Robert Moses as a Controversial Figure

Robert Moses represents a significant and controversial figure in New York City’s history. He represents a man who was pivotal in creating the layout and outlook of the city as it is today, as well as a man who worked to bring his vision to reality without care for those who served as collateral damage. In Hilary Ballon and Kenneth Jackson’s Robert Moses and the Transformation of New York, Moses and his plans for the city were discussed and debated, outlining the goals he wanted to achieve and how he achieved them. Moses advocated for complete urban redevelopment, leading the largest slum clearance program in the 1950s (Ballon 94). In doing so, he aimed to bring back the middle class with affordable housing to reduce the polarization between the two extremes of the social class spectrum, to establish New York as a center of higher education by making land available for university expansion, and to elevate the status of the city in the nation and the world through installations of different “world-class cultural institutions” (Ballon 106). Finally, he wanted to create expressways throughout the city as a more efficient way of traveling through automobile rather than the “ancient relic” of the public transport system (Jackson 68-69). He argued that the city was built “by and for traffic” (Fishman 125). From his perspective, the city needed to be redeveloped in order to make it more efficient and uniform, as well as to create a center of success and culture known across the globe.

Unfortunately, his grand vision was set into motion with an extensive amount of collateral damage in the form of the people who were displaced from their homes in the “slums” that were cleared, and the people who were discriminated against for their race and social class. To allow for the land needed for his city vision, Moses removed these people from their homes to relocate them with little care for what happened to them (Ballon 102). As he completed his projects, the people who were able to afford replacement housing was only about 11.4% of the people who were displaced (Ballon 102), and the patterns of replacement housing for these people enforced segregation with the least desirable areas being given to African American New Yorkers (Biondi 120).

In the article, “A Sculptor Grapples with Robert Moses’ Brutal Urbanism,” artist and sculptor, Lena Henke, discussed her art pieces and her inspiration from Robert Moses and the story of Dead Horse Bay. Dead Horse Bay on Barren Island served as a landfill, in which Moses trucked all of the leftover garbage and objects left behind by people who were displaced. They were buried into the sand and abandoned. The shoreline is still covered in waste, bottles, old toys, car parts, newspapers and other pieces of forgotten property that leech into the waters surrounding it (Bliss). The bay represents all of the negative aspects of Robert Moses and his lack of regard for the people who were displaced and devastated by his projects. Lena Henke took some objects found on the shores and created art pieces out of them, manipulating containers and bottles to form models of architecture and transportation, inspired from the story of Moses and the bay (Bliss). In my interpretation of her artwork, I believe she shows the message that Moses built his magnificent projects through the sacrifices of the people whose possessions were buried into the sands of Dead Horse Bay. Moses represents a figure of controversy in how he is perceived through his role in history and the consequences of his actions, and her artwork allows for us to question how he should be seen as a figure.

With these conflicting ideals of who Robert Moses was, it became difficult to decide on how to understand him, whether he should be revered or condemned for the strikingly contrasting results of his projects. In my opinion, there is no doubt that his work represents an important part of our history, and the institutions he built in the city play a significant role in New York’s culture today. He was able to accomplish many of his goals for the city through determination and efficiency in a very short amount of time. However, the consequences of his actions have not been forgotten through places like Dead Horse Bay, in which artists have utilized the story of those who suffered from his ambition to create art pieces and exhibitions in history museums. I believe it is important to remember that the city is a place to live, where people have settled down, worked, traveled, and created a culture of their own, separate from the rest of the world. As Jane Jacobs had said, the city is better described as “by and for the neighborhood,” meaning that the diversity and unity of the people make up the city, and therefore they should remain a priority in the minds of the people that want to transform their homes (Fishman 129). If only the city could enact all the repairs and changes actually needed by the people, without displacing them, with as much efficiency as Robert Moses, there may be a possibility that a balance between helping the people and helping the development of the city can be achieved in everyone’s benefit.