So far I've focused on my creative (or trendy) impulse to write a blog about urban planning, but lately I've been wondering if there's actually any demand for a blog about urban issues. I searched around and came up with a wider range of blogs than I might have guessed, including the apparent obsession of a young Chicago industrial designer, Fueled by Coffee, ranging to a website extolling "free-market environmentalism".
There is of course also a distinction to be made between blogs about cities, and blogging in cities. If I put in a search for the blogs of young, hyper-self-aware urban dwellers, I'd probably have search results coming out of my ears.
There are a number of interesting urban blog nodes that I need to investigate, including Beyond Brilliance, Beyond Stupidity, a title which summarizes my feelings exactly about the state of urban planning. Well, at least the second part. As I find more interesting blogs, they'll appear on the right-hand column of links, and I'll probably use this space to comment.
I've also been considering the question of what a blog can do, that other more traditional forms of media can't do. At the moment, I think of this blog as a filter for the disparate kinds of articles on the Internet relevant to cities.
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Saturday, March 26, 2005
Devolution
Of course, one has to recognize that my positivist interest in science as a tool for understanding cities occurs within a background of increasing hostility to science, and evolution in particular.
The New York Times had this article last week about some IMAX theater chains refusing to show movies titled "Volcanoes of the Deep Sea", "Galapagos", or "Cosmic Voyage" because of their depictions of the origins of humanity or the universe.
The New York Times had this article last week about some IMAX theater chains refusing to show movies titled "Volcanoes of the Deep Sea", "Galapagos", or "Cosmic Voyage" because of their depictions of the origins of humanity or the universe.
Science & the City
One could plausibly argue that science is both everywhere and nowhere in the city, depending on how one thinks of the city itself. Without getting into an overly detailed debate (with myself) about the character of scientific inquiry -- that will follow shortly -- let me make some general observations about the general nature of science and technology in the twentieth century.
The greatest successes of science of the 20th century occurred in physics and biology, respectively. Physics altered our fundamental perception of the universe, including the relationship of energy, matter and space-time, and biology altered our conception of ourselves as a species, and as a species among other species. At the beginning of the 21st century, it is indisputable that there is no aspect of human life that is unchanged by science and technology.
Though cities have always been crucial incubators and beneficiaries of advances in science and technology, particularly in the case of agriculture, it is not always clear where science and technology interact with the city, if only because the city appears to be a product of human, rather than natural, processes. Cities are artifacts of human intentions and systems, and as such, seem to be independent of otherwise fundamentally natural processes, such as the weather, geology, or geography.
As different as cities appear today, what is it about cities and city life that is recognizable throughout these scientific revolutions and technological changes? How can we encourage the qualities of city life, that is, urbane living? And how can science -- ranging from the natural to the social sciences -- help us do this?
The greatest successes of science of the 20th century occurred in physics and biology, respectively. Physics altered our fundamental perception of the universe, including the relationship of energy, matter and space-time, and biology altered our conception of ourselves as a species, and as a species among other species. At the beginning of the 21st century, it is indisputable that there is no aspect of human life that is unchanged by science and technology.
Though cities have always been crucial incubators and beneficiaries of advances in science and technology, particularly in the case of agriculture, it is not always clear where science and technology interact with the city, if only because the city appears to be a product of human, rather than natural, processes. Cities are artifacts of human intentions and systems, and as such, seem to be independent of otherwise fundamentally natural processes, such as the weather, geology, or geography.
As different as cities appear today, what is it about cities and city life that is recognizable throughout these scientific revolutions and technological changes? How can we encourage the qualities of city life, that is, urbane living? And how can science -- ranging from the natural to the social sciences -- help us do this?
The Conferencegoer
Recently I was invited to a swish conference on cities here in New York, and since it was a very nice invitation for a guy like me, off I went. Though big names in the field were there, I generally find the purpose of conferences often somewhat disappointing. Presenters generally promote themselves, and the hurried conversations at the coffee breaks are what I imagine speed dating feels like.
