Day 7: Epiphany

History has shown that collaboration of information breeds innovation, and innovation is what keeps a city full of creative solutions to its physical, social, and economical problems. Collaboration with the University of Amsterdam via lectures with Dr. Leon Deben was essential to get an academic perspective.

The first time I started reading through Understanding Amsterdam, Dr. Deben’s book, I had a hard time getting into the essays. I picked up a second time a few days later, and WOW! I don’t know if it was because of all the different readings coming together, or that I’m being more exposed to the planning field and have more ongoing mental dialogues going through my head, especially with my planning theory class and the 50 or so articles that we are covering as part of the class.

My first interest was that someone finally was able to point out how often times words are grossly misused, and there is no concrete meaning. I was glad to see that admission, and an offered definition of global economy. I mostly agreed with the points that it is possible for a global economy to exist, but not necessarily encompass each and every country entity. The biggest point is the interdependence and influence that other countries and nations now have on each other, to a tremendous scale. There is no secret that the telecommunication age is helping to encourage this dependency and growth. There was an argument that the information age is having the same revolutionary impact as the Golden Age, or the Industrial revolution in terms of massive changes to the urban scene, and I absolutely agree. The ability to share ideas, and connect with people all over the globe makes it harder to stay ignorant of other cultures and ways of life.

Having traveled to Europe, I usually do not just freely give out my status of American, if at all possible. In my personal experience, many times Americans have given a bad reputation. Inconsiderate American tourists to Europe undoubtedly help to fuel this perception. This bad rep is also evident when American culture is blamed for invading Europe and causing corruption and vileness in European culture. It was refreshing to see an academic reference that there is a fundamental difference in our history, based in the roots - the example of the cowboy and Indian story, where there are just a few generalized figures, and not the breadth of history that makes up European culture. This is also reflected in the comment that American culture has from the beginning been focused on the working class and lower interests and desires, and thus we find jazz and country music have origins here, and not in European countries.



One thing I found interesting were conflicting theories about what drives people to central downtown areas compared to the suburbs. Dr. Gilderbloom had a theory that gays were more driven to the downtown areas, while lesbian were more suburban drawn, partly due to pay differences, but that the female were still entrenched in the theory of the home and being domestic. Understanding Amsterdam had an article that theorized that location was partially dependent on how much women played a role in the household. If it the family had a more matriarchal household, it would drawn to downtown areas for its proximity to jobs and urban services, triggering gentrification. The more patriarchal the family is, it would be more drawn to the suburban neighborhoods to raise children, all economic circumstances being equal. I found this contrast fascinating, and it showed that there is no real right or wrong about some theories - some can be proven right at a certain time, and then 10 years later they may be obsolete. Or, some may be an accurate representation for some groups of city residents, but not all those in other cities, as the geographic experience can vary so widely, especially in the United States.