Critiquing Mike Davis

Having made extensive reference to the work of Mike Davis in this blog, I realise I may come across as heavily sympathetic towards his views. This is not the case and, for the sake of balance, I feel it is important to briefly critique his work and contrast it with the views of some other urban theorists and activists.

Davis’ analysis of Los Angeles in his polemical City of Quartz has been described by Andy Merrifield (2002: 172) as ‘gloom-laden’ and ‘deeply pessimistic’. Immediately Davis’ use of quartz - a diamond-like mineral which sparkles in the sunshine but is also hard and cheap - as a scornful and subjective metaphor for the city warns readers not to take his work too literally. Throughout this piece Davis purely focusses on negative narratives of the city and, as Alan Hunsaker (1992: 506) points out, ‘provides no plan of action or short-term objectives to attack the identified problems’.

This leaves readers with a defeatist view towards the city and its future. It is therefore important to highlight that Davis’ analysis contrasts with the work of many other Marxist urbanists, for example Marshall Berman’s Adventures in Marxism which occasionally ‘spots the positive and empathises with the good little guys as much as raging against the evil big guys’ (Merrifield 2002: 170). Reyner Banham’s Los Angeles: The Architecture of Four Ecologies also offers a far more positive view of the city as he examines the ways Angelenos from all communities relate to its four ‘ecologies’: the beaches, freeways, flatlands and foothills.

Davis’ account of Los Angeles as being fortified and deeply divided has also been undermined by the work of many social activists across the city. One such example, mentioned earlier in this blog, is the Great Wall of Los Angeles. This project not only aimed to raise awareness of the city’s diverse history, but also to bring people together from all communities in its creation and restoration. Since the wall's completion in 1976, 105 other murals have been painted around Los Angeles (SPARC 2016)*. This has brought people from all levels of society together to form a new, city-wide community that transcends traditional social barriers.

For his relentless attack on Los Angeles, Mike Davis has been dubbed an ‘anti-urban’, ‘overly apocalyptic’, ’city-hating socialist’ (Angotti 2006: 961; de Turenne 1998; Merrifield 2002: 171). However, in order to cultivate some positivity in his work and justify my frequent referencing of it, I turn to Hunsaker's (1992: 507) point that City of Quartz also challenges readers ‘to examine their own values and priorities with respect to Los Angeles and the future’. Like many geographers, I fall into temptation to write about the negative, rather than positive aspects of the city. Davis’ work has therefore encouraged me to scratch beneath the surface of this often superficial city, while also underpinning my arguments surrounding what I have found. However, as I hope this and some of my other articles have demonstrated, there is also much cause for optimism in this vibrant, if at times perplexing megalopolis.

*I encourage anyone to explore some of these beautiful pieces here.

References

Angotti, T. (2006) ‘Apocalyptic Anti-Urbanism: Mike Davis and his planet of slums’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30, 4, 961.

Berman, M. (1999) Adventures in Marxism, London: Verso.

de Turenne, V. (1998) ‘Is Mike Davis' Los Angeles all in his head?’ (WWW), San Francisco: Salon (http://www.salon.com/1998/12/07/cov_07feature/; 17 April 2016).

Hunsaker, A. (1992) ‘Book reviews - City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles by Mike Davis’, Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 14. 4, 502.

Merrifield, A. (2002) Metromarxism, New York: Routledge.

SPARC (2016) ‘Neighbourhood Pride’ (WWW), Los Angeles: Social and Public Art Resource Centre (http://sparcinla.org/neighborhood-pride/; 17 April 2016).

Kogi BBQ

While food trucks have been present in the US since the early 20th century, their recent post-recessionary resurgence has made an enormous splash in the gourmet food industry (Lempert 2010). An iconic player in this food revolution is Kogi BBQ. Established in 2008, Kogi prepares and sells Korean/Mexican fusion tacos on the streets of Los Angeles.

Patrons of Kogi BBQ in Abbot Kinney, Venice

At first glance Kogi BBQ appears to capture everything quintessential of Los Angeles: mobility, the boosting and consuming of food culture, and the coming together of different ethnic groups. While also being a delicious combination, the fusion of these two ethnicities is of particular significance in Los Angeles. With Latino workers making up more than half of the employees of Korean-owned businesses in the city and comprising three quarters of Koreatown’s residents, Korean-Latino relations are a socially and economically fundamental aspect of Los Angeles (Gap Min 2013).

