"Tell me more, tell me more, like did he have a car?"
Use Jackson's article to decide if Webber was right about how mass car ownership would transform the American city and its environs.
Use Jackson's article to decide if Webber was right about how mass car ownership would transform the American city and its environs.
In the ‘The Post-City Age” by Melvin Webber, he discusses the dissolution of the city of a necessary place for social interaction. He states that the city serves only as a convenient facility for people who conduct their professional lives through long-distance, means (i.e. the telephone, air travel, etc.) He also says that with this decrease in the distance barrier is causing people to migrate to more isolated areas to live. In the intro to this piece, it is mentioned that it is a “prophetic” writing. In the past decade or so, the internet has become the means to efficiently perform long-distance, impersonal business. I will take a look at how Webber foresaw the distant impacts of the internet’s impact on city life as we know it.
Firstly, Webber’s notion that “rural minded” individuals have moved from the country to the heart of the city is directly related to this notion of internet impact. Today many things are reliant on the internet. You can more effectively pay bills, manage bank accounts, get news, interact with distant people, and keep your finger on the pulse of popular culture. Although the lowest form of internet connect is cheap, computers are still rather expensive. This being the case, many impoverished urban people are left without the means to the internet, and therefore are left without a very vital connection to our society. This, in turn, perpetuates the stereotype of the poor urbanites as “socially ignorant” in a broad scheme. Their detachment from a internet savvy society is comparable to the detachment associated with rural folk of decades past, who were “socially ignorant” to the fast-paced ways of city life. In this way, Webber foresaw the internet’s impact on social assimilation through inaccessibility to connection.
Another point that Webber hits on is the movement of people to more isolated areas rather than closer to the city. He states that “If currently anticipated technological improvements prove workable, each of the metropolitan settlements will spread out in low-density…” The internet is mentioned as a “computer based information system,” and could be considered one of these “anticipated technological improvements.” With the internet’s introduction into society, the need to be close to the city has dissolved, just as Webber predicted. Even as SPRAWL is effectively extending homes outward from the city, even more rural living spaces are being developed. Near towns were there may have only been enough to support a community of farmers, there are now housing developments. The people that reside here are able to conduct business over the internet or phone, possessing the capability of multi-person meetings from their personal computers. Additionally, with a home life isolated from the chaotic life of the city, people may consider the extensive commute to the city “worth it.” With the high of wages with jobs that involve exclusively electronic business (stock trading, e-business, etc) the high transportation cost is more easily afforded.
Although the internet’s impact on our society may still be in relatively early stages of development, Webber had a very vivid intuition on the initial stages. The high speed evolution of technology during the 1960’s gave him foresight to something with an even larger societal impact than moon landings and color televisions. Webber saw the connectivity of people through technology, and knew that it would have a direct effect on the cities that were developed in their absence. With these connective technologies now in place, the city as we know it is changing to accommodate them, just as Webber predicted.
Tim Turi
Nice blog Tim. Everyone check out the "Cafe" for more debate on the issue of the effect of the internet on our experience of "community." TG
I agree that the introduction of the internet has enabled people to move into more isolated areas. While there are benefits to this technology, like the increasing ease of global movement, there are downfalls as well. With the interconnectivity that comes with such technological advancements (including the cell phone), people have almost become slaves to technology. I'm probably alone on this one, but I'm sick of the internet - cell phones too for that matter. It all feels so impersonal and lifeless.
Allison
You know, there are aspects of the internet that are incredibly annoying. Webber talks about a distance-enabled community, and I think that Myspace and Facebook are shinning examples of those. As much as I loathe those two sites, you'll see my profile consistently updated. This is becase I feel without those sites, I will be that much further from the pulse of my friends. It's like not having a cell phone today, really. Facebook and Myspace are stripped, shallow representations of who we are, it's incredibly lifeless. I think old Melvin Webber would definately raise his eyebrows at the prospect of the "stalker-friendly" internet community.
Tim
I agree with the point made about how the internet has become yet an additional mechanism for the dispersal of social capital and the subsequent reinforcement of class stratification. While there are public libraries with access to the internet, their limited hours and locations prevent lower-class people from having equal footing with middle and upper-class people in terms of their social capital acquiring capabilities. It seems like since the advent of cellphones and the popularization of sites like myspace and facebook that the social space many people have has progressively decreased, and this could possibly cause some to feel the need to increase their physical distance in an attempt to create some sort of balance. In terms of how lifeless these technologies are, I would have to disagree. People’s identities and methods of communication have been mediated for hundreds of years and I think that newer forms of technology are just changing how we mediate them.
Nice job Tim. You did a great job on your blog but I don't really agree with the intro portion. I don't think that people migrate to more isolated areas to live due to technology or a distance barrier. Isolation is a result of physical safety. The reformers in Slum Ville city believed that isolation was a way to control your environment and protect your family. I am more inclined to believe that type of thinking.
Dorian
timmy likes egg's
The automobile heavily controls American culture. In Kenneth Jackson’s selection from “The Drive-in Culture of Contemporary America,” dependency on the automobile is undeniable. Jackson argues that everything evolves around vehicles; public life, private life, and personal interactions are all deeply affected by the mode of transportation.
Automobiles control the lives of Americans. As of 2005, there were 241 million registered automobiles in the United States and only 201 million licensed drivers. For every driver on the road, there are 1.2 cars. About 70% of the U.S. population is licensed. The country was once as dependent on their horse and buggies as they now are on cars. It was unthinkable to believe that cars were going to once replace the buggy, but here we are today.
Interstates are expanding, the garage is engulfing the home, parking facilities are popping up at every turn of the head, gas stations have evolved into convenience stores, the fast-food industry is dependent on the drive-thru, and urban sprawl is occurring at a tremendous rate.
With the expansion of interstate freeways, it is becoming increasingly simple to move from city to city – and state to state – with ease. This is one of the main contributors to urban sprawl. Commuters have the ability to live in one city and work in another that may be fifty or more miles away. They can have the best of both worlds – the rural home life and the urban work life.
Industries have been founded and supported by the automobile. The most obvious is the auto industry, which relies on consumer’s dependency and addiction toward automobiles. Other industries like law enforcement, insurance companies, banks, gas companies, repair facilities, emergency medical assistance, the state (licensing & registration) and countless other industries also receive a large part of their revenue from the auto industry.
Parking facilities are everywhere. A trip to any metropolitan area includes a multitude of parking garages. Commuting businesspeople 1.) buy a vehicle to drive themselves downtown, 2.) pay for gas to drive to work, and 3.) pay astronomical parking rates simply to have the convenience of having a vehicle at their disposal. Parking facilities, car dealers, and monopolistic gas companies make off like bandits by taking advantage of the user of the personal automobile.
