Rebel Cities-- A Stagnant Revolution?

Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution examines the urban city as both a revolutionary landscape and a pseudo-utopia, where social and political dynamics are constantly at play in altering the space of the city itself.  Throughout the book, author David Harvey attempts to deconstruct the illusion of the city-as-utopia, and instead explores the overlapping social and political dynamics that make the city itself a space of capitalist accumulation and political impotency.  In regards to cities of the “golden era” Harvey states, “The traditional city has been killed by rampant capitalist development, a victim of never-ending need to dispose of over accumulating capital driving endless urban growth no matter what the social, environmental, or political consequences” (xv).  The implication here is that a once socially and politically active place, the city has fallen into a state of disrepair, in which its inhabitants’ primary interests are the maintenance and consumption of rampant capitalism.  The result of this new capitalist driven environment is ultimately, “[…]A totally different kind of city [made] out of the disgusting mess of a globalizing, urbanizing capital run amok” (xvi).  Ultimately, Harvey illustrates how the space of the urban city has declined from a politically charged site of social organization and changes to a complacent, politically stagnant shadow of its former self. 

While Harvey maintains that within the city there is still, “[…A]n impulse towards and longing for its restoration.” (xvii), he calls its restoration into doubt when he states that, “Any spontaneous alternative visionary moment is fleeting; if it is not seized at the flood, it will surely pass” (xvii).  The reasons for this, according to Harvey, are many—spanning from the capitalists’ grasp over the urban city to the apathy and lack of social awareness among youths and adults.  Are we really failures at changing the world we live in?  Are the days of grassroots social activism and citizen lead reform truly over?  The idea irked me to begin with, but what irked me even more was my immediate inclination to side with Harvey.  And that just opened up the floodgates, because I really, really do not want to side with Harvey.

For reasons I can’t quite explain, I have always been fairly obsessed with the idea of living in a large city because I always envisioned them to be diverse political and social spaces where residents could organize and enact a social revolution.  Another reason that Harvey’s statement bothered me (aside from the obvious ‘big picture’ reasons why it should bother me) is that I always had a bit of a fantasy that I was born in the wrong era, like I should have been a hippie in the 1960’s protesting the war and the economy and all of the other life-altering political and social issues that were going on at the time.  I wanted that since I was a kid, since long before I knew just what those issues actually were, simply because I have always had that sort of passion in me.  Harvey made me feel like I had completely and totally missed my chance to be a part of that kind of movement, which saddened me for reasons that surpass even my academic interests.  And I didn’t want to believe it, so I went in search of counter example of contemporary urban social movements that have had some kind of discernable impact on the world today.  

The urban monster and the citizen: Monstro Chamado Cidade.  The city is regarded as the monster, threatening the individual.  Notice the high rise buildings equivalent to the monster's teeth.  This piece is found somewhere in between Vila Madalena and Pacaembu and Sao Paolo. 

"Money Kills Culture"

A modest proposal?

Maybe organized social change has halted, for the moment, but even if that’s the case, we still see individuals persisting towards making their message heard.  I though that graffiti/street art was an interesting social practice to parallel with Harvey’s comments and the space of the city itself.  What struck me about street art was the fact that no one owns it—the canvas is virtually always “borrowed”, or more harshly stolen from the property owner to display their work.  The images I’ve included here specifically target capitalism within the space of the city.  Not only are these images rebellions against capitalisms’ message (compliance, consumerism, commercialism), they are also a rebellion against capitalisms’ purpose (ownership and maintenance).  And so, like a true urban optimist, I am far more inclined to believe that what Harvey points out in Rebel Cities is a deferral of restoration of the city, which needs to be remedied, but not an abandonment of the cause.