You are on page 1of 3

City as distinct society

Cities are more than just an agglomeration of people The urban is different from the rural, but how?
• good? modern, advanced, cosmopolitan excitement and diversity • or bad? fragmented, decadent, socially polarized, commercialized?

Urban morphology: the social geography of cities

Louis Wirth (1938) on “Urbanism as a Way of Life”
theory of the social responses to urbanization
• process of traditional, rural peoples adapting to a new kind of social environment

cities are big, dense, and diverse, which leads to:
• lots of impersonal interactions with lots of many different people • desire to find one’s place in society and build social distance from others leads to spatial clustering/separation of different groups • potential for deviant behavior as rootless individuals struggle to adapt to new social norms

Urbanism as “community lost”
Wirth was building on older, Germanic scholarship that viewed the modern industrial city as a fundamentally different kind of human community
The old = Gemeinschaft (“community”)
• theoretically ideal village life with deep, mutually dependent, family-based relationships built around folk, household economies and informal traditional methods of discipline and control

Alternatives to the “community lost” perspective
Herbert Gans “urban villagers”
• older, central city neighborhoods with multigenerational immobility • pioneering new suburban communities of people sharing common interests

The new = Gesellschaft (“society”)
• theoretically ideal modern city with numerous, shallow relationships amongst a large, diverse population • specialized labor with formalized corporate/factory settings • discipline and order obtained through formal, institutional rules, regulations, and laws • concerns about alienation, deviance, and anomie

Jane Jacobs promoting busy sidewalks and the social benefit of regular informal interactions among strangers in public
• she doesn’t really disagree with the theory, but instead optimistically posits that gesellschaft need not lead to widespread anomie • vibrant public spaces become the antidote to the loss of traditional community bonds

Sociology (1920s–30s) landmark modern social science Chicago as site and subject of study. enclosed territories Core themes: social deviance immigration. unplanned “natural areas” that display an order. more spacious. more affluent homes on the periphery. defining urban center (the CBD) • newer. industrialization. 1900 Urban morphology Urban Morphology the organization and evolution of urban spaces. and new transportation impacting the city human ecology—adapting to a changing social environment (social distance translates into spatial distance. not randomness • economics: land value. land use • population: race. Chicago as the “shock city” encapsulating industrial urbanism in the USA ca. other group identity • politics and law: controlled. dynamics of neighborhood invasion and succession) empirical methodologies (census maps. ethnicity. of Chicago. ethnography) urban morphology Urban Morphogenesis is the study of how these morphologies develop and change over time Modeling Urban Morphology Starts with the Chicago School and Concentric Zone Theory • spatial logic based on economic bid-rent competition and social “invasion and succession” competition • single.The Chicago School Univ. compared to transitional inner city Alternative Models Homer Hoyt’s Sector Model (1930s) • patterns of home values (rents) • affluent properties along high-rent corridors • still a single-center model Harris and Ullman’s Multiple Nuclei model (1940s) • more than one growth pole/center • agglomeration economies and diseconomies Murdie’s urban mosaic (1970s) • economic status tends to be sectoral • family status tends to be concentric • ethnic-racial status tends to be clustered The “Galactic Metropolis” .

Michael Dear. ghettoes.Critical Urban Geographies Marxist. but perhaps in a trivial. disorder.g. privatization of public space. citadels. and defense economy. complexity. diversity But is it really better? emphasis on symbolism. Allen Scott.. and difference (e. feminist. “dreamscapes” heritage refurbished. contrived. postmodern. edge cities) • Davis’s “Ecology of Fear” and Dear and Flusty’s “keno capitalism” Postmodernism: The L. culture-knowledge-symbolic economy • new looks/landscapes/architectures Postmodern Design The postmodern responds to criticisms of modern philosophy and practice a “restless” revival and juxtaposition of traditional subjectivity. postcolonial. • Los Angeles as the shock city of today’s high-tech information. Mike Davis. et al. and other theories present different models. Short) • new global economies: a “post-Fordist” world system anchored by technopoles and a cosmopolitan. poverty. School USC and UCLA Departments of Geography and Planning • Ed Soja. while suburbs challenge downtowns • new enclosure movements: a “carceral city” of bunker architecture. “hyper-real”. enclaves of wealth. ethnoburbs. but emphasize similar themes • mobility and spatial entrapment. imagined identities.A. and gated communities (culture of fear and security) • new civic cultures: “The redistributional city of late modernism is turning into the entrepreneurial city of early postmodernism” (John R. entertainment. romanticized and commercialized way? (“form follows fiction”) “New alliance of taste and capital” that still can be elitist . pluralism. with suburban sprawl and immigration-related social-economic conflict characterized by neo-Marxist and postmodern themes: • new urban morphologies and systems: newly industrialized regions challenge the old industrial core.