This week’s readings from Edward Soja, Mike Davis and Kenneth Jackson, discuss the different kind of perception the Los Angeles area brings to them. Edward Soja, a professor of geography at the University of California, shows pride in the many military and economical hubs that are present within a sixty-mile circle, with its epicenter being Los Angeles. Mike Davis deems that the modern Los Angeles has created a virtual wall segregating the poor from the rich. Kenneth Jackson, finally, looks disapprovingly at the automobile culture of America, and cites the Los Angeles area as the best example of how the culture evolved the area.

Edward Soja created a sixty-mile circle, encircling the downtown Los Angeles area. He points out that within that circle, many important military bases that present that have served to drive forward the Los Angeles economy. He calls the Los Angeles area as the “premier industrial growth pole of the twentieth century,” taking note that no one thinks of Los Angeles as an industrial center, because of its association with oil, oranges and films. He takes exceptional pride of the downtown area of Los Angeles, full of history, significance and diversity.

Mike Davis sought to show the insecurities of rich people living in the Los Angeles area were both subtle and displaying. From the signs from Los Angeles’ Westside that say “Armed Response!” on neighborhood lawns, we can see how these people seek to protect their properties and communities, such as the “obsession with physical security systems.” But he also suggests that architecture, the planning of buildings and developments have segregated the city by further dividing the poor and rich. The “death of what might be called the ‘Olmstedian vision’ of public space” is what brings about this separation or in other words open, public space. The free beaches, luxurious parks and “cruising ships” were replaced with malls, art centers and gourmet strips. The problems of street violence fond in South-central Los Angeles are thus self-contained in strict boundaries. The vision of having a place to relax from the everyday city-life conflicts is being eroded slowly, according to Davis.

Kenneth Jackson explains how the automobile culture has transformed America over the course of the decades, and its influence over suburban America. The histories of the garage, drive-ins, driveways, motels, interstate system and gasoline stations are all tied in with the American love for cars. The Los Angeles area to him seemed ideal to represent the overall product that resulted from the automobile culture. He mourns the idea that commercial centers replaced the mom and pops stores in the corners, how high schools now needed parking lots to accommodate students who now drive to school, and ensuing drive-in society as seen in fast food restaurants. He states that the area does not have commutation focus as in New York or Chicago, but that it is made up of a conglomerate of suburbs. He calls the region a centerless city.

The different perspectives the three writers have taken on Los Angeles or the greater Lower California region are greatly different. The readings from Mike Davis and Kenneth Jackson seemed to have a notion of regret in which they wished things could have played out differently. For example, Mike Davis states how, “The universal and ineluctable consequence of this crusade to secure the city is the destruction of accessible public space.” It seems that the appeal of the automobile culture has faded away, as noted in the eyes of Kenneth Jackson, who show us that the number of gasoline stations has decreased, and that many commercial structures are now obsolete as of 1985. It is in no doubt that the automobile developed the landscape of the infrastructures in the Lower California region (the motels, commercial centers, the garages, driveways, etc). But it seems that the movement to move away from that culture is beginning with Kenneth Jackson and Mike Davis.