Proud. Proud. Okay. Perhaps an unusual choice. Nicholas. Its like being from nowhere. Like being from nowhere. Like being from nowhere . Good. Other descriptions. Characterization. Safe. Safe. Good. As lexi points out. Cassidy. Utopia. A utopia. Emily . Family oriented. Family oriented. Nicholas, were you going to Say Something . No. Drew. I loved it. Okay. Good. I mean, some people, utopia, maybe this is a different generation. I thought people were going to say lame and boring, which is why i picked this very lame typeface. And i thought wed start with an image of contemporary suburbia, which this is an engagement shoot. A young couple whove taken to the suburban street for their engagement. You know, people get married, they take engagement photos. And this was this went around the internet for a while. And lots of people, including myself, laughed at it. So whats so weird about that . Why does this image seem whats the disconnect . Ali . Usually engagement pictures are like at a scenic place, like outside, in the woods or something. And this is like in neighborhoods. Okay. So somewhere maybe scenic or natural. Emily. Usually have more of a romantic feel to it. Not just random cars parked everywhere. Okay. Romantic. People might take them in nature or the city, places where it seems exciting, young couples we dont usually associate with suburbia. But what we think about suburbia has changed over time. Today were going to spend the class thinking about how the notion of a suburb and it is of course a notion, what we think about suburbs have changed over time. It depends where were talking about and who were asking. But were going to think about suburbs as a kind of historical construct and what they mean. But i think somebody, maybe it was nicholas, im not sure, said its kind of nowhere. But by definition its relative. Suburbs only exist, the word suburb is beneath the city. Its related to the city. Its seen as a kind of nowheres land between city and rural. I was thinking about this the other day. You know, we think about culture as maybe being urban or rural, jazz music, hip hop, those are historically very urban kind of forms of art. And maybe Country Music or folk art we think about Rural America as having a very a culture thats very obvious to us and one we would recognize. But what is suburban music, suburban art, suburban culture . These kinds of things. It can be hard to identify. And people who are from the suburbs, maybe not those of us who think theyre utopians or drew who loved growing up there, but, you know, people are often embarrassed to be from suburbs. And i say this because at the beginning of the semester i often ask students where theyre from and somebody will say baltimore. And ill say, oh, i know baltimore well. What neighborhood . It turns out they live in some podunk town, you know, 25 miles outside of baltimore. Or, you know, there are 8 Million People who live in new york city but probably 30 or 40 Million People who ask where they live they would say new york. Nobody wants to admit theyre from new jersey, i guess. You know, they do occupy this kind of strange space. So were going to go back all the way in time. Were going to focus on the 20th century and the mid 20th century in particular, but well do some early prehistory to think about how suburbs came to be. And much of although the word existed all the way back in the 14th century, these suburban idea, the concept of suburbia really began in the 19th century, particularly in the second half of the 19th century. And it has a lot to do with cities. And weve talked about in class how cities are growing, becoming more industrialized. And over time cities become associated with chaos, disorder, poor health. And as a consequence people are seeking the tonics of nature as a kind of prescription for better health, people are wanting to escape the city and wup of the ways were able to do that before they build suburbs are with urban parks. Heres an example of central park. Construction begins just before the civil war. And the idea was, if you cant live outside of the city, at least you can get a taste of the country. So they may live in these kind of squalled, dirty, crowded city, but they can have the benefit of fresh air, scenery, flora and fauna, most of which was imported. But nevertheless seemed very natural. And wealthy folk could enjoy the curved paths that stood in stark contrast to the grid like streets of manhattan. And as the 19th century continues and cities become larger and more industrialized, the notion that cities were diseased, filth ridden, perverted places to live only grows. And in fact, some doctors even begin to coin medical conditions, one is new yorkitis that affects people who live in new york who become morbid and disturbed by virtue of just living in the crowded chaotic city with the cacophony, the noise, and all of the people. And so late in the 19th century, there are a lot of remedies for this, new parks, people fleeing the city, maybe farther than central park but other parks or other natural landmarks. A lot of people are riding bicycles as a way to escape the city. And have some sense of nature outside. So the suburban kind of style really takes off after the civil war and people begin to emphasize having a detached home, an cottage style house, having fresh air, accessible space, a yard, a garden. And some of you mentioned had notion of suburbs being safe and family oriented. And that idea begins to take off in popularity, as well. We talked about earlier in the Harriet Beecher stow, the famous author. Her sister actually becomes one of the leading proponents of suburbia in terms of thinking about these spaces as ideal for family, to raise a family and to encourage a kind of domestic feminism. And the suburban aesthetic