Jane jacobs genius, who changed our view of the city.

0
672

Jane jacobs genius, who changed our view of the city.

He is the centenary of Jane jacobs’s birth this year. Her 1961 book, “the death and life of a big American city,” changed the way the world views the city. It has been translated into many languages and is considered one of the most influential urban books of the 20th century. It introduced new ideas of urban planning in the urban renewal of demolition Derby day. The importance of street life, local plan, “eye” on the street, mixed use, old buildings, transit, community, diversity and proper density are the mainstream of urban design and planning. When Jacobs introduced them half a century ago, they were revolutionary.

Give up without a plan degree, let alone a university degree, jacobs by Ralph nader, Betty friedan, Rachel Carson and Marshall McLuhan challenge “certificate” in the same way. Although in her book was published before, Mr Jacobs once for the “fashion” and “building BBS” architectural criticism writing articles about urban areas, but she often referred to as “just a housewife”. It is often an outsider in a field, often a journalist who has changed the field. Canadian journalist Robert Fulton, ford (Robert Fulford) in The “New York Times” (The New York Times), said: “this is The great amateur: The role of academic experts cannot see clearly see problems, because they are limited by their institutions and disciplines of The blind spot. In the year 1992.

Perfect city supporters Jacob (Jacobs) may beat by the New York City planning in order to help the czar Robert Moses (Robert Moses) is famous for its driving multiple projects, such as lower Manhattan highway (ManhattanHighway), the project has been eliminated the SoHo, Chinatown and a lot of places of Greenwich village. She did not hesitate to tell the truth in writing or street protests. Most of all, though, she considered herself a writer. Jacobs’ seven books are world-famous and are often referred to as the most important urban thinkers of the last century.

But Jacob never imagined that her book would have a huge impact as usual. In her 1993 introduction to the “death and life of modern libraries”, she questioned her book’s changing views on urban development. Interestingly, she divided the world into people and cars. She agrees that the book gives them the legitimacy they already know about their feet. Experts at the time did not respect what people knew and valued. They are considered old-fashioned and selfish in the wheels of progress. “As Jacob said:

This is not false modesty. There is a lot of wisdom in her words. In my personal observation and writing about the Renaissance of urban citizens, I have witnessed the efforts of many who have never heard of Jacob’s readers. Whether in urban neighborhoods or in suburbs or small towns, local residents and businessmen instinctively know which improvements will lead to positive changes. Positive changes occur when they have the means to make these improvements, or when newcomers enter and improve the size and use of existing places. Jacob recognized this, and endorsed the design of local wisdom and community vision, visionary planners and other so-called experts.

When remote experts, developers and city planners suggest that local wisdom is not brought before the process begins, conflict can arise. Such schemes often have little respect for the nature and architectural form of the community, and are then shown on “public” BBS, known as public processes. At the time, the plans were modified, and perhaps a “convenience” package (a form of bribery, even if not suitable for the place). But the input of local stakeholders does not exist at first, and is ultimately insignificant. This is the transformation of the whole society, often replaced rather than real regeneration.

Jacob has a good description of this method. “There are two kinds of changes, you can represent them on the land,” she told me a few years ago. “This change in surface soil is becoming more fertile, a good animal husbandry for the land. When you do that, the land is changing, but it’s a positive change. So the change is like change – that’s erosion. The soil is being dug in the valley, the topsoil is being taken away, and it is becoming barren. Changing this fact does not mean progress. This is destruction. But, for a long time, people have been thinking that every change in a city is progressive. “Yes, it’s bad, but it’s progress.” No, that’s erosion. “

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here