The City by Joel Kotkin is a very short (about 160 pages of text) and to the point survey of the history of cities in all areas of the world.
Overall, I liked the book, but it left me wanting more AND wondering why Kotkin just didn't provide it to his readers. There were about 45 pages of notes (really just giving the reference citations with very little footnote type text) and suggested readings FOR A BOOK WITH ONLY 160 PAGES OF TEXT!! Was there a paper shortage or something? He did a lot of research and seemed to have very little to say about it. The book ends up coming off as very superficial in many spots.
Kotkin's thesis (seemingly a reasonable one to me) is that cities must remain somehow sacred, safe and busy in order to survive and thrive. He does not do a great job of "pushing" his thesis in the book as one might expect though. He makes a good effort when discussing some earlier cities, but does not carry this forward all that well later. I think that the issue of the sacred in the modern city was something he really could have explored much more.
It is almost like the book was a detailed working outline for a more complete text that he never got around to writing. A real shame, as I think he would have done a pretty good job if he had expanded it some more before publication. His writing style was pretty good, but it seemed so compressed that it made it hard to get through the book quickly even given its short length.
Kotkin does point out many issues that face modern cities that maybe many people do not fully consider. They might be summarized as relevance, at least for cities in the developed world. With the appearance of the internet, telework and all that, are cities as necessary as they have been in the past for "progress"? I guess one could then ask, can great cities survive, just because we like them, even if they are unnecessary?
One point that I noticed made several times in the book was the apparent importance of diversity in the development of cities - BUT this was diversity not for its own sake, but where the minorities really brought something to the table. Think the Greeks in Rome NOT the Visigoths.
Kotkin also brought up how city life is very important in Islam and how this led to development of some very great cities; he presents some ideas on what may have gone wrong later. He also made interesting points about other cities in many other cultures as well.
In any case, I would recommend the book as a starting point for people interested in the topic, but probably only that.
Overall, I liked the book, but it left me wanting more AND wondering why Kotkin just didn't provide it to his readers. There were about 45 pages of notes (really just giving the reference citations with very little footnote type text) and suggested readings FOR A BOOK WITH ONLY 160 PAGES OF TEXT!! Was there a paper shortage or something? He did a lot of research and seemed to have very little to say about it. The book ends up coming off as very superficial in many spots.
Kotkin's thesis (seemingly a reasonable one to me) is that cities must remain somehow sacred, safe and busy in order to survive and thrive. He does not do a great job of "pushing" his thesis in the book as one might expect though. He makes a good effort when discussing some earlier cities, but does not carry this forward all that well later. I think that the issue of the sacred in the modern city was something he really could have explored much more.
It is almost like the book was a detailed working outline for a more complete text that he never got around to writing. A real shame, as I think he would have done a pretty good job if he had expanded it some more before publication. His writing style was pretty good, but it seemed so compressed that it made it hard to get through the book quickly even given its short length.
Kotkin does point out many issues that face modern cities that maybe many people do not fully consider. They might be summarized as relevance, at least for cities in the developed world. With the appearance of the internet, telework and all that, are cities as necessary as they have been in the past for "progress"? I guess one could then ask, can great cities survive, just because we like them, even if they are unnecessary?
One point that I noticed made several times in the book was the apparent importance of diversity in the development of cities - BUT this was diversity not for its own sake, but where the minorities really brought something to the table. Think the Greeks in Rome NOT the Visigoths.
Kotkin also brought up how city life is very important in Islam and how this led to development of some very great cities; he presents some ideas on what may have gone wrong later. He also made interesting points about other cities in many other cultures as well.
In any case, I would recommend the book as a starting point for people interested in the topic, but probably only that.
No comments:
Post a Comment