The City Beautiful Movement vs Henry David Thoreau - Case Study Example

The Beautiful Movement vs. Henry David Thoreau Introduction At the onset of the 20th century, when America’s urbanization was being accelerated by the boom of the Industrial age, urban planning took an interesting turn. The American population was expanding fast and most people were moving to the cities, making them congested and complicating the context of urban planning. However, a group of intellectuals, artists and writers known as the “transcendentalists” emerged, led by Ralph Waldo Emerson. Their role in urban planning was to sensitize America on nurturing the environment which was being threatened by urbanization. Their success was significant. Henry David Thoreau was one of the transcendentalists, and his influence sufficed during the Romantic Period. A little later, after the Romantic Period was born, the City Beautiful Movement was born. These two, apart from existing in almost similar time contexts, were common in that they pointed at nature as an integral element necessary in America’s emerging urban planning. In this study, Henry David Thoreau, representing the Romantic Movement, will be compared to the City Beautiful Movement with regards to their differences and similarities in defining America’s urban planning. The Romantic Movement emerged at the end of the 18th century and is said to have been a reaction to scientific rationalization of nature, the Age of Enlightment, aristocratic norms, and specifically for this study; the Industrial revolution (Rodwell, 2008). The movement sought to create awareness of nurturing nature as an important part of man which, if he related with closely, life [in the cities] would be more bearable. Thoreau as a key icon in this movement had lived his entire life relating closely with nature, and sought to extend the benefits he had realized with the world through the Romanticism. Concisely, Thoreau transformed urban planning into more of recreation and conservation than it was rural and estate design (Jackson, n.d.). Similar to Thoreau, the city Beautiful movement of the late 18th century was born to advocate for a reform in the philosophies of American urban planning and architecture. It was originally affiliated to Washington DC, Detroit, Cleveland and Chicago, but was later spread across America (Schuyler, n.d.). Although its key objectives were monumental grandeur and beautification, the movement perceived of beautification through nature as an effective way of promoting social harmony as well as simplifying and improving the quality of human life (Burnham & Bennett, 1909). This movement was first elaborated in 1893 at the World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago by architect Daniel Burnham. It was its first large-scale elaboration (Miller, 2013). As a Romantic, Thoreau worshipped nature and believed that man was naturally good, and that in a state of nature, man would be at peace (Myerson, 1995). Again, he believed that the corruption of man’s good was caused by civilization in which urbanization is part of. Concisely, the Romantic Period believed that by nurturing nature, man could revert to his natural goodness. Corruption in this case pointed at the blind eye offered to the environment at the end of the 18th century as urbanization set in. The disappearance of nature as Thoreau implied, made humans vulnerable to social disorder and bad quality of life. On the other hand, the City Beautiful Movement advocated for beauty as the key element in urban design and architecture. Beauty, the movement argued, would not only be an attractive sight, but a source of civic and moral virtues. In short, the movement implied that beautification through nature would promote harmony in human societies and also improve the quality of life (Riddell, 2008). The underlying belief here was that lack of [natural] beautification was the cause of most ills in society as well as the deteriorating quality of urban living. Chicago’s state at the end of the 18th century is the binding factor in that it is possible that these reforms were perceived of as necessary because of it. Urbanization had transformed Chicago into an unpleasant place where life was hasty, it was crammed, animals and people shared paths, and natural air was substituted by smoke. As Miller (n.d.)defines it, “…Oh! What an awful city.” In this grotesque portrayal of Chicago, both movements justified their advocacy for reforms in urban design and architecture. To support these Frederich Olmsted’s principles of design in which he perceived nature as possessing restorative powers. He sought to “incorporate countryside settings into urban settings as a reprieve from urban living” (Esparza & McPherson, 2009). After the Chicago fire which was blamed on poor planning, Chicago was rebuilt as per the advocacy of both movements. Nature was considered, such as waterways and unobstructed air flow (Melosi, 2008). Social change was evident in that Chicago no