Gas companies and gas stations have evolved from locally owned companies to global powerhouses. From stations pouring buckets of gas into cars to the highly developed gas pumps and stations of today, gas companies are reinventing themselves daily. Not only have they incorporated convenience stores and rest stops into the stations, but also have incorporated televisions into the gas pumps. Therefore, for the five minutes that it takes to pump gas, the corporations cannot only pump gas into a vehicle, but they can pump the owner full of commercials and advertisements.
Although the automobile has the benefits of getting from point A to point B much in a timely fashion, and doing it in style, it has its drawbacks. Our lives now revolve around a little box on wheels and the companies that keep them moving.
Allison
I think that it is hard to imagine my life without the automobile. I think that the average american will spend 6 years of their life in the car. YIKES! But, with a society that is dependend on people having cars, I do not forsee any changes coming quickly. There are people proposing mass transit rail, but you have to drive to get there! What a waste.
I see changes coming. With an increase in automobiles throughout America, there will be more traffic congestion! AHHH!!
In Melvin Webber’s article “The Post-City Age”, he discusses his idea that urbanism no longer depends on location, but rather technology to make it successful. It is described that technology allows people to be “independent of the city” and spread out due to the accessibility of long distance phones and faster travel. These commodities place a division between classes due to the expenses of technology. Overall I feel that Webber addressed the “post-city age” in a futuristic manner that proved to be true; today technology does represent a large portion of everyday life. I would like to look further into his idea of how a city will be represented and why people would live in certain areas.
Webber noted that city folk used to strangers to rural folk and rural folk used to be confused by city folk, but now urbanites and ruralites are intermingling because of the influence of technology. It seems that Webber assumes that people living in the country use all of the technology provided (i.e. national newspapers, magazines, and television). People that live in different areas have their own communities and influence each other, therefore it does not matter the amount of technology but how the community interacts. For instance, at University of Wyoming (located in Laramie, WY), they have the same technology as Minneapolis, MN but live a very different live. Both are college towns that are filled with young adults that have grown up in the technological age, but differences can be seen that one is rural and the other is urban. There is no public transportation, lack of vehicles and no attraction or activity to do in comparison to Minneapolis. When my friend and I traveled there people could tell that we were from a completely different area. We talked differently (accent and word choice), dressed differently, and discussed different issues within the news. Granted a small rural area across the country is not the best example, there are still differences that show rural and urban communities. Because of this, technology allows for a better knowledge of larger issues outside of the physical realm, but communities discuss issues in different ways.
In “The Post-City Age”, Webber discusses his belief of communities. He stated that social reference groups are based on occupation and in turn create communities. This can be seen in families that travel a lot, such as military families and scientists. These families job position relocate to give them the needs to keep their job and make money. For example, technology allows scientists to gather information from other areas to collect data. These communities of scientists create their own social group that influences every day life. Production of ideas and information, as Webber would say, is sold and location does not matter. Because of this idea I wonder is urbanism created through an occupation. If a city or location is convenient for work and work creates a community and transformation of ideas for work needs technology, this new information age needs technology and produces communities based on occupation.
Webber’s belief on technology creating new and combined urbanism was an amazing prediction of cities today. New equipment allows people to travel away from their home or communicate to another area from their home. There are still differences between rural and urban communities, but in general occupation creates a community of its own based off of new information.
Abby Schultz
Simply put, Webber thinks that the city has transitioned from an industrial hub to a ghetto hinterland. His main reason for this effect is the use of technological advances in the fields of travel and communication freeing the urban bourgeoisie from the city. He does explain that this process is not just an upper-class windfall, but also helps to bridge the conceptual divide between urban and rural populations. He points out that the urban landscape is blamed for non-geographic social problems.
He fails to realize, however, that the effects of a nation’s population increase may have a greater effect on the phenomenon he describes. Webber argues that the technological increase and the accompanying increase in speed is the driving force behind extra-urbanization. While he is partially right about increased speed of transport/communication as a contributing factor, he fails to consider the primary factor in all past eras of rural/urban comparisons: simple population growth. More than any other factor, an increase (or decrease) in the human density affects the operation and perception of urban areas.
Relating to other authors, Webber’s argument is contrary to that of Wirth, if you accept that Webber’s conceptualization of the urban environment is no longer physical but social. Hence the physical distance is great and the social distance is small, the opposite effect of what Wirth describes. Marx seems to be channeling through Webber, because the extensive technological innovation leads to a growing contrast between the bourgeoisie and proletariat. As newer generations are educated in the newer technologies this process can only speed up and caused greater spatial agglomeration. Engels would see Manchester in the descriptions of the new physical urban wasteland and misplaced social policies directed at phantom symptoms. Webber and Le Corbusier would disagree sharply, with Webber arguing that there is no reason to build a perfectly planned environment because the only occupants inhabiting it on a regular basis would be those that Le Corbusier would not want living there. Also, Frank Lloyd Wright’s vision of idyllic futuristic nature communities does not work for Webber’s urban expanse, but it would fit those not hindered by geography quite well.
I am left trying to fully understand Webber’s intent: is he attempting to blame or exonerate technology and the role it plays in spatial agglomeration? What happens when there is nowhere left to expand? He mentions that waterways are experiencing population density increases unlike any other region, which seems to contradict his point that people are choosing to live where ever they want. He does not want to take the responsible path in his argument and acknowledge that there may be other primary or ancillary causes to the phenomena he describes. The presence of higher population densities along water is normal: water is and always has been a good source of food, power and transportation. Webber does create an interesting comparison on the networking of the physical interconnectedness of the cities themselves and people that feel free to skip between the cities conversing with each other. Would either of these be possible without the other? Was there a form of dependence created with the institution of the internet that goes beyond daily life?
David Hauser
Kenneth Jackson’s look at the boom of automobiles, and more specifically the consequences of that boom, was an incredibly interesting read. His writing isn’t academic, it’s humble…he doesn’t assume any judgments or solutions to the advent of a new America in the 1980’s and more importantly gives us a history well needed for our contemporary dependency on the automobile. My limited knowledge, pre-Jackson, consisted of two notions: the car is bad for our environment; the car breeds an anonymity that America thrives on. From Jackson I pulled away many new ideas about the automobile and how it affects space, consumerism, industry and residential life. How is it that an active American who relied for much of her early years on a mini-van couldn’t realize how that mini-van touched almost every part of her life? Sometimes you can’t see what’s right in front of you, isn’t that the saying?
The centerless city, that’s where Jackson’s idea really came to life for me. He gives two extremities of suburban culture, Orange County and Santa Clara County. I had no idea that suburbia had sprawled itself out so much, dependant completely on the automobile. My previous idea of a suburb balanced with a dependency on some inner-center, some downtown that centralized each suburbs connection. Now, Jackson shows us, the car has broken that dependency. I’m sure there would be some to argue that downtowns are a bad habit, a ritual of cities that are simply a waste of time. Congestion, density, low-income residents mixing with high-income professionals? Sure, that sounds like a bad habit. But in your car, oblivious to the humanity of your suburban neighbors, oblivious to class inequalities, forgetting everything but that Temptations song you hadn’t heard in forever and gosh, that deadline coming up at the end of the week – doesn’t that sound like a bad habit? I see ignorance, or at least negligence, as indeed a dependency to be broken. It may be that ignorant bliss of knowing a Mickey D’s is no more than five minutes away that these centerless cities pride themselves on.