Also, I have a love-hate relationship with my career studying cities. On one hand, this blog and my other blogs exist because I'm interested generally in cities and city life, but on the other hand, this blog also also exists because I find the state of thinking in the field often disappointing. Despite a lot of writing in fields ranging from architecture to economics, there seems to be a general lack of creativity, vitality and rigorous thinking in the scholarship addressing cities.
(O Reader, I hope you feel similarly rather than offended, unless you're one of the people I am now going to go on and offend).
Let me illustrate my point with an anecdote. The afternoon began with a hot young architect giving a slick presentation on the quality of spaces inside terminals and airports. The pictures are nice, but like most architects, he crafted an entire presentation about his own buildings, showing them as the inevitable outcome of trends in modern society. Oh please.
Even more deadly dull, however, are the public advocates all sitting in a row, a long line of New York grandees who basically form the city's urban planning establishment, droning on at length about the same projects that they have been talking about for the past twenty years. I'm not kidding. All of these advocates claim that despite the public's natural and overwhelming support, they haven't been able to find the minimum $20 billion they need to be able to do anything at all. There is a lot of murmuring and rueful commenting on the collective inadequacies of the public, politicians, and the federal government.
Then, something amazing happened, in that common sense asserted itself. Someone in the back row stood up, identified himself as a consultant in developing countries, and he said to all of these collective wise men (and one woman) that
Without being too cinematic about it, the most amazing thing then to happen was that the sun really started shining into this conference room, and onto the heads of the dumbfounded New York planning community. The symbolism was much too obvious, but it was a really, really great moment.
Also, I have a love-hate relationship with my career studying cities. On one hand, this blog and my other blogs exist because I'm interested generally in cities and city life, but on the other hand, this blog also also exists because I find the state of thinking in the field often disappointing. Despite a lot of writing in fields ranging from architecture to economics, there seems to be a general lack of creativity, vitality and rigorous thinking in the scholarship addressing cities.
(O Reader, I hope you feel similarly rather than offended, unless you're one of the people I am now going to go on and offend).
Let me illustrate my point with an anecdote. The afternoon began with a hot young architect giving a slick presentation on the quality of spaces inside terminals and airports. The pictures are nice, but like most architects, he crafted an entire presentation about his own buildings, showing them as the inevitable outcome of trends in modern society. Oh please.
Even more deadly dull, however, are the public advocates all sitting in a row, a long line of New York grandees who basically form the city's urban planning establishment, droning on at length about the same projects that they have been talking about for the past twenty years. I'm not kidding. All of these advocates claim that despite the public's natural and overwhelming support, they haven't been able to find the minimum $20 billion they need to be able to do anything at all. There is a lot of murmuring and rueful commenting on the collective inadequacies of the public, politicians, and the federal government.
Then, something amazing happened, in that common sense asserted itself. Someone in the back row stood up, identified himself as a consultant in developing countries, and he said to all of these collective wise men (and one woman) that
"the amounts of money that you are talking about are obscene. The cities I work in have a fraction of the money that you're talking about, and still accomplish more with guts, creativity and ingenuity".This gets a sustained round of almost delirious applause, if only because it suddenly seems obvious to talk perhaps about why if you fail for the first twenty years, one might try a different tack. Then, the mayor of Bogota, Columbia says to the assembled New York grandees,
"I would like to videotape this proceeding, and all of the things that you have just said, and show it throughout the Third World. When people hear the amounts of money that you are talking about, they would not know whether to laugh or cry, but it would be entertaining".Or something along these lines. Turning to the young architect, he says, "To me, the point of transportation planning is not to get people to spend more time in airports and terminals. All of the places that you show, they seem unpleasant. I hate being in airports". This gets another round of sustained laughter and terrific applause.
