Submitted by: Vasudevan K R (2160400058)
Critique of Post-Modern Urbanism as advocated by Dear and Flusty
In Postmodern Urbanism, authors Michael Dear and Steven Flusty (1998) identify Los Angeles as the model city which is shaping postmodern urban processes and socio-spatial forms. Although Dear and Flusty (1998) present some interesting points, their paper fails to present a set of coherent and convincing arguments. Not only are numerous arguments in their paper self-contradicting, but the paper 's overarching theme—to establish the Los
Angeles School of postmodern urbanism is tricky. Richard Shearmur (2006) in Chicago and L.A.: A clash of
Epistemologies, challenges the Los Angeles school on the ground of unsound scientific practices which
…show more content…
How does the hinterland organize the center that does not exist? And if the center does not exist, do Dear and Flusty mean to imply that gentrification is a myth? In the early 1990s when Los Angeles faced an economic downturn, one which Curry and Kenney (2000) detailed was perpetual and long term, the Los
Angeles school has been forced to withdraw some of its more lofty claims. Curry and Kenney (2000) put Los
Angeles as such an incomparable city that it would be impossible to project it as a universal model for all cities.
We are told that the neologism may be regarded as analogous to hypothesis-generation or to the practice of dialectics. But according to Webster 's English Dictionary, neologism has two basic meanings: (1) the creation or use of new words or expressions; (2) a meaningless word used by a psychotic. How can the creation of
…show more content…
Automation refers to the natural revolutionizing of means of production, and the freedom of enterprise in this case refers to its ability to circumvent According to the principle of Occam 's Razor (also known as the principle of parsimony), with all else equal, the simplest statement about the world tends to be correct. This principle demands that one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything, or that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed. Dear and Flusty have violated the principle of thrift in presenting their arguments. Can the ideas of postmodern urbanism be conveyed without using these words
(Bipolar, disorder, Citidel, Citistat, Commudities, Cybergeoisie, Cyberia, Cyburbia, Deep-time, Dreamscapes,
Disinformation superhighway, Flexism, Global latifundia, Heteropolis, Holsteinization, In-beyond, Interdictory space, Keno capitalism, Leitmotif, Memetic contagion, Neologistic pastiche, Pollyannarchy, Praedatorianism,
Privatopia, Proto-postmodern, Protosurps, Telegraphy)? Conclusion is that many (if not all) of these new words are unnecessary to describe the new urban
In Goldberger’s article, Disconnected Urbanism, he does not say much about the advantages of a cell phone and I do not believe he should have. If in fact he had mentioned some of the positive points of a cell phone, the article would not persuade the reader as strongly. He claims that the cell phone takes away from a person's experiences because it allows them to be in more than one place at a time. To truly experience something, you need to have all of your attention on it. The cell phone draws your attention away.
The landscape, trams, and distinctive wooden mansions give the city a unique charm. San Francisco is an outstanding representative of the physical geography. The essay aims to investigate the history of the region, the general features of four spheres of physical geography in San Francisco, and forms the possible representation of the future of the area. History
Anderson begins the section by explaining that there are two separate cultures in inner-city neighborhoods. The first are the “decent” this group is defined by commitment to “middle-class values,” (101). However, they are not mainstream in that they
2009; Brenner, Peck and Theodore 2010) and health inequity mediated via diminished institutional, social, political, and economic capital of marginalized communities (Coburn 2000; Muntaner and Lynch 1999; Gomez and Muntaner 2005) (figure 1, figure 2). Using their conceptual framework for analysis (Peck, Theodore and Brenner 2009) examples of these three general strategies of neoliberalization in urban planning and rebuilding are adapted and organized to fit into neoliberalization’s creative destruction process, (Peck et al. 2009) (table 1). This process of destroying and creating occurs as “moments” and is contextually “embedded” and “path-dependent”: ”we emphasize the contextual embeddedness of neoliberal restructuring projects insofar as they have been produced within national, regional, and local contexts defined by the legacies of inherited institutional frameworks, policy regimes, regulatory practices, and political struggles. An understanding of actually existing neoliberalism must therefore explore the path-dependent, contextually specific interactions between inherited regulatory landscapes and emergent neoliberal, market-oriented restructuring projects at a broad range of geographical scales.