Away from that bitter rant, let’s get back to Jackson’s history. One of the most amazing and ironic consequences of the automobile was the movement as well as depreciation of industry in America. Where Ford at once created a whole new and plentiful way of manufacturing, by the 1970’s there was not only a decrease in the industrial work force as well a dispersal of factories from the city to the suburb. Ford’s theory of creating a car that his employees could afford was ironically flipped around so that employees would NEED a car to even get to the job that would pay for that car.
I tip my hat the first automobile in America. That car has done a lot of good but a certain incredible amount of bad. Socially, ecologically…we all have at least something to say to that guy yelled from his car window “let there be personal space everywhere we go!”
as a small p.s. – does anyone know if that McStop every happened? if it did, I’ve GOT to see it…
-bethanie kloecker
I was wondering about the McStop myself... hmmmm. I googled and I think there is one in Missouri, but I didn't see one listed around here.
Webster's dictionary defines a cosmopolitan as "a person who is free from local, provincial, or national bias or attachment; citizen of the world; cosmopolite: "sophisticated Urbane, worldly. In Melvin M. Webber's "Deadalus" he argues that there has been a decline in urbanization in "The Post-City Age." Webber attributes this decline to the prevalence and increased availability of telephones and airplane's. In this blog I will share personal experiences that prove Webbers theories correct while also arguing that the term Urban has changed in the minds of the American people.
In Webber's "Deadalus" he states that "Air transportation and the telephone... were eliminating the traditional space- time constraints on human interaction and bringing about stunning cultural changes in the nature of an increasingly global human civilization." This quote encapsulates Webber's primary argument. I agree with this statement and would argue that this manifestation has become even more apparent in 2007 with the advent of cell-phones. The cell phone has made it even easier for people to reach each other in different places and has made communication with people in different areas extremely simple. I like Webber would argue that this invention has brought about increased cultural change as many phone companies make it even easier than the phone companies to make calls to places not just all over the country but all over the world as well. Whether you are a Businessman trying to call a client in Beijing or a college student calling home to check on a care package, communication has become extremely effortless and less personal.
Another argument made by Webber is that "Americans are forming social communities comprised of spatially dispersed members. A new kind of large scale urban society is emerging that is increasingly independency of the city. While I agree with what Webber is arguing I contend that in today's society the term Urban by definition is attributed to those that live in city and while people can be Urbane and separate from the city it is impossible to be Urban. Webber's foreshadowing on the state of the city is amazing. Because of the export of manual labor jobs, and "White flight" have taken place at such amazing rates from 1968 to 2007 property rates, and living conditions in cities have gone down drastically. Because of this the word Urban has taken on a negative connotation that is assumed to be a label for minorities, and lower class white city dwellers. This definition of Urban is a far cry from the urbane socialite that Webber describes.
Webber touches on the changing definition of Urbanites and says that they "no longer reside exclusively in metropolitan settlements, or do ruralites live exclusively in the hinterlands." Webber argues that in today's society all you need is a college education and or money in order to be considered an Urbanite and that urban dwellers (immigrants, minorities) have become the new hicks who are uninformed about the world surrounding their neighborhood. I agree with Webber that money, race (although he skirts around this underlying issue), and class are all things that have kept the cities masses from becoming cosmopolitans.
While airplanes and telephones have a lot to do with the simplicity of cosmopolitans interacting with other cosmopolitans, I strongly disagree that this has anything to do with the state of the city. The reason why cosmopolites are being raised largely in suburbs is because when minorities were finally able to obtain a level of economic success and Jim Crow laws were abolished (coincidently right around the time this was written) the people who used to live in these Urban areas began to leave at an alarming rate. Real estate agents were then able to convince other cosmopolites and inspiring cosmopolites to move out of their homes for far less money than there homes were worth. THis trend continued and soon the entire landscape of cities around the country had changed. This is why property rates in these towns plummeted and why many bigoted people don’t want any urban duelers to move into their cosmopolitan safe havens. Telephones had nothing to do with this. In addition the outsourcing of jobs from America’s cities (i.e. the ford motor plants in Detroit) due to the capitalistic need to save money by underpaying workers contributed to current state of spatial relations. Airplanes no doubt had a large part in this. Businessmen (excuse me cosmopolitans) have to have their first class flights to get around the country and around the world in order to close deal’s that drive their costs down and put more money in other more rich cosmopolitans hands. And hoe else would we be able to export the products made overseas in sweatshops? Boats? That would take like years!
People concerned about the city needs have no fear gentrification is here. Soon all urbanities will no longer have to pretend like they grew up and were cultured in the city as opposed to “TV and computer-aided educational systems, no-toll long distance telephone service, and real-time access to national computer-based information systems” (Webber pg. 473). Gentrification will soon disenfranchise city dwellers as corporate giants cut checks and reclaim the neighborhoods that good suits (WOOPS the urbane, urbanites or is it cosmopolitans) rightfully deserve.
The city, in Webber’s perspective, is greatly affected by technology. Spatial relationships became less defined by geography, and more defined by international relations through communication via the telephone, airplanes, etc. Webber points to the ways in which this leads to a deeper division in class, beyond geographical segregation such as slums and suburbs.
The bourgeoisie, educated and funded to make use of new technology, have access to anywhere physically while still participating in the global dialogue in relation to economic and political power. The conquering of lands of the past through simple tools is no longer significant. Today, “genocide of local culture" through acts of globalization is enacted for economic means, but the actual violence is never seen by the consumers. Local struggles are no longer relevant to those who mostly participate in the technological world. They are hardly seen.
The lower class is still influenced by the technological revolution, but they do not have the means to access power through it. This confines them to the urban or rural physical space, to manual labor, and overall to the physical realm. “The societies in the past had been spatially and locally structured. (471). City planning aims to solve social problems, by way of redesigning existing structures, which has little effect on the new social structure. Because contextually we have expanded from local territory to a massive global network, rearranging local spaces will not lead to major social change. Webber is beyond Wright’s theory of the new space that would demolish the social stratification of the urban. Webber understands that the concept of space is much more complex, and technology is the momentum that creates such postmodern spatial relationships.
The urban contemporary social model is now dispersed into the rural areas. Webber mentions that farmers are now consumers of international drama. Social problems that never reached the rural people now have greater effects. For example, even if there is no physical GLBT community in a rural area, information is spread through the ever present technology in rural areas. Television shows and internet today create a postmodern space that pushes the rural communities to conform to the urban standards. In Webber’s time, the airlines and long distance telephone calls were signs of the cosmopolites. Today, laptops, cell phones, and thousands of other micro gadgets send the elites far from local ground into a cyberspace reality where ideas and money are exchanged. This world is private from the lower class, and usually, the lower class or underclass is monitored and silenced by these gadgets. The only information presented is stereotypical and has money-making intentions.
