A City on a Hill

 

 

“The city [according to Robert Park] is man’s most consistent… attempt to remake the world he lives in more after his heart’s desire.”

As with many modern-day issues and arguments, I think David Harvey’s essay, The Right to the City, is an oversimplification. It is very easy to assert that the city is the center of human life: because that’s where riots and revolutions are held, of course. And this can be backed up by many examples of such assemblies and revolts, with fascinating examinations of the city fabric to go along with them. This, in turn, can bring a logical conclusion that architecture is intrinsically political, and cities are the greatest example. But honestly, this is not anything that we do not already know. Architecture is only political because it represents a basic human need, and those needs are targeted in war. Yet, whether it is rural or urban, architecture is shelter. In World War Two in Europe, countryside churches became homes and homes became enemy headquarters. The same occurred in the United States during the Civil War. Buildings can be literal and they can be representative: they are targeted because without them, people suffer. But all of this does not necessarily lead to Harvey’s conclusion, that the right to the city is “a collective human right.”

I think it is completely in the architect’s power to want to better the environment he lives in and contribute to the bettering of society. I think it is reasonable for Jane Jacobs to observe issues in the urban fabric that she lives in and advocate for a better way to do things. But Harvey sees the city as a way to improve humanity, not the other way around. And I do think that is an overly simplified way of thinking. Have our cities made us better? No, why should they? That is in our power and ours alone. Honestly, when migrants first came to the country looking for freedom, they did not believe in a right to the city, but simply the right to live freely.

But perhaps, those are one in the same. The people who came to America to escape came here with visions of a better world, a better way of life. A City On a Hill. Well then, have our cities made us better? Perhaps we should begin thinking of it more as a symbiotic relationship, a give and take between inhabitants and their shelter. The city is not a human right, but it can help contribute to the quality of life. And that is an equally valuable endeavor.