Veritas et Venustas

Even More Red Sox Quotes — updated

“You make your own destination.”

— Manny Ramirez, 10/27/04

I get three or four hundred visits a day from people who Google “Red Sox Quotes” and get a link to this old post by me (if you type "red sox quotes" and hit "I'm feeling lucky," Google sends you straight to me — many companies would pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to learn how to get that link). Since that was written when the Yanks were winning the ALCS, I thought Sox fans might prefer this one. Or maybe even this one.

There was no curse. Although as my brother said, “Maybe the Babe 86'd them.”

Congratulations to the Red Sox Nation.

UPDATED

Major League Baseball reported on Johnny Damon's appearance on the Letterman show:

But Damon's enthusiastic welcome by Letterman's New York audience was more unexpected.

Not by Damon, who recalled of the waning minutes of the ALCS in Yankee Stadium, "The Yankees fans gave us a lot of respect. When the game was coming to a close, they started applauding us and cheering us."

Turning to the audience, Damon added, "So I commend you. And it was a great feeling."

Damon also revealed his team went into the World Series with the best wishes of some prominent Yankees ringing in its ear.

"[Derek] Jeter, Mr. [Joe] Torre, Jason Giambi -- they called and wished us the best," Damon said. "They said, 'Enjoy the moment. It doesn't come around all the time.' And coming from Mr. Torre, it was really special."

Another quote from Damon, with one game to play in the World Series:

You know, a lot of people say they didn't want to die until the Red Sox won the World Series. ... Well, there could be a lot of busy ambulances tomorrow.

And again from Letterman, on the forecast for Game 7 of the Yankees-Red Sox series:

The good news for the Red Sox is, tonight's weather definitely favors the Red Sox. The forecast is breezy -- with about a 60 percent chance of hell freezing over.

What Would Jefferson Do?& What Would DeLay Do?

I had to suddenly fly to Sante Fe on unpleasant business. With some time to spare for reading at night (the Yankees aren't in the World Series, alas), I walked to one of my favorite bookstores, Collected Works, two blocks from the Plaza.

I bought two related but very different books, What Would Jefferson Do?, and The Hammer: Tom DeLay, God, Money and the Rise of the Republican Congress.

I bought The Hammer first, so I've been reading it first. I always knew I didn't like DeLay. Now I know why. DeLay is doing his best to eliminate Democratic choice, and he's personally repugnant as well. The Hammer is not well written, but the facts make up for that.

One story is about DeLay's exterminator business, which he wanted to sell after joining Congress. He cheated one of his partners, and then changed the locks 12 days before Christmas when his partner complained. After his partner, Robert Blankenship, beat him in court, DeLay vowed revenge on him and his wife, and he spent years doing that. For example, when Mrs. Blankenship got a job in a sheriff's office, Congressman DeLay telephoned the sheriff and told him to fire Blankenship. When the sheriff refused, Delay told him that if he didn't change his mind, DeLay would campaign against him, which he did, personally showing up in the district, raising $70,000 for his opponent, and funding a dishonest phone “poll” to discredit the sheriff.

From the little I've read so far, Thom Hartmann's What Would Jefferson Do? is the anti-DeLay. I heard Hartmann on the radio this morning, and he sounded interesting. I look forward to reading the book.

CONTINUED

I once had a phone conversation that went like this: “Hello, this is Congressman DeLay's office calling to invite you to address the American Congress.”

Why, I asked, in a more lengthy way.

“You've been identified as a leading local businessman in your area, and Congressman DeLay would like the Congress to hear from you.”

“How much does it cost?” I asked.

“Oh, there is no cost. Congressman DeLay wants the American Congress to hear from American small business leaders.”

“You realize I'm not a Republican,” I said.

CLICK

I later found out that if you didn't make a minimum donation of $500, you weren't invited to Washington.

Local Is The New Organic

I flew to Santa Fe via Dallas and Albuquerque. While I was on the plane I read an article about Electoral Votes for the Presidential election. These, of course, are based on the number of Senators (the same for every state) and Representatives (based on population as counted in the most recent national poll). Looking at the graphics for the article, I noticed that Texas is now the second most populous state, after California and ahead of New York. Then I flew over the "Dallas-Fort Worth Metro Area" and saw what this growth looks like.

Simple fact: In the last few decades, the US was dramatically transformed with air conditioning and cheap oil. Tens of millions of Americans think the best way to live is to drive from their air-conditioned house to the air-conditioned Sam's Club, in an air-conditioned truck. Every year more people move to Arizona than any other state, even though most Americans would find it unlivable without air conditioning.

Phoenix is the epitome of sprawl. Everyone drives everywhere for everything, particularly patronizing distant stores like CostCo, where the consumer buys in bulk and serves as the warehouse and transportation system. Every year, people move farther out in the desert, trading long drives for cheap land.

Two other facts about Arizona: More people leave Arizona every year than any other state; Arizonans use swamp coolers for their houses rather than air conditioners, because in a desert climate humidifers work better than dehumidifiers — but now the sheer number of swamp coolers in Pheonix has changed the local climate enough that the coolers no longer work as well as air conditioners.

It seems inevitable that oil prices will continue to rise, and that this will all come crashing down. At the same time, food will become much more expensive, because transportation costs will rise dramatically, and a place like Arizona can't grow food for millions of people.

The good news is that the new economy will look very much the economy many dreamt about in the 1960s, when Small [Was] Beautiful. We already see this in upscale marketing, where local beers, local produce, farmers' markets and Slow Food are all the rage (I've written about Slow Food here, here, here and here). As Fast Company says, “Local is the new organic.”

Small Is Beautiful was written by E.F. Schumacher, who lives on at smallisbeautiful.org. That's the website for the E.F. Schumacher Society, which just held a conference on how to rebuild local economies featuring one of the pioneers in this, Judy Wicks, owner of the White Dog Cafe.

