Week 3 Reading Notes

Students:

Again there was great discussion in lecture yesterday regarding Simmel, keep it up. I just got the list of email addresses from Valorie, so you'll be added as an author of this blog soon. At that point, you can post here.

I know this is looking ahead, but here are your reading notes for Week 3. Remember we will be discussing Wirth on Monday in section.

Cheers,
Andrew

WEEK 3
Again Professor Martin has chosen our week’s readings so that we can understand a particular debate, with the authors taking clearly contrasting positions. Wirth’s essay strongly influenced Gans’ response, and Fischer’s theory responds to both. If last week we read two authors who argued for different theories of human action in cities, this week we are reading three contrasting positions on IF, and HOW, cities produce particular cultures.

Wirth

What empirical changes in the real world prompt his inquiry into the “urban mode of living” (1-3)?
Foremost, what is his “sociological definition of the city” (4-8)?
• What are the three key components of this definition?
• How does this definition seek to be flexible to describe most, if not all cities, rather than just a few, or a certain kind of city?

Once you understand his definition, then focus upon how Wirth argues these 3 features affect city life (10-18)?
• I suggest you write up a small table, and keep a list of the effects that Wirth sees each city feature having on urban culture.
• Do you see parallels to Tonnies, Le Bon, or Simmel in this section?

Finally, how does Wirth argue cities affect “social organization” (20-4)?
• What ties are forged, and which ties erode under urban conditions?
• What types of activities do urban individuals pursue, and what groups do they form?


Gans’ essay is in direct response to Wirth’s, and challenges many of his conclusions.

What 2 areas of cities does he focus on? How do the empirical trends in these places relate to his revision of Wirth? (171)

What reasons does he offer for challenging Wirth’s conclusion that cities create particular cultures (172-5)?
• What are the 5 types of people who live in inner cities, and what alternatives to Wirth’s explanation does Gans offer for their behavior (175-6)

What are quasi-primary relationships? How does Gans argue these are different than the kinds of relationships Wirth saw as created by cities (177-8)?

What do you make of his position that suburbs are essentially indistinguishable from cities (178-82)?


Fischer

Fischer’s essay is an interesting counterpoint to Wirth and Gans because he argues partially against both. He disagrees with Gans by arguing that cities DO create particular cultures [subcultures] but disagrees with Wirth by offering different mechanisms by which cities create subcultures [i.e. focus on the Implications section for this 1336-7].

What is a subculture (1323)?

What are the mechanisms by which Fischer sees cities creating subcultures? [Hint, the first two are in Proposition 2 and the third is Proposition 3. Why he isn’t better organized is beyond me.]
*Look for similarities to Simmel in Fischer's argument here.

Having read all three pieces, now think for yourself: do you agree or disagree that there is something inherent about cities that produces particular cultures, or ways of living? Why or why not? And if you do agree, do you think that Wirth or Fischer have it right about the mechanisms by which cities create cultures? Or do you see other forces at work?

Limits of Le Bon?

Students:

As I suggested in section Monday, I have my doubts about Le Bon's theory. He has some good points about what happens IN a crowd, but
-why do crowds form?
-when might crowds form or disperse?
-what's the role of leaders? [he does address this at times, but not much]
-in our age, what's the role of technology?

I was happy with the level of engagement you had with the text, so here's an article for those of you who are interested on the topic in our context from today's NY Times.

Protests in Moldova Explode, With Help of Twitter

MOSCOW — A crowd of more than 10,000 young Moldovans materialized seemingly out of nowhere on Tuesday to protest against Moldova’s Communist leadership, ransacking government buildings and clashing with the police.

The sea of young people reflected the deep generation gap that has developed in Moldova, and the protesters used their generation’s tools, gathering the crowd by enlisting text-messaging, Facebook and Twitter, the social messaging network.

The protesters created their own searchable tag on Twitter, rallying Moldovans to join and propelling events in this small former Soviet state onto a Twitter list of newly popular topics, so people around the world could keep track.

By Tuesday night, the seat of government had been badly battered and scores of people had been injured. But riot police had regained control of the president’s offices and Parliament Wednesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/world/europe/08moldova.html



Also, I contacted the USP office and should have you all updated as authors for the blog soon.

Again, look here toward the end of every week for reading notes on the upcoming week's articles. So, toward the end of this week I'll post notes on Week 3's readings.

-AC

PARTIAL OFFICE HOURS TODAY

Students:

I have an appointment that just came up and will only be at office hours from 2-2:30 today. If people need to meet with me this week, please email me for an appointment.

I'll see you in section,
Andrew

Le Bon Assignment

Students:

I got an excellent question about the assignment, and I'd like to share it with you.