is seen in a number of ways. Well see one example here from a house in newburg, new york. This house was designed by calvert vox, who is one of the two people who designed central park. So theres a lot of overlapping themes here. This is a big house, 5,000 square feet. Eight bedrooms. Only one bathroom. And the idea thats epitomized here but in also a lot of early suburban architecture was to emphasize nature and its relationship to nature. So they built this house for mr. Warren who was the treasurer of some railroad company. The treasurer of a railroad company. They built it purposefully right on the hudson river to take advantage of this beautiful view, the natural splendor, and situate the house in a way that it was opening up to the river view. The big parlor rooms inside the house were in the back of the house so that they could see the water. There was a big giant porch on the back where they assumed, vox assumed that the residents would spend their summer enjoying the breeze and taking in the breathtaking view. And you can also see, of course, theres a garden, a yard. Emphasizing the space that could be had in the suburbs. A much bigger house than most people were living in the city and one that was supposed to blend in with nature. So vox was very concerned about not having the house stick out so much. Even though it was large, so youll notice that the front of the house has these gables that make the house appear very tall but in the rear, those gables are not there, but instead, theres a kind of hipped roof to deemphasize the verticality. And there was also a lot of ornamentation and the idea was that these houses could express the emotions of the owners, there are these window hoods on the first floor windows. Elaborate trim along the gables, as a way to stand out, as a way to have these ornamental flourishes was going to be part of this suburban style architecture. Which was very much intended for wealthier folks who could escape the suburbs. This is just kind of interesting to see what the house looks like today. This was a couple years ago. Nice looking house. It was on the market for 285,000. Pretty cheap. But it remains a kind of signal of this earlier impressive era. So while some people like vox were building these suburban cottage style houses, others were thinking about creating the first suburban planned communities. And a couple of examples, one, Llewellyn Park in new jersey which sat just about 12 miles outside new york city and the other riverside in illinois which was pretty close, about nine miles from chicago. And the idea here was not just to create these nice cottage style homes with their own yard and garden, but to create an entire community where similar kinds of folk could come and develop these suburban developments. These neighborhoods, these planned communities. And you can see in both of the plans here again, theyre emphasizing nature. The roads are all curved. They bring in lots of flora and fauna. In Llewellyn Park, the lot sizes are quite large and they dont allow fences and so the idea was there was going to be this shared open space where any individual owner could kind of roam in this big public nature ground. And theyre kind of interesting examples for several reasons, but one of which youll also notice in the Llewellyn Park, theres a gate house, which they used as a way to appropriate the idea of privacy, security, these kind of fundamental features of suburban life that we think of today but also of course, to suggest exclusivity. These were, in fact, Country Homes for very wealthy city people. Later in the 19th century, we have the origins of streetcar suburbs that have houses that are often a little lessee lab rat but interesting nonetheless. And streetcars become popularized in the late 19th century because they become electrified and theyre able to travel much faster. This is an image of pittsburgh and you can see all of the bridges between pittsburgh crossing the rivers around it. And these bridges are not carrying automobiles, but rather pedestrians, railroads, but primarily streetcars. And so all around pittsburgh, new suburban streetcar suburbs as they called them, are developing, some tony suburbs like Squirrel Hill were managers and businessmen can live in these nice, more bucolic spaces but still manage to get to the city pretty easily. We think of the suburbs primarily, of course, as residential, but theyre also in industrial suburbs. And homestead, pennsylvania, which is about seven miles outside of pittsburgh is an example of one of these industrial suburbs and a streetcar suburb thats connected to pittsburgh via this bridge that was erected in 1895. So this is not a zoomed in look here, but what do you find striking about this particular suburb . How does it maybe look . Unusual . Greg . Unlike the other ones, all the streets are very straight and theres no attempt to incorporate nature. Good. So theres very rectilinear street pattern, linear street pattern. If you notice, they often follow the Railroad Tracks or streetcar tracks, where development is following transportation. Yeah . It also looks like theres factories close to the suburbs, too. Good. So theres a great deal of industry here. This is the homestead steel works that are eventually purchased by andrew carnegie, becomes famous or infamous for a labor strike. But, yeah, this is a center of industry and kind of becomes a company town where more than half of the People Living here eventually work for the steel company. So were not going to spend so much time thinking about these kinds of suburbs, but its important to remember that manufacturing often does move to the fringes of the cities and that there are all kinds of different suburbs. But i want to talk about some of the things that really precipitate the