Shrinking Cities

DETROIT
III--------------------------------------------------------------------------

N
E
I
L
A
I
R
E
T
A
M
S
T
I
S
E
R
B
E
R
P
A
A
P
G
N
I
Y
K
L
R
A
O
I
W
P
E
T
A
M
E
I
C
O
PAB

March 2004-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Shrinking Cities
A project initiated by the Kulturstiftung des Bundes (Federal Cultural Foundation, Germany) in cooperation with theGallery for Contemporary Art Leipzig, Bauhaus Foundation Dessau and the journal Archplus.
Office Philipp Oswalt, Eisenacher Str. 74, D-10823 Berlin, P: +49 (0)30 81 82 19-11, F: +49 (0)30 81 82 19-12,
mail@shrinkingcities.com, www.shrinkingcities.com

DETROIT
III-------------------------------------------------------------------------------DETROIT
III-------------------------------------------TABLE OF CONTENTS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
SUMMARY
Doreen Mende and Philipp Oswalt
5

MAP OF DETROIT

6

STATISTICAL DATA: DETROIT
Jason Booza, Anke Hagemann, Kurt Metzger and Nora Müller

11

IN DETROIT TIME
Curatorial Statement, Mitch Cope

13

SHRINKING CITY DETROIT
Curatorial Statement, Kyong Park

16

CHRONOLOGY: DETROIT SINCE 1700
Jerry Herron

18

THE AMERICAN METROPOLIS AT CENTURY’S END: PAST AND FUTURE
Robert Fishman

28

I REMEMBER DETROIT
Jerry Herron

40

DETROITJohn Gallagher

44

ON SOME SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF DETROIT
Jason Booza and Kurt Metzger

50

THE CAPITAL OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURYDan Hoffman

55

MOTOR CITYCharles Waldheim

63

TROUBLE IN MOTOR CITY
Joe Kerr

71

DEVIL’S NIGHT
Toni Moceri

85

RACIAL DISUNITY
June Manning Thomas

95

A BRIEF HISTORY OF SEGREGATION IN METRO DETROIT
Celeste Headlee

99

REBUILDING DETROIT: AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE CASINOJames Boggs

102

ONE THING LEADS TO ANOTHER: COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENTS IN URBANCOMMUNITIESGrace Lee Boggs

108

BUBBLE METROPOLISDan Sicko

115

INITIATIVES AND PROJECTS119

BIBLIOGRAPHY

122

FILMOGRAPHY
Antje Ehmann and Michael Baute125

AUTHORS127

COLOPHON

APPENDIX: PHOTOGRAPHS DETROIT REGION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 3

SUMMARY-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The ‘Big Three’--Chrysler, Ford and General Motors--created the ultimate ‘Motor City.’ It was in
Detroit that the first street was surfaced with concrete, and Davison Freeway, the first city motorway, was built here. Detroit was long able to boast unparalleled economic growth. During the1920s, one skyscraper was built after another; department stores and palatial cinemas lined thestreets. It is no wonder that the number of inhabitants rose from 285,700 to 1.85 million
between 1900 and 1950. Detroit, as the powerhouse of the U.S., was not just a city. It served
as a unique model for a new type of metropolis and a modern society.
After 1950, the boomtown became one of the first to experience the drift of population to theedges of town. The sub-urbanization of Detroit took place against a background marked not onlyby the rise of the car, but also by racial tension. Between 1940 and 1960, the proportion of
blacks in the population grew to one-third. The white middle-classes, full of resentment against
the black lower classes, fled to the periphery. In 1998, 78% of those living in the suburbs werewhite, while 79% of those in the inner city were black. The sub-urbanization of Detroit did notbring a creeping reduction in density, but a dramatic one. Nowadays, one third of the entire cityarea lies derelict. Countless buildings have been demolished. 4,000 of those still standing arevacant and abandoned: locked, boarded and walled-up. After 1950, the gigantic factories weredecentralized, partly for strategic military reasons, partly owing to the drift, especially of white
people, to the suburbs. As a consequence of the oil crisis of 1973 and increasing competition
from foreign manufacturers, Chrysler, Ford and General Motors suffered immense losses.
Between 1970 and 1980 alone, Detroit lost 208,000 jobs.
In view of its social problems, Detroit was looked upon as a hopeless case. In such a situation,
vandalism can become frequent, as illustrated by the ritual Devil’s Night: year after year, on
Halloween, the night of the 31st of October to the 1st of November, countless empty houses andcars are set alight in Detroit.
For some years now, new investment has been flowing into the center of downtown--modestly,
but steadily. Now that the social and political tension between the inner city and the metropolitan area has died down, Detroit can make capital, in individual cases, from its old title of ‘Motor
City’--but only the downtown is experiencing a slow urban recovery.
The articles collected in the present publication investigate the historical, socio-economic, urban
and cultural processes affecting Detroit. The text section is introduced by a chronological outlineof Detroit’s general history. The essays introduce positions showing different approaches to acity which has faced high degrees of suburbanization, segregation, and urban decline.
Robert Fishman, together with a team of urban specialists, asked urban historians, social scientists, and working planners to rank the influences which shaped and will shape the urban development of America’s metropolises. The results show the overwhelming impact of federal programs on the urban crisis affecting American cities during the past 50 years. What will influence the next 50 years? The prognoses diverge between those forecasting a continuation of theurban situation, a ‘smart’ change in federal policies, and socio-demographic effects.
Jerry Herron examines the 300-year history of Detroit from a distanced but participatory
perspective of its history and collective memory. Herron states that Detroit’s history is based onforgetting how to remember history. The statement of Henry Ford epitomizes the phenomenonof forgetting: “History is more or less the bunk ... We want to live in the present, and the only
history that is worth a tinker’s damn is the history we make today.”
The journalist John Gallagher examines the ‘city’ of Detroit, where the urban landscape has been
relocated to suburbia. Recent decades have seen a deep change in the meaning of the term
‘urban landscape.’ Gallagher states that in Detroit, as in no other city, the suburban landscape“with its spatial orientation, both chaotic and regimented … has become the dominant model.”During the last century, Detroit’s image changed from that of the ‘Motor City’ to that of the ‘mostIII | 4