Communities become even more than what Wirth described as the urbanite’s connection to multiple groups of people. Webber describes the community for the cosmopolites as having contacts across the world, without committing themselves to any certain location. This presents a conflict for those who have little access to technology in a time of cut-throat capitalism and globalization; the only role left for those who are not involved in this global game are various positions in the field of manual labor.
It seems that Jackson is working towards the suggestion that our reliance on the automobile is dangerous
because there is no security that we will be able to maintain our auto-dependant country. With the development of more auto-friendly environments in the United States must come a consequence. The highways that have been constructed to cater to the driving public were laid over natural areas that will never return their original state. We must remember that humans have not, and I believe never will, conquer the forces of nature. The structures that we build to suit our own needs cover up important natural resources. We are continually forcing all other life in this country to the margins of our settlements. The accommodations that have had to been made to allow for the advanced road systems have no doubt come with a price. Advancements in technology, especially the automobile, have allowed the characteristics of the city such as a place of commerce and business have spread outward, Jackson and Webber’s tones in their pieces seem to suggest that this cannot be completely to our benefit. Maybe they felt that the city was best kept limited to a certain area, maybe that saying “anything is okay if enjoyed in moderation” should be applied here with the so-called luxuries that the automobile has brought us. America and it’s oil addiction, I think it is scary to think how far reaching the effects of it have been, to be honest, I don’t think I really want to know. The global warming scares that are increasing with the years can attest to Maybe the dependence on the automobile is dangerous in that it forces us to travel long distances regularly. I wonder, what are the real consequences of the stress that people have added to their daily lives with traveling long distances to and from work in their cars each day?
Both Jackson and Webber seem to be getting at the notion that the transformation of the cities that the
advancement in technology and transportation brings would have the effect of detaching people’s sentiments from certain places, that people would no longer feel endearment towards them as a place where they felt any sense of community or belonging. I think this hint at the notion of detachment from home is interesting, and Webber was not the first to anticipate such a result. The many different tribal peoples that are indigenous to the area known as the United States have always regarded homeland as sacred, and with which a certain connection was essential to the overall balance of an individual’s existence. Jackson’s discussion of the many changes that came with America’s excitement over the freedom of travel that automobiles provided them made me think about how destructive, arrogrant, and one-sided the thinking behind the move towards "Progress" has been at so many times. It seems that a recurring attitude with the developments of cities is the idea that what looks good on the drawing board will always translate well if it involves the expansion of business. If there’s a will and money to implement it, there’s a way, we'll worry about the consequences later.
OBE 3: Technological Advancement and Decentralization
For the most part, I agree with many of Marvin Webber’s ideas about the evolution of technology and the progression of communication, which functions to decrease the necessity of the city as a tool for the exchange of ideas and transactions. However, I do not think that this communication advancement has benefited the interpersonal connections that we have with one another on a daily basis. There is something so essentially human about face-to-face interaction. Something that I believe is lacking in our post-modern or “post-city” (as Webber calls it) society. Maybe it’s true that urban sprawl continues to creep along every nook and cranny of the US, but I still am not convinced that this makes everyone a so-called “urbanite.”
In fact, I was glad that Webber brought up economic advantage as a prerequisite to being positively affected by many of these urban advancements. Many of these special amenities like internet, cable television, satellite radio, automobiles and other transportation are inaccessible to many less privileged individuals. In my opinion, I find both Webber and Jackson’s dialogue on the importance of the automobile to be a bit exaggerated. Of course, I recognize the contribution to the general mobility of our country; however, I don’t the see the automobile as the sole means of propulsion. Indeed, we have made severe changes to our landscape in order to accommodate transportation demands, yet the city still provides a cultural exchange that cannot be attained on the road or via text message.
I am thankful for world news programs, talk radio, cell phones, but they do not dictate my life, and they certainly do not provide me with much of the character that I posses. Like myself, I think Wirth would argue that the city still provides an outlet for experiencing a range of relationships, activities, and other physical/mental stimuli. The city has provided me with a lifestyle that would not have existed had I continued to live in my hometown.
Additionally, I wanted to comment on the transportation issue that takes place within a city. Because of my city lifestyle I am given the option to have/not have a vehicle. In my particular case, I use public transportation at any opportunity. I think it’s unfair to totally dismiss the contribution of metro transit systems across the world. Jackson does have a point though… he discusses America’s obsession with the car and we definitely are underdeveloped when it comes to public transit (in comparison to other countries).
Finally, there are still spaces in today’s America that reject many of these technological advancements, or at the very least, do not regularly practice them. Webber says that “the hicktown…has left the scene.” I don’t think this is necessarily true everywhere. Not that there’s some antiquated town with horse-drawn carriages and phonograms, but it’s worth noting that many still reject the characteristics of modernity.
In the end, I too agree that these various forms of communication and transportation have elevated our society to a new level of interaction and lifestyle. However, I am increasingly concerned that these new advancements will erode our means to authentic relationships; like both Jackson and Webber imply, they will continually separate our population by marginalizing those without the proper economic means to participate in this rapid system of exchange. But let’s not count the city out yet…
During the postwar era, the automobile became the vessel to bring about personal freedom and mobility to people living in both big cities and rural communities. During this time of vast technological improvement, items like the garbage disposal and the color television crept into the homes of the middle class, while many ideal thoughts arose of what the “America of the future” would look like. The resulting society created by the popularity of the automobile and the creation of interstate highway system led to a commercialized and comodified society and way of life.
Franklin Lloyd Wright’s “Broadacre City” was one of these “futuristic” plans that used technology to redefine the American lifestyle. It proposed to give each person an automobile and based housing size on the number of vehicles owned at each house. While his “Broadacre City” relied on the automobile, it ultimately called for the reorganization of government. For Wright’s plan to come to fruition, the decentralization of government and a shift of power to local authorities must have occurred. Wright wanted to change the idea that “success” required a life of excess, which allowed people on a community level to govern their own lives in ways that suit them best. His plan goes against the government and capitalism, by focusing on bringing people together, while allowing them the right to individualism. Although there was a social acceptance of the car, no decentralization of governmental power ever took place. Consequently, the same power that Wright wanted freedom from, created the massive interstate system he envisioned.
In 1954 the Interstate Highway Act planned a massive 41,000-mile highway system. The chairperson of the committee that created the act was also on the board of directors for General Motors. No other options besides the interstate system were ever created and the development of public transportation was completely overlooked. While Wright would have seen the importance of the highway system and the freedom it would allow, it would not have been conducive to his plan due to the carelessness and lack of planning during implementation. As Jackson mentions in his study of the affect of cars on American culture during the highway planning stages, “Not a single word was said about the impact of highways on cities and suburbs.” The plan rushed through government by people with ulterior motives, which not only changed the face of America, but also created cities and suburbs that scarcely resemble Write’s plan.