Without being too cinematic about it, the most amazing thing then to happen was that the sun really started shining into this conference room, and onto the heads of the dumbfounded New York planning community. The symbolism was much too obvious, but it was a really, really great moment.
Why Blog?
Before I start writing on "cities and everything in them", it seems appropriate to meditate for at least a moment on this community, this hallowed ground, this blogspot. In terms of blogs, I would guess that I am fairly late to the party, but still probably on the trailing edge of early adoption, in the sense that not every grandmother has a blog quite yet. Let me retrace my incipient interest in blogs (leading to this one).
Around 2000-1, like everyone else in the world, I thought about starting a website. Not like everyone else, though, I thought about starting one devoted to my idiosyncratic interests in cities. Unfortunately, since I wasn't really interested in making money, and since I didn't have a wife who collected Pez dispensers (as did the founder of Ebay), there wasn't much stimulation to act on this.
I also once dated a web diarist, who had been writing her diary on the web since college in the mid-90's, making it one of the longer-running web diaries. I liked her stories about the community of people and friends that she had developed, but it seemed to require a lot of web experience and technology (or at least friends equipped with this). Sometimes, when we were talking, she would tell me stories that I had already read before on the Internet. This was slightly weird. Most importantly, however, I myself don't have much use for putting my personal thoughts and life on the web. It is the Internet, for godsakes! In general, I'm not fascinated by a lot of personal web blogs, which seem to me variously either overly ironic, confessional, self-aware, self-conscious, self-absorbed and/or just plain boring. (By the way, this is not a comment on my ex-girlfriend's web blog -- but I have to think about whether she might read it -- see?)
Last fall, the main news outlets seemed wildly interested in political blogs, which despite their informal tone and up-to-the-minute news-breaking, simply didn't interest me very much at the time. I was rapidly fatigued by the amount of election coverage, as I am during most presidential elections, and I usually end up trying to limit my intake of articles, if only because there are significant diminishing returns in learning, and because half of the articles are about a candidate who makes me angry, anyway. Also, I like my news filtered and edited, thank you, and I don't live in fear of the hegemony of the mainstream media. (Maybe I should be, but then again, it is rapidly eroding anyway) Mostly, however, as much as I like the idea of writing something light like wonkette.com, I find it hard to make time consistently for websites that are mostly style.
One particular development that really interested me over the last winter, though, was chatting with a friend of a friend at a birthday party, as we were talking about the news, or weather, or whatever, when he mentioned that he only reads "right-wing blogs and economics blogs". I was mildly interested (and amused) by his justification for this, that "blogs are interesting because they're written largely by experts in the field, and not stupid journalists". Though our subsequent conversation went downhill, this was actually kind of refreshing, and also reminded me of something I noticed in the Wall Street Journal online. It had begun to host occasionally well-known economics weblog writers, such as ArgMax or else Knowledge Problem. After looking at them, I thought that here were two blogs that I'd like to read more often, that were well-written, frequently-read, and connected to other interesting sites. Also, I kept on coming across interesting blogs on environmental issues, such as Sustainablog, Worldchanging.org or GristMill.
I did have, however, a technology problem with the time involved in blog surfing and reading. Most mornings I barely got through the New York Times, and despite my interest in reading the Guardian, Boston Globe, Washington Post or LA Times, there is no way that you can really get any work done by starting your day by trying to read five papers thoughtfully everyday. Luckily, finding a good RSS newsreader such as NetNewsWire has really changed idle surfing back to the more conscious act of reading.
I've also been consciously trying to expand my reading over the past few years, and now it seems like there is a galaxy of blogs on every topic, ranging from politics to food to travel to sex (many, too many blogs here), to gadgets to computers, and finally (finally!) to a reason to read Wired magazine. Technology seems to have advanced to the point where any fool (like me) can start a blog, using any number of tools.