segregated city in America,’ in a manner exemplary for the contemporary U.S.A. Which circumstances and events shaped Detroit in these years? Jason Booza and Kurt Metzger offer precise insights into the historical, industrial, and socio-economic developments of the metropolis.
Dan Hoffman analyzes Detroit according to criteria of a “Capital of the Twentieth Century”. He
defines the city as a product of the reciprocal growth of technology in industrial production, andof a multitude of serialized and optimized motions. The Federal Highway Act in 1956 is one outcome of the new self-image, as is the slogan: “What is good for General Motors is good forAmerica.”
In 1996, Charles Waldheim coined the term ‘landscape urbanism’ as a strategy for dealing withdecreasing densities and indeterminate futures in the inner city as well as in the still spreading
suburbs. Beyond this, his text expresses his view of Detroit, which has evolved from an intense
discourse with positions held by architects, philosophers and city planners like Herbert
Greenwald, Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier, Ludwig Hilberseimer, and Paul Virilio.
Detroit’s dramatic change from a ‘powerhouse’ to the worst case of de-industrialization and suburbanization in the U.S.-American city is also the focus of the article by Joe Kerr. He focuseson the correlation of economic and socio-political aspects while considering historical facts.
Urban decline and sprawl, unemployment, racial and social conflicts, sub-urbanization--in 1984,
this complex of problems led to the inner city of Detroit experiencing the worst night in thehistory of vandalism: October 30, the annual ‘Devil’s Night’ saw the highest rate of burningvacant buildings, vehicles, and brush or rubbish fires. Toni Moceri’s study for Shrinking Cities
chronicling ‘Devil’s Night’ shows details and facts.
The problems of racial conflict increased rapidly in the 1950s, culminating in the riot of 1967.
But its roots go back to the middle of the 19th century. Celeste Headlee’s edited radio feature
introduces the history of racial segregation in metropolitan Detroit.
June Manning Thomas traces population changes in light of racial disunity and segregation.
Beyond this, her article scrutinizes three phenomena of the classification in ‘Black’ and ‘White’:disparity between races, discrimination, and regional fragmentation.
James and Grace Lee Boggs are outstanding personalities in Detroit for their involvement inmajor U.S.social movements like Black Power, among others. James Boggs pled in his speechof 1988 for the potential of Detroiters, one obscured by the illusion of a return to the ‘good olddays.’ He appealed to the potential represented by, among others, self-supply through urban
agricultural initiatives, as opposed to the new amusement industry which promotes gamblingand entertaining consumption. Particularly nowadays, active social initiatives get public attention
through their continuity and results. Grace Lee Boggs differentiates currently active projects andcollectives dealing with urban agriculture which use vacant buildings and areas to fill them withnew ideas.
Techno Music grew from a sub-cultural desire to achieve a world-known musical identity, andwas later used as a brand name for the city’s cultural potential: Detroit as an example of economic and urban processes influencing cultural production. Dan Sicko traces the remarkablehistory of Techno, introducing different labels, positions, and musicians.
Kevin Bingham, gardener and arborist from Detroit, researched social-political activities in
Detroit, largely related to urban agriculture. The appendix lists initiatives, network projects, programs, and web links. These organizations and associations show the importance of activists asvital factors in re-activating urban processes in Detroit, currently as well as on a long-term basis.
Doreen Mende and Philipp Oswalt-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 5© State of Michigan, Department of Transportation, www.michigan.gov

III | 6--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------STATISTICAL DATA: DETROIT
Statistics: Anke Hagemann and Nora Müller (Shrinking Cities, Office Philipp Oswalt)
Data Research: Jason Booza and Kurt Metzger (Center for Urban Studies, Wayne State University)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------REGION AND CITIESCity of Detroit
88,641 acres = 359 km2, 951,270 inh. (2000), - 8% (1990—2000)
The City of Detroit stayed in its administrative borders while the urban agglomeration was massively expanding.
When we speak of the ‘City of Detroit’ or ‘inner city’, we refer to the city in these tight borders.
City and Suburbs
Macomb, Oakland and Wayne County, 1,283,.055 acres = 5,192 km2, 4,043,467 inh., + 3.3 % (1990—2000)
When talking about the city with its suburbs or about the metropolitan area, we are referring to the tri-county area(including Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne Counties) for the availability of data before 1970, because these three counties were considered the metropolitan area at that time. While more counties have been added, their impact on andcontribution to the metropolitan area is minimal because most of the population and industry still reside within thesethree counties. When we compare the city and the suburbs, we contrast the development of the city of Detroit andthe three counties minus the City of Detroit (which is part of Wayne County).
Detroit Region
In some cases we refer to the Southeast Michigan Region (SEMCOG: Southeast Michigan Council of Governments) orto the State of Michigan.

Flintsuburbs:
tri-county-region
SEMCOG-Region:
South East Michigan

OaklandMacombCity of
DetroitLake St. ClairAnn Arbor
Wayne

Canada25

50 km

STATISTICAL DATA: Detroit

III | 7

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONPOPULATION -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------01 population development in four investigated cities
02 population development in the city of Detroit andsuburbs2

mill.inh.

Mio.Inh.

3
Suburbs1

Detroit2
Ivanovo
Leipzig
Manchester

City

1
1850

1900

1950

2000

0

1850

1900

1950

2000

2030

INCOME -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------03 monthly average income per capita in the four
04 monthly average income per capita in Detroit city,
locations
suburbs, and U.S.
in EURin EUR

1055

2545
990
893

1828
1655

1055
Det

Man

Lei

Iva

1999

2001

2000

2000

[Note: average incomes are defined differently, cf. notes]

1999

MacombCity

Oakland46

US

Wayne (incl.Detroit)

1547

2002

1999

UNEMPLOYMENT -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------06 development of unemployment rates in city and
05 unemployment rates, international comparison
suburbs(2000/2001)
in %

in %

20,6

20
City
13,8

9,4

10,1*10,5*

DReg.
Iva Ru

6,3

Det

US

10

5,1

4,8

Liv

Hal

GB

*officially registered: 1,4%

Suburbs[Note: unemployment is defined differently, cf. notes]

0

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

VACANCIES -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------07 estimated vacancy rates in housing, international
08 development of vacancy rates in city and suburbs
comparison
in %

in %

10,3
8,8

19,3

8,0

5,9

5,6

10,3
7,0

2,9

2002

Hal
2001

1,0

1,6

1950

4,0

1990

2000

2,8

Suburbs

2000

Man

City

Det

4,3
3,5

1960

1970

1980

STATISTICAL DATA: Detroit

III | 8REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------09 largest private employers in the city of Detroit
10 persons employed in manufacturing and servicebased jobs, 1960 and 2000
number of employees

1960

13.987

Detroit Medical Center(health care)

12.571

DaimlerChrysler Corp.
(auto manufacturer)

8.247

Henry Ford Health System(health care)

7.307

General Motors Corp.
(auto manufacturer)

5.974

St.John Health System(health care)

1

4.824

American Axle
(automotive supplier)

2

3.560

Detroit Diesel Corp.
(diesel engines)

777.017

1 service
2 manufacturing164.276
166.715359.658

312.612228.806

194.991
62.235suburbs

11 total number of jobs in Detroit city and suburbs,
1970—2000

2000

city

suburbscity

12 share of persons living below poverty line,
1970—2000
in %in 1.000
Oakland
30

city

800

Wayne

600

20

400

Macomb
DetroitCity

10
suburbs

200

1970

1980

1990

1970

2000

1980

1990

2000

SUBURBANIZATION ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 changes in housing stock 1970—2000: demolition
14 development of the number of housing units inand new homes
Detroit vs. suburbs
in 1.000demolition
permits

new home
permits
300.726

1.200
suburbs

800
158.506

400
city

2.956
city

city

suburbs

15 distribution of jobs in city and suburbs, 1960 and 2000
in%total: 1.2 mill(1960), 1.7 mill(2000) = 100%

0

1950

1960

1980

1990

2000

in %
private*

56,7

1970

16 means of transportation to work, 1960 and 2000
public*private*public*

95,6
85,7

35,7

83,3

63,6

26,4

17,1

Detroit
City

21,6

8,4

2000

1960

12,9

2000

1960

22,1
16,6

8,7

Wayne
CountyMacombCountyOakland
Countycity*[cf. notes]

4,9
suburbs

0,6

STATISTICAL DATA: Detroit

III | 9DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------17 population projections for city and suburbs
18 youth quotas--population less than 18 years of age
in %2005, 2010, 2015, 2020in mill.

40
suburbs
31,1

city

30

1

25,0
20

10

0
Detroit

Wayne
CountyOakland
CountyMacombCounty19 development of ethnic population in the city of Detroit
in mill.

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

20 development of ethnic population in the suburbs
in mill.