Kogi BBQ also brings people together in public spaces, a rare occurrence in Los Angeles. As Mike Davis (1992) argues, the coming together of people has been heavily discouraged by city councils through the reduction and restriction of public spaces.

Unlike its food, however, Kogi does not appear to encourage the mixing of social or ethnic difference amongst its patrons. Rather, it draws in a relatively homogenous crowd who at a superficial level appear to be wealthy members of the city’s middle class. Thus following a visit to the notorious Kogi BBQ, I realised the aspect of Los Angeles it most clearly reflects is the city’s stark class divisions.

It is both Kogi’s prices and choice of locations that I believe both symbolise and encourage these divisions. With tacos costing $2.29 each and burritos starting at $6, Kogi does not offer an affordable alternative to other expensive Korean or Mexican eateries. It therefore only attracts a clientele with greater expendable incomes.

To match its customers, Kogi only frequents wealthier parts of the city (see map below) such as Oakwood, Westwood and Silverlake. It never ventures into poorer neighbourhoods such as Inglewood, Compton and Southgate, and is therefore unable to bridge social and ethnic gaps in the city like it does in its food.

Kogi BBQ's planned locations for the next week on a map of median household income in Los Angeles (Kogi 2016)

I find this particularly interesting considering a series of recent posts I wrote discussing how fortification, through a variety of mechanisms, divides people in Los Angeles. Food trucks like Kogi BBQ hold the potential to break down social barriers in Los Angeles by bringing people together to celebrate multi-ethnic culinary delights. However it seems they have had the reverse effect. Instead, trucks like Kogi have gentrified a sector of the food industry which once catered to the blue-collar workers of America’s industrial age. Rather than reflecting Los Angeles as it could be, Kogi BBQ is a startling reminder of Los Angeles as it is: characterised by exclusion and division.

References

Davis, M. (1992) City Of Quartz, London: Verso.

Gap Min, P. (2013) ‘Changes in Korean Immigrants’ Business Patterns’, in P. Gap Min (ed.) Koreans in North America: Their Experiences in the Twenty-First Century, Plymouth: Lexington Books, 57-74.

Kogi BBQ (2016) 'Schedule' (WWW), Los Angeles: Kogi BBQ (http://kogibbq.com; 4 April 2016).

Lempert, P. (2010) ‘Evolution: The Time for Food Trucks Has Arrived!’ (WWW), New York: Supermarket News (http://supermarketnews.com/blog/evolution-time-food-trucks-has-arrived; 3 April 2016).

Fortress UCLA

Following my previous post regarding fortification in Los Angeles, I have become more aware of the ‘militarisation of urban space’ as a mechanism for segregating the city (Davis 1992). I believe that, not unlike the infamously exclusive enclaves of Bel Air and Hidden Hills, UCLA has utilised similar methods to keep ‘undesirable’ people out of its hilly campus.

Like the fortresslike architecture Davis describes in parts of Los Angeles, UCLA tactically employs a wall of tall trees to separate Sunset Boulevard and other access streets from the roads that run through the university. These prevent outsiders from easily entering the campus while also blocking views into it. This creates a private and enclave-like atmosphere both within and outside of UCLA.

The tall wall of trees separating UCLA from surrounding roads 

A rare gap in the trees showing the division between De Neve Drive (inside campus) and Sunset Boulevard (outside)

Similar to the private security forces that guard homes and businesses in the wealthier parts of Los Angeles, UCLA also employs its own police force. UCLAPD patrol the campus in armed and armoured squad cars. They maintain order while also intimidating and on occasion removing unwanted people from the campus.

UC Los Angeles Police squad car

Virtually every corner of UCLA is under constant 24-hour video surveillance. This encourages good behaviour while also warding off outsiders who might cause trouble on campus. In 2009 the Daily Bruin reported the use of over 350 closed-circuit television cameras throughout UCLA’s facilities. This number will have undoubtedly increased significantly since.

One of the many cameras capturing 24-hour surveillance at UCLA

In one of my early blog posts I mentioned that the campus feels like a microcosm within Los Angeles. Unlike the rest of the city UCLA is green, welcoming to pedestrians and features plenty of stunning revivalist buildings. However, while UCLA is undoubtedly a beautiful campus, I would argue that it has also utilised methods of fortification to exclude and intimidate unwanted outsiders. It has no homeless people, almost no crime, and a disproportionately low number of ethnic minority people compared with the city’s overall demographics. (UCLA 2015; U.S. Census Bureau 2010). This is something Davis also recognises in other fortified areas of the city

In a similar vein to my posts regarding El Niño and the marine layer in Southern California, it has been very interesting to experience a geographical phenomenon I am consecutively studying first hand.