modern suburban movement in the mid1950s and some of that stems from the new deal policies that we talked about earlier. And in particular, the creation of the homeowners loan corporation. The holc, a new deal byproduct that was trying to help people afford homes. As we discussed a couple of weeks back, the great depression, of course, produced tremendous homelessness, foreclosures, et cetera. And part of what the new deal wanted to do was to create a boom in the Construction Industry and also provide homes for people who needed them. So this holc was an effort to provide mortgages for people. In the 19th century, most buyers either built their house or they paid cash for it. And mortgages were just beginning to become a thing but they were often very short term. You would have to refinance and so the holc promoted a longer term mortgage with, therefore, a lower monthly payment. But one of the interesting things about the holc is, is, of course, they didnt want to give out loans that werent going to be paid back. So they had a very intricate process of assessing neighborhoods. Values, and they didnt want to give loans to neighborhoods that they thought would be in decline. So they created a very detailed system where individual assessors would go to a nand, they would look at the kind of housing, they would look at how old the housing was, whether it was in good shape to try to determine if it was a really good neighborhood that was going to hold its value or a neighborhood that was on decline. And they made these maps with colors and letters to denote a was a were the best neighborhoods and then b, c, and d. But as well see from this example of a 1937 map from richmond, virginia, the most salient feature in the assessors reports had to do with race. And in this case, white neighborhoods tended to be shaded in green or blue, which were the highest ratings, and if a neighborhood was populated heavily by africanamericans, it would almost always receive a d or red rating. And that was certainly the case in this neighborhood that well look at in a minute, which today is randolph. And it had an effect even on neighboring neighborhoods. You can see just to the side of this neighborhood is a yellow grouping. Thats currently bird park in richmond. And the reports for this neighborhood say that it would have been higher it would have got a blue rating, a b rating but was downgraded because its next to an africanamerican neighborhood, and theres a park on this side of the c4 neighborhood. So africanamericans are walking through this neighborhood. Thereby, supposedly, devaluing it. And when the assessors wrote reports like this, in other neighborhoods they included all sorts of detailed information. And maybe you cant see, but under inhabitants often it would say salaried workers, managerial class, to define the kind of people who work there as a way to understand how much money they made, as a way to understand if this neighborhood was going to become prosperous or at least maintain itself. But in neighborhoods dominated by africanamericans, the assessor usually just listed negro and that was enough to warrant a red designation. And this is the part of the origin of the term known as redlining, which came to mean discriminating against certain minority groups in terms of providing services, financial services, government services, et cetera. Now, theres been some debate about how much these ratings actually mattered in terms of lending practices. But theres no doubt that theres certainly a sign of how new deal benefits were being meted out disproportionately, and perhaps its not also a surprise that theres a correlation between these maps and poverty rates today. This is an overlay, a map of the original holc map from 1937. And the areas shaded in red underneath it are areas that are that experience more than 20 poverty rate. And perhaps the government was simply good at predicting the future and these neighborhoods were really in decline, or more likely, the government helped cement the fate of these neighborhoods. So what does this have to do with suburbanization . Youll notice that the areas in red in rich monday tended to be at the center, at the core of the city. And that was often the case. This is a map of chicago. Another from cleveland. And finally, in oakland, all of these from 1940 or 1937 like richmond. And youll notice that the red is at the city center, the core of the city. And so the government started to promote by giving loans and incentivizing in other Way Development at the fringes of the city. Which happened at the expense of the city center. And it also began the process of associating inner cities, city centers as the neighborhoods of decline. Neighborhoods of decline were the neighborhoods in which africanamericans disproportionately lived. And these ideas would become linked in a way that was hard to that would be hard to untangle for a very long time. Following up on the homeowners loan corporation, another even bigger and more important new deal program known as the fha, the federal housing administration, which becomes a huge part of the postwar suburban boom that incentivizes suburban building by making home loans much more affordable and goes even further than the holc in providing insuring private loans that will provide very longterm loans with very little down payments, often less than 10 was needed. And this similarly operated in a way that promoted discrimination. So the fha would often was more likely to insure new Housing Development rather than reconstructing or rehabilitating old development, which, of course, meant new housing was more likely to be built outside of the cities. They were more likely to insure mortgages for Single Family houses, the kind that would be very popular in the suburbs. And