From: "E.F. Schumacher Society" <efssociety@smallisbeautiful.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:24:31 -0400
To: john@massengale.com
Subject: Rebuild Local Economies

Dear Friend

"We have to change our concept about how we measure value in things, and get people to be willing to pay more for something that's well made, made locally, and that they would have for a long time. . . . This is a new way to operate. It's about stepping outside your business and working collectively and cooperatively with others to rebuild local economies." — Judy Wicks in her interview with Josh Harkinson for his essay "Profits of Place in the January/February 2004 issue of Orion magazine.

From: "E.F. Schumacher Society" <efssociety@smallisbeautiful.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:24:31 -0400
To: john@massengale.com
Subject: Rebuild Local Economies

Dear Friend

"We have to change our concept about how we measure value in things, and get people to be willing to pay more for something that's well made, made locally, and that they would have for a long time. . . . This is a new way to operate. It's about stepping outside your business and working collectively and cooperatively with others to rebuild local economies." — Judy Wicks in her interview with Josh Harkinson for his essay "Profits of Place in the January/February 2004 issue of Orion magazine.

Judy Wicks, owner of Philadelphia's famous White Dog Café and co-founder of the nation-wide Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE) will be one of the speakers at the Twenty-Fourth Annual E. F. Schumacher Lectures, October 23rd at the First Congregational Church in Stockbridge, Massachusetts.

Judy Wicks started the White Dog Café out of the backdoor of her Philadelphia home and grew it into an enterprise known for its advocacy of local organically raised food and for the farmers who grow such food. The adjoining Black Cat retail shop specializes in locally made products and fair trade goods.

A leading national spokesperson for the importance of creating healthy local economies, Judy¹s experience with her own business led her to co-found the Business Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE), a two-and-a-half year-old national organization with chapters in over fifteen cities, the first national network of small, sustainable companies dedicated to buying and selling products locally.

Her awards include the prestigious Business Enterprise Trust Award, founded by Norman Lear, for creative leadership in combining sound business management with social vision, and Business Ethics magazine¹s first "Living Economy Award." With Chef Kevin von Klause, she co-authored White Dog Cafe Cookbook: Multicultural Recipes and Tales of Adventure from Philadelphia¹s Revolutionary Restaurant. Judy Wicks is a fine example of someone who has understood how to "reinhabit place" by working with the resources both human and natural of the region to shape a vibrant local economy.

Judy Wicks' ethics of running The White Dog Café reflects a Small Is Beautiful philosophy put in practice. We are pleased she can join us.

The two other speakers at the day's event are: Chief Oren Lyons, revered leader of the Onondaga Nation; and environmental author and elegant wordsmith, Stephanie Mills.

The lectures are the twenty-fourth in an annual series sponsored by the E. F. Schumacher Society of Great Barrington, Massachusetts. Past speakers have included Wendell Berry, Wes Jackson, Hazel Henderson, Winona LaDuke, Jane Jacobs, David Korten, Jerry Mander, Ivan Illich and other notable contemporary visionaries. The E. F. Schumacher Society is a national educational organization formed in 1980 and named for the British economist and author of Small Is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered.

Additional details about these and previous speakers are at www.smallisbeautiful.org. Pre-registration material for the October 23rd Lectures follow.

Warmly, Susan Witt Executive Director E. F. Schumacher Society 140 Jug End Road Great Barrington, MA 01230 USA www.smallisbeautiful.org

* * * * * * * * THE TWENTY-FOURTH ANNUAL E. F. SCHUMACHER LECTURES

Saturday, October 23, 2004, 10:00 - 5:00 First Congregational Church, Main Street, Stockbridge, Massachusetts

FEATURED SPEAKERS: OREN LYONS, JUDY WICKS, and STEPHANIE MILLS

LECTURE SCHEDULE

9:30 Registration and coffee 10:00 Welcome 10:15 Talk by Oren Lyons 11:15 Audience response and questions 12:00 Lunch (see details below) 1:00 Talk by Judy Wicks 2:00 Audience response and questions 2:30 Coffee Break 2:45 Talk by Stephanie Mills 4:00 Audience response and questions 4:30 Closing remarks by the speakers 4:50 Tea and book-signing by the speakers

DETAILS

Time: Saturday, October 23, 2004; 10:00 - 5:00. There will be a lunch break from 12:00 - 1:00.

Cost: $20 per person, $15 per member of the E. F. Schumacher Society, and $15 for students and seniors. Tickets are available at the door and from the E. F. Schumacher Society, 140 Jug End Road, Great Barrington, MA 01230 (413) 528-1737, efssociety@smallisbeautiful.org.

Registration: Pre-registration recommended. Checks payable to the E. F. Schumacher Society, Visa and MasterCard accepted.

Lunch: A vegetarian brown bag lunch may be ordered in advance for an additional $12. Call for menu details. Alternatively there are several nearby restaurants or bring your own bag lunch.

Directions: The First Congregational Church of Stockbridge is located on West Main Street (next to Town Hall) in Stockbridge. From Boston, take the Lee Exit on the Massachusetts Turnpike and follow signs south (Route 102) to Stockbridge. From New York City take the Taconic Parkway to Route 23 in Claverack. Follow Route 23 east to Great Barrington, where Route 23 joins Route 7. Take Route 7 north to Stockbridge, turn left on Main Street at the Red Lion Inn. The church will be on your left approximate 1/3 mile. The historic red brick church is easy to identify behind the prominent clock tower. A map can be viewed and downloaded from the "events" page of our website at smallisbeautiful.org.

Accommodations: Call the Southern Berkshire Chamber of Commerce 413-528-1510 for listings of the many overnight options in the region or visit www.greatbarrington.org.

Membership: Contributions to the E. F. Schumacher Society are tax-deductible.

