Book Review: What We See

Released last summer, What We See: Advancing the Observations of Jane Jacobs is a collection of dozens of essays ranging from architecture to economics, planning to activism. Edited by Stephen Goldsmith and Lynne Elizabeth, notable contributors include Copenhagen-based urban planner Jan Gehl, former mayor of Curitiba Jaime Lerner, writer and NYC Landmarks Preservation Commissioner Roberta Brandes Gratz, NYC Department of Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Kahn, and many more illustrious names with impressive CV's. 

The essays do not follow any apparent set guidelines, just general themes, and some are written rather personally, others more like a research paper. Some of the writers knew Jane Jacobs personally, whereas many didn't and may only refer to her in passing. Regardless, the depth of topics covered makes this a great read for anyone with an interest in Jane Jacobs and her several decades of writing. Although she may be best known for The Life and Death of Great American Cities, most of her later work was concerned with economics and social issues and the full breadth of these interests can be found in What We See.

It's difficult to review a collection of essays, each being very different from the next, so instead I have decided to feature several quotes from the book, and elaborate on them. The quotes are by no means the only ones I found worthwhile, but rather ones that gave me something to think about.

Michael Sorkin discussing sociologist Henri Lefebvre

"His argument for a shared "right to the city"... insisted that this right must include the empowerment of citizens to work toward the city of their own dreams and fantasies... "

A city of dreams and fantasies is not something modern politicians, and even most planners, strive for anymore, which is a real shame. True visions have been lost in a capitalist world where profit reigns supreme, above all other pursuits. Now, I'm not particularly religious, but it seems rather evident that our secular society fails to build beautiful built environments precisely because there is no one to honor, whether spiritual or material. We just live, and build just enough to house ourselves, but not to enrich our daily lives. I don't expect religion to play a significant part in Western society anytime soon, so where does that leave us? How can we once again, by default, build beautiful cities? At the very least to be given a choice between an urban or suburban lifestyle, a life with or without cars, anonymous or social.

Stephen Goldsmith and Lynne Elizabeth

"Jacobs was determined to see the truth. She held a bright torch to everything she observed... "

"... favored insertion of the good and warned against damage caused in excising the bad: "It's not so much a matter of taking out bad things as sensitively adding in good things." She exhorted city fathers not to study the causes of poverty, but rather to apply their minds to the causes of prosperity, poverty being simply the absence of prosperity, as darkness is the absence of light... "

I find this really profound, and extremely rare in our society. When expressed so openly by Jane Jacobs, however, it's almost self-evident. She had a knack for stating the obvious in ways no one had thought of before. To me this philosophy explains why actions such as charity have always felt so foreign, working to prop up the lowest denominator rather than working from the top down. When seen in this light, the so-called "charity" of billionaire "philanthropists" such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are especially perverse, they being among the few members of society with the access to enact real change, to grow true prosperity, but instead they preserve the status quo.

Rob Cowan

"... we observe in order to understand. Only when we understand can we hope to shape the world around us for the better.The Scottish pioneer planner, sociologist, and biologist Patrick Geddes wrote in 1905: "A city is more than a place in space, it is drama in time." That insight was forgotten for a few decades as professions... emerged to compete for the dominant role in remaking cities, and their members failed to see the narrowness of their particular perspectives."

"In today's professionlized world, we need all the inspiration we can get... to help us learn the fine arts of seeing."

I found this essay by Rob Cowan, a London-based urban designer, to be among the most interesting and relevant to me. I think he truly understands the issues facing those architects and urban designers with a passion for creating high quality streets and cities. To walk our streets and be humbled by the accomplishments of the past is a gratifying experience, but not particularly encouraged in architecture schools throughout the world, which still cling on to modernist arrogance of ignoring the past altogether. Maybe if architects and urban designer spent a little more time trying to understand the accomplishments of the past they would be better equipped to design a better future. In my walks throughout London and Europe over the past few years, I would always ask myself "what do I like, what don't I? What works and what doesn't?" I've recorded these walks with thousands of photographs over the years. Not even the best education can teach one about "the ballet of the sidewalks", as Jacobs used to say, only a thoughtful eye and will to learn can do that.

Jaime Lerner

"... a certain sense of urgency is vital to the transformation of our cities. The idea that action should only be taken after all the answers and the resources have been found is a sure recipe for paralysis."