[culminated][culminated]

3.0

other

1.6

black
2.5

1.2

2.0
other

0.8

1.5
white

black

1.0

0.4
0.5
white
1900

1950

2000

1900

1950

2000

STATISTICAL DATA: Detroit

III | 10-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ABBREVIATIONS:
Det – Detroit, U.S. – United States, Liv – Liverpool, Man – Manchester, GB – Great Britain, Hal – Halle,
Lei - Leipzig, D– Germany, Iva – Ivanovo, RU – Russia, Reg – region-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------NOTES:
03 Definitions of average income: U.S.: Total income for a defined geographic unit divided by the total population.
Income is defined as: total money income of persons 15 years and over. Potential sources: wage or salary; selfemployment income; interest, dividend, net rental or royalty income; Social Security or rail road retirement
income; public assistance or welfare; retirement or disability income. GB: Income data are only available forhouseholds--the data have been modeled to per capita values by applying a persons: house hold ratio for each
district. D: The average monthly net income includes salaries and wages, self-employment income, pensions,public assistance, rents/tenures; not included are farmers and persons without any income (such as children).
RU: Total income of the total population (pensions, salaries/wages, grants, child benefits, interest incomes, rents);
income from informal or illegal work is not included; children and pensioners are included
05 Detroit/U.S.: 2000; Ivanovo/RU: 2000; Halle/D: 2001; Liverpool/GB: 2001
Definitions of unemployment: U.S.: Civilians 16 years and over are classified as unemployed if they 1) were nei
ther “at work“ nor “with a job but not at work“ during the reference week, and 2) were looking for work during
the last four weeks, and 3) were available to accept a job. Also included as unemployed are civilians who did
not work at all during the reference week and were waiting to be called back to a job from which they had beenlaid off. D: Unemployed is someone, who 1) has no employment or less than 15h per week, 2) is looking for
employment, liable for insurance deductions and over 15h per week, that means who is making an effort to finda job and who is available for the services of the employment office. Not included are persons, who a) are
employed for more than 15h per week, b) are not allowed orn are unable to work, c) are restricting their availability for no reason, d) are older than 65, e) are presently beneficiaries in employment measures. GB: Nomisdefintion: monthly administrative count of unemployed claimants--this is different from the ILO (International
Labour Organization) definition, which estimates all jobless people who want to work, are available to work, andare actively seeking employment. The claimant count measures only those people who are claiming unemploymentrelated benefits (Jobseeker’s Allowance). This is always a lower measure because some unemployed people are
not entitled to or choose not claim benefits. RU: There are two differing figures: 1) collected by a method basedon monitoring/estimations, similar to the ILO method. 2) registered: people who claim unemployment benefit,
which is not worth the effort.
16 Private transportation: car, truck, van; public transportation: bus, streetcar, train, etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SOURCES:
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

U.S. Census Bureau, Census Reports for GB and Greater Manchester, Statistisches Jahrbuch Leipzig, Institut für Länderkunde (IfL) Leipzig / Datenbank „Städte Russlands”
U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Census Bureau; CACI Ltd, Center for Urban and Regional Studies (CURS), Birmingham University; Statistisches Landesamt Sachsen; Goskomstat (Staatliches Komitee
für Statistik), Moskau; Goskomstat, Ivanovo
U.S. Census Bureau
Fischer Weltalmanach 2003; U.S. Census Bureau; NOMIS (GB, Employment Department Group’s on-line information system); Amt für Statistik und Wahlen Leipzig;
Goskomstat, Moskau; Goskomstat, Ivanovo
U.S. Census Bureau
Stadt Halle, Wohnungsmarktbericht 2003; Center for Urban and Regional Studies (CURS), Birmingham University; Center for Urban Studies, Wayne State University
Center for Urban Studies, Wayne State University
Detroit Regional Chamber
U.S. Census Bureau
SEMCOG (Southeast Michigan Council of Governments)
U.S. Census Bureau
SEMCOG
Center for Urban Studies, Wayne State University
U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Census Bureau
SEMCOG
U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Census Bureau-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 11--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------IN DETROIT TIME
Mitch Cope (2004)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------“French continued to be the principal language of the town, Catholicism its dominant religion,and the atmosphere of a French provincial town its pervading aura. It was a paternalistic
and easygoing society, which did not enshrine hard work and competitiveness as virtues.”(Robert Conot, American Odyssey)“Along the way, the pace of change in Detroit has always seemed a beat faster, the tenor ofits social life a pitch higher than elsewhere.”“Detroiters still are, as archbishop Edmund put it, ‘Rather feisty as a group.’ They like to
speak up and express their opinion. But that feistiness is a sign of their great strength, theirgreat determination to stick to it out, to weather the storm, to find solutions.”(Steve Babson, Working Detroit)
Throughout history Detroit has been a place of fascination for artists interested in economic,
labor and industrial perfection. They have come to Detroit to investigate, and to witness firsthand the ‘idea of Detroit.’ However, the city has gone through many transformations in a shortperiod of time, making for an unstable and unpredictable environment. Detroit has become asymbol of both the American Dream and the American Nightmare.
Physical labor is extremely important in Detroit’s social structures, economy, politics and overall mentality. Built up to be a utopian working class city where you are paid well for your work,
setting high hopes for a plentitude of well-paid jobs, has created a level of heightened expectations that proved impossible for many to realize. The mentality of an idealized working city stillpermeates Detroit’s cultural diversity, although the tension this has created has overflowed several times, resulting in some of the most segregated and divided neighborhoods in America. To
further complicate things, Detroit is home to some of the richest and poorest communities in the
U.S., with some of the largest and wealthiest corporations in the world as well as some of thehighest unemployment rates in the U.S.
The Detroit Metropolitan area has become a rhizome, connected in every way, but completely
separate all the same. An open grid of abandonment and development. It is like a dysfunctionalfamily whose members refuse to talk to each other, all sharing the same toilet, the same lights,
the same house, while each individual lives in his or her own isolated world.
People have left the city to build and occupy a new utopia, the suburbs. In contrast to the city’stall skyscrapers, tight grid pattern, abandoned shops and industrial buildings, the suburbs are alandscape of massive strip mall grids, enormous enclosed shopping malls, parking lots andevenly manicured lawns. Suburban Detroiters live out the new American Dream of isolation,
segregation and lawn mowers. For the artist, metropolitan Detroit’s landscape has become asymbol for the fall of either the American Dream or the result of the American Dream fulfilled.
Artists who come to Detroit today are less interested in the product of American and industrialization, but are now fixated, paralyzed by the discovery of its feces. Detroit is a great American
contradiction. The vast population decline in the city has created a scene that looks as if it has
never left the year 1968, kept in an eternal freeze frame, while nature grows over it. As the
population in the suburbs increases, a scene appears of a perpetual motion outwards, anxiously
growing, in an eternally increasing pace, while growing over nature.