E. F. Schumacher Society
140 Jug End Road
Great Barrington, MA 01230

www.smallisbeautiful.org

(413) 528-1737

10,000 Waves & Baden-Baden

10,000 Waves is a well known spa on a hill above Santa Fe. Condé Nast Traveler called it the fourth best spa in the US. People love the buildings and location in the hills, and they look great in the photo above. There are times, however, when the picturesque, neo-Japanese architecture can be a little precious and even suburban in its details. Many of the handrails, for example, look like they came straight off a deck in Long Island backyard.

10,000 Waves has all sorts of masseurs and a whole range of hot tubs, including a public tub and sauna for individuals. Some of the hot tubs can be spectacular on a chilly, starry night, but I have to say I've never found baths as relaxing as the Roman Irish baths in the center of Baden-Baden.

The baths are in a neo-Classical building built over Baden-Baden's famous thermal springs. Men and women enter at opposite ends and go through equal, symmetrical rooms and pools while working their way to the co-ed pool under the dome at the center. The baths combine the famous waters, Roman bathing culture, Irish bathing traditions, and German efficiency. The latter may sound bad, but the combination is superb.

There is a sequence of rooms, with showers, saunas, cold plunge pools, and the like. Each room has a number that shows its order in the sequence, a sign telling the number of minutes to stay in the room, and a clock on the wall. Halfway through, one can pay a little extra to be brushed all over with a stiff brush. At the end, there is a darkened room with beds for napping. As Mark Twain wrote, “Here at Baden-Baden's Friedrichsbad you lose track of time in 10 minutes and track of the world in 20.”

Some might think the picture below makes the baths look formal and cold. Since everyone is naked, it doesn't seem very formal. Gracious and uplifting better describe the feeling in the baths.

The Red Sox Win

Yes, I thought the Yankees would prevail, but the Red Sox won. Anyone who saw Curt Schilling speak after his win saw one reason why. Schilling was explicit: in the first game he acted purely on ego, and lost, while in the second game he pitched for the team and simply asked to be able to do his best. The important Yankees like Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams and Mariano Rivera have always had this attitude.

I think the Red Sox as a whole had the same maturation during the series as Schilling, which is why they went from a 19 to 8 loss to winning 4 straight games against all odds. The way they spoke about their respect for the Yankees, rather than their hatred, suggests this. If they want to win their first World Series since 1918, they should remember this.

Duany Crits Celebration

Celebration photo by Smith Aerial Photos.

On the pro-urb and TradArch lists, Andrés Duany wrote,

Celebration is perhaps the most prominent and certainly the most controversial of the second-generation New Urbanist communities. Along with Harbor Town, Kentlands, Haile Plantation, Southern Village, Newpoint and Laguna West, Celebration followed Seaside by approximately eight years. They collectively offer corrections to the problems and deficiencies of Seaside and a furtherance of its promise.

Controversies have swirled around Celebration since its inception, eliciting two full-length books (The Celebration Chronicles by Andrew Ross and Celebration, U.S.A. by Douglas Frantz and Catherine Collins) as well as countless articles. This discussion intends to clarify the principal issues, separating the intentions and actualities of the plan from the popular sport of shadowboxing the developer who promoted it — the Disney Corporation.

(via the pro-urb and TradArch lists, and the INTBAU essays — particular thanks to Matthew Hardy, INTBAU's Secretary)

Celebration had a very long gestation, indeed a prehistory. Its genesis was in the late 1960s when the Disney Corporation purchased some 27,000 acres in central Florida near the then-quiet city of Orlando. Following the success of Disneyland in Anaheim, Walt Disney began conceiving a second-generation theme park in Florida. It may be remembered that the design establishment of the time (less cynical than today's) had admired Disneyland. In the influential essay by Charles Moore, You Have To Pay For The Public Life (Perspecta 9/10 - the Yale Architectural Journal), Disneyland was proposed as a surrogate public realm. The planning profession (at its technocratic peak, before Jane Jacobs) heartily approved of the crowd handling, the transportation interfaces, and the amazing monorail. Disneyland was hailed for its potential to influence actual communities. This praise must have affected Walt Disney for he envisioned the Florida project to include a habitable new town to be called EPCOT (Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow).

EPCOT was to embody the most advanced planning techniques; indeed it was the kind of futurist vision possible to contemplate only in the heyday of the space program (Cape Canaveral is about one hour from Orlando). It was a remarkable project, not least because it could have been built. The design was completed to the extent that plans, renderings and a model were prepared and, with Walt Disney serving as narrator, a short film was produced.¹

Disney's unexpected death in 1966 halted the process, and the generation of administrators that followed him, either lacking the vision or perhaps having the good sense not to attempt an urban experiment at such a scale, shelved everything but the name. EPCOT was eventually built as another theme park; or more precisely, a turn-of-the-century-style world's fair of the sort where different countries are represented by surrogate pieces of their architecture, food, artifacts, and inhabitants in native costume for the delight and instruction of the visitors. EPCOT does this rather well, but it is not a community intended for habitation, let alone a demonstration of visionary urbanism.

The idea died for a couple of decades, until the advent of yet another generation of management; the present one under Disney Corporation CEO, Michael Eisner, having assembled a staff arguably the equal to Walt Disney in vision. He set about to fulfill the potential of the company, including the revival of the idea of building a model city.

Eisner's first step was to restore to America the role of architectural patron.² This involved the retention of first-rate architects for various Disney office buildings, hotels and even some park structures. Under the new entity of Disney Development Company its president Peter Rummell, with Wing Chao and others serving as architectural advisors. Graves, Venturi, Stern, Gwathmey, Gehry, Isosaki, and other such illustrissimos, designed buildings. The critical success of this venture probably emboldened Eisner to the resuscitation of the new town idea, but as one that could hardly be more different from the original EPCOT.