perhaps most appallingly in many of the new suburbs that the fha subsidized in a way, they appropriated the idea of restrictive covenants. Agreements that the suburbanites who moved into these neighborhoods would be held to that made sure they would never sell their house to somebody who was not white. Excluding very explicitly africanamericans. These covenants would eventually be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1948 in shelley versus cramer. But discrimination managed to continue in a variety of other ways. So these programs are in place before the war but once the war begins to die down, soldiers are returning home. The gi bill is enabling all sorts of economic growth. We have really postwar suburban boom that follows world war ii. And during the war towards the end of the war in 1944, there were about 144,000 new houses built in a single year. By 1950, there would be roughly 2 million houses built in that exact year. And by 1950, the rate of suburban growth was more than ten times that the rate of the city center. So these new suburbs were often must less dense before, often the houses looked very similar and so did the people. And the most famous and largest example of these postwar suburbs was in levittown in long island, about 25 miles east of new york city. Where Abraham Levitt and his two sons buy 4,000 acres of potato farms in 1946, and eventually build 17,000 houses, and do so in a way thats reminiscent of mass production. As you can see here. Nonunionized workers would go from house to house and do the same task, oftentimes very you know, minute over and over again. And they really helped revolutionize the building process. So as you can see from this aerial edge they had precut lumber that came from the levity levitt farms. And they made these concrete slabs, 60 feet apart and they dumped all the materials out, and they would quickly build a house. Very, very quickly. They were able to build houses at a rate exceeding 150 a week. And the result was that the houses were very affordable since they were built so quickly. The earliest model sold for 7900. And its hard to do kind of economic comparisons to today, but would probably be Something Like 85,000, 90,000 in todays money. So they became very affordable for many people any the middle class and people start moving in in 1947. To houses that look like this. This is one thats still standing. But the original cape cod style and floor plan. So what do you make of this particular house . Compared to other suburban houses . Whats interesting . Devon . Good, its one floor. Emily . Really basic. Its very basic. Its simple. Its compact. Good. These cape cod style houses were only 750 square feet. They only have one bathroom. Theyre two bedroom. These seem pretty small to us in our suburbs today but at the time, seemed pretty spacious and roomy and had a lot of exciting features for people. Most notably, of course, it was your own house. It was detached. It was separate. You had a yard. The house conveyed a sense of family. There were very few private spaces. Instead of formal dining rooms, there was just a public much more open kitchen that was designed so that he mothers working in the king could look out the front window and watch their children playing in the front lawn. Theres no porch, which is often seen as the kind of connection to the public of what makes the link between the public street and the private house, right . Hanging out on their porch. A sense of community, things that suburbs would be ridiculed as lacking later on. And there were no sort of stereotypical male spaces. Theres no den, library, billiard room. And in fact, these kind of suburban houses reflect a new male domesticity where men were more likely to be expected to spend time with their family instead of just hanging out with other male friends. Speaking of the community, there are of course, no bars or saloons where men or other people are hanging out. And at first, there werent any swimming pools, parks or playgrounds. This was really all about the house. Eventually some of those things are built but that comes much later. Theres also, of course, this is only one of the house types, eventually they develop a ranch style. But there are beak only two kinds of houses. They all look very similar and some people would suggest helped create a lack of diversity in terms of the architecture. And suburban architecture, indeed, tends to look similar whether its in long island or somewhere else. But perhaps the more the more important critique is that the People Living in levittotn all looked fairly similar as well, at least in terms of them all being white. By 1960, when 82,000 people are living in this very popular suburban community of levittown, theres not one africanamerican included. And they are purposefully and explicitly excluded. So this issue of diversity is, of course, one of the critiques of suburbia. But there were many others, even at the time back in the 1940s as theyre starting out and the 50s and 60s as theyre exploding in popularity. Ashley . Yeah, i had a question. You had said something about red lining and restrictive covenants. But when was like block busting introduced . Because i know during that time a lot of, like, white families were selling their homes. Good. So although restrictive covenants are ruled unconstitutional in 1948, a lot they sort of put a waiting period on it so a lot of communities, new communities are able to actually create them and they dont negate existing ones and then what happens, of course, even after those are put in place, there are a variety of ways, mostly Real Estate Agents that are working to make sure that africanamericans dont purchase in a particular neighborhood because the fear was that have Property Values would go down. And