DETROIT / In Detroit TimeIII | 12The vast size and open landscape of metropolitan Detroit has created a place where there islittle physical overlap with people outside ones immediate circle. Designed for the automobileand not the human being, the environment is hostile to foot traffic and person to person chancemeetings. Communication is bad, with the majority of people gaining information about theirneighbors, not from the neighbors themselves, but through the distortion of the media, and thisis usually bad news.
This isolation enables artists to go longer without interactions or the distractions of outside influences, giving them more time and space to develop stronger and more uniquely isolated ideas.
Although also suffering from the lack of critical dialogue or competition that other artists provide, isolation generally provides a place to produce work that is more personal, unique andcreative. As a result of the individualistic nature of art in Detroit, there is a sense of apathy inthe art community, a sense of overt friendliness, which has a tendency to create windows ofmediocrity, yet at the same time giving rise to some extremely creative and unique artists. So,on the one hand, artists have a chance to experiment and develop an intense personal relationship with their work, but on the other hand they can fall into bad artistic habits. Due to limited
community criticism and competition, creative development in an artist’s work is slowed. Artists
are therefore unknowingly working with Detroit issues without having to literally bring them into
their work, with a freedom to work, but with an abandonment to work through.
A recent visitor to the city describes the tension and difference between freedom and abandonment that she found here:“The city reminds me of the nights I spent at that one friend’s house I had in middle school
whose parents were barely around. And while spending the night over at her place wewould stay out to all hours of the night, come home smelling like whatever concocted formof alcohol we could fill a empty bottle of hair spray with (the spritzer kind of course), reeking of whatever smoke (funny-smelling or not), without the parental unit even noticing. All
rules were lifted. Sweet, scary, unfamiliar nihilism set in. And once you are there--mixed
with the freedom of having no one pay attention to your well-being or the rules--it makes
you kind of nervous.” (Michele Howley)-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 13--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SHRINKING CITY DETROIT
Kyong Park (2004)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The urban condition in the first half of the last century could generally be defined as one of
expansion--with populations from rural areas becoming concentrated in urban ones--at least forthe developed nations of today. However, in the latter half of that century, a different form of
expansion emerged, the sub-urbanization of rural territories at the periphery of developed cities,
especially in the U.S.A., which, consequently, introduced the contemporary phenomena of urban
shrinking in many core cities. A reversal of population movement, from the urban to the rural,creating semi-cities, a hybrid of rural and urban. As the result, the urban dynamic is no longer
purely one of expansion, but simultaneously of shrinkage, with metro Detroit as a paramountexample, as its center shrinks while its edges continue to expand.
And as more and more shrinking cities emerge in different nations and on different continents,
we should expect that shrinkage would accelerate, while expansion would subside, both in scaleand speed, globally and within each city. Urban shrinkage appears to be an economic diplomathat honors a nation when it becomes fully developed, which typically excels in achieving low
birth rates and high production, again in general.
Furthermore, when the migratory behavior of labor and capital is added to this mix, as it captivates more people and corporations, social conflicts occur not just between cities, suburbs andrural areas. Conflict now becomes prevalent between cities and especially between shrinking
and expanding ones. And for a city to survive within the conditions of competition between cities,
especially shrinking ones, or must adopt the same nomadic behavior that labor and capital haveadopted. This may mean that a city has to learn to move itself, physically as well, from one place
to another, just like populations and industries now do. And for a city to continue to exist as aplace and a space of stability, permanency and heritage, it may, or must, become completely, orat least significant, unstable, temporal and without a history.
This is happening already, and some cities have begun to move physically, because they havebecome difficult to self-sustain--after pawning their assets while erasing their own histories atthe same time--and without a definable future. These cities move by simultaneously developing
and abandoning, along the geographical and financial vectors of urbanization, sub-urbanization
and re-urbanization. They are also prepared to migrate nationally and internationally, as population, labor and capital shift from one city to another, from one nation to another, and from one
culture to another. The slowness of this movement is partly due to the magnitude of this endeavor,
in size and scale, of course. Yet there is a feeling of intention, a conspiracy to move a city
without us noticing or dissenting, so as to encapsulate the complacency of its citizenry into theprophesy of prosperity forever--the American Dream?
Possibly, emanating from one of the most enduring American myths, cities, not just people, are‘pulling up stakes’ to move on to another place and try again, following the speculative cultureof endless opportunities. Imagine that the frontier caravans and mobile homes, along with thedisposable culture of consumerism, reaching their epic dimensions in creating disposable andmoving cities. Like a car, here lays no fear of ‘turning off’ a city, because you could always
restart it any time, or simply buy, or make, or get into another one. This recalls a popular phrase
among the Detroiters that speaks, “the last one to leave the city, please turn off the light.”
In short, the urban condition of the first half of the new century may be defined by moving cities,
with metro Detroit as a paramount example, or at least one of the earliest. I hope, the Detroit
section of the project Shrinking Cites will investigate the contradictions between the mobile
elements of cities--industries, economies, labor, culture and everything that is non-physical--with

DETROIT / Shrinking City Detroit

III | 14

its immobile elements--buildings, roads, land, infrastructure and everything that is physical. Its
central focus could be to question the legitimacy of permanent or static cities, and to ask about
the future of theories and practices of urbanism once the reality of moving cities is accepted andnormalized. It could also ask if the nomadic cities are unique only to the capitalist economy, andfurther the inquiry into the biology of capitalism to find if it is the final solution or is now becoming obsolete.
Such shift in our positions and views about the concept of the city may be necessary, simply
because we have been unable to stop these cities from shrinking. The solution is urgent, but notreadily nor easily attainable. Personally, I believe the project Shrinking Cities would best serve
us by generating new and more intelligent questions. Perhaps our failure is due to asking thewrong questions. And as a member of this project, I would like to contribute some questions of
my own here.
What does it mean when industrial cities return to nature, such as parts of inner Detroit have?
Does this means the end of urbanism as we have known it, and will a new urban formation
emerge from these ex-urban spaces? Or is this condition simply the second phase of the sameurban dynamics that abandoned the inner city in favor of edge cities, and now is simply restarting the expansion over again from the original site? Will the edges of suburbia suffer the samekind of abandonment and decay the center experienced? Should we imagine and constructentirely different forms of economics, politics and culture if we want to stop the practice of disposable cities? Is the concept of the sustainable city merely a utopian dream or can it becomea reality that could produce a better culture and environment than the current one?
Did urban renewal and redevelopment projects fail to save many American cities and their communities because they did not recognize the nomadic tendencies of the contemporary city? Did
their belief in the permanency of cities instead produce isolation and containment of a selected
population in deadlands, creating a new kind of segregation? Will the invasion of temporalspaces of suburban culture be the cure of the inner city blues, or should that be resisted to prescribe the concept of multiple urbanism instead? Do people currently have the choice of living
in a different urbanism, and should the urban option persist and multiply?
Will Detroit and other shrinking cities bring a new kind of preservation method, such as ‘storageof cities,’ to preserve them at low cost now for more timely and advantaged redevelopments inthe future? Is immediate demolition or development really necessary or can cultures and cities
live with ruins? Must every building and space be occupied full time at all times? Must these
empty buildings and spaces be molded to the existing pattern of use and to existing urban practices? If not, are they really obsolete, and must they be demolished? Is the current demolition ofabandoned buildings an appropriate response to the ecology of moving cities, or is it this simply
a cultural psychosis about our fears of the end of civilization, like our fear of death?
Can there be mutually beneficiary relations between unoccupied buildings and an unemployed
population? Could these empty spaces be given for free to the unemployed population to selfincubate new types of labor and economy in informal, separate or semi-autonomous states?
Should the principle of social welfare change from patriarchy to self-reliance, and should weeven consider the creation of independent states for them?
Is perpetual growth the only economic model for cities, or are there also benefits from the deurbanization of cities, such as the affordability of spaces and the increase of open land, as in thecase of Detroit. Is the mutual action of shrinkage and expansion driven by the reality of scale?
Is the concept of smallness, as opposed to bigness, the more effective scale for urban ecology?
Is a new or better economic model possible through the conscious and positive reduction in sizeof a city, which might involve, for instance, re-designing the city of Detroit to accommodate apopulation of 500,000 or less?
Do cities age, like all other things, or are they eternal? What are the life expectancies of cities,
and what are the elements that allow one city to remain healthier longer than others? Should

