2006eScholarship (California Digital Library)Open access

Places Archive: Downtown [Threads]

John N. King

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Places Archive: Downtown John King Downtown, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. It marks the triumph of civilization and the hollowness of authority. It stands for architecture, poli- tics, culture, the future and the past— all depending on your point of view. What better word to test the keyword search in the Places archive; and the four pieces I selected offer their own Rashoman-like take on what we should value and how we can measure a society’s health. “A Redevelopment Success Story,” by Jay Claiborne (Places 15.2), shows Above: Revitalized First Street in downtown San Jose—from Jay Claiborne’s article in Places 15.2. Photo courtesy of San Jose Redevelopment Agency. one perspective, the established order consolidating territory and proclaim- ing victory. We read about “highly talented city officials” and “an influ- ential group of local leaders” and “the importance of a civic context for private development”—hence, the use of redevelopment funds for everything from sycamore trees to light-rail lines. But another school of thought would hold that what cities need is an aesthetic vision rather than a public-works checklist. In “Urban- ism Downtown” (Places 13.2), Todd Bressi explored renewal efforts in Albuquerque and Milwaukee that map out how things should look and where growth should go: “both rely on carefully calibrated architectural imagery—suggestive in character but generic in representation—to convey a sense of place.” All of which ignores the box for the wrapping, Michael Pyatok would argue—and looks right past the inner-city residents who are strug- gling to gain access to the Ameri- can Dream. His eloquent “Martha Stewart vs. Studs Terkel?” (Places 13.1) says the first priority is not the “picturesque architectural qualities that will attract people with more discretionary income.” It is “design- ing neighborhoods that promote eco- nomic opportunity for people who are already there.” The only author who takes down- town as it is is Louise Mozingo. In King / Downtown

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Places Archive: Downtown John King Downtown, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. It marks the triumph of civilization and the hollowness of authority. It stands for architecture, poli- tics, culture, the future and the past— all depending on your point of view. What better word to test the keyword search in the Places archive; and the four pieces I selected offer their own Rashoman-like take on what we should value and how we can measure a society’s health. “A Redevelopment Success Story,” by Jay Claiborne (Places 15.2), shows Above: Revitalized First Street in downtown San Jose—from Jay Claiborne’s article in Places 15.2. Photo courtesy of San Jose Redevelopment Agency. one perspective, the established order consolidating territory and proclaim- ing victory. We read about “highly talented city officials” and “an influ- ential group of local leaders” and “the importance of a civic context for private development”—hence, the use of redevelopment funds for everything from sycamore trees to light-rail lines. But another school of thought would hold that what cities need is an aesthetic vision rather than a public-works checklist. In “Urban- ism Downtown” (Places 13.2), Todd Bressi explored renewal efforts in Albuquerque and Milwaukee that map out how things should look and where growth should go: “both rely on carefully calibrated architectural imagery—suggestive in character but generic in representation—to convey a sense of place.” All of which ignores the box for the wrapping, Michael Pyatok would argue—and looks right past the inner-city residents who are strug- gling to gain access to the Ameri- can Dream. His eloquent “Martha Stewart vs. Studs Terkel?” (Places 13.1) says the first priority is not the “picturesque architectural qualities that will attract people with more discretionary income.” It is “design- ing neighborhoods that promote eco- nomic opportunity for people who are already there.” The only author who takes down- town as it is is Louise Mozingo. In King / Downtown

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Places Archive: Downtown John King Downtown, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder. It marks the triumph of civilization and the hollowness of authority. It stands for architecture, poli- tics, culture, the future and the past— all depending on your point of view. What better word to test the keyword search in the Places archive; and the four pieces I selected offer their own Rashoman-like take on what we should value and how we can measure a society’s health. “A Redevelopment Success Story,” by Jay Claiborne (Places 15.2), shows Above: Revitalized First Street in downtown San Jose—from Jay Claiborne’s article in Places 15.2. Photo courtesy of San Jose Redevelopment Agency. one perspective, the established order consolidating territory and proclaim- ing victory. We read about “highly talented city officials” and “an influ- ential group of local leaders” and “the importance of a civic context for private development”—hence, the use of redevelopment funds for everything from sycamore trees to light-rail lines. But another school of thought would hold that what cities need is an aesthetic vision rather than a public-works checklist. In “Urban- ism Downtown” (Places 13.2), Todd Bressi explored renewal efforts in Albuquerque and Milwaukee that map out how things should look and where growth should go: “both rely on carefully calibrated architectural imagery—suggestive in character but generic in representation—to convey a sense of place.” All of which ignores the box for the wrapping, Michael Pyatok would argue—and looks right past the inner-city residents who are strug- gling to gain access to the Ameri- can Dream. His eloquent “Martha Stewart vs. Studs Terkel?” (Places 13.1) says the first priority is not the “picturesque architectural qualities that will attract people with more discretionary income.” It is “design- ing neighborhoods that promote eco- nomic opportunity for people who are already there.” The only author who takes down- town as it is is Louise Mozingo. In King / Downtown

Key concepts: Downtown, Redevelopment, Context (archaeology), Visual arts, Beauty, Representation (politics), Sociology, History

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Places Archive: Downtown [Threads] — Research Paper | ScholarLens