The dwindling
days of this summer will give me the opportunity to look at urbanism in a new
region.
In the sixty
years of my life, I’ve seen too little of the Midwest. I’ve visited the larger cities, Chicago,
Cincinnati, Detroit, and Cleveland, but I haven’t traveled into the heart of the
Great Plains. The deficiency will soon be
addressed when I travel to Nebraska and Iowa.
I’m
intrigued by the cities of the Great Plains.
Growing up on the west coast and having traveled often along the east
coast, the geographical justifications of most cities are evident. San Francisco, Oakland, Portland, Seattle,
Boston, New York City, Charleston. It
takes only a cursory look at a map to understand why those cities grew where
they did.
But the
origins of the cities of the Great Plains are less evident. The geographical advantages of Omaha over
other Nebraska locations aren’t particularly evident. Yes, Omaha is alongside the Missouri River,
but so are many sites in Nebraska. Omaha
is where it is because of the decision of a railroad engineer, followed by the
successful huckstering of early developers and cemented by a later aura of
inevitability.
That type of
civic history is fascinating, especially when the importance of railroads has
faded. I look forward to looking around
some Midwest cities, trying to get a grasp on their past and their prospects
for the future.
But going
into a region unprepared isn’t an effective way to learn. A tour guide is valuable. With the nom de plume of the Urbanophile, Aaron
Renn writes about urbanism for a national audience. However, his roots are deeply in the
Midwest. And his perspectives about
cities are influenced by those roots.
Late in
2012, he summarized his beliefs about cities. I share many of his thoughts, although he
expresses them better than I could have.
But some, such as his belief that urbanism has its roots in God, have a
Midwest flavor that I don’t share.
(Personally, I think that humanism leads to urbanism just as surely as
God does.)
And there is
a self-reliance flavor to his comments that I share, but don’t put as front and
center in my thinking. It’s a sense that
Midwesterners don’t expect anything to be given to them, but must work for
every step forward.
A brief
selection of Renn’s thoughts includes:
“There is no one-size-fits-all model of
urban success.”
“Cities are also where the poor come to
become middle class.”
“Building on assets is a strategy about
defending the past, not embracing the future.”
“We must boldly re-imagine the
possibilities of what a city can be and bravely identify what works today and
what doesn’t.”
If your day
permits, I recommend reading his entire post.
I know that I’ll review many of the Urbanophile’s posts before I leave
for the Midwest. It’s only reasonable to
take advantage of an experienced tour guide.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
Just because railroads are nowhere near as visible as they used to be doesn't mean they aren't there. The Western railroads, in particular, are instrumental in bulk shipment from West Coast ports to East Coast markets. For Omaha, the original eastern terminus and HQ of one of the most important ones (the Union Pacific) its strategic advantage lay--like Chicago, Kansas City, and (AFAIK) Minneapolis--in its landport status. They are loci of transshipment--where, historically, freight was handled. But even as the economic relevance of railroad transshipment has waned, these cities have diversified so that most of them are able to keep on chugging.
ReplyDeleteSteve, I agree. The railroads represent a smaller percentage of the Omaha economic activity than they did in the late 19th century, but they're still important. And I'd like to see a world in which railroads grow further in importance.
Delete