This week for my blog I will be taking a look at Kel Komuro’s trip to Downtown Los Angeles. He posted his exploration to this district last week and touched on some very interesting points while applying concepts we learned in the reading “The Emergence of Postsuburbia: An Introduction” written by Kling,Olin, and Poster. In specific, he thoroughly assesses how the Downtown area exemplifies post suburban spatial organization and appears to be a metropolitan hub for Los Angeles County.
Komuro starts his blog by quoting how downtown is “organized around many distinct, specialized centers rather than a traditional city center surrounded by industrial and residential areas.” I really enjoyed how he clarified this because the spatial organization of Downtown Los Angeles is something that really differentiates L.A. from other cities in America. Chicago for instance contradicts this city layout in the sense that it has very distinct zoning starting with a traditional city center, followed by an industrial zone then panning out into what will eventually end in nice residential suburbs on the outskirts of the city. He then follows’ up on his point by showing pictures of the multiple buildings that could be confused or misunderstood as the “center” of the city. His understanding of downtown’s spatial organization, as well as mine, is best summed up from this quote from our reading “the result of complex and weakly coordinated sets of conscious decisions by private entrepreneurs and many politicians who reflect their interests.” ”This quote from the reading enlightened me on the strong effect private entrepreneurs can have on city planning. To build on what Komuro had started to point out, it seems that what happened to Downtown Los Angeles was the beginning of the post-suburban spatial organization. As the reading stated, people from Downtown Los Angeles were the first to infiltrate and develop what is now Orange County. Orange County’s urban planning is a hallmark example for the influence private entrepreneurs can have on a city’s spatial organization.
The next thing he points out in his blog is the stark difference in the people that hang around Downtown Los Angeles during the day. In specific he emphasized the contrast between these corporate businessmen working inside these skyscrapers and the service men who do all of the maintenance as well as the vast amount of homeless people walking the streets. Every time I have been to downtown I have also noticed a group of very wealthy and very poor people making their “space” in the same “place.” We both agree that this reflects the capitalistic nature of cities.
Next he talks of the consumer culture seen in downtown Los Angeles. He put up some pictures showing the streets full of different places for one to spend their money at. Anything from Jeweler shops to McDonalds as well as multiple forms of advertisements all around. The fact that downtown has so much to offer for the consumer leads him to his next point about how it is a cosmopolitan area. This part of Los Angeles is very dense with a lot of people trying to make a living from all different walks of life. Some of the billboards were written in Korean, Japanese, and Thailand. Clearly, there are multiple cultures in the area and each lifestyle needs to be satisfied thus filling a specialized niche. The effect’s of globalization can be embodied in the multi-cultural society of downtown L.A.
Despite the fact that downtown has so many influences on its culture, Kumuro reports how things did no interpenetrate which I found to be very interesting. He reported how things can be so different and so close to each other yet still maintain a clear level of separation. This aspect of downtown L.A embodies that unique way people fit together functionally in a city.
P.S. Here is the link to the blog I was responding to.
http://kkomuro1005.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment