The beginning chapters of Root Shock were in a sense very revealing. The author opened the novel by relating her, in a sense, epiphany of the term root shock. Dr. Fullilove goes on to discuss the effects of urban sprawl and urban renewal. She mainly focuses on root shock, and cites Ebbets Field as an example of root- shock. Afterwards, she focuses on discussing the effects of root- shock in areas like Paris during the Haussman era, and in the United States during the McCarthy era.
I really never thought about urban renewal and sprawl in the terms Dr. Fullilove analysis presented them to be. One can’t help but associate urbanization with progress and development. At the same time, you don’t usually think about all the destruction urbanization can cause. I mean for the buildings to be built, other ones had to be destroyed. Concurrently, many people’s lives were ruined and changed forever. In a sense, the first few chapters really opened my eyes to the whole scope of urbanization. It can really be viewed as a double- edged sword. You can draw a parallel to the manifest destiny. One associates the manifest destiny with America’s prosperity and development, at the same time it caused the destruction of Indian reservations.
I wanted to ask if you think that urban renewal brings more harm than good (vice-versa)?
I also never thought of the urban renewal in this light. I wonder if the people who were proponents for it thought of it also? I see the harm in urban renewal however, Im not sure whether it was a positive or negative thing since there was also good that came out of it.