there are all sorts of ways of doing this not only Real Estate Agents steering people in a particular direction but how you present the community, think about even here in virginia, you know, some of you may see suburbs, neighborhoods that are called you know, the jones plantation. What does that signal to a particular group . Or i dont know if any of you ifsh every ever go pumpkin picking. Anybody go pick pumpkins . Yes, well, if you go in town here, theres a great little nice place to pick pumpkins that i take my family to every year but you have to drive through this little suburban development. And its called battlefield estates and you drive on confederacy lane. These are names that signal something to certain people. But what eventually happens, which were not going to talk about too much today, of course, is that the city populations decline as theres a great impetus for people to move to the suburbs. And families are beginning theres a socalled white flight where neighborhoods are going from white to black. And people are trying to, so call, defend their neighborhoods, to make sure they stay white, and do so through all sorts of ways, and thats when we have block busting and neighborhoods rapidly changing, is predominantly in the 50s when you start to see that as happening much more so. But good question. So other critiques, while people are boosting suburbia, Real Estate Agents, developers, banks, mortgage insurers, Construction Companies are boosting the notion of suburbia while Popular Television shows are romanticizing a kind of almost inaccessible suburban ideal. Plenty of people are beginning to question whether or not these are actually utopias. And great places to live. And part of that critique is, of course, about sameness. That theres this mass culture thats developing where people are replicating one another and that theres this concern that houses all look the same. The pieces all look the same and were going to have this very boring staid culture that is antithetical to perhaps what we want, especially in terms of culture. Theres some also unique problems in terms of women and the notion of a suburban housewife. And what that does in terms of isolation and female oppression. And women across the country whether in cities, suburbs or rural areas of course, are facing challenges all their own. But to get to this idea of a housewife, and eventually a suburban housewife, i thought id show a brief clip from a news reel of the 1951 mrs. America pageant. Of so Pay Attention what the kind of housewife, what miss america is expected to do. A quest for mrs. America. Shes got to cook as well as look. 32 married lovelies show they know potatoes need to be peeled. The cooking contest goes to mrs. New york city, with a cheese casserole. Bed making comes next. Into the beds go the testers. The best beds by mrs. New york city. Hmm, feels comfortable. But its the body beautiful thats the criterion for the wellrounded mrs. America. The winner is mrs. New york city. Mrs. Maynard duncan. Yes, wife can be beautiful. So, you know, mrs. America, the married women are being rated on how well they can peel potatoes, how well they make beds, and the men come in as the test i dont know what theyre testing for. But theyre, you know, testing the bed. And then, of course, they have to look good in a swimsuit to boot on top of it all. And so women in suburbia are facing this prevailing image of what a suburban housewife should be and has to do. And their lives are quite challenging. This is one example of a woman, marjorie from the late 1940s who lives in a suburb about 20 miles outside new york city. And shes talking about just how difficult and how busy her life is, right . She doesnt have a job in the typical sense of the word. But her schedule, she wakes up at 6 30 a. M. In the morning. She has three kids, a 4yearold, a 2yearold, and a baby. She wakes up at 6 30, shes dresses two boys, makes breakfast, her husband goes to work. Washes dishes, cleans downstairs, the kids are downstairs playing, bathes the baby, nurses the baby. Makes lunch, lunch for the kids, husband comes home, kids take a nap. She washes the dishes, nurses the baby, wakes up the kids, gardens, mends clothes, fixes a snack. Dinner for the kids. Gives them baths. Then she dresses for dinner with her husband. Has a cocktail with her husband, makes dinner for her husband, washes dishes, nurses the baby. Kids go to sleep and 11 00 she goes to bed. In the article she talks about how they wake up in the middle of the night, too, and, you know, its a neverending cycle. This is a lot of work for somebody whos not working. And surely some of you grew up in households where one of your parents stayed home and probably underappreciated how much they did. My wife stays home with our two boys and her schedule looks Something Like this. Although she doesnt dress up for dinner with me, im going to have to ask her about that. But, you know, these people working really, really hard. And we dont think of them as working. But, of course, they have tremendous economic value because if they were working outside the home, somebody would have to be doing these tasks. Today, of course, day care is more common. But theres real value here. And this photograph is symbolizing one weeks worth of her work. They assembled. She makes in a given week 35 beds. And she washes 750 items of glass and china. She washes 400 pieces of silverware. She prepares 175 pounds of food. She does 250 pieces of laundry. In a given week. And in the article accompanying this photograph, she talks about her many roles. Shes a driver, a seamstress, a maid, a cook, a nurse and her husbands glamour girl. And she has all of these modern appliances and people think now by the time we get to the 40s and even more so the 50s and