksome - this rationalizing of decisions to make events that are wrong, seem right. And then, when all is said and done, a film of altruism is laid upon the entire thing. Apparently the timber from the diseased trees is going to be given to “vulnerable families for heating”. Yet most suspect that the new parking places have been sketched in with CAD and there is suspicion over other “hidden projects” that are in the works.
P.S. Other than this little analogy, my mom is nothing like corrupt politicians. May Brewster rest in peace.
