Skip to main content

The missing Jane Jacobs chapter in The Power Broker

Now that Jane Jacobs is back in the news, with an exhibit at the Municipal Art Society, Jane Jacobs and the Future of New York, we should look forward to a lot more research into her life.

The one extant biography, Jane Jacobs: Urban Visionary, by Alice Sparberg Alexiou, was published last year. (Here's a review by the Regional Plan Association's Alex Marshall and a review by architectural historian Peter Laurence.)

It will soon be supplemented by two scholarly books about her and her era. And someday a long-lost portrait of the urbanist by Robert Moses biographer Robert Caro should surface.

Jacobs and Moses

Caro's The Power Broker contained not a whit about Jacobs. Indeed, as co-curator Christopher Klemek points out in the book accompanying the new exhibit, Moses and Jacobs were hardly longtime adversaries and contemporary public figures only briefly. (Much of Moses's work came before Jacobs entered the public fray.) Moses comes up only six times in the index of Jacobs's 598-page The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Still, they were involved in a big fight over the Lower Manhattan Expressway and are often discussed as major figures representing different paths in the city's development.

In May, I observed that "The Power Broker, Robert Caro's monumental biography of Robert Moses, oddly omits any mention of Jane Jacobs, now thought of as Moses's polar opposite, and the successful citizen protest against Moses's 1950s attempt to run a highway through Washington Square Park."

Caro's contribution, cut

I got a response from Ina Caro, the author's wife and research assistant, via his lecture agent, who wrote, "Over 30 years ago, when she typed the original manuscript for The Power Broker, there was a wonderful chapter on Jane Jacobs--as good, she thought, as the one on the Cross Bronx Expressway. Unfortunately, when the book was handed in it was one million words long and had to be cut by a third -- 300,000 words. Entire chapters were cut. One on the Brooklyn Dodgers and Moses, one on the Port Authority, one on the city planning commission, one on the Verrazano Narrow Bridge and one on Jane Jacobs. She hopes those pages are still in storage and can be read someday when a library acquires Mr. Caro's papers."

In other words, Caro, no slouch at research, didn't ignore this angle.

(Was this generally known? His agent responded, "To the best of my knowledge no one has ever asked this question before and it has never been answered.")

That's a trove of material that should surface someday. Beyond the portrait of Jacobs, the chapter on the Dodgers should be especially interesting as well, given the enduring debate about whether Moses was responsible for the Dodgers' departure or, as scholars say, Moses merely reflected a consensus against public subsidies for sports facilities at that time.

Given that The Power Broker has been reprinted umpteen times, I'd love to see future editions add a bibliographical note briefly describing the missing chapters. That would relieve future readers from some measure of wonder.

More books coming

Klemek is revising his dissertation on urban renewal into a book. He's carved out several articles about Jacobs, including an intriguing piece about how Jacobs, whose ideas were seen as radical in the United States, was far closer to the mainstream in Canada, the U.K., and West Germany.

Also, scholar Laurence, whose research into the Rockefeller Foundation archives highlighted the foundation's significant support of scholarship regarding urbanism and Jacobs, is working on a book.

Comments

  1. Wow, I'd love to read the "missing third." Given the popularity of The Power Broker, I think it'd be popular as a supplement to the book. Or if they don't think they can sell it, then put it on the web for free!

    ReplyDelete
  2. My book on Jane Jacobs and Robert Moses will be published next year by Random House, fyi. I blogged on the MAS exhibit in PLANetizen Interchange at
    http://www.planetizen.com/node/27229

    ReplyDelete
  3. [Please forgive if this is a double post, but the first attempt didn't seem to register.]

    Norman, you're amazing! What a treasure trove of information about Jacobs!


    I've always thought (but never thought to write to Caro or his associates about it) that Caro had originally written a chapter, or more, about Jacobs and that it eventually had to be cut. I forget where I’ve read it, but I think a number of sources have said that the original "Power Broker" manuscript was much, much longer -- perhaps as much as twice as long? -- and that his publisher made him cut it. So I assumed that the Jacobs chapter, along with things like a fuller explanation of the situation with O’Malley, etc., had to be cut. Plus, if I remember correctly, even Caro himself wrote or said somewhere (maybe it was at the talk he gave last spring at the Museum of the City of New York that I attended?) that his publisher told him that they wouldn't do a two volume biography of Moses because two volume biographies were not (at least then) financial practical. So I too have thought that, now that the book has become an established classic (and a perennial obligatory purchase for many college courses, so it seems), its publisher now has the luxury of coming out with a two-volume thirty-fifth anniversary "author's edition" of the original manuscript -- which I assume would be purchased by people like me (whose original paperback copy has totally fallen apart), most public libraries, and a great many others who have now become a ready made market for the full story.