> Hi. I'm doing the assignment for the Le Bon reading and I can't find the
> answers to questions 4, 6, 9, 12, and 13. I cannot find anything in the
> reading where Le Bon specifically mentions cities or urban environments.
> What exactly is the professor looking for in these questions?

>>[my reply] You raise an excellent question. Le Bon takes for granted that crowds are things >>that take place in cities. So don't look for specific mentions of city/urban, but merely for the >>content of those questions.

>>If nothing else, rest assured that at least trying to find the right mentions will get you full >>credit on this assignment--


Also--because I'm so busy this quarter I've been getting ahead on our readings. This is great news for you, because I'll be posting reading notes, as I did already for Le Bon/Simmel, for the remainder of the quarter. These notes will also be the basis of our section discussions--again focusing on readings for a given MONDAY--so check this space regularly for updates.

Andrew

Reading Notes for Le Bon & Simmel

Students

First of all I was really excited to hear the level of involvement in lecture yesterday. It looks like things are starting out well for this course, keep up the good work. I'm going to do my best to reciprocate that by staying ahead of the reading load so as to give you some thoughts/questions to help you along the way.

Here are some thoughts to keep in mind when reading Le Bon.

• What is a crowd for Le Bon? What constitutes a “psychological crowd” for Le Bon, as opposed to a mere gathering of people? (2-4)
• What is the "psychological law of mental unity of crowds"? (5)
• What are the 3 key characteristics of organized crowds? (9-11)
• As you read from here on out, keep a running list of the main ways in which Le Bon describes crowds [hint he calls them impulsive on p18]. What do these descriptions have in common?
  
• In your own words, attempt a summary statement of how Le Bon sees city life, or the urban experience, through his theory of crowd behavior.
  
• Le Bon's essay is a excellent example of Prof. Martin's advice to read to understand first, and then criticize. Most notably, Le Bon has some awfully outdated views of gender and race. How do these inform his theory of crowd psychology? What associations does Le Bon make between men and women's psychological states, or Anglo-Saxon vs. Latin?

Simmel is similarly concerned with the mental or psychological effects of metropolitan living, yet offers a contrasting view to Le Bon's conclusions.

**NOTE Simmel can be very difficult to read--skim the first paragraph and concentrate beginning with the bottom line of page 409.

Similar to how you read Le Bon, keep a running list of how Simmel argues that city life affects its residents (esp 410-17)

• What aspects of a person does the city life enhance, and what aspects does city living discourage?
• How are urban psychological traits linked to the "money economy" (411)?
• How does Simmel's view of crowds contrast with Le Bon (418)? What is Simmel's view of urban "freedom"?
• What is the significance of the specialized nature of work in the city? How does that affect individuals?
  

After you come to understand each author's point of view, then develop your own position. Which of these contrasting theories makes sense to you? Or do you disagree with both? Try to commit your thoughts to paper, as these readings are an excellent first opportunity for you to practice laying out an author's argument, and then making your own case. Remember that both of these theories concentrate on human action, that living in the city makes people behave in a particular way.

Section Policies

Students:

My office hours are 2-3pm Monday afternoons at the Grove Cafe, or by appointment.
My email is acheyne@ucsd.edu.

Remember--section attendance is MANDATORY and I need either an:
--legitimate excuse beforehand if you know you will have to miss
--legitimate explanation afterward if something came up and you had to miss

Here's how your 15% section grade breaks down:

• You will receive one-half point for each section attended [plus one-half automatically] for Memorial Day, for a total of 5 points.
• You will receive the remaining 10 points from participation. These will be assigned on the basis of asking or answering questions in section, being active in small group settings, and anything that illustrates to me that you are keeping current with the readings.This class requires participation on your part, so I expect you to have done the readings before class. Even if you don't understand it--or hate it--spend the time so that section can be a productive time for you and me. Remember, much of this course grade will be EASY to earn, the challenge will be on your own to put in the effort to read these texts.
  

Finally, remember that most sections will focus half on reviewing what we've done in the past week, and half on what has been assigned for that Monday. For the next two weeks, that means we will be focusing on Gustave Le Bon, and then Louis Wirth's essays.

Again, look for me to post comments on them in this space, and when you're added as an author, please feel free to contribute as well.


Have a great day, and I'll see you in class.
Andrew

Greetings and Welcome

Students:

Hello and welcome to USP3, The City and Social Theory. I'll be posting thoughts about the class readings, assignments, and so forth here. I'll also add you soon as an author so you can ask questions and post things here as well.



Here is a cut and pasted version of the syllabus. I apologize for the formatting but please get a clean copy from Prof. Martin if you do not have one yet.


