Comments on: What Would Jane Jacobs Think of Dubai & Shanghai?

By: Oswald

Oswald — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 22:55:22 +0000

Speaking of Paris and Hausmann – Personally I think Paris would have better without Hausmann gutting it with vast empty boulevards.Just because it happened long ago doesn’t make it right – and weren’t the boulevards all about social and military control of the populace anyway? Similar to Robert’s point, I don’t understand why what Hausmann did to Paris is so widely viewed as ‘good’, especially by those who deplore the inhuman scales of more recent cities (as I do)- it is not consistent.

By: Wil

Wil — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 02:14:32 +0000

If we focus on the form of cities rather than the results they produce, we will miss an important component of Jacobs’ lesson. With that in mind , what is the impact of Dubai, and Shanghai ?

By: hayden fisher

hayden fisher — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:58:37 +0000

Great piece!! Love it!!!

By: tpk-nyc

tpk-nyc — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:12:14 +0000

To me, Jane Jacobs’s greatest insight was the importance of street life. Too many developing cities disregard this lesson and prefer the old, tower-in-the-park model. This makes for pretty postcards, but I wouldn’t want to live there.

Yes, Napoleon III was a dictator, but Hausmann’s designs facilitated walking and street life. The effect, if not the intention, was quite democratic. It is possible to do the right thing for the wrong reason.

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:54:28 +0000

And that last sentence is the rub – so many planners admire Hausmann’s Paris, yet also declare to love community engagement. Slavoj Zizek has a good book that touches upon the sometimes fraught relationship between democracy and “public good” called “In Defence of Lost Causes”.