The only ones confused are the “transplants” who come to our City and live exclusively in one area and then begin to rearrange the City’s boundaries, rename areas of the City that already have traditional community names then make boastful ignorant statements such as “living in a city without a center”, “supposedly called Northeast Los Angeles” and “was just an unincorporated part of the city”. For people like myself, who have lived here for generations, it’s very frustrating. Especially when these very same transplants have the power of the media, printed or otherwise, on their side and are therefore able to spread their ignorance to a larger population. The arrogance of some of these transplants is very annoying and their refusal to hear out and respect the views and opinions of Native Angelenos makes it all the more hurtful. So please before you make another statement such as “piss people off” and “awfully territorial” try and read up on the history of your adapted city and who knows perhaps you too will find yourself correcting transplants.

Hmmm, well that’s exactly why folks like Al and myself are trying to bring attention to this error. Your version of the Eastside was a mistake. A mistake that’s been repeated by newcomers who did not know that the other half of the city was right across the river. And the reason they didn’t know about the other half of the city was cause they probably didn’t know anyone there. And the reason they probably didn’t know anyone there is cause it’s a working class neighborhood filled with lots of Brown people. And the reason it’s a Brown working class neighborhood is because of the not-so-in-the-past racial housing covenants for non-White people in the city. And the reason those covenants existed is cause White people only wanted to live with other White people…And because they only lived with other people like themselves, they forgot that the other half of the city, The Eastside still existed.

I’m sorry I had to break it down this way. I usually don’t like to bring issues of race into this argument but it’s the historical white elephant in the room (or should I say neighborhood?)

To answer your question about the term fluidity of the city it measns that the term “Eastside” that you are talking about is historically a recent incarnation that evolved because it made sense to the population living there. before that term there was an east/west division of streets and before that there was a small town along the river “El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora de Los Angeles. The Name Los Angeles itself is a product of Spanish Colonization and I’m sure there was a term for the area by native people. Those previous monikers where relevant to those using them. It means that some people call Atwater the Eastside and some don’t. It also means that there are interpretations about the exact nature of the so called Eastside border from all sides and differing opinions within each group and you are not the ultimate authority or that anyone who disagrees with you is callous.

Except that I find your self righteous attitude obnoxious I don’t think I disagree with what I understand your point to be which is how do we preserve the character and acknowledge the history in the face of gentrification.