33 pages • 1 hour read
Elijah AndersonCode of the Street
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1999A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
The Hopelessness of Poverty
Throughout the book, Anderson emphasizes the impact of poverty on the possibilities for hope for inner-city families. Often alienated from the structures and institutions in mainstream society, these families find themselves stuck within generational cycles of poverty, which in turn generates desperation and even despair. Economic prosperity and narratives about the American Dream, therefore, become an illusion. These generational cycles of poverty often push people toward the underground economy, which often consists of drug deals and sex work. According to Anderson, when the underground economy prevails over mainstream (and legal) means of revenue and economic growth, urban poverty becomes persistent. Persistent poverty is therefore not the byproduct of individual or even familial choices, but the result of systemic structures that prevent sustainable economic prosperity for inner-city families.
As poverty persists and desperation increases, young people turn away from being law-abiding, value-driven citizens in an effort to survive. Those who can escape the poverty associated with the lower rungs of the underground economy often do, moving out of the neighborhood in search of new opportunities and environments. According to Anderson, “this exodus further demoralizes neighborhood residents and makes them more vulnerable to a number of ills, including rising drug use and teenage pregnancy” (145). The pathways out of poverty are limited, especially since issues like underfunded public school systems make it difficult to get the education required for better jobs. Additionally, the criminal records that often result from time spent in the underground economy make it virtually impossible to gain legitimate employment, as many employers refuse to hire people who were incarcerated or charged with a crime.
The family unit is compromised when poverty becomes the norm. Would-be breadwinners are often forced to quit their jobs in order to provide childcare and become dependent on state welfare. In neighborhoods where employment opportunities are scarce, Anderson argues that welfare becomes the only legal and viable alternative. Along with this dependence on government aid comes a lack of faith in educational institutions as an avenue toward greater financial gains. With so much desperation, Anderson presents a bleak picture of the current state of inner-city black families. The only possible solution is systemic change, one in which significant investments are made in the inner city.
The Complexity of Family
For inner-city families, relational dynamics are often complex, layered with implicit, gendered expectations and deeply connected to notions of loyalty. Anderson calls attention to this complexity by arguing that living as a family unit is also connected to the basic need to survive: “Some working poor people survive by living with kin and thus sharing household duties and close family life—joys as well as troubles” (28). Family life is therefore not associated with the clichés of mainstream culture, but with the need to stick together in order to avoid total economic desperation.
Anderson presents two types of families that exist and operate according to the code of the street. In the case of what he calls “decent families,” parents and their children must learn how to circumvent the restrictiveness of the code of the streets in order to keep their aspirations for a life beyond the inner city alive. For “street families,” the other side of his dichotomy, adhering to and even embracing the code of the street is a way of life. Yet even within families, there may be conflicting or competing views and values, as “the same family is likely to have members who are strongly oriented toward decency and civility, whereas other members are oriented toward the street—and to all that it implies” (36).
Within this complexity, Anderson also highlights a few key archetypal figures. In Chapter 5, he elaborates on the role of the “decent daddy,” who as a father figure is expected to be morally upright while also protecting his family through traditional values. In Chapter 6, Anderson exalts the role of the inner-city grandmother, who often carries the financial weight of the family and who must occasionally raise her grandchildren when their parents are unable to do. In order for families to effectively survive the code of the street, they must learn to successfully navigate the nuances of their own households.
Violence and Respect in the Inner City
Throughout the book, Anderson intertwines the concepts of violence and respect, which to some degree renders the two inseparable. Respect is one of the value pillars of the code of the street, which in turn exacerbates the stakes in cases where someone feels disrespected. The ever-present threat of violence becomes a conduit for gaining respect or avenging disrespect. Yet the violence in this context is not specifically directed at individuals, nor does it exist within a vacuum. Instead, according to Anderson, the kind of violence that erupts from instances of disrespect happens because many inner-city residents “feel that they are on their own, that especially in matters of personal defense, they must assume the primary responsibility” (66). Violence is, therefore, a natural aspect of life in the constant fight for survival, especially since inner-city residents experience alienation from the norms and regulations of mainstream society.
In addition, violence can also serve as a form of social capital, which in turn yields a greater degree of respect. If someone succeeds in a physical altercation, their reputation is bolstered by their ability to defend their honor. According to Anderson, “physicality is a fairly common way of asserting oneself” (68). Thus, engaging in confrontations that involve violence is not seen as a loss of emotional control but as a mutually agreed-upon method for regulating respect within the community. When someone crosses the line into disrespect, usually verbally, vengeance through violence becomes an acceptable response.
While Anderson emphasizes that this mentality is especially true among young people, he also establishes that the respect/violence continuum is perpetuated by the messages young people receive from their parents at home. Anderson explains that “many parents actually impose sanctions if a child is not sufficiently aggressive […] Thus the child gains reinforcement for being tough and showing nerve” (70). On the flip side, losing a fight is seen as shameful, even humiliating. The code of the street does not, therefore, call for restraint or verbal arguments as pathways to conflict resolution. Instead, respect and violence are inextricably linked.
The Danger of Stereotypes
Anderson is aware that harmful stereotypes, rooted in institutional and systemic racism, play a central role in the vices perpetuated by the code of the street. Residents of the inner city do not abide by the code of the street due to a religious identity or economic advantage but instead must find ways to operate within systemic alienation. This alienation often arises from the effects of widespread stereotyping, which, according to Anderson, causes employers to lump all inner-city residents into one category. Anderson writes: “beset with negative stereotypes, employers sometimes discriminate against whole census tracts or zip codes where impoverished people live” (113). The most practical effect of negative stereotyping in this case leads to financial suffocation and economic desperation, both of which lead to greater adherence to the code of the street.
Furthermore, when these stereotypes are so widespread that they effectively disqualify inner-city residents from gainful employment, two main effects come into play. First, many people (particularly youths) turn toward the underground economy, which is sustained by the drug trade and sex work. One of the practical consequences of this gravitation towards the underground economy is that “the community may get a bad name, while residents themselves, notably black males, are demonized” (318). Secondly, many of the “decent” residents become so desperate in their pursuit of economic growth that they decide to move out of their communities. This in turn produces a snowball effect that ultimately weakens the community, as its members with the highest aspirations and goals decide that they no longer want to be governed by the code of the street.
Thus, an ultimate danger of stereotyping becomes systemic alienation from conventional society, which theoretically contains pathways that can lead to greater economic growth. The stereotypes do not affect individuals simply from a social or emotional perspective, but from a widespread societal structure that limits opportunities for inner-city residents. According to Anderson, even the most well-meaning individuals within stereotyped communities are “often caught in a horrendous bind, because, though completely decent, he or she may take up this way of dressing, this way of looking, this way of acting, in order not only to preserve a measure of self-respect but to survive the street” (19). As stereotyped communities find meaning within their own contexts out of necessity, their ideological and physical distance from mainstream society increases.