Prof. Isaac Martin Spring 2009
469 Social Sciences Building MWF 10:00-10:50
Phone: x4-5589 Center Hall 214
Office Hours: M, T 4:00-5:00 PM

URBAN STUDIES AND PLANNING 3:
THE CITY AND SOCIAL THEORY

This is a course in how to read social theory, with a focus on theories of the city. Social theory
emerged in rapidly urbanizing societies, and the first social theorists were people who watched
firsthand as rural life was transformed by the growth of cities. They were theorists because they asked
what this transformation meant for human social life, and because because they tried to come up with
answers that were more abstract than the history of any particular city or society; that were reasonably
complete in the sense that their assumptions were explicit; and that were logically consistent.

Every urbanizing society has had its social theorists. We will focus on the tradition of modern
European and American social theory, with an emphasis on the last 120 years or so. By the end of the
course, you will know a lot about the social theories that are foundational in contemporary urban
studies as that subject is taught in American universities. You will also have new skills for reading and
understanding difficult theoretical texts. And you will see the city around you differently.

The readings are arranged roughly in order of scale, beginning with the effects of urban life on the
fleeting experiences of the individual city-dweller, and concluding with the permanent effects of
urbanization on the planet as a whole.

Requirements

You are expected to attend all lectures, to do the reading on time, and to come to class prepared to
discuss the reading. You are also expected to comply with the section attendance and participation
policies of your TA.

Because this is a course in reading social theory, the most important and most distinctive requirement
for this course will be a series of eight short, weekly reading reflection assignments. These assignments
are designed to achieve two purposes: (1) to keep you on track with the readings and (2) to provoke
careful and critical reading. These assignments will vary. Some of these assignments involve short-
answer queries. Others involve writing assignments of at most 2-3 paragraphs.

The reading reflection assignments will be handed out or presented orally in lecture, and the due dates
will be announced, at least three full days before they are due. This means you need to come to lecture
regularly to get the assignments. One reading reflection assignment will be due every week beginning
in week 2 and ending in week 9. Each is worth five points, and the grading rubric is simple: you will
receive full credit (5 points) if you complete the assignment on time; you will receive zero credit if you
do not complete the assignment on time, or if you turn in work that is copied or faked or obviously
half-hearted.

You are required to complete seven of the eight reading reflection assignments, for a total of 35 points
toward your final grade. These reading reflection assignments comprise the greatest part of your course
grade. If—and only if—you keep up with the scheduled readings, these assignments should also be the
easiest part of your grade.
Prof. Martin – The City and Social Theory 2

The grade will be based on the following:
• Section attendance and participation (15%)
• Reading reflection assignments (35%)
• A final exam (cumulative) on Monday, June 8 (25%)
• A short final paper of no more than 5 double-spaced pages, due on Friday, June 5 (25%)

The dates of the lectures and midterm exams are subject to change. Any changes to the schedule of
exams or lectures will be announced in class.


Schedule of topics and required readings

WEEK 1. THE PLACE OF THE CITY IN SOCIAL THEORY
We will use a classic theoretical essay in urban sociology to introduce the themes of the course, and to
practice analyzing theoretical arguments.

Required For Wed., April 1:
Ferdinand Tönnies. 2001 (orig. 1887). Community and Civil Society. Edited by Jose Harris. Translated
by Jose Harris and Margaret Hollis. New York: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 17-19, 27-29,
52-54, 247-261.

WEEK 2. THE METROPOLIS AND MENTAL LIFE
The city is a population cluster—a lot of strangers living very close together. This is still a new way of
living for human beings. The rapid growth of cities in Europe at the end of the nineteenth century led
many scientists to propose new theories of how urban living affected the behavior of individual
humans. We will treat these theories as an occasion to discuss the theory of individual action.

Required for Mon., April 6:
Gustave Le Bon. 1896. The Crowd: A Study in the Popular Mind. New York: MacMillan. Pp. 1-69.

Required for Wed., April 8:
Georg Simmel. 1950 (orig. 1902). “The Metropolis and Mental Life.” Pp. 409-424 in The Sociology of
Georg Simmel. Edited and translated by Kurt Wolff. New York: The Free Press.

WEEK 3. COMMUNITIES AND SUBCULTURES
Do cities have their own cultures? We will review a mid-twentieth century debate about cities in order
to discuss a debate about the nature of society.

Required for Mon, April 13:
Louis Wirth. 1938. “Urbanism as a Way of Life.” American Journal of Sociology 44(1): 1-24.

Required for Wed., April 15:
Herbert Gans. 1994 (orig. 1961). “Urbanism and Suburbanism as Ways of Life: A Reevaluation of
Definitions.” Pp. 170-195 in Metropolis: Center and Symbol of Our Times. Edited by Philip
Kasinitz. New York: New York University Press.


