An Interstate Running Through His Front Lawn
The blogger Atrios likes to highlight articles about the incongruities between urban life (with its walkability and density) and automobile culture (which demands curb cuts, parking spaces, fast-moving highways, and suburban developments). He’s especially giddy when drivers are driven mad by cities–because suburbanites perceive them to be unsuitable as places to live, yet they still want to visit urban attractions (or work their urban jobs). So when they can’t find a place to park, their frustration is palpable (particularly on internet comment boards). For an urban planner, the only solutions seem to be: a) destroy your city, or b) resist the suburbanites’ car-centric frustration, possibly by coming up with transportation alternatives.
Atrios highlighted an article on the parking shortage in Newport, RI, particularly this quote:
Though a modern streetcar system may seem out-of-place with the city’s colonial appeal, officials say it could actually be a throwback to the early 20th century, when trolleys operated in the city. Plus, Bronk said, there’s nothing quaint about the city’s traffic.
“Does four lanes of automobile congestion, is that in keeping with the colonial period? It’s not,” he said. “Is a highway downtown in keeping with the colonial era? It’s not.”
Of all the cities I discussed in Rebels Rising, Newport is the best place to discern a surviving colonial landscape and surviving colonial buildings. After that, I’d rank them as follows, from best to worst: Charleston (SC), Philadelphia (where Atrios lives), Boston, and New York City. (Obviously there were other cities at the time, but those are the five that got the most attention in my book.) Of those five, Newport has grown the least, economically and demographically, over the years, so it’s not so surprising that more of its colonial landscape survives. The other cities have also struggled with transportation access in a lot of ways, and I’m sure visitors to all these cities (and to all cities, really) can call to mind the highways that lead into these cities, the neighborhoods that have been blighted by modern highway construction, and the public transportation alternatives that exist (or don’t exist) in these places.
All this is making me very grateful that my fellow fellow at the John Carter Brown Library used to offer me a parking space at his father’s office whenever I was driving down to Newport for dissertation research.
UPDATE: Why preserve historic buildings? Because sometimes the findings are really cool.
Jeff–I agree with you about Newport, but why such an Anglocentric view of “colonial” architecture? Boston and NYC are totally outclassed by Quebec, whose haute and basse villes inside the old city walls are marvels (not to mention the old walls and gates themselves). I haven’t been to Santa Fe myself, but I would assume that that’s the place to find quality colonial architecture in the Southwest, not to mention all of those Presidio-Mission complexes that are preserved or have been rebuilt by local historical societies in Texas.
Comment by Historiann — July 6, 2009 @ 10:51 am
This was one of Ben’s posts, but I guess I will have to admit that I too unconsciously modify the adjective “colonial” with “British” or “English” based on long habit in our field. Given that British American cities in the revolutionary era is the focus of Ben’s scholarly work, he comes by the habit very honestly. So, we will probably have to plead guilty to the charge of aggravated Anglocentrism.
On the other hand, Historiann is quite right that Quebec City and Santa Fe far outdo most of the eastern U.S. cities in terms of providing a colonial landscape/townscape that can still be seen today, if you can avert your gaze from the hordes of tourists and modern/quaint shops and restaurants. Might as well throw in the French Quarter in New Orleans too. There are even some nicely preserved French colonial places in Missouri and Illinois, on both sides of the Mississippi. You won’t be too bothered by tourist crowds or conflicting skyscrapers in Ste. Genevieve, MO, I can assure you.
Ben was picking among the cities he covered in his book, which is fair, but there is definitely an issue (one that cuts both ways) with the Northeast (plus Williamsburg and Charleston) defining “colonial” for the rest of the country. Of all the places I have been in the U.S., I thought Annapolis and other places in Maryland provided the best, non-re-created feel for what a British colonial town must have been like. The tiny, tiny State House in Annapolis certainly captured for me how small a place British America was.
Comment by Jeff Pasley — July 7, 2009 @ 12:12 am
Sorry, I was away from the internet and so I’m late to respond. I definitely didn’t say, “of all the cities in North America”; I said “of all the cities I discussed in Rebels Rising.” To the extent that that book is Anglocentric, I discuss my rationale for focusing on those five cities in the book’s introduction. But yes, if I had been speaking more broadly about surviving colonial urban architecture in the New World, I would have had to incorporate locales from Spanish and French colonies in particular.
I definitely could have given more thought to surviving colonial architecture (to say nothing of surviving Native American architecture) in other parts of the New World (I’ve never visited Santa Fe, but I have seen some neat stuff in Quebec, the North American Southwest, and the Caribbean), but my goal was to write a quick post in response to things I’d been perusing on the internet that morning.
Comment by Benjamin Carp — July 7, 2009 @ 9:06 pm
Holding both a primary and general election allows the voters of the First Congressional District full participation in selecting a replacement.
Comment by dini videolar — August 4, 2011 @ 3:17 pm
The district has elected only Democrats to the House since 1974, so the winner of the November Democratic primary will likely go into the general election as a heavy favorite
Comment by rüyada görmek — August 4, 2011 @ 3:18 pm