If everything had to be in place before anyone ever did anything, very little indeed would be accomplished. Among startup businesses very few start with the resources they need but accomplishments are made through sheer dedication and perseverance. Taking risks is the cornerstone of almost all new achievements, which rarely coincides with all the numbers lining up. Tackling the challenges of the the 21st century street is much more about the passion to take steps, even unusual ones, than it is on relying on traffic engineers. Jaime Lerner faced a lot of naysayers when he wanted to reform public transport in Curitiba, and it was his conviction that got him through. He knew if he sought the support of local businesses, the cost of the project would soar and very likely the whole project collapse through lack of consensus. Sometimes bold steps need to be taken even in the face of adversary. Let's just hope those taking the steps are like Mr. Lerner, with the aim to do good, rather than like Robert Moses and his path of destruction.

Janine Benyus

"... the fastest way to change is for societies to change what it is they compare themselves to, what it is they admire."

It is often said that architecture and design reflect the spirit of the age, or zeitgeist, which explains the disappointing built environment we see springing up around us. Values which influence architecture, such as fashion, ethics, consumerism, politics, and environmental stewardship, are all poor or worse in today's society, so little wonder that beautiful new streets are very rarely built. Values which our culture pays heed to are not those which result in beautiful architecture and cities. There's scarce appreciation for aesthetics anywhere in the mainstream. Unfortunately, even once the will is there for a change of direction, this is not something that will change anytime soon, for just as it took decades to arrive where we are now, it will take decades to get out. And perhaps once again build, by default, beautiful streets and delightful towns and cities which capture the soul and are a joy to walk among.

I had thought this would be one of my shortest reviews but instead it's the longest. This book is a great read for anyone with a passing interest in Jane Jacobs and her work on cities, economics, and culture. Through the dedication of her friends and colleagues around the world, I have no doubt her legacy will continue to shape our world in the years to come.

Book Review: Dark Age Ahead

Among architects, Jane Jacobs is best known for her seminal book The Death and Life of Great American Cities, published in 1961 but still influential today as a warning against urban renewal and the destruction of communities. If not for that book, countless other cities across North America would have perished in the onslaught of the automobile, and the preservation movement may have never happened, or at least not early enough to save generations of buildings from demolition. In 1968, Jacobs moved to Toronto where she continued the fight to preserve communities and published many more books before her death in 2006. Dark Age Ahead is her last book, published in 2004. 

In the book Jacobs argues that western civilization today, in particular North America, sits at a turning point between continued prosperity and a slow and painful degradation, or dark age of the kind that followed the fall of the Roman Empire two thousand years ago. Then as today, degradation is not an overnight collapse but a culmination of numerous erosions in society, which one by one add up to a society no longer recognizable as its former self and no longer able to remember what made it great in the first place. Jacobs calls this mass amnesia, wherein even the memory of what was lost is lost.

Perhaps one of the book's best insights is into university education, or credentialization as Jacobs calls it. While she does not doubt the good intentions the system once had, a series of events have led to universities no longer being the centers of learning they once were, but rather stepping stones into the corporate world. Jacobs goes so far as to say a degree is little more than a proof of basic competence for recruiters. While once a personal relationship with professors was common thanks to small class sizes and a culture of seminars, the huge upswing in students after WWII has led to huge lecture halls with little opportunity for critical analysis. Furthermore, whereas one would assume the nation's top universities are bound  to teaching moral ethics and legal practices, they in fact arm their students with methods for avoiding the law, teaching "don't ask, don't tell", which has helped dozens of executives and even presidents such as Reagan and Bush to avoid scrutiny. 

It isn't always clear where Jacobs is going with a particular point. Sometimes she can go on for pages about one thing or another without a definite conclusion only to tie it together in a further chapter to prove a point. The book is a built-up of numerous small examples to convince the reader of a spreading rot in society which if not addressed could single-handedly first settle and possibly collapse our fragile society. She makes her points using examples for recent memory, such as a growing trend of corporate accounting fraud of the kind we saw with Enron. Or the killer heat wave in Chicago in 1995, which the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) blamed on unprepared elders who didn't seek out help, completely ignoring that death rates were much higher in low-density neighborhoods than in lively high-density neighborhoods with a strong sense of community. It took a young graduate student, Eric Klinenberg, to discover this overlooked but vital flaw. 

In a society so focused and devoted to modern science, Jacobs says there is a growing resistance to time-tested scientific methods, with dogma increasingly creeping in where it should not, as with the CDC, which did not even consider that the problem may lie in the greater system rather than something that individuals had or had not done. And so one of the problems our culture faces, according to Jacobs, is a lack of vigilance regarding our own flaws. We fail to see our failing education system, corrupt corporations, and deteriorating families as a danger which could dissolve everything we know. 

Book Review: Cities for People

Danish architect Jan Gehl has become something of a living legend in the urban design field. Founding partner of Gehl Architects, he was a professor at the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts and has taught and lectured throughout the world. His most famous book to date is Life Between Buildings (1987). Cities for People is his latest book and a culmination of everything he knows about designing people friendly streets and cities. While Gehl has mainly worked in Scandinavia and England, he was instrumental in the transformation of Melbourne, Australia into a more pedestrian friendly city and over the past couple of years he completed his highest profile project yet, the pedestrianization of Times Square in New York. Apart from his day job, he is at present a consultant to NYC for all things urbanism. 