Some say that Celebration would not have been undertaken were it not for the need to maximize the value of Disney's enormous land holdings. After every conceivable idea for theme parks, hotels and office parks had been allocated, there was still substantial territory left over. Another, more intricate story involves a geopolitical scenario where two additional interchanges on I-4 an extension of the eastern to connect to I-4 Beltway would open up this sector of the Disney holdings for development; but only if a project as appealing as Celebration were to be proposed.³ Both of these are plausible scenarios. The latter, if true, was a brilliant strategic move, as two exits were duly granted on the Beltway — one for a new entry, in addition to a major new tollway connected directly to the airport The Greenway. This sort of move is no less than a responsible development company would make in the vast game that is the urbanization process in the sunbelt. There is nothing dishonorable about it.

Even beyond the prehistory and the elaborate permitting maneuvers, the incubation of Celebration was unusually protracted, taking over eight years. This was due to the careful consideration of every aspect, and perhaps also to excessive caution with the marriage between the then-impeccable Disney reputation with the tainted trade of Florida development.

The design process was not only long, it was also elaborate. To create Celebration, a new design team was assembled. Peter Rummell had been brought in to head Disney Development from a career with Arvida, the most prestigious of Florida's real estate development companies. He was seconded throughout by Tom Lewis, formerly head of Florida's Department of Community Affairs and an architect with a record of public service. They began by holding an invited competition to choose the firm who would design this prestigious Disney project. Invited were Robert A.M. Stern Architects, Gwathmey/Siegel & Associates, Duany Plater Zyberk & Company (DPZ) and Edward D. Stone, Jr. What DPZ would do was assumed, but to the evident surprise of the Disney Development team, all but one (Ed Stone's) were also neo-traditional plans (the term in use prior to the advent of the New Urbanism). As a result of this convergence (Ed Stone's design was a conventional resort), the three sympathetic architects (Duany, Stern and Siegel), in a men's room conversation, contrived a proposal for jointly preparing a plan. Lewis, with Rummell, had in the meantime arrived at the idea of pursuing “consensus plan”. A charrette duly took place in the Gwathmey/Siegel office not long afterwards. “Seaside” book co-author Keller Easterling, at that time a Stern employee, played a prominent part in the design. The resulting plan called for a continuously curved grid, both simple and elegant, which as it turned out did not take the wetlands sufficiently into account. Ultimately, this and other realities of the site would cause the plan to be modified to the present one.⁴

At this point, the project became submerged in the permitting process (by all accounts well handled by Tom Lewis with attorney Bob Rhodes in charge of environmental issues). During this time designs for a proposed Disney Institute was studied, in a competition between KPF, Morphosis and Moore Ruble Yudell. Ultimately, a site was chosen outside of Celebration. When it emerged for detail design years later, the team stood as: Robert A.M. Stern with Paul Whalen as lead, assisted by Dan Lobitz; Jaquelin Robertson with Brian Shea as project manager. EDAW was charged with the landscape plan. It is this team, with the addition of Ray Gindroz of U.D.A., contriving the urban and architectural controls that were responsible for the final design. Despite gracious acknowledgement by Tom Lewis, DPZ did not participate except indirectly through the influence of Seaside,⁵ and whatever ideas from the original consensus plan happened to be incorporated along the way.

This team's master plan, currently being built out as planned, finally broke ground in 1994. Like all New Urbanist towns, Celebration includes a wide range of mixed-use and residential building types, a network of walkable streets, and at least one town center. Development entitlements include 8,065 residential units, 3,100,000 square feet of workplace, 2,125,000 square feet of retail, including the Main Street shops. The question whether Celebration is a New Urbanist town is no longer under debate, as it fulfills as complete a checklist of the Charter's principles as can be found in any New Urbanist project. The controversies have emanated from sources other than the purist New Urbanists: the entrenched development industry, for one, perhaps fearing that Celebration's success would change the rules of the game; and for another the avant-garde academic establishment, absolutely terrified that such a conservative design could actually result in a respectable, socially responsible community. From these sources, skepticism continues to be produced despite “the facts on the ground”.

The facts are that Celebration is one of the most intricate and accomplished examples of urban development since the 1930s. The diversity of housing in close proximity at Celebration breaks new ground, as it includes rental apartments and rowhouses, all seamlessly integrated with single-family houses and quite expensive mansions. This ideal is a risky marketing proposition for a developer. Few New Urbanist towns do as well, while conventional suburban development do not even acknowledge the possibility. The large, mixed-use town center also includes apartments above stores, a school, a branch college campus (Stetson University), a hotel as well as useful retail and restaurants (not one a national chain); a bank, a church and plenty of office space. It includes a cinema attached to a late-night bar and an ice cream store. This center is associated with a lake along a public waterfront drive.⁶ The lake is part of a simple and elegant drainage system along a central canal that is both a beautiful civic element and environmentally responsible. There is a golf course accessible to the public and shared visually by all, as it is fronted by a public drive rather than privatized by backyards.

But Celebration is certainly not flawless. In terms of the housing, there were two errors made: one relates to the marketing, the other to affordability. At first, there were not enough townhouses to meet demand. This is a common mistake among the New Urbanist greenfield towns. Since there is no precedent for higher density housing types located so distant from the center, conventional rear-view market analysis yields no conclusion other than that they will not sell. But such methods do not take into account that while townhouses are meaningless without a town, they are a very desirable residential type when there is one. A row of townhouses isolated amidst suburban parking lots has the double disadvantage of lacking the big yard in the back without the compensation of a lively street in the front. But Celebration is a town, of course, and thus the 200 or so original townhouses that were reluctantly provided sold out immediately, and there are no more to be had in the town center. More are now being built in the outlying areas where they make as little sense. It is difficult to retrofit to a higher density so it is always advisable in such cases of skepticism to provide the paper density and to reduce it subsequently if there is indeed a failure of demand.