Lance Freeman, an associate professor of urban planning in Columbia, wanted to investigate if there was any displacement going on in two predominantly black neighborhoods that was briskly gentrifying. Much to his dismay, he couldn’t find any correlation between gentrification and displacement. What was surprising to Freeman was his discovery, “poor residents and those without a college education were actually less likely to move if they resided in gentrifying neighborhoods”. (Sternbergh, 19) Freeman adds, “The discourse on gentrification, has tended to overlook the possibility that some of the neighborhood changes associated with gentrification might be appreciated by the prior residents.” (Sternbergh, 19)
There has to be a realistic solution that can be put into motion to benefit everyone involved. Referring again to his article “Is Gentrification All Bad?” Davidson argues that urban renewal, if done right, is not a monstrous custom that it is painted to be; nevertheless, he reasons that gentrification depends on who does it, how they do it, and why they do it. As a resident in New York, a city where gentrification is as widespread as the common cold in winter, Davidson speculates that those who go into a neighborhood with the intention to renovate houses, or abandoned buildings ought to have a good reason for it. The author points out that “Gentrification does not have to be something that one group inflicts on another…” (Davidson 349), rather, he suggests that everyone, the gentrifiers and the locals, be on the same page when it comes to developing their
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, “ . . .
American Urbanization started like a wildfire and it spread so rapidly that facilities and institutions in society could not keep up. From 1850 to 1900 America completely changed from its agricultural state into a new industry based society. The four paramount changes that occured during America’s urbanization period were new immigration, the build up of cities (skyscrapers and mass transit), living conditions, and boss rule and the rise of mass consumption. Even though the changes during urbanization did not come easily due to immense diversity, they still paved the way to modern day America.
Introduction As the world’s population continues to migrate and live in urban areas, planners, engineers, and politicians have an important role to ensure that they are livable and sustainable. But what defines an urban area and what makes it so attractive? In my opinion, urban areas are places that consist of a variety of land uses and buildings, where services and amenities are easily accessible to the general public, and includes an established multimodal transportation network. Also, it should be a place where people can play, learn, work, and grow in a safe and collaborative manner.
Title: Gentrifying Chicago neighborhoods. General Purpose: To inform my audience of Gentrification in the Norther part of Chicago around the 1960s. Specific Purpose: At the end of my speech, the audience will understand the meaning of gentrification, how Puerto Rican families in the Northern part of Chicago lost their homes to Gentrification, how they fought against gentrification, and how gentrification is now occurring to Mexican families in the Southern part of Chicago. Thesis: Puerto Rican families lost their homes in the 1960s when Lincoln Park was gentrified despites their best efforts, and today Mexican families are losing their homes in Pilsen to gentrification. Introduction I. Attention: What would you risk in order to continue having a home?
There is the idea of a city, and the city itself, too great to be held in the mind. And it is in this gap (between the conceptual and the real) that aggression begins” is central to Saunders’ essay, due to the fact that this quote illustrates Saunders’ message that people tend to have misconceptions generated from their own limited experience and misconceptions can easily lead to conflicts and aggression if handled
Rem Koolhaas, observes and begins his retroactive manifesto, a scripted chronology of the stages of Manhattanism, its changing’s and lasting legacies; especially the culture of congestion. Manhattans own metropolitan urbanism and revolutionary lifestyle. Through his optimistic narrative “Delirious New York” he documents the repeated elements and themes in New York’s development and decline that make it a theatre of progress and the capital of timeless crisis. This focuses in particular on the skyscraper as a product of the physical manifestation of Manhattanism on the grid, along with the relationship between this density-focused architecture and the culture of congestion.
Issue: Within the last decade, San Francisco has dramatically changed. San Francisco’s working class people and poor neighborhoods underwent drastic economic and racial changes from the 1990s to mid 2000s, resulting in the undeniable gentrification of the districts. San Francisco’s gentrification has reached a ridiculous new extreme, making it the most expensive city in the country, outstripping even Manhattan. The beginning of the issue was right after the dotcom and Tech industries started drastically moving to the Bay Area.
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.
The main ideas of these two explanatory frameworks for the causes of gentrification have driven a theoretical conflict to explanations of gentrification, but more importantly, that these theoretical approaches are complementary and thus a more effective insights result from the combined application of these theories could be