In many ways this book is a handbook for how to design people and bicycle friendly cities. Based on years of experience, especially from Copenhagen, Gehl provides numerous examples of good and bad urban typologies from the perspective of pedestrians. If you're looking for a general city design manual, look elsewhere. For many it isn't difficult to identify a street they do or don't like, but Gehl's examples show us why. Quite plainly he brings a lot of common sense to the urban debate. Among all the lecturing and pretentiousness of some architects like Rem Koolhaas, Gehl offers genuine suggestions for fixing the many genuine problems our cities face today. 

The book is divided into several sections each dealing with a different aspect of cities, such as "Senses and Scale" and "Developing cities". A separate review should really be written dependent on the reader's experience with urban design, as those already familiar with the subject can pick up a few good tips but much of it will already be common knowledge. Who should really read this book are those not entirely certain what makes an enjoyable city fit for people rather than cars. I can certainly think of at least a few people who find it very difficult to imagine a world without cars, so used are they to having a car available at their every whim. Gehl clearly and convincingly makes the case for cities where the human dimension is first and foremost the most important, citing examples how precisely cars and modernist planning have destroyed our cities. 

I do think Gehl could have gotten his message across far more strongly had he demanded a higher quality graphic layout. Not only is the cover unconvincing, but inside the book is rather poorly designed and paragraphs frequently interrupted by mini titles. In fact, just about every paragraph is labelled, certainly confusing me as to whether the reader is meant to read the title or not. Eventually I ignored them, as they interrupted the flow of an argument. For a popular book meant to sell in the millions, this lack of care is odd. 

Some of the book's best points are related to pedestrian obstacles, such as intersections, crossing signals, and the like. Having grown up in car cities where such a system is the norm, it's easy to start accepting these obstacle courses as a normal part of life, but Gehl rightly presents this as unacceptable and counterproductive to a pedestrian friendly city. In London, the present mayor Boris Johnson made it a priority to pander to motorists (despite being a bicyclist himself) and lengthened the waiting periods at many pedestrian crossings. It could be very frustrating, as this negatively impacted on my walk to university, where lights which once turned immediately now required a wait of a minute or two. Of course, all this did is endanger walkers by encouraging them to cross busy streets whenever a gap opened up, and further emphasizing the hierarchical organization of our streets, where pedestrians are often treated as the lowest priority. 

I agree wholeheartedly that greater emphasis must be placed on designing lively city spaces, and that too much attention has been lavished strictly on buildings in recent years (though not necessarily on quality architecture). However, Gehl can at times stray a bit too far towards the opposite extreme, ignoring architecture altogether. Several of his examples of well-designed urban projects are, to put it mildly, disappointing. We see a development in Amsterdam, granted full of people in the photo, but surrounded by abominable buildings, obviously designed with little or no care as to their architectural quality. Or a new project in Melbourne just as empty as any he criticizes. These are not places anyone would willingly go, no matter how brilliant the urban design. Often the book gives the impression that Gehl is advertising the cities and projects he himself has been involved with. He is right to deride modern planning and architects, but the two go hand in hand. One cannot have an urban space rivaling the squares of old without excellent planning and beautiful architecture.  

If the key test for a book is how deeply it makes the reader consider and reconsider things they both knew or thought they knew, and new things, then Cities for People passes with flying colors. Even with some of the repetition, it kept me on my toes, and I found myself pausing to consider how certain flawed aspects of cities have influenced my life. Gehl is obviously a passionate man, eager to see cities change for the better and knowing exactly how that can happen without demanding any particularly radical changes. Already in Copenhagen most of his suggestions have been commonplace for decades to the benefit, not detriment, of the city and its inhabitants. Sure Gehl sort of skims over the developing world, allocating just a few pages, but perhaps he rightly believes that first the Western world must fix its own problems before lecturing others. In that he would be right, for although there are many great cities in Europe and the US, the problems are likewise great. 

Review: Google and Bing Maps

It hardly needs to be said that my case studies would not be possible without Google's Street View and Bing's aerial views. They're an invaluable tool to anyone interested in cities they've never been to, though I also frequently used them to identify locations in London I'd like to walk in, or to see from above a location I'd just walked in. Largely thanks to these technologies, the map of London is practically in my subconscious. I always joked I could be plopped down anywhere in central London and be able to identify my location to an accuracy of a block or two. My case studies are making me similarly knowledgeable about these other cities.