the 60s, that a washing machine and a dishwasher makes life easy. But, in fact, women even by the mid60s are spending just as much time on housework as they were 50 years earlier. But for marjorie part of the extra burden is that shes living in the suburbs and its isolating. She has to drive her family around all over the place. Her aunts or cousins, or parents or inlaws dont live with them. Her neighbors are more distant. She doesnt see people walking in and out of the building. And it can feel and does feel for her, very isolating. So thats another, of course, kind of critique. Yet another is the idea of consumption. That suburbia is driving american consumption, to even greater levels. We talk about it over and over again in this class, how markers of class and status arent based on somebodys income. But rather based on what they buy, what they consume. What they wear, what they drive. And nothing becomes more important in terms of class than ones home. And in terms of achieving the socalled american dream. By being a property owner. And that idea is portrayed in this magazine cover from the late 1950s, in which a young couple is imagining their future, imagining a ranch home, and imagining all the stuff stuck inside of it. All of the appliances. By the 1950s, americans buy Something Like threequarters of all the appliances in the world. One of the more lasting critiques of suburbanization is in terms of its effect on the environment. Theres a kind of irony here that people are moving to the suburbs to get close to nature, but in the process, of course, theyre helping to destroy it. What might have been more Natural Landscapes or being bulldozed, topsoil is being replaced with houses and lawns. Air pollution, gasoline consumption, energy consumption, trash, all of these things are creating great waste. And, of course, is suburban nature even really nature . If you think back to those levittotn houses, and many of the suburbs you grew up in, people have little pieces of rectangular grass. Right . Whats up with that . And thats not and they water it in the summer. They fertilize it with chemicals. They mow it all the time. What would the grass look like if it was just kept more natural . And, of course, the kinds of grass that were growing are not even native to the area. So its kind of, you know, strange. And people are pruning their trees and, you know, hedging their lawns to make these perfectly rectangular angles. People have bushes. Just today on my way to campus, i walked by a house i never noticed it before. But it had a bush in the shape of a dog. A little dog. Like woof woof. Thats a bush. I was about to take a picture and include it, but people saw me standing in front of their house, and i didnt want to be creepy. But, you know, its weird. Everybody pruning their trees. This time of the year, everyone is raking their leaves, putting them in plastic bags and putting them on a truck. Is that natural . Or the guys outside our building here with their machines, you know, blowing the leaves everywhere. Its kind of weird if we think about it. This natural element. And, of course, a lot of the environmental critique critiques have to do with automobiles. And one of the developments in terms of suburban architecture is, of course, in terms of the garage. You may have noticed those levittown buildings in the 1940s didnt have garages, and weve talked about automobiles earlier in the class, but theyre very rare until the 1920s, people are parking them maybe in stables. By the 30s and 40s we begin to have driveways. Its not until the 50s and 60s that garages become integrated into the house. You can see from this floor plan of a model of a house in 1963, the garage is enormous. It takes up more than 25 of the entire Square Footage of the whole house. It can fit two cars and a whole bunch of junk inside. And this becomes a stable of suburban architecture, these dominant garages. You may remember the first image we showed in class, the most striking architectural feature of those suburban houses were these protruding garages. Theyre kind of called pe joertively known as snout houses. And people are critical of them because they elevate the car, but they also distance the house from the public. Its often hard to see the front door and the connection to the people. Garages are weird, right . Theyre an entire house, just for your car. You can drive your car into your house so you dont have to be feel the weather or see any of your neighbors. You just drive into your house. In this little house just for the garage. And theyre not so little. And these garages have become bigger and bigger, even as the cities have. Sort of alluding to ashleys question earlier about what is happening in the cities, a lot of people are becoming autocentric and desire having a car, which is propelling people to move to the suburbs. And some cities cognizant of this, are trying to promote automobilety within the city and create garages. This is one famous example of a residential skyscraper in chicago from 1964 called marina city. Its a little hard to tell, but at the bottom of this giant building is this many story tall, 900space valeted garage where people could park their cars. And this was done as a way to stem white flight and encourage people in chicago to not move to the suburbs where you can have your own garage. You can have it here in the city, too. You can see this is what it looks like today. Theyre all backed in by valets. Youre not allowed to drive it yourself. Its a very striking building, but certainly elevating the idea, of course, of the car. Weve already talked about in our last class the highway act that creates all of these roads in the mid1950s. But in terms of their affect on the urban and suburban landscape, they should not forget about