References

Daily Bruin (2009) ‘Security cameras monitor campus’ (WWW), Los Angeles: Daily Bruin (http://dailybruin.com/2009/10/13/security-cameras-monitor-campus/; 3 April 2016).

Davis, M. (1992) City Of Quartz, London: Verso.

UCLA (2015) ‘Enrollment demographics, Fall 2015’ (WWW), Los Angeles: UCLA (http://www.aim.ucla.edu/tables/enrollment_demographics_fall.aspx; 3 April 2016).

U.S. Census Bureau (2010) ‘2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates’ (WWW), Suitland: U.S. Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/06037; 3 April 2016).

Fortification: the next chapter of The Great Wall of Los Angeles

My task for this term’s History M155 (History of Los Angeles) final paper has been to propose a new chapter for The Great Wall of Los Angeles. This chapter, like others that have come before, must represent a historical event, person or phenomenon that has reshaped the city. Drawing on my studies in urban geography, I proposed ‘fortification’. Coined by urban theorist and historian Mike Davis in his polemical 1992 City of Quartz, fortification captures the ‘militarisation of urban space’ in cities like Los Angeles (Davis 1992: 221).

In order to justify my proposal I discussed three processes occurring throughout the city. These were the emergence of gated enclave communities, the securitisation of space, and the use of fortress-like design in Los Angeles architecture. All of these have had a segregating effect in a city which, following civil insurrections such as the Watts Riots of 1965 and the 1992 Los Angeles Riots, no longer appears to encourage the mingling of people in public spaces.

This being a history class, I was required to use primary sources to reinforce my argument. The three sources I chose were an article published in a 1991 issue of the Los Angeles Times (McMillan 1991), the classifieds section of a 1990 issue of the Los Angeles Times (1990), and a photograph taken by Diego Cardoso (1992: 241).

The first of these sources helped to explain how and why gated enclave communities have emerged. It describes the $250,000 installation of eight electronic gates in Whitely Heights, thus demonstrating how neighbourhoods play an active role in sealing themselves off from the rest of the city. The action was justified by residents as a means of controlling ‘crime and traffic’ coming from the nearby Hollywood Bowl area. Leading to a 20% increase in property prices, the article also highlights how gates are more than a physical barrier as they keep lower income residents out.

I used the ‘classifieds’ section of the Los Angeles Times to show how, in 1990, spaces were becoming increasingly fortified through the use of private security services. This particular issue boasts 53 advertisements for private security, more than any other position being promoted in the paper. Beyond the number of advertisements was the impressive variety of services offered, ranging from ‘security guard’ to ‘armoured car crews’ and ‘experienced field supervisor’. Almost all posts offered some sort of ‘armed’ services. This clipping therefore points to the increase in securitisation and thus fortification of public and private space in Los Angeles.

A snippet from the Classifieds section of April 24, 1990 issue of the Los Angeles Times

Finally, a photograph taken by Diego Cardoso illustrates the extent to which architecture in Los Angeles has become a form of fortification. With Frank Gehry at the forefront of this design revolution, Cardoso’s photograph captures the fortress-like nature of Gehry’s Goldwyn Library. Defensively entitled ‘Dirty Harry’s Library’, the photograph depicts an introverted building with high gates, thick concrete walls and a sunken entrance. This impenetrable and unfriendly facade almost entirely resembles a fortress. This particular site is therefore a demonstrative case of fortification in Los Angeles.

'Dirty Harry's Library' by Diego Cardoso (1992)

There are many other aspects of fortification which, for the sake of brevity, I was unable to describe in this essay. It is also important to note that Davis' is not the only narrative of the city. Many other urban theorists and activists, such as Reyner Banham, have written more positively about Los Angeles' layout and its structures. However Davis' work lends itself well to studies that explore more negative aspects of the city's urban design.

References

Cardoso, D. (1992) ‘Dirty Harry’s Library’ in M. Davis City of Quartz, London: Verso, 241.

Davis, M. (1992) City Of Quartz, London: Verso.

McMillan, P. (1991) ‘Affluent Enclave Will Close Gates on the City Neighborhoods’, Los Angeles Times, February 19, 1991.

Los Angeles Times (1990) ‘Classifieds’, Los Angeles Times, April 24, 1990.