Historic Contingency in Dolgeville, Los Angeles 1903-1910
The socioeconomic divide in American cities can be better understood through the lens of contingency. At the start of the twentieth century, speculative developers began capitalizing on suburban land. “Manufacturing suburbs” were made possible through the migration of production and labor. Many work...
Saved in:
| In: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/ardeth, |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Language: | Anglais |
| Published: |
Ardeth
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Summary: | The socioeconomic divide in American cities can be better understood through the lens of contingency. At the start of the twentieth century, speculative developers began capitalizing on suburban land. “Manufacturing suburbs” were made possible through the migration of production and labor. Many worker towns have been razed, exemplified by the case of Dolgeville in Los Angeles. Imagined as a workingman’s Eden, Dolgeville was publicized as a socialist failure seven years later. This essay challenges assumptions of failure by exploring contingent affairs which influenced the design of Dolgeville. Worker housing was contingent upon infrastructure and politics, as much as workers’ wages. The geometry of Dolgeville, a financial proposition readily adapted to changes in market demand, was its own contingency plan. Wealthy suburbs with curved streets and landscaped parks remain, while worker towns have been replaced by commerce and industry. |
|---|