As the highway system gained popularity more and more people and families became mobile, which led to the expansion of businesses outside major cities to cater for drivers. From drive in movies to drive through funeral homes, many businesses have changed or adapted in questionable ways to accommodate drivers. As time went on questions of funding the building and maintaining of these roads developed. In Jackson’s article, he brings up how “Truck companies promoted legislation to spend state gasoline taxes on highways, rather than on school, hospitals, welfare, or public transit.” Therefore, the capitalists created the roads, ruined small businesses with new, more convenient driver friendly businesses, and finally took money away from important social programs to build and maintain these roads. This seems drastically different to the vision of “Broadacre City,” which really called for the change of lifestyle and government, not just an increase of cars and driver friendly businesses that have come to dominate or cities and suburbs. While Wright’s broad acre plan seemed drastic and heavily relied on the automobile, much of the theory proves valid and reminiscent of Thoreau and Emerson values. By idealizing the car as an individual’s freedom of mobility, Wright wanted to push the concept of decentralizing power and create individualism not only on a personal level, but also at community level. Instead, we deal with an ever-growing network of roads, restaurants, businesses, and communities that all resemble one another. It seems to me and Jackson would agree that we have taken the worst aspect of “Broadacre City,” the car, and created a whole nation based on it, while forgetting the true theory behind the type of people and community “Broadacre City” would have created.
tyler
Does Jackson’s article confirm Webber’s theories? Well, yes and no. A good example of the “yes” can be found in the section of Webber’s article where he talks about how the urbanites used to live in the cities and the rural people used to live in the country, but now – or at the time he wrote the article, anyways – the trend has reversed itself. While Webber never seems to implicitly say it, the only real way this reversal could have happened is due to the automobile. The urban people got cars more frequently, realized “hey, it’s pretty nice out here – less crime, less pollution,” and decided to move out of the city, killing the city somewhat. Which is exactly what Jackson was talking about in his article.
This brings up an interesting idea, mainly: were the city people really that transformed by the idea of mass car ownership or was it more a case that the city people didn’t really want to live in the city in the first place? If all it took was a steady, convenient mode of transportation that they themselves could both own and operate to get them out into the surrounding areas (causing the birth of the suburb), one wonders if this mass migration wasn’t an inevitability, anyways. My guess is that this was bound to happen, anyways.
While Jackson helps confirm Webber, they have some areas in which they differ. Mainly, Jackson and Webber seem to differ on how they feel about this transformation. Jackson damns the idea of a growing suburban culture – which came about mainly through the automobile – while all Webber seems to say is that things like mass car ownership will change things. This is where Jackson can be found at fault. Jackson’s main fault lies in the fact that he seems to put the blame for declining cities directly on the automobile. Webber touches on things like cars, but he was smart to also point out things like air travel and telephones as reasons that people migrated out from the cities. He doesn’t pin the blame strictly on the automobile.
And yes, the car did take the people out of the city. But did it take the city out of the people? I don’t think it did. Webber himself says, “High educational attainments and highly specialized occupations mark the new cosmopolites.” Nowhere in there does he say, “You have to have an address within the city limits to be a cosmopolite.” Just because cars have given people a way out of the city, that doesn’t mean they don’t like the city, which is what Jackson seems to be saying throughout his article. Take Minneapolis, for example. Sure, people might live in Edina or Chaska or wherever, but if they want to go to a Twins game or a concert at Target Center, they have to come into Minneapolis. Last time I checked, there weren’t any major concert venues or stadiums in Eden Prairie.
In the end, Jackson – to a certain extent – helps confirm what Webber was talking about. But Jackson takes a far too narrow view of what caused the decline in cities and a far too narrow view of how people perceive cities. Webber, by casting a wider net, comes off with a better approach.
Every part of Kenneth T. Jackson’s “The Drive-in Culture of Contemporary America,” is pretty spot on: his fact checking seems pretty respectable, his argument is clearly laid out, and his theme is steadily maintained. I guess the only real problem with his essay is that there is no particularly driving point (once again, I’m punning. Sorry).
Ok, let me back up real quick. Essentially, Jackson says that the advent of the automobile has radically changed the structure of the American city and, more importantly, the way Americans interact with their cities. First, cars create new needs, from the thousands of miles of highways to the garages accompanying even crappy houses. Cars also gave rise to new industries, such as the automotive insurance industry and the fast food market. Lastly, cars changed the forms of certain cultural artifacts: pushing individual stores together to form the first indoor malls (whoot Southdale), shifting the hotel from the uniquely charactered urban mode of housing to the motel, a cheap roadside locus for vacation stopovers and adulterous trysts, and even giving rise to the house on wheels, a.k.a. the mobile home.
Ok, let’s get a little more nefarious. Now that the automobile has drastically altered everything we hold dear, and our urban has sprawled, it turns out that we kind of need to own one of these things which has heretofore had the agency to change nations (commodities creating needs which in turn create the need for more of the commodity, trés Marx, eh?). Suburbs have taken over, everything is super far apart, people are being drawn out of the city center, public transit is shot (how symbolic is it, by the way, that the first person to be killed by an auto was a user of public transportation?), etc.
I’ll admit it is totally legit to write a primarily expository piece of work when one wants to just get a point across and not necessarily make some giant, controversial claim. This essay is not objective, however, it’s solidly anti-car, anti-suburb, and anti-urban-sprawl and I wish he’d just come out and say that rather than needling us with his cloaked message and passive-aggressively negative language like Aunt Edna asking when we’re going to settle down. If this were a historical piece, I could get over it, but Jackson seems to be hinting that there is some significance about the fact that is was cars particularly that sent us into a whirlwind of change. But what about skyscrapers? They have forever changed the face of the U.S. The Empire State Building, the first (or one of the first) building over 1000 feet was finished in 1931, which is during this sort of mid-World-War formative time in U.S. history about which Jackson mention repeatedly. Using up all the downtown space in a city for an application that is primarily commercial certainly could explain the popping-up and growth of suburbs. They created huge booms in the building industries (elevators, I-beams, windows, etc.) and to some extent tourism (the Empire State Building’s observation deck as destination, for example). I’m sure that there are all kinds of dirty dealings in their past, but Jackson mentions nothing of them. If cars are such a villain in our past, I want to know why, and Jackson never seems to get round to the point.
As an interesting bit of trivia, according to wikipedia (not the best source, I’ll admit), the Empire State Building’s spire was originally meant to be a dock for dirigibles. Imagine what our country would be like if those had become the main form of transportation.