The second error in the housing provision is social, and also one of public relations. It involves a Florida law requiring a ratio of affordable housing to be included in projects of a certain size. In most cases developers, as is their right, opt to make payments to the agency in lieu of providing their actual construction. This practice is supported by the agency because it allows all their housing to be clustered, facilitating its administration. By New Urbanist standards this is irresponsible as it segregates the society. In the case of Celebration, this was certainly an opportunity lost. To respond to much of the criticism regarding affordability that, as with all New Urbanist communities, is lost due to scarcity regardless of its original selling price. Besides, it is now difficult for Celebration to accommodate the schoolteachers, babysitters and service industry workers that a modern 24/7 society requires (except where the ancillary apartments in the backyards of the housing meet some part of this need). n fairness to Disney, Celebration is being built in Osceola County where there is an abundance of affordable housing. The elected officials of the County made it very clear to Disney that they wanted no lower cost (under $125,000) housing in Celebration.

Beyond these criticisms, the plan itself makes several important improvements to the Seaside model. True alleys were provided to accommodate the parking (in Seaside, the few planned alleys have been gentrified), and the privacy of the backyards was carefully secured by “backbuildings” (such outdoor privacy is neglected at Seaside). Also, a set of controls discourages the purchase of houses by individuals who would use them primarily as vacation houses, thus undermining the reality of community (this is an obvious problem at Seaside). Also learning from Seaside, where many buildings became spectacular investments rather than homesteads, Celebration controls rampant speculation: a house sold within one year of its completion requires that the profits above the Consumer Price Index to revert to the Celebration Foundation. Thus Celebration has become a proper full-time community rather than a resort. This achievement should be applauded by those critics who demand such statistical ideals from New Urbanist communities.⁷ This constraint which lowers the desirability and consequently the value of the real estate, is not a policy that the usual for-profit developer would undertake.⁸ In this regard, Celebration is a reflection of the idealist economic model of Ebenezer Howard, so seldom implemented.

A trivial controversy was made prominent by a New York Times article and must therefore be addressed here. Its details are vaguely remembered, so only a generalized taint remains regarding an oppressive Disney paternalism. But the healthy investigative instinct of the journalist does not mean that the reporting was anything but ideologically driven. There was indeed a protest led by some Celebration parents against the curriculum of the town's public school. The dissatisfaction was presented by the Times as a civic failure of the community, but it is actually the symptom of something else. That residents coalesce around a gripe is a manifestation of healthy community life (see Baumgartner, The Moral Order of the Suburb) and the outcome is revealing of the actual balance of power. Celebration's residents were more conservative than the developers and did not appreciate that school's innovative curriculum, one that had been designed by the Harvard School of Education.⁹ The residents ultimately succeeded in altering the course at the public school demonstrating that the terms of association are not entirely loaded to the advantage of the developer, as they routinely are with the several hundred thousand other such homeowner's associations currently in place across the United States; those that seem to have slipped beneath the horizon of our intelligentsia, distracted as they are with more important issues of free artistic expression.

An interesting and valid set of questions regards the retail component. This one is debated principally within the development industry. It concerns a Main Street that was fully built-out very early in the project, providing the commerce to serve the community before the population was there to support it. Several of these shops have failed. This has caused some to question the decision of building retail at all or, more cogently, to question its location; for the Main Street is placed at the center of the community and away from the traffic flow of the highway that passes by its edge. Because of the Disney wealth, some assume the surviving shops must be heavily subsidized. This is not so, as shown by the fact that a few of the most sentimentally compelling have gone out of business (a bakery, a bookstore and a bicycle shop). Indeed, the shops are centrally managed, the merchants are recruited proactively as is the case with any modern shopping center. The subsidies are no more than incubator tenants receive in a conventional shopping mall as the management helps them get a start in business. These “subsidies” are about to end at Celebration as is standard practice. In any case, the Main Street in a New Urbanist community is not necessarily to be considered a profit center; it plays the role of the principal amenity. It is the marketing equivalent (and equivalent line item on the budget) of the clubhouse and guarded entry of the conventional suburban housing pod, from which no developer expects to make a direct profit.

Be that as it may, the Main Street in Celebration was placed at the centroid of the community, where it does not have access to the economic energy of the regional traffic, but where it provides “walk to town” convenience to a significant number of residents, especially kids. The criticism that the shops should not have been located internally is valid in economic principle; along the highway they would certainly have been successful from the very beginning. However, had the shops been so located, the regional traffic may have overwhelmed the smallish Main Street and undermined its role as social condenser of the community.¹⁰ The result could have been that of Seaside, where the town square has become a regional destination. Great numbers of outsiders do support the relatively cosmopolitan mix of merchants at Seaside, but they overwhelm the residents and dilute the sense of community.

Besides, a close study of the plan shows that there was really no other choice. The highway, where the town center could have been, is cut off from the community by a second, limited-access expressway. As it is, this awkward residual area between the two regional thoroughfares is where the employment area is planned. Four center office buildings by Aldo Rossi, Celebration Health and a branch of Florida Hospital by Robert A.M. Stern are complete, and others that will provide the balanced employment are currently planned for construction. It does continue to be a problem that these workplaces, cut off by the tollway, will not be within walking distance of “lunch” on the Main Street; but there is no better solution available than the one that was implemented. Celebration's is what we call an “unlucky site,” in this respect.

The tenuous economic situation of the Main Street is another manifestation of the citizen's relative power. Disney could assure the success of the shops by introducing the Main Street to the infonet that distributes the millions of tourists to its various venues. Celebration could easily have become part of the visitor's itinerary. While the merchants sought it, the residents did not wish it, and the Disney Corporation complied against its own best financial interests.

Beyond these controversies, there are lessons to be learned from Celebration's corporate management. For example, the Main Street maintains four restaurants at different price points. The most expensive is a “white tablecloth and wine” operation suited for special occasions; while the most economical one will feed a family nicely without undue hardship. This is not the usual situation. Following the dictates of highest and best use, most Florida waterfronts have restaurants that have either become simultaneously expensive or been reduced to providing cheap tourist food. Corporate management can maintain variety when appropriate, assuring that ordinary and useful things remain available. The alternate is the antiques or t-shirt-and-tourist-trinket-emporia typical of most historic Main Streets. Mom and pop stores may succeed economically, but they do not usually serve the ordinary needs of the surrounding residents. Celebration maintains its traditional Main Street of useful, ordinary retail only with modern shopping center-style management. This, it seems, is the future.

