From the book City of Quartz,
Mike Davis wrote the book in 1990 excavating the Future in Los Angeles, trying to examine how Los Angeles contemporary has been shaped by diverse forces powerful in its history. Davis had a visit to the community socialist ruins of Llano del Rio 1914 organized in what is known as the Antelope Valley Los Angeles north (Biriukov, 2019). In 1918, the community moved, behind leaving the “ghost” of a Los Angeles future alternative.
Davis explores competing for intellectuals’ ideas of Los Angeles, from the promoted “sunshine” by boosters of the real estate in the early 20th century, to the “debunkers,” the journalists muckraking of the century early, to the “noir” of the writers 1930s and the fleeing exiles from Europe fascism, and “sorcerers,” finally the Caltech scientists.
The Protestant downtown elite, the leader Chandler family of the L.A. Times, and the elite new of the westside Jewish, the powerful surprisingly homeowner groups, the L.A. Department of Police. He tackles the leadership Irish of the Church Catholic and its friction with the dominant numerically element Latino. (Eckardt, 2017) Davis concludes the book at what he calls the “dreams of the junkyard,” the steel former town of Fontana, LA east, a decay and de-industrialization victim.
L.A. Fortress is about public space destruction that comes from and reinforces a spiritedness general loss. The ineluctable and universal consequence of this crusade for the security of the city is the destruction of public space accessible.
* The architectural public realm privatization
* Electronic space parallel privatization (databases elite, subscription cable services subscription)
* Middle demand class for social and spatial increased insulation
Davis is appealing to the city early planner Frederick Law Olmstead’s parks and public landscapes conception as valves for social safety, ethnicities, and classes mixing in ordinary enjoyments and recreations, with some affinity vision with Jane Addams settlement house notion as an inter-class medium of communication and fraternity.
Deterrents design: the barrel-shaped bus benches, sprinkler overhead systems, and locked, caged bins trash.
The use of ramparts architectural, security sophisticated systems, police and private security to achieve urban areas recolonization via walled enclaves with controlled access. Examples:
Los Angeles’s new downtown postmodern, a redevelopment massive corporate office project, hotels, and shopping malls.
The goals of this strategy may be summarized as double repression: to raze all Downtown’s association past and to prevent any articulation with the non-Anglo urbanity of its future. An architectural brutal edge that reproduced massively apartheid spatial.
The fortification of affluent satellite cities, Complete walls with encompassing, entry restricted points with guard posts, private overlapping and police public services, and even roadways privatized. Weekend park and Night closures are more common becoming, and some communities are considering requiring proof of residency local to gain admittance.
Areas of residence with enough clout are thus able to privatize local public space, partitioning themselves from the rest of the metropolis, even imposing a neighborhood variant control passport on outsiders.
Use of permanent barricades around neighborhoods in denser, lower-income neighborhoods private pervasive policing contracted for by affluent homeowners’ associations.
Anyone trying to take a dusk stroll through a new area patrolled by armed security guards and signposted with death threats quickly realizes how merely notional, if not obsolete utterly, is the old idea of the city freedom.
The LAPD transformation into an operator of security macrosystems significant crime databases, surveillance aerial, jail systems, paramilitary responses to terrorism, and insurgency street. Security’ becomes a good positional defined by access income to private services protective and hardened residential membership enclave or restricted suburb (Tapp, 2019). As a symbol, prestige and sometimes as the borderline decisive between the well-off merely and the true security-rich have to do less with personal safety than with the unique degree of insulation, in work, residential, travel environments, and consumption, from groups and individuals unsavory, even general crowds.
Fear proves itself; the threat of social perception is a function of the mobilization of security itself, not rates of crime. Moreover, the syntax neo-military of contemporary architecture insinuates violence and imaginary conjures dangers. While being full of signs, invisible warning off the underclass.
Crowds fear the malls’ designers of and public pseudo space attack the group through homogenization. They set up barriers that are architectural and semiotic to out filter undesirables. The remaining mass is enclosed, directing its circulation with ferocity behaviorist.
No metropolis has been loved more or hated more. To detractors, L.A. is a mortuary sunlit where you can rot without feeling it. To Mike Davis, the author of this elegant fiercely and ranging extensive social history work, L.A. is both dystopia and utopia, a place where the Joshua last trees are being under plowed under to make room for communities model in the desert, where the rich hire their police to off fend street gangs, as well as Beirut armed militias.
In the City of Quartz LA is reconstructed by Davis as history shadow and dissects its ethereal economy. He explains to us who is the most powerful and how they retain it. He gives us a Dickensian extremes city, Pinteresque conspiracies, and straight desperation out of West Nathaniel city in which we may glimpse our own mirrored future with clarity terrifying.
From the Death and Life of Great American Cities
Jane Jacobs, in 1961 wrote a book by the name The Death and Life of Great American Cities. The book criticizes urban policy planning of the 1950s, which responsibly holds for the many fall of neighborhood cities in the U.S. (Jacobs, 2016). The Jacobs’ book is the most influential and known best work ever done.
Jacobs criticized the 1950s and 1960s planners’ rationalists, especially Robert Moses, as well as the earlier done work by Le Corbusier. She argued that modern planning urbanists oversimplified and overlooked the human lives complexity in different communities. She opposed large-scale renewal of urban programs that affected whole neighborhoods and freeways built through inner-cities. She advocated instead for mixed dense development use and streets walkable, with the roads on the eyes of passers-by helping to maintain order in public.
Mrs. Jacobs’ argue that people like to be living, not just be, in lively such neighborhoods. Elders and Youngsters both want such surroundings. But she ridicules at our understanding of these obligations; for we still upend civic centers, density low residential housing and areas segregated projec