I definitely agree with your analysis of Jackson and his passive aggressive style. Similar to your findings, Jackson doesn't seem to conclude his article at all. It's almost as if the rest of his piece was cut off at the end. I'm not sure what his intentions are leaving such an open or unfinished work. I didn't understand what his point was other than he seems to (like you said) cloak his dislike for urban sprawl and the automobile with facts and boring information about garages, malls, etc. What does he propose as a solution? What does all of this information on the evolution of the automobile and the decentralization of the city mean? He gives us no answers... and certainly doesn't ask any questions.
Tim Turi
3-7-07
Cities 07
OBE #3
In “The Drive-In Culture of Contemporary America,” by Kenneth T. Jackson, he speaks of the heavy, negative impact that the automobile has had on our cities. He does this by describing the interstate highway as a massive conglomeration of factions (government, road workers, automobile manufacturers, etc) working together to cover the U.S. in asphalt. He also fingers the garage, motel, drive-in theater, mobile-home, and drive-thru restaurant as means to facilitate our growing reliance on our cars. He says “the car is like a member of the family,” and with that in mind, we must keep it close to us in all situations. With this reliance on our car’s capability to deliver us to far off areas, we no longer need to put stock in the proximal community that the city provides for us. With the ability to come and go from any destination as we please, it has spurred on the development of suburbia, which Kenneth sees as the “anti-city.”
As Americans grew exponentially closer to their automobiles over time, they desired to have them with them at all times. They had it with them when they ate, watched movies, and of course, “utilized the backseat.” This had allowed Americans to basically become nomads during the day, only needing to go home to collect mail and sleep for the night. This has made the car a veritable, unnatural extension of our bodies. The problem with growing so accustomed to something unnatural is that you are helpless without it. Jackson suggests that since our cities have been completely designed around the automobile, without it much of our civilization would be useless. He talks about a car-hop oriented restaurant becoming a historic icon. This is a sign that even though it has just about 50 years since the “automobilization” of our country, there are already aspects of it that are dissolving into ruin. Jackson suggests that this is a hint of things to come.
If this descent of the automobile’s prominence comes to fruition, then it could mean this country would become a collective mass of useless, retired institutions built around this mode of transportation. The massive, entwining, convoluted mess of highways and streets that slither across our country will serve no purpose expect for bicyclists, pedestrians, and other more natural means of transport. Additionally, all the amenities that Jackson mentions, such as the drive-thru, the gas station, etc will all become obsolete. This will mean quintillions of dollars that have been spent, and years of becoming assimilated to automobiles will be for nil. Our society will be turned on its ear, and we will quickly have to search for new ways to move from place to place. This could be comparable to the induction of the internet, and how many services can only be paid online. If a person is accustomed to have their check book with them when making transactions, then this foreign means of commerce may be overwhelming. Failure to conform to new means would mean severe societal handicap. Just like not being able to find a new transportation to replace the car.
Additionally, I think Webber would disagree with Jackson’s apparent disdain of the mobile. Webber would see the automobile as necessary instrument in the dissolving of the spatial boundaries of the city. They are necessary in making it from the sprouting rural communities back to the reliable urban environment. I’m also certain Webber would be confident in the means of communication to remedy the lack of transportation. Communication could be used to bounce new transportation ideas around until something has been developed. Webber would agree, however, that America’s reliance on the automobile has greatly determined the course of city planning that has, and will occur.
Tim Turi
Kenneth T. Jackson’s “The Drive-in Culture of Contemporary America” discusses how the automobile “transformed both the structure and social life of modern cities” (Legates pg. 67). And provides a fairly negative view of what suburbs have become. In this blog I will discuss Jackson’s ideas on the garage, the motel, the drive-in theater the gasoline service station, the shopping center, the house trailer and mobile home, a drive-in society and the centerless city as they pertain to today’s suburbs.
Jackson starts his argument by first providing the reader with background information about how suburbs came in to existence. The conception of the interstate highway led to the expansion of cities from coast to coast and consequentially made it easier for people to develop land surrounding the cities creating the suburb. This is significant to Jackson’s argument because it could be debated which was truly more important to the formation of suburbs, the highways or the cars? I believe like Jackson that it was the car however if horse drawn carriages were still used to this day I have no doubt that we would have created a more efficient system of roads that would make travel much easier than the dirt covered roads that are still common in rural areas.
The car became not only a status symbol, but almost a member of the family, to be cared for and sheltered. The introduction of a canopied and unenclosed structure called a “car port” represented an inexpensive solution to the problem.” This quote exemplifies the way Americans think about their cars. Like Jackson says we almost view them as our horses we provide them with shelter that has since become enclosed, wash and water them at the feeding hole (Car Wash/ gas station), and even take them to the vet (the mechanic) when they get sick (car trouble). Jackson reiterates the strength of our love of car’s when he says “In California garages and driveways were often so preeminent that the house could almost be described as accessory to the garage. Few people, however, went to the extremes common in England, where the automobile was often so precious that living rooms were often converted to garages” (Jackson, pg. 70). This quote epitomizes the love the whole world has for cars and just how far people will go to protect them. I actually found that many homes in California and down south, especially in lower income and rural neighborhoods, don’t have enclosed garages. In Minnesota you would be hard pressed to find a car in any city rural or otherwise that didn’t have an enclosed garage I presume this difference is due to weather and climate rather than anything else but I thought it was interesting.
The motel is another post World War II phenomenon discussed by Jackson. “By 1972…an old hotel was closing somewhere in downtown America every thirty hours. And somewhere in suburban America, a plastic and glass Shangri-La was rising to take its place” (Jackson, pg. 71) this quote is exemplary of the major changes and outsourcing of resources from the cities to the suburbs. When I was a senior in high school I was involved in something called the rights of passage which is basically a mentorship program for young black males and at its completion we are put through a ceremony attended by friends and family. This year I went back to see the ceremony, it has been three years since I completed the program, and was surprised to find that the ceremony was being held at the Marriot Hotel in the suburb of Minnetonka rather than at the downtown Minneapolis suburb that it had been held in for many years. While it may seem like a small point of emphasis I believe its implications are very real and support the arguments that Jackson has made in regards to motels.
The Drive-in Theater, the gasoline service station, the shopping center, the house trailer and mobile home, and the creation of the drive in society are all things that have been evolved due to the car. The drive-theater is not as popular as it once was but I’ve been to a few in my life out in the outer lying suburbs and they are a lot more fun that a regular movie. First you are allowed to view three movies in one showing as opposed to 1 at a regular theatre two the tickets are cheaper and three it more intimate for you and your family or you and your significant others because you can talk, or make out without people looking at you funny or telling you to be quite. Jackson notes the decline in drive in popularity that began in the 60’s and 70’s and attributes it to the creation of malls.
