Throughout this weeks reading on Chapter 4, we focus in on the Progressive Era and the establishment of urban America. The industrial revolution was at its peak and the United States was developing rapidly. Immigration, manufacturing output, and urban development grew faster than any other time in the nation’s history. Not only that, but scientific developments changed lives and revolutionary theories challenged traditional beliefs. As Rury suggests, “ . . . it is probably safe to say that there was a greater degree of social change at the point than any other, simply because of the magnitude of economic expansion an population movement” (Rury 136). It was a time of globalization, when there was movement around the world on an unprecedented scale. Even when compared to …show more content…
Due to the rapid population growth and social differentiation, social bonds loosened and long-standing relationships weakened. Social cohesion, which formerly existed within cities, was no longer prominent. “Chicago sociologist Louis Wirth noted that life in the biggest cities was marked by a loss of community. People no longer knew their neighbors and others in the community” (Rury 138). There was no longer a connection with others that once existed in towns and neighborhoods. Relations became impersonal and any potential for social capital was dissolute. In urbanized areas, people were known by their occupation or social status, rather than as individuals. In booming cities, such as New York City, people would form distinctive residential territories. This would draw in people from specific religions and ethnicities. This is comparable to New York City today, where we have ethnic-based neighborhoods and culturally unique communities such as Little Italy and Chinatown. It’s interesting when you learn about how such cities developed and led to these monumental sectors
Therefore, the US became much more culturally diverse and areas were inhabited to form mini “hubs” for people of similar ethnicities and races to live together. Although internal migration in the US had a big impact
Thomas W. Hanchett is a historian, who taught urban history and history preservation at Young Town State University and Cornell University. Hanchett is now currently working at the Levine Museum of New South in Charlotte as the staff historian and he is also the author of Sorting Out the New South City. Race, Class, and Urban Development in Charlotte 1875-1975. The book is filled with his remarkable outpouring ideas that talks a lot about Charlotte during 1875-1975. He breaks down the content of the book into eight different tables and fifty-eight figures to help reader to understand his idea with a broader sense.
Throughout the mid 1800s to the late 1800S, millions of immigrants flooded into the United States hoping for a new life. Most of them faced a difficult journey by ship to enter “The Land of Opportunities”. Many of the immigrants moved to the city in search for jobs because machines were replacing farm laborers in the rural parts of the country. Along with the immigrants, thousands of other families moved to the city. This rapid increase of city dwellers led to new inventions and technologies.
The industrialization of America had a monumental impact on the citizens. With change comes the upsides and the downsides, so there were critiques such as Henry George and Edward Bellamy. Also this was a time of change for woman, questions regarding ‘place’, purpose, and morality were too brought to light.
In his exceptionally well-written book, A Shopkeeper’s Millennium, Paul E. Johnson illustrates the dramatic changes in American economics, politics, and religion during the Second Great Awakening through profiling the new city of Rochester, New York. Through his thoroughly-researched depiction of life from the year 1815 to 1837, Johnson seeks to explain how the religious revival in Rochester changed the lives of middle class members and thus Rochester’s society. He further strives to prove his point by showing how the Rochester revival related to what was happening in the rest of America at that time. The early nineteenth century saw a time of growth for many cities in the Northern United States, including Rochester.
If you had been a reformer during this era (remember planning as a profession did not yet exist), what type of progressive era urban reform would you adopt and implement? Why? Would it engage with the good government movement or not? Why? What lessons, if any, would your response then provide for your planning practice today?
After the American Revolution, New York was decimated and were in a state of worry with a dwindling population while Philadelphia and Boston were confident and ready for change. However, the tide turned when the “population burgeoned” and became twice the size of any rivals New York had (Jackson and Dunbar 101). Diversity played a main key in the rise of the New York economy after the American Revolution. New Yorkers, as did the Dutch and British, places less importance on “difference” and more on innovation and risk taking than their rivals. People who came to New York from all over the world were excited of having a better chance to become rich than they would have in their home country or in the other cities nearby.
With the increasing population in cities, it created competition for jobs. People now had to compete with one another, as there were more people than there were
Gary B. Nash writes his piece, “Social Change and the Growth of Pre Revolutionary Urban Radicalism” as secondary source to articulate his thoughts about the poor living conditions in Boston, Philadelphia and New York during post war time of the later part of the 18th century. Gray Nash who is PhD graduate from Princeton University, produces concrete arguments to inform the people of the late 1960’s about actual history that conflicted with social development and advancement after the war with France and Native Americans. Nash utilizes credible historical documents to highlight the unbalanced and radical quality of life for city dwellers, especially around clustered and poverty stricken areas on the Eastern coast of the colonies. Even though
City life was changed drastically in the 1800s. “The most extensive urban renewal… took place in Paris in the 1850s. George Haussmann… built wide boulevards and splendid public buildings... Gradually, settlement patterns shifted” (250). Before, the streets were narrow and people didn’t have a lot of work to come by, and the reconstruction of the areas created many jobs.
Cities improve due to innovation, but humans residing in them may not. The Industrial Revolution was a period in time where new inventions helped labor become less taxing and more efficient in the South. On the other hand, the North developed urban cities, which attracted many people. Urban cities had become the epitome of civilization: ease of life and wealth was present, but not available to everyone. To elaborate, these urban cities provided job opportunities to women.
With more widespread access to magazines, news, movies, and other “luxuries”, the containment of individuality and shared opinions of those not in the upper status became increasingly hard. In short, the political leaders of this time tried too hard to control population, cultural assimilation, and force of growth of industry. He uses the historical facts about important public figures of the time such as Theodore Roosevelt, W.E.B Du Bois, and the Rockefellers while explaining and aligning the movements themes and events in relation to the rebels and the Progressives during the particular period of the era he was outlining. He uses these characters of time
The expansions of bedroom-communities also materialized to accommodate the large volume of new Americans that was being produced. After the World War II numerous individuals purchased land on the outskirts of urban-cities and use the advancement of technology to create inexpensive houses that was attractive to the baby-boomers. To further accommodate the audience the G.I. Bill of the returning soldiers & their families made housing in the suburbs even cheaper. In a way it was a win-win for man and country. It wasn’t all peaches & roses in the late 1950s for minorities.
A shock city is the urban place that represents a massive and rapid changes in social, economic, and cultural life (urbanization) due to many factors, including new models of transportation such as railroads, industrialization, and other factors. The first city that was considered the “shock city” was actually Manchester, England. It grew very quickly, and it was the world’s first industrialized city and the home of the cotton industry, cottonopolis - a metropolis centered on cotton trading. Same as Manchester, Chicago was also the “shock city” of North America because of its rapid growth. Both cities were industrial cities, Chicago rose from a struggling village sunk in the middle of a grassland creek to a metropolis city.
Kingsley Davis, who is said to have pioneered the study of historical urban demography wrote his “The Urbanization of the Human population” in 1965. In his essay, he states that the history of the world is in fact the history of urbanization and then begins with description of how tiny European settlements grew slowly through the Middle Ages and the early modern period. According to him, urbanization occurred mainly because of rural-urban migration and not the other factors that people believe. He discusses how the production levels of this time period, due to the feudal system, used to favor an agrarian culture and then how the process of urbanization intensified during the 1900s, especially in Great Britain. He then clarifies the difference between urbanization, which he describes as the process of a society becoming more urban-focused, and the growth of cities i.e. the expansion of their boundaries.