Jane Jacobs: The Death and Life of Great American Cities

Jane Jacobs was a writer and activist who was born in 1916 and passed away in 2006. She had no college degree, she had no professional education; instead, she relied on her observations. Instead of going to college, she learned about cities by observing and living. She was neither an architect nor an urban planner but she named herself as an urban sociologist, who uses her own experiences as a citizen in one of the biggest cities in the world. Living in a city like New York, an urban jungle that contains everything, had became a huge inspiration for her. It must have been the biggest reason to push her thinking about what cities are and how they work. She had strong critic and unusual opinions about urbanism. With her sharp opinions going against the modernist planning dogma of the era, made her stand out from the other urban writers. She began to write freelance articles to New York Publications.

In “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” she challenges the theory and practice of urban renewal policies appeared in 1950’s in the United States. Jacobs argued that these kind of policies would harm the characteristics of the city created by the community.  These policies, she claimed, destroy communities and the underlying social fabric by creating isolated, unnatural urban spaces. Though “The Death and Life” was about all cities, it was mostly about New York, she explains the reader by continuing “Because that is where I live.” She highlighted the benefits of city living, comparing her own New York neighborhood, Greenwich Village, with the public housing and urban renewal projects being built in surrounding districts.

Jacobs objected to what she labelled the “Radiant Garden City Beautiful” or RGCB, an amalgam of all the principal planning theories of the time, which she saw as being utterly at odds with urban realities, and leading to the destruction of the city as a living community. She argued that these utopias, even if they were applicable, are inconsistent with the real-life functioning and would destroy the natural texture of the cities. Jacobs argued that modernist urban planning, as well as RGCB rejects the city, because it rejects community. Her first mission, therefore, was to save the city by protecting old dwellings and neighborhoods. She had not only criticize these theories, but also put her words into action. In 1960’s, Jacobs led several successful fights in New York against large-scale building projects. She saved her beloved Greenwich Village from renewal and helped defeat Lower Manhattan Expressway.

“Designing a dream city is easy; rebuilding a living one takes imagination.” she said, and dedicated her whole life for rebuilding a living one.

Theo Van Doesburg and “De Stijl” Movement

For ARCH222 History of Architecture II course, we were all assigned a differeny text and expected to present and discuss all relevant and important names, cases, issues, ideas and etc. In my research paper I referred Theo van Doesburg and other associated artists, regarding “De Stijl” movement and their first manifest “Manifesto I”.

He is a Dutch painter, architect, designer, writer, decorator, poet, and art theorist.  In 1915 van Doesburg discovered Piet Mondrian and published an enthusiastic account of his work. He find in Mondrian’s work a new and holistic way of painting: the abstraction of the reality. Van Doesburg admires Mondrian’s painting so much that he started to see abstract painting as a higher and more spiritual level in painting. Through the following few years Doesburg’s style rapidly developed from Post-Impressionist to abstract.

After he met Mondrian, he got in contact with other like-minded artists, whom later will be a part of the De Stijl movement. He discusses his ideas with the architect Oud and with the painter Huszar. At the same time he was in touch with the painters Mondrian and Van der Leck. And in 1917, they all founded the magazine “De Stijl”

Number of artist from different fields and different disciplines come together under a mutual desire to create a new style of the arts. Van Doesburg pointed out that the various artists had more in common: ‘the need for abstraction and simplification.’ The important fact about this development is, that the three painters of De Stijl, Van Doesburg, Van der Leck and Mondrian, each originally had his own special corner in the field of art and so were able to furnish different contributions to their common cause, ‘De Stijl’.

Number of artist from different fields and different disciplines come together under a mutual desire to create a new style of the arts. Van Doesburg pointed out that the various artists had more in common: ‘the need for abstraction and simplification.’ The important fact about this development is, that the three painters of De Stijl, Van Doesburg, Van der Leck and Mondrian, each originally had his own special corner in the field of art and so were able to furnish different contributions to their common cause, ‘De Stijl’.

The idea of De Stijl is an “absolute” concept, they dedicated to developing a universal aesthetic, intellectual and spiritual unity to art, architecture and design. The “absolute” is the cornerstone of De Stijl and it can only be expressed by the abstraction. To this end, artist’s personality completely eliminated by using straight lines, right angles and particular colors. Traditional artistic representations, limited to more or less casually selected fragments of the material world, as seen through an individual’s senses and personality, were to be distrusted and disregarded. John Nixon summarise this thought by stating: “Traditional artistic representations, limited to more or less casually selected fragments of the material world, as seen through an individual’s senses and personality, were to be distrusted and disregarded. Instead, with the traditional limitations, encumbrances and distractions set aside, a new pure art would emerge, expressing by its formal relationships the very essence of things.” De Stijlists, therefore, excluded all individual life and they tried to create more universal form of life, aimed the universality of the essentials of form and colour.

In 1918 they published their first manifesto, “Manifesto I”.

In general, the manifesto is reflecting both current world and the changes in the art world regarding the shifting in dominance and power caused by the war. The effects of the war can easily be interpreted nearly all the clauses existing in manifesto. Besides, the emergence of the De Stijl movement itself also coincides with the crucial period of the war. In such circumstances impacts of the war to the ideology is quite understandable. In the first clause it says, “The struggle of the individual against the universal is revealing itself in the world-war as well as in the art of the present day.” This quote is simply reflecting their desire of creating something completely new in art instead of what the world had offered so far. In that respect, the whole manifesto written in a way that explains their thought on trying to change the style within art and how art was made.