Mall's are some the most noticeable traits of suburbs and in many instances what separate another small town from a suburb. Jackson notes that the first mall was created “introduced at the South dale Shopping Center near Minneapolis in 1956.” I used to work right across the street from Southdale and would go there all the time. I remember seeing Santa Claus their one year and taking dates their as well. For a long time the mall didn’t have a movie theater but competition with the mall of America and other surrounding malls has led Southdale to create on of the nicest movie theaters I have been to. They have spacious reclining seats and big cup holders (AHhhh the luxury). Southdale is located in one of the wealthiest suburbs in the country, Edina, MN. I think it no coincidence that the first mall in America is also in one of the wealthiest. Id bet that property values in Bloomington, MN, where the Mall of America is located, skyrocketed after “The Mega Mall” was created in the early 1990’s.
In Kenneth Jackson’s article “The Drive-In Culture of Contemporary America,” he brings to attention some of the changes associated with society that the automobile has created since its birth. It is a simple fact that the personal automobile has forever shaped the way the world runs, day to day, year to year decade to decade. Without the car, personal transportation would be shaped in an entirely different way. Jackson’s ideas seem to convey a message about the negativity associated with the uprising of the car, and the effects on culture, society, and the cities. This view is much different from the perspective Frank Lloyd Wright describes in his view of a “Broadacre City.” Wright holds the personal motor car at the center of power among the cities inhabitants, transforming the surrounding city to accommodate the high speeds of transportation throughout a city.
Jackson describes many different effects automobiles have had on the structure of cities. One of these, of course, is the highway system. With the growth of ownership of personal cars, there must be expansion somewhere to accommodate the new influx of automobiles. This expansion came from the highways and super highway that now line every major American city. Jackson expresses his displeasure regarding the emphasis put into expanding highways, while leaving such institutions like schools, hospitals, welfare, and public transit behind. Jackson feels that the overcrowded streets have forced their way to the forefront of the state’s costs, and pushed aside other key issues that he feels required greater attention. Wright, however, would praise the trend of personal transportation and fully embrace its effects. Wright’s “broadacre city” is centered on super speed interchanges, massive 12 lane highways, and intertwined monorail lines. Speed is a necessity for the function of a major city, and the most common mean of transportation is the automobile. Therefore, paying attention to how the city accommodates the vehicles is vital to the success of the city according to Wright.
However, I believe both Wright and Jackson would agree that automobiles and the extensive freeway systems work to decentralize the city. Jackson states that due to the connectivity that highways create from city to city, there becomes a lack of a central focus to the city, which is lost by urban sprawl and expansion. Wright also believed in decentralization and the low-density model for his city. He felt individuals should be allotted land according to family size; yet maintain communication between residents with the use of technology like telephones and automobiles. Although decentralization of the city is something agreed upon by both authors, Jackson clearly believes it to be a problem created and maintained by motor vehicles. He feels that the non-connectivity that urban sprawl brings has diminished the feel of American cities, and pushed structural expansion to the limit.
Comments
I believe that Webber has some very good points in regards to the way that mass transportation has changed the landscape of cities. Webber shows that telephones and airplanes have turned the city into a place were cosmopolities go to work yet have little connection to. Without the car people would not be able to get anywhere and the change in spatial relations that form the cities and the surrounding communities never would have taken place.
Posted by: James Cannon | March 7, 2007 09:30 PM
Webster's dictionary defines a cosmopolitan as "a person who is free from local, provincial, or national bias or attachment; citizen of the world; cosmopolite: "sophisticated Urbane, worldly. In Melvin M. Webber's "Deadalus" he argues that there has been a decline in urbanization in "The Post-City Age." Webber attributes this decline to the prevalence and increased availability of telephones and airplane's. In this blog I will share personal experiences that prove Webbers theories correct while also arguing that the term Urban has changed in the minds of the American people.
In Webber's "Deadalus" he states that "Air transportation and the telephone... were eliminating the traditional space- time constraints on human interaction and bringing about stunning cultural changes in the nature of an increasingly global human civilization." This quote encapsulates Webber's primary argument. I agree with this statement and would argue that this manifestation has become even more apparent in 2007 with the advent of cell-phones. The cell phone has made it even easier for people to reach each other in different places and has made communication with people in different areas extremely simple. I like Webber would argue that this invention has brought about increased cultural change as many phone companies make it even easier than the phone companies to make calls to places not just all over the country but all over the world as well. Whether you are a Businessman trying to call a client in Beijing or a college student calling home to check on a care package, communication has become extremely effortless and less personal.
Another argument made by Webber is that "Americans are forming social communities comprised of spatially dispersed members. A new kind of large scale urban society is emerging that is increasingly independency of the city. While I agree with what Webber is arguing I contend that in today's society the term Urban by definition is attributed to those that live in city and while people can be Urbane and separate from the city it is impossible to be Urban. Webber's foreshadowing on the state of the city is amazing. Because of the export of manual labor jobs, and "White flight" have taken place at such amazing rates from 1968 to 2007 property rates, and living conditions in cities have gone down drastically. Because of this the word Urban has taken on a negative connotation that is assumed to be a label for minorities, and lower class white city dwellers. This definition of Urban is a far cry from the urbane socialite that Webber describes.
Webber touches on the changing definition of Urbanites and says that they "no longer reside exclusively in metropolitan settlements, or do ruralites live exclusively in the hinterlands." Webber argues that in today's society all you need is a college education and or money in order to be considered an Urbanite and that urban dwellers (immigrants, minorities) have become the new hicks who are uninformed about the world surrounding their neighborhood. I agree with Webber that money, race (although he skirts around this underlying issue), and class are all things that have kept the cities masses from becoming cosmopolitans.
While airplanes and telephones have a lot to do with the simplicity of cosmopolitans interacting with other cosmopolitans, I strongly disagree that this has anything to do with the state of the city. The reason why cosmopolites are being raised largely in suburbs is because when minorities were finally able to obtain a level of economic success and Jim Crow laws were abolished (coincidently right around the time this was written) the people who used to live in these Urban areas began to leave at an alarming rate. Real estate agents were then able to convince other cosmopolites and inspiring cosmopolites to move out of their homes for far less money than there homes were worth. THis trend continued and soon the entire landscape of cities around the country had changed. This is why property rates in these towns plummeted and why many bigoted people don’t want any urban duelers to move into their cosmopolitan safe havens. Telephones had nothing to do with this. In addition the outsourcing of jobs from America’s cities (i.e. the ford motor plants in Detroit) due to the capitalistic need to save money by underpaying workers contributed to current state of spatial relations. Airplanes no doubt had a large part in this. Businessmen (excuse me cosmopolitans) have to have their first class flights to get around the country and around the world in order to close deal’s that drive their costs down and put more money in other more rich cosmopolitans hands. And hoe else would we be able to export the products made overseas in sweatshops? Boats? That would take like years!
