In his article, Michael B. Katz offered many good ideas on what is exactly an American city. Moreover, he attempted to trace the development of defining what exactly is an American city. One familiar source Katz brought up was mother of the post-modern image of urban america herself, Jane Jacobs. Jacobs had always advocated a viewpoint of urban spaces which reflected that of a tight knit community, replete with mix commercial and residential land use, pedestrian friendly walkways, ect.

While I agree with many of the ideas proposed by Jane Jacobs, I can’t but think they are somewhat unrealistic. In addition, I feel they tend to dismiss the idea of urban areas as major commercial and business hubs. I do not see there any room for massive sprawling office spaces, ect, which are integral for a city’s success and development. While I believe major industry should be moved as far away as densely populated centers as possible, it would incur a huge transportation issue having them so far away. I think there should be a strong delineation between residential and commercial spaces.

One of there more fascinating elements of Katz’s piece which I enjoyed was the description of geographic-regional elements of American cities. Indeed, with the rise of suburbanization in the 1950s, a city now cannot simply defined which the context of tall skyscrapers and densely populated areas. Many suburbs see themselves as extensions of cities. Growing up on Long Island, I felt this phenomena firsthand. There was always a strong sense that us Long Islanders were indeed part of the New York CIty greater area. Advances in transit continue to bridge the gap between urban and suburban areas.

In his piece, Katz described a dualism between “inner city” and the consumeristic bourgeois areas of a city which are often romanticized and glorified about. The term  “inner city” tends to refer to poverty stricken areas of marginalized racial makeup which have fallen to the wayside with the advent of urban decay. Indeed, income inequality is one of the major forces shaping modern American cities today. This polarization is what often brings about the blatant urban decay which sparked the movements where figures such as Jane Jacobs made their names in.

In all, it is hard to identity exactly what is an American city. Moreover, it is especially more difficult to pinpoint a specific ideal for such a city. In contrast to thinkers such as Jane Jacobs, I believe there should be a stronger segregation between social and cultural life, and business life. WIth greater modernity and technological advances, the concept of an American city has become harder to define and greatly abstracted. Social, political, economic, and cultural forces continue to shape our cities in distinct ways. Even though idea if a uniquely “American” city has seen itself become diminished with increasing globalization.

In here essay titled “The Use of Sidewalks: Safety,” Jacobs offers an interesting analysis on the role of sidewalks in a community. As what is often expected of her, Jacobs offers a rather contrarian view of sidewalks. I find it once again interesting to hear her out on her unconventional viewpoint

When one attempts to associate crime with a public space, often one will draw a negative image of people congregated in large amounts on the so called “streets.” In fact, the expression “to take someone of the streets” generally connotes jailing a known felon. Jacobs argues that streets, and specifically sidewalks, should be encouraging to people that venture into their walkways. Moreover, this does not inducing crime but rather hinders it.

A cohesive neighborhood is often a safe neighborhood. When people feel threatened or detached from their neighbors, inevitably crime will follow. These few points are crucial to Jacob’s overall thesis.

I am a strong believer that people generally good, and that more than not they do not take advantage of other people’s good faith. Yet, I find it hard to argue that less police officers on the streets lead to more crime. There has to be a middle ground between the two differing perspectives.

Streets and sidewalks should be designed in a fashion which encourages community inclusion and cohesion. It should also be harmonious in that is helps to identify that which is public and that which is private. Yet, there has to be an additional security layer which takes the form of police officers. Many crimes are committed by people who do not call the place in which the crime was committed home. Sidewalks and other public spaces are limited to who they can unite and what they can achieve. Thus, I am inclined to believe that sidewalks must both integrate a neighborhood yet yield to the authority of police.