Max, you really nail the question down, and clearly state a well formulated opinion about how Time Square experienced a rebirth. A rebirth of times square allowed it to be revitalized into the bustling hub it is today.

 

In the 1970’s walking through Times Square one would see drugs, alcohol, fights, knifings, and shootings right in the street. The deteriorating street scene impacted loads of people and businesses, including pillars of Times Square such as the New York Times for whom Times Square got its namesake. In an interview with Arthur Sulzberger Jr, chairman of the New York Times he said journalists were often refusing jobs, for fear of walking the one block between Port Authority and their building. Sulzberger related an anecdote, where a truck driver was sitting in his truck waiting for it to be loaded, when he was shot.

A scene of disorder and griminess was present, and crimes and muggings were all too common. My uncle related a story to me, where he was mugged by a group of 10 men, who picked him up, ripped off all his clothes, and ran away leaving him shocked and in his underwear. These types of occurrences drove hoards of people away leaving New York desolate.

 

By the early 1980s New York was on the verge of bankruptcy and Times Square was a symbol of its decline. The city approved a radical redevelopment plan that would’ve gotten rid of the sleaze and culture of Times Square. The plan called for the construction of 27 high-rises. And a quartet that would’ve surrounded and dwarfed the Times Tower. Big signs and flashing lights would’ve been eliminated from Times Square. The city was offering zoning incentives to get people to build bigger building and create a cavern of quiet office buildings.

Clearly, the city was looking for a way to change Times Square. They were hoping, that by uprooting the industry supporting the violence, they’d be able to disperse it, and normalize day to day behavior.

 

Groups like the municipal arts society lead campaigns to stop the city from redesigning times Square. At one such event they staged a blackout to show how Times Square would look at night if it was just an office district. The city eventually abandoned its high-rise plans in the 1980s. Clearly, there was enough pressure to get the city to drop its plans, and a search for new plans ensued.

 

The city came up with a new idea built off shopping and media icons, to revitalize Times Square in a less seedy way. The critical turn-around came when Disney decided to come on condition of less sex shops. The city created new zoning laws to push out the sex shops and encourage big media outlets and high profile shopping in Times Square.

 

The order of events leading to the cities encouraging of Disney to come to Times Square shows the cities scorn of the prevalent sex industry that was Times Square. Today, as you state tourism has grown and crime rates have fallen. Times Square is occupied by new driving forces of more culturally acceptable entertainment and shopping.

 

I’d like to note that, although I definitely see a rebirth of Times Square shining through its changes, elements of revanchism also ever present. The idea of reversing losses caused by changes is a common theme in urban planning. Times Square had almost lost its ability to attract large crowds. It had almost become a struggle to find advertisers to fill the large billboards, and the policy makers missed the glory that once defined Times Square. They wished to recapture elements of old Times Square, and were thus thrilled with the refurbishment of old theatres.

 

Essentially, revanche and rebirth are two related terms. A city enacts a policy of revanche to recover losses and produce a rebirth. And although you describe a rebirth and I agree with you, I think elements of revanche are also prevalent.