« Oakland's Warehouse Culture | Main | Urban Families »

October 03, 2006

The City: A Global History

The City: A Global History. Originally uploaded by jessehudson.

I've recently finished reading The City: A Global History by Joel Kotkin, noted author and speaker on global economic, political and social trends.

The City is a whirlwind tour of cities through the ages. A macro-historical study of various cities in time, to which the author assigns three essential and universal functions shared by all: Cities as centers of religion, political power, and commerce. By placing urban spaces at the heart of his analysis, Kotkin offers a convincing look at what has made them central to human society and civilizations, as well as what distinguishes the more successful examples from the rest.

My main problem with Kotkin's account rests in its theoretical frame. He fails to convincingly explain the ups and downs of past civilizations' great cities. The three roles he outlines in the beginning are a good start, but he doesn't delve much deeper than that. His account ends up reading like laundry-list of cities throughout history, and he seems to justify their success or failure largely on whatever point he is trying to make at that moment. Amsterdam's expansion is presented as a necessity, one nearly as evident as its eventual demise explained away briefly on the next page. Kotkin reverts to this kind of tautology again and again. Often, I couldn't see from his account wether the three factors to which he ascribes so much importance were the only or even the primary causes for a city's growth or slow-down.

I appreciate his effort to keep his work on the shorter side, as some of these macro-histories tend to drag on for far longer than is necessary to make their point. But succinctness shouldn't be an excuse for poor analysis. At times that brevity felt like the result of tunnel-vision.

Kotkin is best when he focuses on the global nature of cities, and when he looks to their future development. There in particular he has some interesting points to make about what will happen to cities when their physical roles (as market places, centers of human interaction, etc.) become less important as a result of technological change. This work also echoes his criticism of the Ephemeral City. Cities cannot depend only on the "creative classes" for their survival, he has argued, since only a vibrant middle-class can lead to successful cities. I see a link between that realization and his assertion that cities need some shared sacred myth(s) to thrive. Both necessitate the masses to be central participants in the urban project. What happens to cities when those people are priced out?

Posted by jessehudson at October 3, 2006 04:01 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://urbancommons.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/120

Comments

Posted by: Tim Halbur at October 3, 2006 05:32 PM

Posted by: jessehudson at October 3, 2006 06:04 PM

Post a comment