Celebration is controversial in other ways related to management. One has to do with its political implications, the second has to do with its physical results.

Management such as there is in Celebration is usually tagged by critics as “private government”. This critical term cleverly implies a secession from the travails of American democracy. This is not so. The property owner's associations ¹¹ of Celebration are actually an additional layer of government, willingly engaged by the residents. It does not preclude the usual overlay of county, state and federal government. In fact, the Celebration Associations are not unlike 200,000 other property owners' associations that are common to the post-war suburbs.¹² Associations are municipal governments by contract. At the time of purchase, future residents agree to abide by a stated set of rights and responsibilities. Is this less just than moving into a city subject to a municipal code one has not been reminded to examine? And what of the unquestioned commonplace of being born into a government? How fair is that? One day, as is the case with virtually all such developments since the 1920s, I expect that Celebration will be incorporated as a municipality, with the association as its basis.

What exacerbates the Celebration governance controversy is that, in this case, the current controlling entity is an enormously powerful corporation. I experimented with this relationship three years ago by purchasing a lot in Celebration and designing and permitting a house to be built on it. Coincidentally, I went through a similar process for a house in my hometown, the city of Coral Gables, Fla. I found my experience at Celebration to be very superior to that provided by the presumably excellent municipal government of upper-class Coral Gables. The details are beyond the scope of this paper, but the experiences opened me to the possibility that American municipal government is often less responsive to its citizens than an American corporation to its customers. The competence and alacrity so often lacking in the public sector is commonplace in private enterprise. And besides, the correction of mismanagement by corporation with a contractual relationship to a customer can be readily engaged by arbitration or threat of lawsuit. A municipality is usually unresponsive to remedies other than concerted political action — a rather labor-intensive, long-range and iffy proposition, not worth engaging to correct the minor humiliations that Americans have learned to endure from their municipal governments.

In the end, Celebration must be assessed the way all urbanism should be assessed — not by photos and short visits (which suffice for architectural criticism), but by inhabiting a place for a period of time.¹³ Does the community improve how the day is lived? Does it accommodate the ebb and flow of life? I spent several days in Celebration sampling the quality of the morning coffee, the kind of groceries and newspapers available at the market, and the “third place” atmosphere of the eateries. I even tested the police and maintenance functions by engaging in mild civic misbehavior, such as throwing trash on the ground and vandalizing parts of the urban furnishing.¹⁴ I joined seniors and kids gathering; and I experienced how late at night I could hang out (martinis were available till midnight from a satisfyingly flirtatious bar girl next to the movie house). Celebration tested well in such ways, and particularly well when compared to developments of equal age; which is how urbanism should be evaluated. I don't know about New York when it was still New Amsterdam, but Celebration certainly outperformed Miami when on its sixth birthday.¹⁵ Time is a tremendously important factor in urbanism, one that is seldom internalized in the current critical assessment of the New Urbanism.¹⁶

The other controversy over controls is architectural. It centers around The Celebration Pattern Book, conceived by Ray Gindroz and U.D.A. This document is of a different order altogether from the Seaside code, and indeed from most any other code ever written or drawn. It has a precision, clarity and completeness that should elicit admiration from anyone who studies it as an intellectual achievement. But its very comprehensiveness goads critics. In addition to those arguments from architects concerned with the infringement on their prerogative for creativity, one can legitimately raise the question: Does it improve the urbanism when its physical manifestation is so precisely prescribed? First, to the complaining architects, one would have to respond: Why is it that there are no complaints of repression when a single architect designs all the buildings? What is it about rules, even when they distribute the design to scores of architects that would not otherwise by involved, that cause a problem? This concern is a knee-jerk reaction and compels no further attention, but there is an interesting question regarding a tradeoff in quality. Many creative possibilities are precluded by codes, but so is substandard performance and kitsch. It is a truism that, by raising the bottom, a code inevitably lowers the top. A code operates like a sine curve controlling symmetrically the oscillation between the brilliant and the dismal. While no building in Celebration rises to the level of the best buildings at Seaside, no building falls to the level of kitsch. This range can be attributed to Seaside's looser code, which allows better but also worse buildings. Seaside has buildings by Rossi, Holl, Chatham, Berke, Machado, Silvetti, Gorlin, Merrill, Mockbee and Krier, all by code, but it also has buildings that will improve when blown down by a hurricane.

A code is a neutral instrument that can be adjusted, but it cannot eliminate the exceptionally bad without limiting the exceptionally good. The application of The Celebration Pattern Book has led to a general run of architecture that is uniformly good, but not more. This potential problem has been mitigated by the two dozen commercial and civic buildings at the town center that were not coded - at least not in the usual sense. For these, the old stable of Disney star architects were invited and given the “theme” of the “small southern town”. They worked together in cycles of mutual critique to achieve the necessary compatibility that a code normally assures and that urbanism requires. Thus Celebration presents two patterns of coding. The Pattern Book, which prescribes at a level corresponding to the builder's manuals of the 19th Century, and also the organic method common in the 1920s of regionalist collegiality (which was later undermined by the manic individualism induced by modernism).

Some who object to The Pattern Book are correct in assessing that one would not need an architect at all, and that indeed it is a waste to engage one. This may be so, but it remains an important instrument for those instances, all too common in the American building industry, when an architect is not involved. In the meantime, we can look forward to a new section of the Pattern Book, in use but not yet printed, which creates modernist patterns for the office buildings already underway. This will be added to the six traditional styles already included in The Pattern Book.

Another controversy (one of no permanent interest) regards the quality of the construction. Some early residents complained about what they perceived to be shoddiness. This is understandable but unfair. The quality at Celebration was similar to that of the corresponding price points in competing developments. The dissatisfaction stemmed from expectations projected on a Disney product. Disney is perceived to be the creator of perfect environments, and those that purchased did not take into account the realities of the Florida context. In any case, the corrections were duly made and housing at Celebration currently exceeds the norm in both workmanship and quality of design.