Prof. Martin – The City and Social Theory 3
Required for Fri., April 17:
Claude Fischer. 1975. “Toward a Subcultural Theory of Urbanism.” American Journal of Sociology 80
(6): 1319-1341.

WEEK 4. ZONES, ENCLAVES, AND GHETTOS
The city is a spatial order in which some people are brought together and others kept apart. We will
review debates about how this spatial order arises, and we will use these debates as an occasion to
discuss some different theories of social order in general.

Required for Mon, April 20:
Harvey W. Zorbaugh. 1926. “The Natural Areas of the City.” Pp. 217-229 in The Urban Community.
Edited by Ernest W. Burgess. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Required for Wed., April 22:
Thomas C. Schelling. 1972. “A Process of Residential Segregation: Neighborhood Tipping.” Pp. 157-
184 in Racial Discrimination in Economic Life. Edited by Anthony H. Pascal. Lexington,
Mass.: Lexington Books.

Required for Fri., April 24:
Loïc Wacquant. 2007. “Territorial Stigmatization in the Age of Advanced Marginality.” Thesis Eleven
91: 66-77.

WEEK 5. LOCAL DEMOCRACY
The city is also a self-governing unit. We will look at some theories of how cities govern themselves in
the United States, and we will pose some general questions about the quality of city-level democracy.

Required for Mon., April 27:
Charles M. Tiebout. 1956. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.” The Journal of Political Economy
64 (5): 416-426.

Required for Wed., April 29:
Harvey Molotch. 1976. “The City as a Growth Machine.” American Journal of Sociology 82 (2): 309-
332.

Required for Fri., May 1:
J. Eric Oliver. 2001. “The Rise of a Suburban Demos.” Pp. 1-32 in Democracy in Suburbia. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.

WEEK 6. CITIES AND STATES
Cities are also centers of political power: every state in the history of the world has had its capital.
Why? We will use some classic readings here to discuss theories of the state.

Required for Mon., May 4: Max Weber. 1966 (orig. 1923). “Citizenship.” Pp. 233-249 in General
Economic History. Translated by Frank H. Knight. New York: Collier.

Required for Weds., May 6: Paul Peterson. 1981. “The Interests of the Limited City.” Pp. 17-38 in City
Limits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Prof. Martin – The City and Social Theory 4
WEEK 7. CITIES UNDER CAPITALISM
A city is an immense concentration of wealth, as well as a center of production and of exchange. We
will look at theories of how these great concentrations of economic activity arise, in order to pose a
more general question about the driving forces of social change.

Required for Mon., May 11: Edward Ullman. 1941. “A Theory of Location for Cities.” American
Journal of Sociology 46 (6): 853-864. [NB. An informal and math-free introduction to central
place theory, which might otherwise bee too technical for an introductory USP class.]

Required for Wed., May 13: David Harvey. 2008. “The Right to the City.” New Left Review 53: 23-40.

WEEK 8. THE GLOBAL CITY
Thanks to technologies for communication and transportation, humans can interact with each other
over greater distances today than ever before. Is it possible that cities as distant as London and Tokyo
are now so connected that they are in some sense a single city? We will be discussing the limits of the
concept of the city—and also the boundaries of other social entities.

Required for Mon., May 18: John Friedmann. 1986. “The World City Hypothesis.” Development and
Change 17 (1): 69-83.

Required for Wed., May 20: Saskia Sassen. 2001. The Global City, Second Edition. Princeton:
Princeton University Press. Pp. xvii-xxiii, 345-363.

WEEK 9. THE CITY AS A NORMATIVE IDEAL
Cities are many things, but are they good? We will consider whether the city, as a human institution
subject to moral evaluation, is to be celebrated or condemned.

No class Mon., May 25.

Required for Wed., May 27: Iris Marion Young. 1990. “City Life and Difference.” Pp. 226-256 in
Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

WEEK 10. THE CITY OF THE FUTURE
Social theory is not only about explaining the world as we find it: it is also about explaining how we
might bring about the world as it could be. We will examine two very different visions of the desirable
urban future—both of which were called “new urbanism”—in order to pose some questions about the
relationship between theory and practice.

Required for Mon., June 1:

Ivan Chtcheglov. 2006 (orig. 1953). “Formulary for a New Urbanism.” Translated by Ken Knabb.
http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/Chtcheglov.htm

Required for Wed., June 3:

Douglas Kelbaugh. 1997. “The New Urbanism.” Pp. 111-138 in Common Place: Toward
Neighborhood and Regional Design. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

FINAL PAPER DUE FRIDAY JUNE 5

FINAL EXAM MONDAY JUNE 8