Personally, I found the writing by Jen Jacobs rather dry and boring. It seemed more like a long list of figures and isolated accounts rather than a flowing narrative, which conveyed the point that was trying to be made by the passage. What I did find interesting about the entire writing though was the view that Jacobs took to the concept of safety on the streets of major cities. I personally always thought that the only way to lower crime in a city was to increase the police coverage of any particular area (this is of course from news reports I’ve seen living in the outskirts of Philly as well as my own personal experience in Sim City… just kidding.) The entire concept that the safety of the streets is enhanced by crowded areas and constant traffic seems counterintuitive when you look at the clichéd crimes in major cities, like pick pocketing, but in reality, when one really thinks about it, is the better way to watch the streets. Having a bust street encourages bystanders as well as people in their homes and businesses watching the streets, as Jacobs pointed out in the story of the old man and the little girl, and can help to stem a tide of crime in any major city.
On the other hand Murphy Davis’ piece on Woodruff Park seemed to have more of an impact simply because of that fact that it was written from a more emotional and subjective standpoint, establishing the idea that it is better to have a well transverse and sociable setting than some kind of sterile environment in the middle of a city that draws people away. This passage brought up an idea that I never would have thought of either, that the city of Atlanta and those responsible for its planning seem more interested in a sterile city, inhabitable to the homeless, than they do in creating an environment which encourages people to spend time outside in the city.
The thing that I found very interesting with these two passages is that the two authors’ views seem to complement each other perfectly. On one hand, you have Davis’ piece about how it would be far more desirable to create an urban environment which is naturally beautiful and encourages people to not just spend time in it, but to actually s inhabit that space. Then you have Jacob’s piece about how an areas, which encourages people to inhabit the space, will create a safer and more pleasant environment in any city. I now understand why we read both of these passages at the same time. Even though they were thematically and stylistically different from each other, their concepts complemented each other and created an overarching concept of what public space construction can convey a message as well as benefit the people that inhabit that space.
No comments:
Post a Comment