    Also, thanks for the link to the reviews (which I haven’t gotten to read yet) of the Alice Sparberg Alexiou bio of Jacobs and the info about the new planned Jacobs biographies (which I didn’t know about). I purchased the Alexiou bio of Jacobs and found it disappointingly skimpy (most of the info seemed to be readily available elsewhere -- just scattered). But I also assumed that this project was an oddly difficult project to begin with, as Jacobs choose not to cooperate and my guess is that there probably are not that many alternate sources of information about her. (While Jacobs is famous, she’s not that famous. So unlike the situations with celebrities like Frank Sinatra or Elizabeth Taylor, I assume that there are not that many people out there who’ve been paying enough attention to Jacobs for there to be much in the way of alternative sources of information for an unauthorized biographer.) So it will be interesting to see what these other biographers come up with.


    I also strongly disagree with a number of Alexiou’s assessments regarding Jacobs work. It seems to me that Alexiou, who comes from a different field entirely, has only a superficial understanding of Jacobs work (and urbanism in general) and therefore relied too heavily for her opinions about Jacobs on the thoughts of a narrow spectrum of thinkers in the field. It was as though she had done a biographer of B.F. Skinner (the behaviorist) and had based her opinions of his work mainly on what she had been told by psychologists coming from a Freudian perspective.


    I ran across the on-line version of Klemek’s dissertation last spring, but am unfamiliar with Laurence’s writings. One possible interesting angle that none of these author’s seem to have addressed yet (perhaps Laurence has, but I haven’t run across it) is the fact that -- and I admit that I may be mistaken here, and maybe it isn’t a fact at all -- Jacobs herself has bad mouthed both the Rockefeller Foundation in general and David Rockefeller personally in her writings and interviews. If I am remembering correctly, Jacobs criticizes (almost ridicules?) some of the initiatives of the Rockefeller Foundation in her later books (including, perhaps, the “Economy of Cities”?) and has said in an interview (or interviews?) that David Rockefeller was one of the main villains -- maybe even the main villain -- behind a) the plan to clear her neighborhood, b) the Lower Manhattan Expressway and c) the World Trade Center. While David Rockefeller’s support of the Lower Manhattan Expressway and the World Trade Center are well-known, I think the only place I’ve ever read that he was supposedly behind the clearance of the West Village was in a Jacobs interview (e.g., the Kunstler interview?) or interviews.


    But, then again, not only may I have misremembered these comments, perhaps there are a number of different Rockefeller foundations and I have gotten them mixed up?


    P.S. -- Also interesting to see Anthony Flint's comment that his book on Jacobs and Moses will be published by Random House (which is, of course, Jacobs' own publisher). Perhaps this is something that he can't get into, but if he can, it would be interesting to learn how and why he was able to get the support of Random House while Alexiou said in her book (if I remember correctly) that Jacobs asked Random House not to cooperate with Alexiou in the writing of her biography of Jacobs.

    Also, I'll have to check out the post on PLANetizen, but I wonder what angle the book on Jacobs and Moses will have, since the personal angle is so lacking (with Jacobs and Moses never really dealing with each other directly).

    ReplyDelete
  4. I hurriedly skimmed your original post, Norman, so please forgive my not noticing that you said that only one-third of the Caro's manuscript, not the one-half that I had thought, had been cut. Also, I now see that in his comment on your post, grvsmth made a suggestion similar to mine.

    Here's are brief "reviews" of the reviews of the Alexiou bio of Jacobs.

    A brief "review" of Alex Marshall's review

    Since Marshall is from the Regional Plan Association, I suspect that 1) he is not likely to be much of a Jacobs fan to begin with (as Jacobs apparently had a great disdain for the RPA approach) and 2) he is likely to be pretty ignorant about things that are rather well known among Jacobs'admirers. So it seems to me tht he is too easily impressed by the Alexiou biography of Jacobs.

    It's also interesting to note that this RPA review of the book seems, at least to me (who's not a fan of the RPA), to overdo the similarities between Mumford and Jacobs and to underplay their very significant (so it seems to me) professional differences of opinion.

    A breif review of Peter Laurence's review

    His review seems to contain more specific and detailed info about Jacobs than the Alexiou book, and therefore seems to be actually kind of generous to the Alexiou book. It will be interesting to see what his book is like.

    (I'm assuming that the two new scholarly books about Jacobs that you refer to earlier in your post are the books by Klemek and Laurence that you mention later in your post.)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

At 550 Vanderbilt, big chunk of apartments pitched to Chinese buyers as "international units"

One key to sales at the 550 Vanderbilt condo is the connection to China, thanks to Shanghai-based developer Greenland Holdings.

It's the parent of Greenland USA, which as part of Greenland Forest City Partners owns 70% of Pacific Park (except 461 Dean and the arena).

And sales in China may help explain how the developer was able to claim early momentum.
"Since 550 Vanderbilt launched pre-sales in June [2015], more than 80 residences have gone into contract, representing over 30% of the building’s 278 total residences," the developer said in a 9/25/15 press release announcing the opening of a sales gallery in Brooklyn. "The strong response from the marketplace indicates the high level of demand for well-designed new luxury homes in Brooklyn..."

Maybe. Or maybe it just meant a decent initial pipeline to Chinese buyers.

As lawyer Jay Neveloff, who represents Forest City, told the Real Deal in 2015, a project involving a Chinese firm "creates a huge market for…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…