High Country News Feature
New Urbanism Irks Even Green Westerners
Many of us still long for wide, open spaces.By Jackie Wheeler, Guest Writer, 5-17-11
Agritopia image courtesy Flickr user Brandon Hunt.
In my last post, I explored what appear to be conflicting views on what we today call environmental justice in Edward Abbey’s cult classic, Desert Solitaire. The book is fun to assign to my Environmental Rhetoric students because, between the lyrical descriptions of Utah wilderness and the fist-pounding Luddite rants, it’s guaranteed to provoke lively discussions, even among the usually sleepy and stealth-texting back row. The upshot of these conversations, if there is one, is that Abbey’s a tough nut to crack, and his brand of environmental consciousness resists pigeonholing.
We’re certainly not the only ones invoking the ghost of Abbey lately; Michael Branch’s recent High Country News essay memorably related an episode where he and his friends applied the question WWEAD (What Would Ed Abbey Do) to the seductive temptation of dislodging a precariously-perched hillside boulder. The virtuous greenie would “leave only footprints” and feel pretty guilty even about those. Though Abbey was green at heart, Branch implies, he wouldn’t be opposed to shaking things up a bit, “freeing” the boulder, even (perhaps especially) if it infuriated the virtuous.
So in the spirit of Abbey’s cantankerous brand of environmentalism, I’m going to come right out and confess that I’m not completely on board with the whole virtuous New Urbanism thing. I’ve been stewing about this for awhile, but a recent series of posts in Grist, especially this one, which advocates the New Urbanism-friendly plan of abandoning one’s car for a bike and a smart phone, really got me fired up.
To be fair, the New Urbanist idea is eminently sensible and sustainable: Design communities that are walkable and human scale, where all socioeconomic groups can come together and interact, shop, work, live, pla, and worship without long commutes or other unhealthy, expensive barriers. Parks and other green spaces provide Agritopiabalance to the necessary increased density. Despite the name, the idea isn’t new: European villages are partially the inspiration for this model, and European villages are indeed delightful and fun to visit. Many Americans who currently live Old Urbanist or Suburbanist lives obviously long for such an existence, and New Urban developments like Celebration, Florida, and Agritopia in Arizona (Phoenix area) are popular, though debatably accessible to certain parts of the socioeconomic scale. (Also see HCN’s recent story on a New Urbanist development in the Albuquerque suburbs.)
We should embrace New Urbanism, and I’m trying. But it wasn’t so long ago that members of my family fled those picturesque European villages and took up residence in the big wide, open spaces of the West, where life was tough, but success meant your neighbor couldn’t hear your toilet flush and you could plant any kind of tomatoes you wanted to in your garden without getting the approval of the neighborhood committee.
If we want a more environmentally and economically healthy and diverse society, then New Urbanism is probably the way to go, but I say this with a sigh. The dreams of the suburban – and rural—West die hard, and it seems evident that today’s immigrants and less-fortunate folks haven’t given up on them either. Can’t we be sustainable and long for some personal space to call our own?
Dr. Jacqueline Wheeler is the Writing Programs Associate Director at Arizona State University. Her essay originally appeared on the High Country News blog, A Just West.
Agritopia image courtesy Flickr user Brandon Hunt.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Add your comment below
This "New Urbanism", which espouses a utopia where "all socioeconomic groups can come together and interact" actually translates to places where "all middle, upper middle and wealthy socioeconomic groups can come together and interact".
I highly doubt these designers envision the poor being part of the "plan".
Force it as much as you want, but people will always associate themselves with people who are most like them, or who they want to be. It is human nature.
I must respectfully disagree as the previous two individuals have on strong points. Your students are notengaging in any free form ‘’Environmental Rhetoric”. It seems to me that the ''Rhetoric’’ is being driven by example, Professor(s). A ‘fringe’ group should not be referenced as the perfect model.
New Urbanist are far from sensible and a silver bullet answer group for our environment, society, and human existence. Eminently sensible, well, that is laughable Professor. This would lend the idea that New Urbanist philosophy will lead to peace and harmony among all; this is not a laughing matter if you review the violent history of humans. Rather, this is an open offer to direct our Democratic Freedoms to Socialist mechanisms.
My family left Europe for very specific reasons when New York was known as New Amsterdam. My Maternial line had inhabitted North America for thousands of years previous. Europe or Utopia will not be recreated by a group of New Urbanist or whatever they may call themselves to feel better about the destruction they cause. New Urbanist will spend Millions taking long ago stolen Tribal to Farmer lands to build their Egoist-Urban Community. New Urbanist, whatever label they may add, have long robbed Tribal lands and the Indigenous populations of the Southwest.
As they further destroy land availability, actively engage in driving real estate prices beyond the means of the vast majority of the population in most socio-economic classes and demand others live as they do a silent resentment grows in the ‘poor’ communities and logical minds alike.
Yes, I lived in New Mexico and have seen such green communities. I was amazed at the reliance on water lines and hydrocarbons considering it was a supposed eco-friendly community. Interestingly, the ''less fortunate’’ Tribal Pueblo Peoples have far less environmental impact based on poverty alone. Yet, why are Professors not saluting their efforts in carrying water by bucket, going without electricity, or living in homes with dirt floors? Why only focus on the dollar wealth fringe? I take great offense as a American Indian and German American that you would hold high those with resources while ignoring those without; those without who have far less impact upon our environment.