After that difficult initial period, the national builders involved with the housing have learned how to build traditional houses correctly, and they have learned also that they are marketable, particularly when assembled on traditional streets within a walkable neighborhood. These builders are now elsewhere projecting New Urban communities, and many others are following them. The list is becoming longer, and it includes some large companies.

Many individuals who participated in the Celebration project have gone on to influence the development industry. The subsequent achievements of the designers are well known. Peter Rummell has since become CEO of the St. Joe Company, with the largest real estate holdings in Florida. St. Joe, having purchased Arvida, is committed to the New Urbanism and is now doing excellent work in Watercolor (adjacent to and an extension of Seaside) as well as half a dozen other large and prominent sites. Celebration's first town architect, Joe Barnes, is now the general manager at I'On. A group of executives has spun off and now consults under the name of Celebration Associates. Tom Lewis is a vice president of Walt Disney World and a resident of Celebration.¹⁷

Celebration promises to become the most influential new town since Radburn, N.J., that project that in 1927 introduced the cul-de-sac and the collector road to America. This is obvious in Florida where, like the ripples of a stone thrown in a pond, the effect is more visible close to the impact point. On any given day, developers troop through what is now the most visible of the New Urbanist models.

Despite this projection, the question persists Is it economically possible to build a Celebration without the deep pockets of a Disney? The answer is yes; even the Main Street is economically feasible. This is demonstrated by a visit to Haile Plantation in nearby Gainesville. This superb New Urbanist community was designed and developed by Robert Kramer under conventional constraints. Haile Plantation, as accomplished in every way as Celebration, must become an integral part of any study tour, so one cannot talk oneself out of a commitment to the New Urbansim by concluding that Celebration is a great concept but that “only Disney could do it”.

But then why doesn't The Celebration Company (or its current parent Disney Imagineering) continue in the business of building new towns? The answer is simple. For all its success, the effort and time that it took to develop Celebration made is comparably less profitable than producing a single Disney movie, of even middling box office success. It is not a rational allocation of Disney's resources to invest in further New Urbanist projects. But for the rest of us, it is.

Andrés Duany     

© Andrés Duany 2004

[1] This film was subsequently shown to the designers of Celebration.  (back to text)

[2] Eisner's fascination with architecture may have had its origins with Robert Stern's design for his parent's New York apartment.  (back to text)

[3] In Florida, a Seaside-type development opens doors to permitting.  (back to text)

[4] These early plans are on record in a history album at the Celebration sales office.   (back to text)

[5] Seaside and NewPoint scrutinies were led by Robert Stern.  (back to text)

[6] Celebration is not a gated community.   The security forces are the Osceola County police force.  (back to text)

[7] I was pleased to find that, adjacent to a lot I purchased for research reasons (see below), were houses occupied by a black family and a gay couple.   This sort of random occurrence is considered highly significant by those who reduce the judgment of urbanism to quotas of diversity.  (back to text)

[8] Although, in fact it has soared at Celebration.  (back to text)

[9] Harvard and other institutions. It is Disney Development practice to involve multiple consultants in all their endeavors.  (back to text)

[10] Besides, Route 192 is a brutal commercial strip that would have destroyed the environmental qualities of the Main Street.  (back to text)

[11] There are two: a residential and a commercial one.   The former will one day be entirely controlled by the residents.   The commercial association will likely continue to be controlled by the Celebration Company.   Main Street, like other modern retailing must be centrally managed to remain competitive.  (back to text)

[12] These numbers do not include the management associations increasingly common in inner cities, nor the otherwise similar condominium associations.  (back to text)

[13] The authors of the two books previously mentioned, to their credit, lived in Celebration for long periods of time.   That is why the books are worth reading.  (back to text)

[14] The result was gratifying:   I was not arrested, and the damage was quickly made good.  (back to text)

[15] Founders' Day: November 18, 1995  (back to text)

[16] For example, in the writings of Alex Marshall, who has been proven wrong continually as the years pass, in a sort of rolling error that is peculiar to urban criticism.  (back to text)

[17] Tom Lewis may yet write a book on Celebration.   He is so evidently proud of his very real achievements that one fears that it will be overly celebratory.  (back to text)

New Traditional Architecture Books+ Duany Introduction

I haven't seen Steve Mouzon's new Traditional Construction Patterns yet. But I know Steve, and I expect it to be good. You can buy it from Amazon here, or you can order autographed copies from Steve here.

Andrés Duany's written an interesting introduction. An educator, Modernist (co-founder of Arquitectonica) and NeoTraditional designer, he talks about the state of architectural education and traditional practise today:

Nothing seems stranger to the layman than the contempt with which certain architects hold other architects.

It is ever thus with tribal warfare.

How would it otherwise be possible that an architect could dislike another having never met, but simply on the basis of a building seen? How is it possible that a style of architecture should be considered to be the only appropriate one “for our time”? How is this possible in an era when we are meant to be categorically open to diversity?

It seems that architecture and its sects constitute the last of the respectable wars. In the profession's modernist schools, suppression of ideas is overtly practiced. At gatherings of the tribal divines and at the oracles, otherwise known as lectures and symposia, there is an irrational blood lust against traditional architecture.

CONTINUED

How can such prejudice be sustained? Is it not obvious that we can look with interest upon all styles of buildings, enter them, use them, not be fundamentally harmed and even sometimes be inspired by them? Is it not everywhere observable that both traditional and modernist buildings may perform well or badly, and that this depends on the quality of their design and construction—not their style?

