Where You Are in the World

North Devon countryside

I have taken a long break from writing since I finished my thesis in June. I will post the intro soon. Here’s to jumping back in…

I have been traveling a lot recently for work. I am noticing more and more the need for better clarity of place in our cities. In England, the urban and rural landscape is unmistakably English. In villages, towns, and cities, the architecture and landscape reflect the local culture and tradition of the place. The beauty of the rural landscape is derived from the agricultural heritage. It is a sometimes understated beauty, which is reflected in the architecture of England. Think of an understated Georgian townhouse in Bath.

The important distinction between city and open countryside was very strong in traditional English development. Also, how a settlement sits in the landscape was always well thought out. The buildings seem to naturally sit within the landscape, which is due in part to the materials used in the buildings. Again think of the Georgian buildings in Bath all made from that rich Bath stone. There is a clear permanence to these buildings. They are now part of the natural landscape of that place. There is an enormous cultural importance to all of this. The people that I have met from these types of places have an enormous pride in their communities. They talk differently about their community. They know how important it is to continue the arc of tradition in their place.

Cornwall

Putney Bridge, Bath

These sometimes nuanced design sensitivities and resulting community and cultural pride are all but completely lost in development in America. Of course England has its share of bad suburban development, but the dominating features of the country are the rich urban areas and the bucolic countryside. America does have beautiful urban areas, though on a much smaller scale relative to suburbia. America is obviously much younger than England. But it is shocking to see how much the newish development dominates. Maybe because it more or less all looks the same. Suburban Columbus, Ohio looks a lot like suburban Tulsa, Oklahoma. I understand that people don’t live in suburbia because it is beautiful. They live there because it has better schools and is perceived to be safer and cheaper.

The side of a highway, anywhere in the US

So traditional land patterns and architecture reflected the local culture and tradition, which grounded people and gave them a sense of pride in their community. What happens to ‘community’ when the land pattern and architecture do not reflect any local culture? These suburbs do have a sense of community around children. Schools, sports and other activities serve as the basis for community. But what happens when a suburb’s children grow up? We can look at earlier generations of suburbs if community persists. Unfortunately suburbia’s inherent inflexibility causes its redundancy every twenty years or so. Small, cape cod homes of 1940s suburbia were out of date by the late 1960s. The 1970s ranch houses were irrelevant by the 1990s. And the oversized 1990s McMansion was made moot by the real estate crash of 2008.

I believe one reason traditional buildings and cities are able to adapt to continue thriving is because they fit into the local natural patterns. Most American suburbs do not. So what follows when a suburb dies? What happens when the whole concept of the car-based suburb dies?

Advertisement