Geddes, Mumford's primary inspiration (to the point that he named his son "Geddes") was a biologist who wrote more or less one book on city planning. This copiy of "City in Evolution" is a version of that book.
Geddes has a number of interesting and provocative ideas about cities. The one I think is most important is the idea of city in evolution. In other words, Geddes constantly uses biological metaphors to describe the growth of the city: he describes London as an "octopus" or "polypus," ever-expanding, and also as a "man-reef," a particularly apt metaphor as the reefs are more or less concrete structures built by the creatures who live in them (9).
One of Geddes' biggest concerns is that, as "conurbation" occurs and chokes the life out of the cities, no municipal body is prepared to govern it. Looking at a map of London, Geddes asks "Do we not see, and more and more clearly as we study it, the need of a thorough revision of our traditional ideas and boundaries of country and town?" (11). Geddes suggests that industrial growth has created "a new heptarchy, which has been growing up naturally, yet almost unconsciously to politicians, beneath our existing, our traditional political and administrative network; and plainly not merely to go on as at present, straining and cracking and bursting this old network, but soon surely to evolve some new form of organisation better able to cope with its problems than are the present distinct town and country councils. What are the new forms to be?" (19). Geddes doesn't answer this question, but I would like to suggest that perhaps private industry - Cowperwood at least - are what stepped up to the task. Also, heptarchy refers to an ancient grouping of 7 Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, now replaced by 7 conurbations (West-Riding, London, Tyne-Wear-Tees, etc). Geddes, in these names, suggests that a simple town or city name is no longer enough, and we need to recognize that we are in the presence of regions.
A few other notes: In regards to the industrial revolution, Geddes is adamant that what looks like "progress of wealth and population" is just the rampant march of coal "to produce cheap products to main too cheap people" and the industrial revolution has created cities which look like mold spores on jam - rapidly devouring all available resources and then dying out once the jam/coal has been consumed (26). Geddes does note that there is a new hope: electricity which can do everything coal does more cleanly (31 - a 2nd industrial revolution) and he praises the nordic system of wind and hydroelectric power for allowing humans to spread out in a line, not in a giant clump.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Democracy and Social Ethics - Jane Addams
Ok, there's tons of useful stuff in this little book, although perhaps not quite as much as I'd hoped. Some highlights from Anne Firor Scott's introduction: We get the importance of Darwin to Addams on p. xiv, some information about the radicalization of Addams on p. xxxix, a quick rundown of Hull House accomplishments on pp. xxxvi-xxxvii. We also have, on page xxv, the acknowledgment that Dreiser, Norris, and Garland were on the same path as Addams, Henry George, and Emma Goldman: all of them were expressing bitterness about the social conflict taking place in the gilded age.
The biggest thread to follow in the introduction - a thread that is also the biggest thread within the larger work, but is never hit quite so hard as in this intro - is Addams belief that humanity in the industrialized society needs to develop a new form of ethics. In Scott's words: "It was no longer sufficient to fill responsible for the well-being of one's own family, friends, and social equals. A new social ethic would have to evolve which would be based on responsibility to the whole community. This is [sic] essence was the purpose of Hull House..." (xxvi). This is the biggie in the whole book - the idea that an ethical evolution needs to take place, where a newly interconnected world requires a newly expanded ethics (this also sounds alot like Rorty's insistence that to be a liberal is simply to be a bleeding heart).
A few other related notes from the introduction. Addams/Scott diagnoses the problems of capitalism quite succinctly by noting that "an inherently social effort was used for individual gain" (liv). In other words, in true Marxist fashion, Addams doesn't understand why the work of the many enriches the one. She does, however, note (in p. 270 of the text, quoted on p. lvii of the intro) that the boss can be more moral than the reformer, for although he is corrupt he nevertheless is "democratic in method" while the technocratic reformer "believes that people must be made over by 'good citizens' and governed by 'experts.'"