The final step taking me to this blog is a recent career change to teaching and writing. As I sit down to write longer pieces, I've become very conscious of the fact that good thinking requires active reflection. Writing consistently is an old-fashioned way to engage in reflection, even as this new technology evolves towards instantaneous publication. It's an experiment, for now.
Welcome to my new blog. I hope you like it, and I would welcome any comments.
Around 2000-1, like everyone else in the world, I thought about starting a website. Not like everyone else, though, I thought about starting one devoted to my idiosyncratic interests in cities. Unfortunately, since I wasn't really interested in making money, and since I didn't have a wife who collected Pez dispensers (as did the founder of Ebay), there wasn't much stimulation to act on this.
I also once dated a web diarist, who had been writing her diary on the web since college in the mid-90's, making it one of the longer-running web diaries. I liked her stories about the community of people and friends that she had developed, but it seemed to require a lot of web experience and technology (or at least friends equipped with this). Sometimes, when we were talking, she would tell me stories that I had already read before on the Internet. This was slightly weird. Most importantly, however, I myself don't have much use for putting my personal thoughts and life on the web. It is the Internet, for godsakes! In general, I'm not fascinated by a lot of personal web blogs, which seem to me variously either overly ironic, confessional, self-aware, self-conscious, self-absorbed and/or just plain boring. (By the way, this is not a comment on my ex-girlfriend's web blog -- but I have to think about whether she might read it -- see?)
Last fall, the main news outlets seemed wildly interested in political blogs, which despite their informal tone and up-to-the-minute news-breaking, simply didn't interest me very much at the time. I was rapidly fatigued by the amount of election coverage, as I am during most presidential elections, and I usually end up trying to limit my intake of articles, if only because there are significant diminishing returns in learning, and because half of the articles are about a candidate who makes me angry, anyway. Also, I like my news filtered and edited, thank you, and I don't live in fear of the hegemony of the mainstream media. (Maybe I should be, but then again, it is rapidly eroding anyway) Mostly, however, as much as I like the idea of writing something light like wonkette.com, I find it hard to make time consistently for websites that are mostly style.
One particular development that really interested me over the last winter, though, was chatting with a friend of a friend at a birthday party, as we were talking about the news, or weather, or whatever, when he mentioned that he only reads "right-wing blogs and economics blogs". I was mildly interested (and amused) by his justification for this, that "blogs are interesting because they're written largely by experts in the field, and not stupid journalists". Though our subsequent conversation went downhill, this was actually kind of refreshing, and also reminded me of something I noticed in the Wall Street Journal online. It had begun to host occasionally well-known economics weblog writers, such as ArgMax or else Knowledge Problem. After looking at them, I thought that here were two blogs that I'd like to read more often, that were well-written, frequently-read, and connected to other interesting sites. Also, I kept on coming across interesting blogs on environmental issues, such as Sustainablog, Worldchanging.org or GristMill.
I did have, however, a technology problem with the time involved in blog surfing and reading. Most mornings I barely got through the New York Times, and despite my interest in reading the Guardian, Boston Globe, Washington Post or LA Times, there is no way that you can really get any work done by starting your day by trying to read five papers thoughtfully everyday. Luckily, finding a good RSS newsreader such as NetNewsWire has really changed idle surfing back to the more conscious act of reading.
I've also been consciously trying to expand my reading over the past few years, and now it seems like there is a galaxy of blogs on every topic, ranging from politics to food to travel to sex (many, too many blogs here), to gadgets to computers, and finally (finally!) to a reason to read Wired magazine. Technology seems to have advanced to the point where any fool (like me) can start a blog, using any number of tools.
The final step taking me to this blog is a recent career change to teaching and writing. As I sit down to write longer pieces, I've become very conscious of the fact that good thinking requires active reflection. Writing consistently is an old-fashioned way to engage in reflection, even as this new technology evolves towards instantaneous publication. It's an experiment, for now.
Welcome to my new blog. I hope you like it, and I would welcome any comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)