Google Street View in particular has attracted a strong amount of controversy the world over, most recently in Germany, where for many years Google was unable to launch the service due to "privacy concerns". Eventually they got the all clear but not before hiring hundreds of extra employees to blur hundreds of thousands of homes of concerned homeowners. An absolute joke. What has the world come to when people are afraid of having their home unveiled online, as if each and everyone one of them was directly targeted by someone or another. It's immensely frustrating and completely defeats the purpose of the service to enter some neighborhoods in Germany and have every other house blurred. Worse, if just one resident in a multi-unit building requested their home blurred, the entire building had to be blurred as it is impossible for Google to know which windows belong to who. I must admit I sympathize with the group in Essen which egged blurred homes. If those residents don't want their homes visible from the street, they are more than welcome to build walls or plant trees, but if it's visible from the street, it's public domain. Period. Germany's decision is a serious blow to all interested in gaining a greater understanding about the cities we live in. I hope Google can reverse the law in the near future. 

Bing's aerial views are less controversial as it offers a top down bird's eye view, though arguably it offers a well-detailed view of private gardens and the such. Nothing more than what you'd see from a plane, however. Recently I discovered the Streetside option in Bing, essentially the same thing as Street View but Bing's camera seems to be positioned slightly higher, offering a different perspective. The resolution is marginally lower than Street View, with images a bit blurrier, and Bing seems to automatically color the sky a saturated blue in places that otherwise might not be. Still, I appreciate the competition. Both services can only get better with time. Another big plus with Streetside is that images are spaced closer together, perhaps just a few meters, whereas Street View can often jump a couple of homes. 

It's quite remarkable, but as I'm writing this I've just noticed Bing has expanded its Streetside service. A week ago Presidio Heights had no coverage, but now it does. This is fantastic. It's also better integrated, no longer an "app" but as with Google's Street View, it's a button off to the side.

A feature I wish would be integrated in one or the other is the option to switch views to a different time of day or different season, for example. Both seem to target clear sunny days but what do they look like in the winter? Or at night, sunrise or sunset? This sort of interaction would greatly enhance the attractiveness to a wider audience. With any luck the quality of my case studies will improve as Google and Bing step up their game. 

Book Review: Makeshift Metropolis

Makeshift Metropolis, by University of Pennsylvania Professor of Urbanism Witold Rybczynski, is a concise well-written book which charts the progress of urban development over the past hundred years. Rybczynski offers a summary of major movements such as the City Beautiful, the Garden City, Wright's Broadacre, and Le Corbusier's Radiant City, interspersed with a large dose of freely available statistics and studies over the years. He follows on from these turn of the century movements to more recent advances in urbanism, such as the work of Jane Jacobs and New Urbanism, concluding with his own observations of the path urbanism is taking and what kind of cities are likely to be built in the years to come.

One point I must disagree with Rybczynski on is his infallible belief in the people. Numerous times throughout the book he suggests that urbanism has evolved in the way it has due mainly to the desires of the population, thus explaining the rise of suburbia. This viewpoint is meant to suggest freedom of choice in the United States, in the strength of individualism in American culture. Suburbia, if anything, has shown the American people liable to mass decision making, as evidenced by the homogeneity found in most suburbs. Furthermore, suburban growth did not occur for the simple reason of choice. It was a very complex migration due to a number of reasons, not least of which massive financial support from the government, which to this day supports policies favouring single family homes in the form of zoning, tax cuts, and road construction. All points Rybczynski fails to mention. I've yet to find a study showing how many people wouldn't rather live in the city over suburbs, if not for the inflated prices of real estate in urban areas, but I'm willing to bet it's substantial. 

I wish this book was longer, more fleshed out. I think Rybczynski has a lot more to tell given his extensive experience and knowledge on urbanism. The last chapter in particular, in which he describes the likely scenarios for the cities of the future, seems a bit rushed, focusing on the usual subjects of rising oil costs and increased population densities. Certain recent projects are mentioned, such as The Yards in Washington DC, and Modi'in in Israel, which I'll have to look in to.

Admittedly the book is shorter than I had expected it to be, really more along the lines of a long essay in a general interest journal. Perhaps this is not surprising given Rybczynski's former writing, often aimed at a general audience rather than well-informed professionals. Much of what is in the book is information anyone with a basic knowledge of urbanism will already know, such as the summaries of the major movements. I had also been aware of much of the statistics contained in the book, some of which I cited in my dissertation earlier this year. At one point I almost had a déjà vu moment, realizing I must have read the exact passage in one of Rybczynski's columns for Slate. Those columns, I should add, are what introduced me to his writing. I had hoped the book would be a substantial addition to his earlier writing, but unfortunately that is not the case. Still, I recommend it to those with even a passing interest in urbanism.