The text itself has plenty of highlights, such as her description of the new ethics as "an affinity for all men" (9), but is most useful for me in two chapters: the chapter on industrial reform and the chapter on political reform.
The industrial reform is chock full of useful stuff about Yerkes/Cowperwood. Addams begins by noting that we are in a new era of association, but committees nevertheless often struggle, and the decisive individual still has the best of it in terms of getting things done (137-138). This seems to backup my idea that Cowperwood's ruthlessness is better for the community in the long run. Addams also mentions the Chicago strike of 1894 (140), something I should be thinking about. Finally, she mentions that the factory owners are not yet aware of this new era of association and are stuck back in the old squid/lobster way of thinking (148).
In the political passage, Addams first attacks wealthy reformers who seek only to fix the political machine so that it is no longer corrupt without trying to actually better the lives of people. For them, politics and life are separate, something that the workingman and the Hull House worker know to be totally untrue (222). She also again mentions, on both p. 224 and p. 240, that a corrupt alderman might do more for the community than a highminded reformer, because the alderman is at least integrated into the praxis of daily life. Although he is stealing a few pennies from the people's pockets in streetcar fares every day (p.252-253), the alderman is a "manifestation of human friendliness," far better received than the reformer who only embodies "honesty of administration" (240). Obviously, Hull House attempts to bridge this gap with both honesty of administration and manifestation of human friendliness.
The biggest thread to follow in the introduction - a thread that is also the biggest thread within the larger work, but is never hit quite so hard as in this intro - is Addams belief that humanity in the industrialized society needs to develop a new form of ethics. In Scott's words: "It was no longer sufficient to fill responsible for the well-being of one's own family, friends, and social equals. A new social ethic would have to evolve which would be based on responsibility to the whole community. This is [sic] essence was the purpose of Hull House..." (xxvi). This is the biggie in the whole book - the idea that an ethical evolution needs to take place, where a newly interconnected world requires a newly expanded ethics (this also sounds alot like Rorty's insistence that to be a liberal is simply to be a bleeding heart).
A few other related notes from the introduction. Addams/Scott diagnoses the problems of capitalism quite succinctly by noting that "an inherently social effort was used for individual gain" (liv). In other words, in true Marxist fashion, Addams doesn't understand why the work of the many enriches the one. She does, however, note (in p. 270 of the text, quoted on p. lvii of the intro) that the boss can be more moral than the reformer, for although he is corrupt he nevertheless is "democratic in method" while the technocratic reformer "believes that people must be made over by 'good citizens' and governed by 'experts.'"
The text itself has plenty of highlights, such as her description of the new ethics as "an affinity for all men" (9), but is most useful for me in two chapters: the chapter on industrial reform and the chapter on political reform.
The industrial reform is chock full of useful stuff about Yerkes/Cowperwood. Addams begins by noting that we are in a new era of association, but committees nevertheless often struggle, and the decisive individual still has the best of it in terms of getting things done (137-138). This seems to backup my idea that Cowperwood's ruthlessness is better for the community in the long run. Addams also mentions the Chicago strike of 1894 (140), something I should be thinking about. Finally, she mentions that the factory owners are not yet aware of this new era of association and are stuck back in the old squid/lobster way of thinking (148).
In the political passage, Addams first attacks wealthy reformers who seek only to fix the political machine so that it is no longer corrupt without trying to actually better the lives of people. For them, politics and life are separate, something that the workingman and the Hull House worker know to be totally untrue (222). She also again mentions, on both p. 224 and p. 240, that a corrupt alderman might do more for the community than a highminded reformer, because the alderman is at least integrated into the praxis of daily life. Although he is stealing a few pennies from the people's pockets in streetcar fares every day (p.252-253), the alderman is a "manifestation of human friendliness," far better received than the reformer who only embodies "honesty of administration" (240). Obviously, Hull House attempts to bridge this gap with both honesty of administration and manifestation of human friendliness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)