People concerned about the city needs have no fear gentrification is here. Soon all urbanities will no longer have to pretend like they grew up and were cultured in the city as opposed to “TV and computer-aided educational systems, no-toll long distance telephone service, and real-time access to national computer-based information systems” (Webber pg. 473). Gentrification will soon disenfranchise city dwellers as corporate giants cut checks and reclaim the neighborhoods that good suits (WOOPS the urbane, urbanites or is it cosmopolitans) rightfully deserve.
Posted by: James Cannon | March 7, 2007 11:44 PM
Kenneth T. Jackson’s “The Drive-in Culture of Contemporary America” discusses how the automobile “transformed both the structure and social life of modern cities” (Legates pg. 67). And provides a fairly negative view of what suburbs have become. In this blog I will discuss Jackson’s ideas on the garage, the motel, the drive-in theater the gasoline service station, the shopping center, the house trailer and mobile home, a drive-in society and the centerless city as they pertain to today’s suburbs.
Jackson starts his argument by first providing the reader with background information about how suburbs came in to existence. The conception of the interstate highway led to the expansion of cities from coast to coast and consequentially made it easier for people to develop land surrounding the cities creating the suburb. This is significant to Jackson’s argument because it could be debated which was truly more important to the formation of suburbs, the highways or the cars? I believe like Jackson that it was the car however if horse drawn carriages were still used to this day I have no doubt that we would have created a more efficient system of roads that would make travel much easier than the dirt covered roads that are still common in rural areas.
The car became not only a status symbol, but almost a member of the family, to be cared for and sheltered. The introduction of a canopied and unenclosed structure called a “car port” represented an inexpensive solution to the problem.” This quote exemplifies the way Americans think about their cars. Like Jackson says we almost view them as our horses we provide them with shelter that has since become enclosed, wash and water them at the feeding hole (Car Wash/ gas station), and even take them to the vet (the mechanic) when they get sick (car trouble). Jackson reiterates the strength of our love of car’s when he says “In California garages and driveways were often so preeminent that the house could almost be described as accessory to the garage. Few people, however, went to the extremes common in England, where the automobile was often so precious that living rooms were often converted to garages” (Jackson, pg. 70). This quote epitomizes the love the whole world has for cars and just how far people will go to protect them. I actually found that many homes in California and down south, especially in lower income and rural neighborhoods, don’t have enclosed garages. In Minnesota you would be hard pressed to find a car in any city rural or otherwise that didn’t have an enclosed garage I presume this difference is due to weather and climate rather than anything else but I thought it was interesting.
The motel is another post World War II phenomenon discussed by Jackson. “By 1972…an old hotel was closing somewhere in downtown America every thirty hours. And somewhere in suburban America, a plastic and glass Shangri-La was rising to take its place” (Jackson, pg. 71) this quote is exemplary of the major changes and outsourcing of resources from the cities to the suburbs. When I was a senior in high school I was involved in something called the rights of passage which is basically a mentorship program for young black males and at its completion we are put through a ceremony attended by friends and family. This year I went back to see the ceremony, it has been three years since I completed the program, and was surprised to find that the ceremony was being held at the Marriot Hotel in the suburb of Minnetonka rather than at the downtown Minneapolis suburb that it had been held in for many years. While it may seem like a small point of emphasis I believe its implications are very real and support the arguments that Jackson has made in regards to motels.
The Drive-in Theater, the gasoline service station, the shopping center, the house trailer and mobile home, and the creation of the drive in society are all things that have been evolved due to the car. The drive-theater is not as popular as it once was but I’ve been to a few in my life out in the outer lying suburbs and they are a lot more fun that a regular movie. First you are allowed to view three movies in one showing as opposed to 1 at a regular theatre two the tickets are cheaper and three it more intimate for you and your family or you and your significant others because you can talk, or make out without people looking at you funny or telling you to be quite. Jackson notes the decline in drive in popularity that began in the 60’s and 70’s and attributes it to the creation of malls.
Mall's are some the most noticeable traits of suburbs and in many instances what separate another small town from a suburb. Jackson notes that the first mall was created “introduced at the South dale Shopping Center near Minneapolis in 1956.” I used to work right across the street from Southdale and would go there all the time. I remember seeing Santa Claus their one year and taking dates their as well. For a long time the mall didn’t have a movie theater but competition with the mall of America and other surrounding malls has led Southdale to create on of the nicest movie theaters I have been to. They have spacious reclining seats and big cup holders (AHhhh the luxury). Southdale is located in one of the wealthiest suburbs in the country, Edina, MN. I think it no coincidence that the first mall in America is also in one of the wealthiest. Id bet that property values in Bloomington, MN, where the Mall of America is located, skyrocketed after “The Mega Mall” was created in the early 1990’s.
Posted by: James Cannon | March 8, 2007 02:42 PM
I like you introduction...the definition is an interesting way to look at this
Posted by: Karah | March 20, 2007 01:29 PM
I really enjoyed our class discussion over Jackson on Thursday. It is truly amazing the difference cars have made. The sad thing is that their influence has been so severe that it is hard to even take a couple steps back and imagine a world where life did not revolve around cars...especially in America.
Posted by: Rachel Bickel | March 24, 2007 11:42 PM
Jackson broke down and analyzed many different aspects of life that the automobile has affected in life. For the purposes of my OBE I will focus on the gasoline service station, and the house trailer and mobile home. I will address how I feel these two services are a blessing in life.
Jackson explained the history of the motor home, and how it was started as a means of travel, but later turned into a form of shelter for people in need of a place to live during the Great Depression. In my opinion, this form of transportation turned housing is a blessing. My mother was a single mother in need of a place to live with her children after a divorce. If it weren’t for the mobile home we would have had to find an apartment to live in. The benefits of not having to find an apartment were space and owning something. Because we were able to purchase a moderately cheap mobile home there was enough room to accommodate my siblings and myself. In addition because my mother owned it, and therefore had equity, she had an easier time borrowing money for the things she needed to accommodate her family. Without her ability to purchase an affordable home for my family and me, we would not have had as high of quality of living.
The next blessing that stems from the automotive industry are gasoline service stations. Jackson addresses more of the issues of self service pumping, and automotive tune-up stations. However, I want to focus on how the gasoline service station has evolved again from gas station to convenience store. The merchandise available in most gas stations is outrageously priced. I will agree with that, however there is a reason for the ridiculous prices. Gas stations are providing a service in which they are usually in a convenient location close to residential areas so they can be reached by pedestrians or bikers in addition to cars. Therefore, since people can walk into a gas station these days and pick up their snacks, medicine, or even groceries if they so choose the prices are a little bit higher. Speaking from personal experience, gas prices are expensive so the only time my car moves is if I go to work or am in dire need of something that cannot be reached by foot or bicycle. So when I run out of toothpaste the day after I made the trip to the supermarket I feel blessed that I can walk a block or two to the supermarket and for a slightly higher price pick up the items that I need.
Posted by: Karah Barr: OBE The Blessings of Mobile homes and Gas Stations. | April 28, 2007 01:59 AM