that. Just think about the size, the gravity, the effect of these highways. This is from los angeles. The i10 and the 110 exchange. Just shows you the immense nature of these highways that are helping to funnel people out of cities into the suburbs. But still allowing them access and where these highways were built inside the city, or on the periphery, was often determined by the political will of a certain community, how well off and affluent a community was, and oftentimes the racial makeup, where highways often cut through neighborhoods filled through people of color. That happened down the street even here in harrisonburg. This is a photograph of east street down in downtown harrisonburg in 1957. A neighborhood known as new town filled with many africanamericans, and harrisonburg, not a huge city, but still a city, begins to think about sure urbanizing the city, making it more carfriendly. Widening the roads, creating Retail Shopping centers. And you can see the giant hole here is what used to be the neighborhood. And if you want to know how beautiful this place looks today, its this wonderful parking lot and Shopping Center that nobody goes to. And its kind of ugly. But there are these suburbanization elements that creep into the city. And remnants of it are still felt today. Every time the city considers some new project, people always go to city council to voice their concern about loss of parking, and theres a great concern about how much parking there is. So, one of these things one of the things these highways do is enable sprawl, which is unplanned scattered bits of the city that are spread across. And los angeles is probably the most famous example. You can see in the very, very distance is downtown l. A. And all of this low density housing and commercial districts leading towards los angeles. In reality, l. A. Is more dense than many other places, but you still got the idea, or, perhaps, even a more striking example from nevada. A subdivision created in the middle of the desert. Where do these people go Grocery Shopping . Where do they work . Where do they play . They have to drive everywhere. And its completely separate. And, of course, to think about the environmental consequences of this is obvious. So, there were a number by the time we get to the 60s, a lot of these critiques of suburbia had blossomed enough that a number of innovators were trying to do Something Different and created a series of new towns like reston in virginia, irvine, california, and columbia in maryland, which was started by a guy named james rouse, who was particularly concerned about sprawl between baltimore and washington. And he created the city of columbia in between these two cities because he was afraid that the current housing and these dots represented essentially where people were living and sprawling from the city, that these dots would eventually swallow columbia. That everything between baltimore and washington would be an ugly, sprawling, unplanned mess. And so he took this opportunity to buy 14,000 acres of land, which was then pretty rural, from farmers in small tracks and, you know, milking cows and picnic lunches. And he decides hes going to section off this place to create a new kind of suburb. One that explicitly deals with the limitations, the problems of existing suburbs. And he secretly buys all this land and eventually comes to the public that hes going to create this new city. And a lot of people were happy to hear that because there were. People were happy about that because there was rumors spread that everyone was buying all the land to create a garbage dump for all of baltimore and washingtons trash. People thought perhaps this was a better idea. So his idea was to create a new city from scratch, and the symbol of this new city is this tree, a people tree. And he had this kind of corny phrase that he wanted to gr eed a garden to grow people. What do you need to grow the best community to create the best kind of people . His solution was to break down the city into smaller bits. You can see that on this plan here. To have a downtown but nine villages and this could be a hybrid of small town america with the villages and their own little main street, Shopping Center, but also have a kind of bustling downtown with industry, with commerce, with an urban pulse. He wants to counter that with industry and commerce. Hes thinking about suburbs that are all white and goes to Great Lengths to create a much more diverse community. Of the first village was known as wild lake. Trademark elements here. One, there was a lake, and the idea that this suburb would respect nature instead of run over it. It was also broken down into several smaller neighborhoods, each of which had its own elementary school, the understanding was that school was at the center of community and that each of these neighborhoods would coalesce around a particular school. This set of building says churches but in reality they created what they called instead Interfaith Centers where they forbade churches, synagogues and mosques have being created but instead had these intercenters where christians, jews, muslims and others would worship under the same roof to promote a sense of community and understanding, along the same lines in each of these villages was a community pool. People werent allowed to have their own pool. So they would be forced to go swim with other people. They couldnt have fences. Nobody their own mailbox. Instead, there were community mailboxes. So you had to get out into the street and see your neighbors and think about this sense of community. You can see faulkner ridge, they named the communities and the streets after american poets and writers as a way to try to instill creativity and foster a sense of intellectualism. Columbia, of