DETROIT / Shrinking City Detroit

III | 15

we let cities die, or should we keep them alive at all cost? Is the shrinkage of cities unacceptable, or is it just a natural condition , like urban growth? If we accept shrinkage as a naturalprocess, then should we support and encourage it? If so, can we find economic and social
advantages from this and, if so, what would they be?
Are cities no longer entities of the nation state, but instead more of the global state? If so, will
this further strengthen cities as centers of economy, politics and culture, or gradually weaken
them? What, then, does the existence, and perhaps the increase, of shrinking cities suggest in
relation to the increased globalization of cities?
Are the shrinking cities a natural product within the dynamics of capitalism that shift urban
growth from one city to another? Or do shrinking cities imply the failing points of the capitalist
model? Do shrinking cities give a greater dominance to capitalism worldwide, or are they theplaces where post-capitalist economic models would form?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 16--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------CHRONOLOGY: DETROIT SINE 1700
Jerry Herron (2004)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1701 French entrepreneur Antoine Laumet comes to the New World to invent Detroit and himself, Antoine dela Mothe, Sieur de Cadillac
1751 Now 50 years old, Detroit languishes for lack of a purpose; population of 483, including 33 slaves
1763 Temporary purpose discovered for Detroit during Pontiac’s War, when it becomes valuable as British outpost
against encroachment of French troops
1796 Detroit officially becomes part of United States following the American Revolution
1801 Detroit at 100 still lacks a purpose; population remains about 500, most residents forget to celebrate theCentennial
1805 Detroit burns to the ground, inspiring the city’s motto (still in use), spreamus meliora; resurget cineribus (wehope for better days; it shall arise from its ashes)
1807 Woodward Plan adopted for laying out the city, based on circuses, boulevards, and connecting streets
1809 Detroit’s first newspaper, the Democratic Free Press, folds after one edition
1812 British troops occupy Detroit for over a year during the War of 1812, making it the only major U.S. city since
the Revolution to be occupied by foreign soldiers
1815 Detroit is incorporated into a city
1818 Woodward Plan abandoned in favor of nothing
1925 John R. Williams: Detroit’s first elected mayor
1833 Detroit’s first race riot
1837 Michigan becomes the 26th state; Detroit is its capital
1841 Detroit oldest cemetery opens: Mt. Elliot
1847 State capital moves to Lansing
1850 Detroit finally finds a purpose as manufacturing/transportation center; population increases ten-fold from1830 U.S. Census, to over 20,000 citizens stove and kitchen manufacturing become Detroit’s leading industry
1851 Detroit at 150 has about 26,000 citizens, making it 23rd largest city in the U.S.
1863 Detroit’s second race riot; two men killed, 30 buildings burned by mob (Detroit Almanac, p. 515)
1896 Charles Brady King takes first automobile ride in Detroit. Henry Ford builds his first car in Detroit: theQuadricyle on the site of the future Michigan Theater
1900 68% of tri-county residents live in Detroit; 68% of white residents live in the city (Detroit Almanac, p. 289)
First auto factory in Detroit was built in 1900 by Ransom E. Olds
1901 World’s first concrete road is build in Detroit
1902 Ransom Olds becomes first auto millionaire in human history
1902 First auto fatality in Detroit, George W. Bissell, dies when his carriage is struck by an automobile at the intersection of Brooklyn and Lysander
1903 Ford Motor Company is established1908 William C. Durant founds General Motors Company
1908 Ford’s Model T goes on the market
1909 First mile of concrete paved roadway in U.S., Woodward between 6 Mile and 7 Mile Road., at a cost of $14,000(Detroit Almanac, p. 59)
1911 First painted centerline in the world created by Wayne County Road Commission, on River Road, near
Trenton (Detroit Almanac, p. 59)
1913 Henry Ford introduces the assembly line
1914 Henry Ford announces the Five Dollar Day
1915 World’s first traffic lightDETROIT / Chronology: Detroit sine 1700

1917–1927

III | 17

River Rouge Construction: Ford Motor Company. Mercy General Hospital: first black hospital in
Detroit. Current I-75 and I-375 interchange

1921 GM builds World Headquarters on Grand Boulevard, world’s largest office building
1924 Chrysler Corporation is established
1925–1929

95% of all downtown Detroit high-rises are completed in a five-year period

1928 Grand opening of Michigan Theater
1930 Detroit ranks above one million citizens for first time in U.S. Census; city stops growing in terms ofgeographic size at 139.6 square miles
1930 Detroit rail system peaks with 30 lines and 534 miles of track inside the city (Detroit Almanac, p. 232)
1933 Diego Rivera finishes ‘Detroit Industry’ murals at Detroit Institute of Arts, depicting scenes from the Ford
Rouge Plant
1941 Streetcars run every 60 seconds on Woodward Avenue at peak times (Detroit Almanac, p. 232)
1942 Construction of the world’s first urban freeway, the Davison (M-8)
1943 Detroit’s third major race riot; 34 killed
1947 Henry Ford dies1948 First parking meters installed on Detroit streets
1950 65% of tri-county residents live in Detroit; 58% of white residents (Detroit Almanac, p. 289). Detroit reaches
peak population / ‘white flight’ begins
1953 Detroit reaches its peak population, and immediately begins to shrink
1954 Nation’s first shopping mall, Northland, is constructed1956 Detroit city rail service discontinued. Federal-Aid Highway Act begins to build 41,000 miles of interstate highways with 90% federal funds
1957 Rosa Parks moves to Detroit
1959 Motown’s first single. I-94 Freeway: Edsel Ford
1960 First U.S. Census to register population shrinkage for Detroit. Motown Records established in Detroit
1961 Southfield Freeway [M-39]
1963 Dr. Martin Luther King delivers his “I Have a Dream” speech in Detroit, two months before the national rally
at the Lincoln Memorial
1967 Detroit’s fourth major race riot; 43 killed [begins on 12th Street]
1969 I-75 Freeway: Walter P. Chrysler/Fisher
1972 Motown Records moves to Los Angeles. I-96 Freeway: Jeffries
1974 Coleman Young becomes Detroit’s first African-American Mayor
1975 Jimmy Hoffa disappears from suburban restaurant
1976 I-275. 12th Street is changed to Rosa Parks Boulevard
1980 ‘Urban Farming’ begins in vacant spaces
1983 J. L. Hudson’s closes its downtown store, making Detroit the largest U.S. city without a department store
1984 Peak number of fires on Devil’s Night (October 30): 810. Michigan Theater is turned into a parking garage
1989 I-696 Freeway: Walter Reuther1990 25% of tri-county residents live in Detroit; 8% of white residents (Detroit Almanac, p. 289). Detroit ring-neckpheasants are bred with northern Michigan pheasants to produce a heartier animal
1992 Ambassador Bridge, connecting Detroit with Canada, becomes the busiest border crossing in America
1995 First Annual Woodward Avenue Dream Cruise. (Cruise travels between 8-Mile and Pontiac. It does not enter
Detroit.)2000 Detroit population falls below one million for first time since 1930 Census
2000 Detroit has 40,000 empty lots, compared with 9,800 in New York; 4-5,000 in Chicago: 8,500 in Philadelphia(Detroit Almanac, p. 295)
2000 First Electronic Music Festival (Memorial Day Weekend)
2002 Eminem releases movie 8 Mile2003 Detroit’s newest cemetery: Guardian AngelIII | 18--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE AMERICAN METROPOLIS AT CENTURY’S END: PASTAND FUTURE INFLUENCES
Robert Fishman (2000)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The American metropolis at century’s end is vastly different than what many expected just 50
years ago. At mid-century, seers envisioned a clean, rationally planned city of the future, free of
long-standing problems such as traffic and poverty. The reality is more complex. We built a new
metropolis that addressed some major problems while simultaneously creating a host of new
ones. The next 50 years will undoubtedly contain similar surprises. In conjunction with the 1999
Annual Housing Conference, which looked at the legacy of the 1949 Housing Act, the Fannie Mae
Foundation commissioned a survey that asked urban scholars to rank the key influences shaping
the past and future American metropolis. The ‘top ten’ lists that resulted are the focus of this article.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------METHODSThe top ten lists are the result of a two-stage process. First, a group of urban specialists met tooffer their ideas on what items should be included in preliminary unranked lists of influences.
Next, these lists were mailed to members of the Society for American City and Regional Planning
History (SACREPH), an interdisciplinary professional organization composed of urban historians,social scientists, planning faculty, and working planners and architects. SACREPH members
were asked to select and rank the “top ten influences on the American metropolis of the past
50 years,” from a list of 25 choices. They were also asked to rank “the top ten most likely influences on the American metropolis for the next 50 years,” from a separate list of 19 choices.
(Write-in votes were allowed, but none made the top ten.) Of the 280 surveys distributed, 149-53%--were completed and returned.
Survey participants were asked to pick ten items on each list and assign them a score basedon their importance, with 1 being the highest and 10 the lowest. (The same method is often usedin coach’s polls that rank the top college football and basketball teams.) To calculate the results,
the items were weighted according to their rank. In other words, rank 1=10 points, rank 2=9,
rank 3=8 points, and so on down to 1 point. Points were multiplied by the number of times anitem got a particular rating. For example, if an item ranked 1 on 7 surveys, the item’s score at
the rating level would be 70 (7 x 10=70). The sum of an item’s score (adding up each ratinglevel) equals the total score for that item. The final top ten influences comprised those items withthe top ten overall scores, with number 1 having the highest scores, and 10 the lowest.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RANKINGS AND SCORES
The top ten influences on the American metropolis of the past 50 years are as follows:
1. The 1956 Interstate Highway Act and the dominance of the automobile (906 points)
2. Federal Housing Administration mortgage financing and subdivision regulation (653)
3. Deindustrialization of central cities (584)
4. Urban renewal: downtown redevelopment and public housing projects (1949 Housing Act) (441)
5. Levittown (the mass-produced suburban tract house) (439)
6. Racial segregation and job discrimination in cities and suburbs (436)
7. Enclosed shopping malls (261)
8. Sunbelt-style sprawl (242)
9. Air conditioning (234)
10. Urban riots of the 1960s (219)DETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 19

