The Geography of Nowhere: The Rise and Decline of America's Man-Made Landscape

I am a great fan of the writings of James Kunstler. That is not to say I totally agree with his point of view. However, suburban development in the US is something in dire need of challenge, and Kunstler is the one who stepped up and make that critique, and did a good job of it. Having enjoyed his recent writings, I never had read this earlier book, and I now finally have read it, and found it very enjoyable. I think the one main weak point in Kunstler's writings, and I already felt this way before having read this book, and this book is consistent with that view, is his tendency to muddle aesthetics and economics. I would say he has two key assertions: 1). The suburban style of development which dominates in the US is extremely ugly 2). That style of development is economically unsustainable In general I always get the feeling that he views those two as one and the same. And he does make a good case that there is a considerable tie-in between the two. However, I do believe that in some cases what is ugly is not necessarily economically unsustainable. Let us take a central example of what he finds nonviable- the heavy reliance on the automobile for transportation. In his recent writings, he has been extremely dismissive of the potential for society to continue to rely heavily on automobiles. I believe in Peak Oil and I do believe that fossil-fuel based automobiles do not have a long-term future. What about cars that run on alternative energy? I believe Kunstler tends to be too quick to dismiss that possibility based on his aesthetic objection to an auto-based culture. I do believe that it is quite possible that new generations of automobiles may have much less capability than current ones, however. I think probably the "worst case for the car" is that most people in the US will have something along the lines of a motorized golf cart. Certainly electric cars will at least be able to provide that level of functionality, in my view. In that case, I would expect that Kunstler may be wrong that communities in the future must be designed on a scale that walking can be the primary mode of transportation. With golf cart-style tranpsortation, communities could be spread out somewhat further. However, they would still have to be far more compact than the current suburban pattern of development. In other words, I could imagine future communities being somewhere in-between what we have now and what Kunstler envisions. Another area where I think Kunstler somewhat muddies the waters between esthetics and economics is in architecture. His comments on architecture strongly focus on his view that design needs to intelligently integrate the building with the surroundings. He makes a compelling case as to the aesthetic poverty of current architecture which is oblivious to this, and the fact that current architecture stymies the creation of public places that allow a healthy interaction between citizens in a community. He makes a less compelling case in my view, however, in linking ugly contemporary architecture to economic unsustainability. Clearly his critique of parking lot-centric architecture does provide a clear link between aesthetics and sustainability. His critique of specific features of the design of individual buildings, however, I believe often are strongly rooted in aesthetics and aren't necessarily too germane to sustainability. ----- In summary: Our suburban approach to land-use is something that was in desperate need of criticism. Kunstler is the one who stepped up and made that critique, and did so in a powerful and entertaining manner. Consequently, this book is an extremely important contribution to a reasoned debate about where our society should be headed.

My first intro to Kunstler was watching his equally informative speech on Americas urban design nightmares on You.Tube TED talks. He made a strong case as to why the suburbs are so pat ethic and American architecture can be cruel to the people it's supposed to serve. This book was a marvel to read also because it was written over twenty years ago and is still dead on in its analysis. Post 2008 recession who could argue credibly otherwise? My hope is that millennials will wake up and break the cycle of suburban home buying. My awakening began in the early 2000 when I got a job working housing construction then later landscaping and later again installing storm doors and windows. Entire suburban neighbourhoods throughout the Midwest are essentially empty and lack any character or soul. There is no community, and no one is around except on weekends. It,s a social and economic disaster. Everyone just works or stays inside getting fatter, more diabetic, and watching their TVs endlessly. It,s time for an overhaul. Washington, D.C., NY, and Portland hopefully are leading the way. The future of urban design will about creating the framework for organically grown towns, cities, and communities. The suburbs are death and dying.

This is a book that details how America came to have giant suburbs where there’s no third space and everyone is distant from each other with no community for children, teens, or adults to congregate and really connect with each other. There is reflection on his time growing up in the suburbs, how it differed from his time in the city, and what he felt when he came to a more natural town that had grown instead of cultivated by profit margins. I think the Lebanon thing is what turned me against the book. Because I live in New Hampshire, and listen, I think suburbs are bullshit too, but I can assure you that teenagers are doing plenty of drugs and rotting in their homes in these “more ideal” towns, and we also lack a lot of the old community. That said, there are things we have within walking distance to do, and he had some interesting points. To why New England towns actually have these more natural towns with a city center, places to congregate, and generally just be around. To the cities that people wanted to escape due to smell, sound, and just unsanitary living. The people who were catered to were naturally the rich. If not the most wealthy, then those with enough money to buy houses in what architects saw as efficient housing that allowed for cars to comfortably navigate. This author has a lot to say about how architecture changed especially in the Modern era. About what happened once cars were not just invented but then became a commodity everyone needed, even more than they needed houses. Which, in New England you need cars usually as well. I live in a small town. There are only so many jobs in a walking or biking distance. One of my jobs is in walking distance, but the one that does make money is a twenty-minute drive and that’s the one I love. Anyway, I actually think the reason I was so critical of this book because there’s more I can complain about, is mostly because I was in a bad mood myself. It made the authors very distinct voice come across as… well, I felt like I was getting defensive over a thing I had no reason to get defensive over. So I’ll try to read this again, much later, but for now my review is: very informative, a little rose-tinted glasses over the past, and I’m in a book bad mood.

A terrific book and sobering reminder of how easily our enthusiasms can overwhelm us. While I agree that the dominance of the car in modern life has led to a situation that is unsustainable, it is hard to see how it will be fixed in a sensible way. Not everyone will agree that the suburban way of life is so bleak compared to the way things were a few decades ago because most are too young to know and accept the mess that modern urban life is as normal. The writer describes the growth of the US and how land use, architecture, building methods and technology have brought the US to a position where the cost of the built infrastructure has become overwhelming to maintain and how the resulting destruction of real communities has enormous costs too. He explains how things came to be in such beautiful lucid sentences. I know of few other writers who can explain things so well but with a cutting edge of irony and not without humour.

About a decade ago, James Kunstler gave one of the most engaging, intelligent, witty, impassioned, subtle, and also sweary TED talks I've ever seen. He's never been invited back. About a decade and a half before that, he wrote the Geography of Nowhere. The book swings between chapters offering careful historical analysis of the factors which led to the development of modern North American sprawl, and chapters bristling with the biting sarcasm and fomentation seen in the talk. As long as this oscillation in style is chalked up as a genuine expression of the author's feelings as well as thoughts, rather than a flaw or inconsistency, then the reader is unlikely to be disappointed with the book, if not the urban environment it so accurately and painfully describes.

A fundamental book on suburban phenomenon in US context.

The book was delivered even before the estimated time. It's a good reading for all those who are curious to understand why North America landscape and architecture has been built the way it is: the bad historical decisions, the bad political decisions, and the psychology that is affecting major metropolis and the social aspects of suburbia. It's a must read for all those in the field of architecture, design, and urbanistic. James Kunstler writes the truth on topics that affects society with the era of the exploit of cheap oil and the drive-through lifestyle it has spawned.

Great read. Led me to other dorks of JHK, loved every single one.