course, was created in this time of cars but there was also the hope that it wouldnt be as auto centric. All of these shaded lines, which are bike paths that link the schools to the people and community to community that he imagined would foster another way of moving around this kind of new city. Again an antithesis to the already existing sub shalls and this would combine to the Downtown Center that would provide the center of activity, the center of culture. And the excitement. Instead of building a traditional downtown with a series of intersecting streets and restaurants and public kind of facilities in downtown columbia, which was a relatively new concept at the time, the downtown became essentially a mall built in 1971. The Columbia Mall was only the 16th mall in the country. They called it a galleria at the time. But it became emblematic of what new suburbs were going to look like, where commerce was going to be insulated in these kind of strange structures. The mall which, of course, on the one hand is very auto centric. You can see the mall surround by a moat of parking spaces. Of course, this makes it inaccessible for those who dont have cars and helps control the kind of people who shop there. But the malls are kind of like suburbs themselves. Theyre supposed to be this mix of urban. You can see here the space frame geometry on the roof of the mall signals this kind of urban, geometric grid. There are brick pavers that make it feel like an outdoor plaza. There are shadows coming in. There are little vendors, the kiosk and stuff where people sell you monogrammed sweatshirts or whatever, cell phone plans. Street lights, supposed to make it look outside while inside. Birds in these places. I dont know if they put them there or they just get in, but there are birds and you kind of feel like theyre outside. But theyre not really like a city because they have these they imported, in this case, ficus trees from florida. And, of course, everything is controlled. There are niece natural elements like the waterfall and the trees, but everything is planned and controlled. Theres private security. There are no homeless peechlt theres no graffiti. There are no bars. Theres no pornography shops. These are not really urban spaces, but a very purified notion of what an urban space might be. And were going to talk more about malls as the center of urban culture in the 1980s eventually, but the mall becomes the kind of, of course, downtown of columbia at the expense of everything else. And with an happens in columbia after this, in the 70s and 80s, ends up being mimicked in many other places t remains much more racially inclusive than many other suburbs, but it has become many of its progressive elements, the things that were trying to be less suburban like have gradually moved to become more suburban like. People are building their own pools instead of going to the community pool, erecting fences. The bike path that i showed you earlier, the person on the bicycle was my mom, who lives there. And i was standing on the bike path waiting to take a photograph of somebody walking or riding their bike, but nobody came. And everybody drives, even if they live a mile or half mile from the Shopping Center. Everybody drives. So i asked my mom to stage the photograph. She kindly did. But people are the sense of community hasnt really panned out so much. The Interfaith Centers, some of the churches, communities moved to the fringes of the city. One of the largest, if not the largest synagogue in town decided it didnt want to share space with other religions anymore and built its very own, nice synagogue but outside of town, cannibalizing the need for these Interfaith Centers. People are private. Even my parents who live there, who are very friendly, nice people, their blinds were always drawn. Even in the front of their house. They dont even have blinds. They just have these drapes that are permanent. People cant see out and people cant see in. I talked to one neighbor recently who lived there for 30 years who said he only knew the name of one person on his entire block. So some of these things didnt pan out quite the way that rouse had hoped as columbia has become more quiet, more corporatized and even has had more sprawl. We dont really have time to discuss the development in the last couple of decades, the diversification of the suburbs, the politicization of the suburban vote. The rise of mcmansions, gating, private communities and all this kind of change thats been happening in suburban development, but we can sort of return back to our engagement photo at the halfdeveloped culdesac here to think maybe we still decry suburbs as mediocre, lame or boring, but we still very much live in a suburban nation. More than half of americans describe themselves as suburban. And so suburbs are changing. Malls, strip malls, big box retailers are beginning to maybe well have selfdriving cars, who knows. Suburbs remain interesting places to study. Adios. Tonight chief policy officer for parler, amy peikoff. Hate speech, misinformation, to address those problems with more speech, not with any types of content restrictions. And we act accordingly. Watch the communicators tonight at 8 00 eastern on cspan 2. Youre watching American History tv. Every weekend on cspan3, explore our nations past. Csp cspan3, brought to you today by your television provider. Locate d about 25 miles norh of philadelphia, levittown management refused to directly sell homes to africanamericans. Although they couldnt prohibit private owners from doing so. Next, on reel america, from 1957, crisis in levittown, p. A. Exploring the attitudes of homeowners after a black veteran and his family move into the allwhite development of 60,000 and are initially met with violent, rockthrowing crowds