If that wasn't the best case of "I told you so" I've seen in a long time, then I don't know what is. I'm not sure if it was by design, but if so "BRAVO" Herb!
I started squirming a bit uncomfortably in my chair when I hit the description of Duncan's Alpha landscape, then the annoying twitch in my eye after seeing the Beta description, but the kicker was Table II "Social Groups and Landscape" and at that moment I knew I had been had. Over the last 5 days the majority of us - with me perhaps being the biggest perpetrator - derided Bickford's primary thesis as virtual hogwash that had little substance to back it up. Duncan, ladies and gentlemen, is what I refer to as substance. Accept it or not, he has made a pretty compelling case for what Bickford outlined - and even though Duncan's paper is some 25 years old, I can apply a modified Alpha/Beta description to even my sleepy little town without much stretch. The tables of the social group breakdown are laugh out loud funny in their applicability.
The Duncan research is incredible and the links he makes to the landscapes are spot on. I will certainly be looking for more of his papers to read and will probably be finding myself nodding in agreement again.
All for now - I have to go write an apology to Susan Bickford.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Lucy, in-house architectural theorist, expressing her contempt of my research thus far
Doubting Kitten
Lucy, in-house architectural theorist, expressing her contempt of my research thus far
My partners in crime
Important Stuff
About Me
- Eric Randall
- Bartlesville, OK, United States
- I live in Bartlesville, Oklahoma home of Phillips Petroleum and F.L.Wright's Price Tower. I share my home (currently under renovation but then again, whose in this profession isn't?) with my beautiful wife Jeanifer, our equally beautiful daughter Ciera, two dogs and three cats. I work at a small firm in Tulsa where I am the senior project manager. I graduated just across the Charles River from the BAC at MIT in 1994, with a Bachelor of Science in Art and Design. I am excited and a touch overwhelmed at continuing my education again after *cough* 14 years, however I look forward to an amazing 2 years with everyone.
7 comments:
Hey, Eric. Don't feel too apologetic. Bickford is a theorist, which means that she uses analytical tools from a few examples that she says are indicators of something more widespread, but she focuses more on the themes than on the facts on the ground. She trusts that we believe her. Duncan, on the other hand, wrote this article back when he had to do empirical research (that's what you do when you're a baby Ph.D., before you're senior enough to be a theorist, which he certainly became). And so his paper is facts on the ground, and it has that surface credibility.
This, frankly, is a big problem with scholarship in general. Academics get more interested in the frame than the story, but most readers want the story. (This is one of the reasons I can rarely stomach architectural theory; it almost never has people and their stories attached. Architectural history is littered with utopian landscapes designed for cartoon people rather than us messy, complex real folks. cough*Corbusier*cough)
I too found Duncan’s research filling in the missing facts from the Bickford article. After struggling with the previous article this one got the wheels moving on recognizing separations in my area and why. Simple things like landscape, the color of a facade, or even how people park their cars can draw distinguishing bounds.
Driving around I noticed that certain neighborhoods have at least one car parked in the front yard, often accompanied by a small boat or four wheeler. A few neighborhoods away cars are lined up carefully in the driveway or tucked into the garage, out of site. It is interesting to see how these two styles of living rarely cross from one area to another, even when something like a homeowner’s association ISN’T in place.
I agree with you that Duncan's article was easier to digest. It's easier to believe something and agree with it when you can see the facts. Seeing in a "chart" how a town is divided makes you step back and mentally make the chart about where you live.
Ha! Herb, were you saying that Corbu is NOT the king of all that is architecture?? How refreshing! For four years, it was shoved down my throat that he was God's gift to buildings. Not a fan.
So clearly the segregation was defined in this neighborhood and we all seem to be able to identify with it on some level in our own towns. Bickford thought it was simply terrible. I think its unavoidable on a certain level. Is that a bad thing? What do you guys think?
I'm glad you brought this point up Eric - to be honest, I hadnt thought of it in that perspective. I walked away from Bickfords article thinking that she "justified" the segregation because of fear of one another, not of a simple distaste for lifestyle.
I like that Herb pointed out that most academics get caught up in the theory, rather than the story itself. I found this article much easier to digest because he related it to a situation that I could "feel" and grasp.
But overall, dont both points that each author is making seem so obvious - even if we had never thought of it before? As mentioned in earlier blogs, people want to live (be surrounded by) people of like minds/race/status/bank account size. I supposed Duncans article truly reinforces that which we have been blind to see - that segregation happens everywhere! Even in little backwoods towns, not just large cities.
*Whew!* I thought I was the only one who *cough* disliked Corbusiers architecture/attitudes towards architecture... Anyone feel like knocking down *dare I say it* Frank Lloyd Wright now?
I think that in this instance, presentation and knowing your audience is the key. The differences between how Bickford and Duncan presented their findings directly related to their profession as Herb mentioned, and likely the audience whom they were writing it for. I did agree with some points in Bickford's article, but it took an extreme amount of effort to de-code her writings and figure out what the heck she was trying to get at. She also did not show a good representation of research findings; this is where Duncan succeeded and what able to simply display a complex issue to readers.
Melissa, I too think that it is unavoidable to a certain level, whether it is a bad thing or not. In our profession, we as designers can do our part to better the world...one project at a time. But changing the world, or as displayed in these articles the U.S., takes a lot more than just all of the designers out there. Other people/professions, especially those paying the bills, have to want change too. We'll have to chat more about this in Boston. I fear that I may be coming across as a negative person and I am definitely not. See you in a couple of days everyone!
Post a Comment