longer acted as a business cum residential area; rather, the planning was done such that people would work in Chicago then retire to other towns or cities for the night. This amounted to social change. Spatial reorganization was also done with adherence to beauty and nature. P. D. Armour and G.F. Swift, meat packers, redesigned the famous “mechanization of death” which was a slaughter yard. Prior to their reforms, the slaughter yard handled its activities with confusion and much waste. However, after the reformation, the yard could hold more capacities of animals than before, the design channeled the animals to the slaughtering machine easily and collectively, the mechanization of death became more hygienic, more productive, and spacious (Jackson, n.d.). In this case, spatial change had been enforced than to Thoreau’s Romantic Period and the City Beautiful Movement. In 1901, Charles McKim, Frederick Olmsted, and Daniel Burnham got a chance to showcase the City Beautiful Movement’s way of employing designs and plans to support their vision. They were appointed by a committee formed by congress to consider replanning the mall (William, 1901& Henry, 1909). They came up with the 1902 Mc Millan Plan which substituted some buildings in the mall area with roman classic structures which resembled the Washington monument, the U.S. Capitol, and the White House grandeur (Foglesong, 2014). The Mc Millan plan represented the large-scale rational planning model employed by designers and architects in the City Beautiful Movement. In Washington’s planning, nature and beauty were also integral factors employed in addition to settlement nodes, pathways, avenues, docks, bridges, and all other elements of urban design. As is Pierre Charles L’Enfant stated while proposing a plan for the Washington, DC, “… a direct and large avenue… with a middle way paved for heavy carriages and a walk on each side planted with rows of trees” (Reps, 1967). In both cases, the similarity suffices in that the elements such as nature advocated for by the two movements were evidently considered, and again, large-scale planning models were employed in both cases (Fabos, 1973). In a nutshell, both Thoreau’s Romantic Movement and the City Beautiful Movement advocated for similar elements, and both applied large-scale rational models of planning. Conclusion As the study shows, urbanization influenced the transcendentalists who comprised of intellectuals, artists and writers into advocating for different methods of urban planning. As urbanization was expanding, nature was being ignored, and the transcendentalists emerged, creating awareness that nature was a determinant of human peace and quality of life. Out of such ideologies, movements such as the Romantic and City Beautiful grew and went on to influence America’s future in urban design and architecture. As the results show, they were successful because Congress appointed planners from the City Beautiful Movement (Frederick Olmsted and Daniel Burnham) in replanning the mall, thus the birth of the Mc Millan Plan. Additionally, the two movements are seen to have played almost similar roles in influencing large-scale rational planning models and the beautification using nature. As such, the beauty and efficacy of urban planning as seen in major U.S. cities such as Washington, Chicago and Cleveland can be attributed to the two movements. References Burnham, D, & Bennett, E. (1909).Plan of Chicago Prepared under the Direction of the Commercial Club during the Years 1906, 1907, and 1908. The Commercial Club. Esparza, A., & McPherson, G. (2009).The Planner’s Guide to Natural Resource Conservation: The Science of Land Development beyond the Metropolitan Fringe. Springer. Fabos, J. (1973). Metropolitan Landscape Planning Model (METLAND.University of Massachusetts. Foglesong, R. (2014). Planning the Capitalist city: The Colonial Era to the 1920s.Princetown University Press. Henry, M. (1909).“The Rebuilding of the National Capital.”American City 1(1), 3-13. Jackson. “American Space: Chicago in The Midwest.” Jackson. “Jefferson, Thoreau & After in Landscapes.” Melosi, M. (2008).The Sanitary city: Environmental Services in Urban America. University of Pittsburg. Miller, C. (2013). Atlas of US and Canadian Environmental History.Routledge. Miller.“The Astonishing Chicago in City of the Century.” Myerson, J. (1995). The Cambridge Companion to Henry David Thoreau.Cambridge University Press. Reps, J. (1967).Monumental Washington: The Planning and Development of the Capital Center. Princetown University Press. Riddell, R. (2008). Sustainable Urban Planning: Tipping the Balance. John Wiley & Sons. Rodwell, D. (2008). Conservation and Sustainability in Historic Cities.John Wiley & Sons. Schuyler. “Last Words About the World’s Fair in American Architecture.” William, V. (1901).Celebration of the One Hundredth Anniversary of the Establishment of the Seat of Government in the District of Columbia. Government Printing Office, Columbia. Read More