How amazing that this intolerance can be maintained in the teeth of the most sacrosanct of American scorecards: the marketplace. After all, traditional buildings are preferred by the people by overwhelming, crushing, margins. In a society that measures success in numbers (the most votes, the most sold, the richest, the fastest, the tallest) traditional architecture wins by a landslide. It is the way (let us conservatively estimate) that 95% of the million new housing units are built in the U.S. every year. In the presence of this physical fact, how can the modernists‚ dismissal that traditional architecture is “not of our time” be maintained?

Of course, there is the requisite “critical” discourse, by which success in the market is ipso facto degraded for being complicit in capitalism—a quaint conceit. But why should anyone be concerned about such opinions?

After all, these editors editors, teachers, and critics are on the margin, visible only to themselves. Traditionalist architects, with their million annual buildings, with their success, could easily ignore them.

But they should not.

This book responds with the reason why. Yes, traditional architecture appeals. But the fact is, most of the vast production of traditional building is dismal, ranging from the merely inept to the simply hideous.

It is now apparent that many architects, including the well intentioned, lack knowledge of the principles of their tradition. This is a fundamental problem, because traditional architecture is intrinsically a body of knowledge.

It is not like the modernist styles where architects define the rules of their own game—a self-determined contest in which each is therefore the indisputable champion. No one beats Eisenman at Eisenman's game; and when anyone else enters the field, he changes the rules. It is quite a different story with traditional architects. There are rules. A person who designs a traditional building is entering a field populated by true world champions including Palladio, Schinkel, Lutyens, and Goodhue. It takes extraordinary courage and temerity to do so—or ignorance. And that is, I'm afraid, the general situation: an innocent ignorance that leads inevitably, in the case of traditional architecture, to mediocrity.

These poor results are what sustain the otherwise untenable modernist critique. Modernist critics never attack a good traditional building. It is not the work of Krier or Porphyrios or Merrill that is held up for ridicule; it is always the buildings that deserve it.

And so, it turns out, that the true enemy of traditional architecture is not modernist architecture. The vulnerability of today's architecture is its own poor quality—and that's why this book is important.

The author, Steve Mouzon, is a practicing architect. For over twenty years, he has dedicated himself to the study and design of traditional buildings and places. In search of deeper knowledge and authenticity, his travels have allowed him to assemble an unparalleled understanding of what can go wrong. Through his experience with a New Urbanist Town Architect, he has seen what almost always goes wrong. And now, with discernment and wit, he has thoroughly catalogued the ideal and the shortcoming. He has produced a manual that is clear, easy to use, and targeted to the most common error (yes, in the use of traditional language, there are errors). There is no further excuse. Traditional architects can now sweep their own house clean.

Andrés Duany
July 6, 2004

New Internet List for New Urban and Traditional Architects

Here's a description of a new discussion list at TradArch.org:

The New Discourse List is a temporary forum for the discussion of progressive and new ideas in support of traditional architecture and urbanism, a place for traditional designers who feel the philosophies and theories of the past do not adequately describe their work and motives today. Anyone may subscribe, but it is requested that subscribers remember the agenda of identifying and clarifying promising but inchoate philosophies, and therefore refrain from regularly repeating the conservative positions and academic theories that have been well articulated during the last few years.

To subscribe, go to http://www.TradArch.org.

19 to 8

“Oh, so NOW you want the Twins” — so writes Red Sox fan and Boston Globe blogger Eric Wilbur. And so the Red Sox Nation turns.

Take a look at today's column by Globe sports writer Bob Ryan to see how despondent Sox fans can be. But I may agree with Ryan in one way: this year's Red Sox team is a strange combination of talent, bluster and a funny way of giving up. They know they can hit, and they're confident they can come from behind, but they seem to think that once they've shown their awesome batting, the other team is supposed to roll over. In a game like last night's, where the Yankees came right back every time the Red Sox scored, they seemed to give up. Damon admitted as much in his post-game comments.

Meanwhile, the fans were astoundingly quiet, and they started walking out in the seventh inning of a must-have game for their team.

CONTINUED

Anyone who goes to any of the 81 home games at Fenway each year, knows that a good 5% to 10% of the fans at all the games will be wearing shirts that say, “Yankees Suck.” And as the crowd leaves after beating the Devil Rays once again, a good percentage of the crowd will be chanting “Yankees Suck.” But so many of the same fans wrote and called the Major League Baseball offices to complain about the curse-free Who's Your Daddy t-shirts that Baseball banned their sale.

At the same time, the difference between this year's Red Sox team and the Yankees of the last 10 years is that the Sox badmouth their opponents and say they're going to sweep, while the Yankees always say how good the Sox are but may actually sweep.

Before the series started, the bookies in Las Vegas and all the critics said the Red Sox have better hitting, better pitching and better defense. And that may be true. But the Yanks are killing them. They respect their opponents, and they're more of a team. And they have players like Jeter, Rivera and Bernie who know how to win when it counts. Saying they'd be scared and the Sox would shut them up was just dumb.

Last night, Rodriguez, Sheffield, Matsui, and Bernie combined to go 16 for 22 (.727), score 14 runs, and knock in 15. In the first three games, the Red Sox have led for only one half-inning.

Interview with Denise Scott Brown & Robert Venturi

The Philadelphia Independent interviewed Robert Venturi (RV) and Denise Scott Brown (DSB). Although I usually don't like their work — Venturi is the anti-Classicist, and Scott Brown's planning is not very spatial — Bob is a supremely talented architect, well-deserving of the Pritzker Prize he won, and Denise is an enormously intelligent planner and critic. And frankly, they're a terrific couple.

Their comments on architecture and urban design are, as usual, interesting and insightful:

DSB: We are very interested in archetypes, in typologies. Imagine a toy train that runs through a small, toy-train town. What would the post office, schoolhouse, and town hall look like in that little town? Those are generic types. When we design, say, a school building, we try to keep the generic in mind.

RV: There's a tendency now for buildings to be dramatic, expressionistic, original, sculptural kinds of objects. But there is another tradition of the building that is not revolutionary but that evolves over time and connects with convention. And it can still be good architecture.