The ten most likely influences on the American metropolis for the next 50 years are as
follows:
1. Growing disparities of wealth (567)
2. Suburban political majority (553)
3. Aging of the baby boomers (517)
4. Perpetual ‘underclass’ in central cities and inner-ring suburbs (481)
5. ‘Smart growth’: environmental and planning initiatives to limit sprawl (452)
6. The Internet (415)
7. Deterioration of the ‘first-ring’ post-1945 suburbs (372)
8. Shrinking household size (353)
9. Expanded superhighway system of ‘outer beltways’ to serve new edge cities (337)
10. Racial integration as part of the increasing diversity in cities and suburbs (195)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE TOP TEN LISTS EXPLAINEDThe top ten influences on the American metropolis of the past 50 years
The single most important message of this list is the overwhelming impact of the federal government on the American metropolis, especially through policies that intentionally or unintentionally promoted suburbanization and sprawl. At the top of the list are the two judged mostimportant: number 1, the massive interstate highway program, and number 2, the less obvious
but highly influential policies of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). Moreover, the opportunities created by these and other federal initiatives were eagerly seized by private enterprise(number 5 on the list, Levittown, and number 7, the enclosed shopping mall), leading to the proliferation of what number 8 on our list designates as Sunbelt-style sprawl.
The unfortunate consequences of these policies are seen in the items that identify the urban crisis that resulted when American cities lost population and jobs to the suburbs. The survey
respondents emphasize the racial dimensions of this urban crisis (number 6, racial segregationand job discrimination in the cities and suburbs, and number 10, urban riots of the 1960s), forthis was a period when more than four million African Americans left the rural South for cities
that were already undergoing a deindustrialization that devastated their economies (number 3
on the list).
In this context, the 1949 Housing Act (number 4 on the list) has a strategic and perhaps tragic
importance. Unlike the other federal initiatives in this list, the 1949 Housing Act sought mainly
to benefit big cities through urban renewal: large-scale slum clearances, high-rise towers for
new public housing, and downtown redevelopment. But this act not only failed to counterbalance the other, weightier pro-suburban policies of the federal government, the failures of urban
renewal itself as a design and social strategy worsened the plight of the cities and thus accelerated sub-urbanization and sprawl.
1. The 1956 Interstate Highway Act and the dominance of the automobile.
Proclaimed the “largest public works program since the Pyramids,” the 41,000-mile Interstate
Highway System transformed the American metropolis in ways its planners never anticipated.
The system was supposed to save the central cities by rescuing them from automobile congestion and also provide high-speed long-distance travel from city to city: “coast-to-coast without atraffic light.” But the massive new urban highways, intended to move traffic rapidly in and outof downtown, quickly became snarled in ever-growing congestion, and their construction devastated many urban neighborhoods. Meanwhile, the new peripheral ‘beltways,’ originallydesigned to enable long-distance travelers to bypass crowded central cities, turned into the Main
Streets of postwar suburbia. Cheap rural land along the beltways became the favored sites for
new suburban housing, shopping malls, industrial parks, and office parks that drew people andDETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 20

businesses out of the central cities. Finally, the interstate system was financed by a highway trust
fund supported by the abundant revenue from federal gasoline taxes. Under the provisions of
the 1956 act, these funds were available only for highways: The federal government paid 90%of the cost of the new highways, the localities only 10%. By contrast, localities paid a much higher percentage for investment in mass transit. This was a powerful incentive to neglect masstransit and focus a region’s transportation investments only on roads. More than any othermeasure, the 1956 Highway Act created the decentralized, automobile-dependent metropolis weknow today.
2. Federal Housing Administration mortgage financing and subdivision regulation
Compared with the impact of 41,000 miles of interstate highways, the mortgage policies of thisrelatively obscure federal agency might seem unimportant. But the experts recognize that post1945 suburbia was built on the financial foundation of the FHA’s low-down payment, long-term,
fixed-rate mortgage. This crucial innovation was developed during the New Deal, when the federal government was forced to intervene in housing finance after the older mortgage system
based on down payments as high as 50% and terms as short as five years had led to massive
defaults. By the seemingly simple expedient of insuring against default the long-term, low-down
payment, fixed-rate mortgages issued by federally chartered thrift institutions, the FHA createdthe financial instrument that would help raise American home-ownership from 44% in 1940 toa record 66% today.
Moreover, the power to award or withhold mortgage insurance gave the FHA the hidden leverage to shape the postwar metropolis. The FHA developed standards for both home and subdivision design that quickly became the norm for the home-building industry. More important,
FHA-insured mortgages in the two decades after World War Two were limited to race-restricted housing on the suburban fringe, the FHA refused to insure mortgages on older houses in typical urban neighborhoods. This meant that a white home-buyer who wished to stay in his oldneighborhood had to seek old-style conventional mortgages with high rates and short terms. The
same purchaser who opted for a new suburban house could get an FHA-insured mortgage withlower interest rates, longer terms, a lower down payment, and a lower monthly payment. By
contrast, all African American households were excluded from FHA-subsidized suburbs, whichmeant that they were denied the benefit of better schools, rapid appreciation in home prices, andaccess to the booming suburban economy. Although the FHA and other federal agencies have
tried since the 1960s to eliminate their anti-African American bias, their policies during the period from 1945 to 1965 have had a lasting impact on the American metropolis.
3. Deindustrialization of central cities
In the years immediately following World War Two, American industry was concentrated innorthern and mid-western cities whose prosperous factory districts combined state-of-the-art
production facilities, the best rail transportation links in the country, and the best access to theskilled urban labor force. But these seemingly permanent advantages were lost as employers
were tempted by cheaper labor outside the older urban centers and by tax breaks and othersubsidies offered by suburbs and rural areas. Moreover, the urban factory districts lost further
advantage as industry shifted from rail to truck transportation and from multistory urban plants
to more efficient single-story structures that required more space than most cities could provide.
As national corporations shifted production out of the central cities to places where costs were
lowest, manufacturing jobs moved first to industrial parks in the suburbs, then to the Sunbelt,
and finally out of the country. The hardest-hit industrial cities such as Buffalo, Detroit, andPhiladelphia lost nearly three-quarters of their manufacturing jobs. This radical deindustrialization of what had been America’s industrial heartland devastated urban economies and municipal budgets. Deindustrialization also destabilized urban neighborhoods, which were based on a

DETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 21close relationship between work and residence. Perhaps most important, the deindustrializationof central cities meant that the millions of African-Americans who migrated from the South did
not find the abundance of entry-level manufacturing jobs that earlier immigrants from Europe
had found. Instead, most African-American migrants were trapped in a declining urban industrial economy where good factory jobs were rapidly disappearing.
4. Urban renewal: downtown redevelopment and public housing projects (1949 Housing Act)The landmark 1949 Housing Act enshrined in its preamble the worthy goal of “a decent homeand suitable living environment for every American” in federal legislation, but this goal waslargely undermined by the urban renewal methods favored by the act. The legislation fundedlarge-scale clearances of blighted urban areas, which were bought up by local redevelopment
agencies and then leveled. These areas were then typically rebuilt according to the then-fashionable theories of modern architecture as high-rise towers set in massive superblocks, or,worse, remained vacant for decades. Urban renewal helped rid the cities of some of their worst
slums, but the federal bulldozer also leveled many close-knit neighborhoods. The superblocks
invariably lacked the vibrant street life of the older districts, and high-rise towers proved to be
especially ill suited to the needs of poor families living in public housing. Many local redevelopment agencies used ‘urban renewal’ to mean ‘Negro removal,’ clearing away African-Americanneighborhoods close to downtown and concentrating public housing in hyper-segregated ghettos.
To upgrade decaying central business districts, the 1949 act and its successors also targeted
downtown blight, which they sought to remedy with new middle-class high-rise apartments andautomobile-friendly shopping areas. But the middle class still opted for suburban single-family
houses, and the modernized downtowns were hard pressed to compete with suburban malls.
All too often, planners targeted for destruction irreplaceable historic structures and the small
businesses that tended to occupy them--the two factors that gave downtown its special character. Urban renewal combined with the impact of urban highways (see number 1) and competition from suburban malls (see number 7) left many downtowns a pedestrian-unfriendly patchwork of highway ramps, empty lots, parking structures, and isolated buildings.
5. Levittown (the mass-produced suburban tract house)
The 17,000 houses that Levitt & Sons built on former potato fields east of New York City on Long
Island from 1947 to 1951 have become the enduring symbols of the postwar sub-urbanizationof the United States. These simple-looking structures in fact grew out of a highly sophisticatedcombination of advanced manufacturing and financial techniques that for the first time put thesingle-family detached suburban house within the budget of most middle-class and even working-class families. The Levitts (father Abraham and sons William and Alfred) pioneered the‘industrialization’ of suburban tract housing by using the techniques of mass production of standard models to speed production and cut costs. These techniques proved so effective that they
were soon used not only by big builders like the Levitts, but by the medium and small builders
who in fact constructed the bulk of postwar suburbia. Tied to innovations in home finance introduced by the FHA (see number 2), Levittown meant that buying a new suburban house wasoften cheaper than renting an apartment in the city. The Levittown mass-produced housebecame the defining ‘consumer good’ in our consumer society--the mark of middle-class status
in a middle-class society. Ironically, the original Levittown houses proved too small for an
increasingly affluent society, but their simple flexible design made them easy to upgrade. As aresult, very few unaltered Levittown houses remain in Levittown.
6. Racial segregation and job discrimination in cities and suburbs
The more than four million African Americans who migrated from the rural South to northernindustrial cities from World War Two through the 1960s encountered an urban world alreadyDETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 22

defined by the ‘color line’ and ‘the job ceiling.’ The color line forced them to live in ghettos whose
strict boundaries in the 1940s had usually been drawn during the previous great AfricanAmerican migration of World War One. In ever more crowded ghettos, African Americans wereforced to pay higher rents for inferior housing, and even middle-class blacks who ventured to live
beyond the color line in surrounding white ethnic neighborhoods met with hostility and, often, violence. At the same time, the job ceiling limited African-American workers regardless of their skills
or seniority to the lowest-paid, dead-end jobs. Although white European immigrant groups had
earlier encountered prejudice and exclusion, African Americans suffered from unprecedented
levels of segregation and job discrimination, which together put tremendous pressures on AfricanAmerican families struggling to succeed in the supposed ‘promised land’ of the North.
Although the civil rights acts of the 1960s outlawed both the ‘color line’ and the ‘job ceiling’, bothsurvived in altered forms. For example, the ghettos tended to expand not by integration at theiredge but by ‘blockbusting,’ in which unscrupulous real estate agents used fear tactics to force
white home-owners just outside the ghetto to sell at panic prices; they then resold the houses
for a large profit to African-American residents who found themselves still within the nowenlarged color line. These and other forms of racism meant that many black migrants wereunable to take the route of assimilation into the suburban middle class that earlier immigrants
had followed. They were instead trapped in inner cities characterized by what social scientists
call “hyper-segregation”: virtually total exclusion from white urban and suburban America, combined with a concentration of poverty, crime, and other indices of social disorganization.
7. Enclosed shopping malls
Suburbia found the definitive equivalent to downtown shopping when architect Victor Gruen
synthesized the innovations of many previous developers into the first fully enclosed, climatecontrolled shopping mall, which opened in 1956 in Edina, Minnesota. The enclosed shopping
mall overwhelmed the old downtown shopping districts, offering the downtown’s variety ofdepartment stores and specialty shops combined with the easy highway access, ample parking,and climate control that downtowns lacked. The massive scale of an enclosed regional mallmeant that American retailing would now be dominated by large development that controlled
this total shopping environment as no single landowner could dominate a downtown. This corporate concentration encouraged the growth of national franchise stores at the expense of local
Mom-and-Pop retailing. Under the combined influence of the development corporations, thenational franchisers, and their design consultants, the enclosed mall has evolved into an evermore elaborate, totalizing environment where shopping, eating, and entertainment are cunningly synthesized to maximize revenues. The mall design formula now virtually precludes the variety and diversity that once marked public spaces--political activities in malls have become anespecially contentious legal issue. Nevertheless, revenues from enclosed malls have stagnatedin the 1990s as consumers sought to save time by shopping in more convenient strip malls orfrom catalogs or through the Internet. More than one-quarter of all existing malls are expected
to fail in the next decade, and mall developers are frantically seeking newer, more enticing
incarnations of the mall experience.
8. Sunbelt-style sprawl“There is no there there,” writer Gertrude Stein famously observed of an early example ofSunbelt-style sprawl in Oakland, California. Where northern and mid-western metropolitan
areas had expanded outward from well-defined, long-established central cities, post-1945
development in the Sunbelt very quickly left downtown and all other traditional urban forms
behind and sprawled out in all directions. As developers seized any opportunity to build quickly, these Sunbelt metropolitan regions grew into centerless, borderless agglomerations where
massive housing developments, regional malls, industrial parks, office parks, and strip-devel-

DETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 23

opment spread out in seemingly random order along the network of highways. Such areas aretotally automobile dependent and as resistant to mass transit as they are to limits on growth.
Although some observers claim to appreciate the surreal ‘pop art’ juxtapositions of function andstyle that these areas inevitably provide, Sunbelt-style sprawl has generated an architectural andplanning backlash in the New Urbanism, a movement that attempts even amid Sunbelt-stylesprawl to bring back the traditional urban values of well-defined town centers and edges, andwalkable neighborhoods.
9. Air conditioning
The rise of the Sunbelt and the enclosed shopping mall would have been impossible without this
now-ubiquitous technology. Invented earlier in the century to improve photographic manufacturing, air conditioning became widespread in homes by the 1950s and 1960s. Air conditioning helped transform some of the most inhospitable sites for human habitation in the country
into some of our fastest-growing metropolitan areas. The spread of air conditioning, moreover,has encouraged the cocooning of America, as people learn to move as seamlessly as possible
from centrally air conditioned homes to air conditioned cars to air conditioned offices, schools,
malls, and entertainment centers, thus minimizing any possible contact with the natural environment. Today, more than 80% of new homes are centrally air-conditioned.
10. Urban riots of the 1960s
The full impact of the postwar urban racial crisis remained hidden from most of white America
until the urban riots of the 1960s shocked the nation. Fueled by persistent unemployment, poor
housing, and racial prejudice, the riots generally ignited at the flash point of conflict between a
black ghetto population and a largely white police force. After the Watts district in south-central
Los Angeles erupted in 1965, the long, hot summer of 1967 brought even more destructive rioting to Newark and Detroit; this in turn was followed by the riots that broke out after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968. The 1968 presidential commission headed by thenIllinois governor Otto Kerner laid the blame for the riots not on outside agitators, as many
believed, but on the structural racism in American society. As the Kerner Commission reportconcluded, the riots showed that the United States was becoming two societies, “one black, one
white--separate and unequal” (U.S. Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1). Although thereport urged that the riots become the occasion for a concerted attack on racism and social divisions in American cities, the riots in actuality produced few positive responses and mainly accelerated ‘white flight’ and urban disinvestment. In many cities, areas burnt out by the 1960s riots
have remained devastated to this day. The riots thus mark the transition from the overcrowded
ghettos of the immediate postwar period to the much larger inner cities marked by depopulation, deindustrialization, and abandoned housing.
The top ten most likely influences on the American metropolis for the next 50 years
Not surprisingly, the respondents disagreed more about the future than the past. Most of thosepolled foresaw the continuation and even intensification of the urban crisis that has characterized the past 50 years: growing disparities of wealth, a suburban political majority, a perpetualurban underclass, the deterioration of first-ring post-1945 suburbs, and continued automobilebased sprawl into new peripheral edge cities. A smaller group, however, predicted that ‘smart
growth’ policies would help preserve the environment and limit sprawl, this group also believedthat cities would overcome racial and class divisions to become more diverse than they are now.
Yet another group of respondents emphasized demographic factors: the aging of the baby
boomers and shrinking household size. New technology in the form of the Internet made number
6 on the list and might well have ranked higher if the likely impact of this technology on themetropolis were clearer.

DETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 24

1. Growing disparities of wealthThe past 30 years have seen increasing concentrations of income and wealth at the top of theincome scale, relative stagnation in the middle, and worsening poverty at the bottom. Our
respondents expect this trend to continue in the next 50 years, with possibly dire consequences
for American cities and regions, for growing disparities in income and wealth lead inevitably to
an increasingly divided metropolis. If, as our respondents believe, these growing disparities of
wealth will become the most important single influence on the American metropolis in the next
50 years, some of the negative consequences are detailed in the rest of the top ten list: a perpetual underclass in central cities and inner-ring suburbs and the deterioration of the first-ringpost-1945 suburbs, as the struggling portions of the middle and working classes find themselvestrapped in deteriorating older suburbs. On the wealthier side of the great metropolitan divide,
we are likely to see the winners in our winner-take-all society isolate themselves in ‘gated communities’ or other exclusive preserves at the edge of the region. Other likely trends include ahome-building industry increasingly focused on high-end trophy houses or tract mansions, asimilar concentration in retailing on the upscale mall, office parks located near the enclaves
where top executives live--locations that often leave the bulk of the employees with long, difficult commutes; and increasing disparities between the quality of the school systems and otherservices in elite suburbs versus less favored suburbs and inner cities. We are also likely to see
new building focused not just on the outer edge of a region, but in certain quadrants favored by
the affluent: for example, the northwest in Washington, D.C., the southwest in Minneapolis-St. Paul, and the north in Atlanta and Chicago. For the affluent who choose to live in gentrified
neighborhoods in central cities, the rule of isolation will also govern, as the wealthy use privatization techniques ranging from private schools to special tax-and-service districts to insulatethemselves from the urban crisis around them.
2. Suburban political majority
The suburbs rule. The suburbs will continue to rule. The suburbs now enjoy an absolute political majority over both central cities and rural areas. In the 1996 presidential elections, for example, the suburbanites (residents of metropolitan areas outside of central cities, as the Census
Bureau identifies them) comprised 50.5% of all Americans over age 18, and they cast 52.2%of the ballots because suburbanites register and vote in greater numbers than residents of central cities (who cast 27.8% of the ballots) or non-metropolitan areas (who cast 20% of the ballots). Our respondents believe that this majority will grow and will increasingly determine policyin the next 50 years. If, as many argue, the most important future challenge for metropolitan
areas will be to create some kind of effective regional governance for both central cities and theirsuburbs, this will happen only in ways the suburbs support. Nevertheless, the fact of the suburban political majority leaves many important questions unanswered. In the past 50 years, thesuburbs have used their political clout to promote rapid growth for their own communities andisolate themselves and their tax bases from urban problems. Today, many suburban leaders havecome to believe that the well-being of their own communities depends on regional cooperation
to limit growth at the edge and reinvigorate their central cities. Moreover, if the predicted deterioration of older, first-ring suburbs takes place (see number 7), these less affluent suburbs mightform coalitions with the central cities against their more affluent neighbors on the edge. Thus, thesuburban political majority could mean continued divisions between the suburbs and the central
cities, or it could mean the opposite: regional coalitions and ‘smart growth’ (see number 5).
3. Aging of the baby boomers.
Because of the sheer size of the baby boom generation--the 80 million Americans born between
1945 and 1964 who now comprise 30% of our total population--their needs have determined
the most important trends in metropolitan development. This has meant not only the explosion

DETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 25of Levittown-style tract houses bought by the parents of the baby boom generation, but also thegrowth of Sunbelt-style sprawl that has been the over-whelming choice of the baby boomers
themselves. But this automobile-dependent suburban environment currently offers little provision for the aged. The baby boomers are now at or near the peak of their earning capacity, but
by 2030 the estimated 61 million surviving boomers ages 66 to 84 will constitute 18% of ourpopulation (compared with 11% for that age category today). Indeed, by 2030 a record 32 million Americans are predicted to be 75 years of age or older, double the number today. Beyond
the physical difficulties of driving and home maintenance in the typical suburban environment,
the suburban “communities of limited liability” have made few social investments in caring forthe aged and dependent. But suburbia has already shown an unexpected capacity to adapt itself
to new needs--for example, older people using empty mall corridors each morning as their
walking tracks and social clubs. More important, developers are pioneering new forms of suburban assisted-care living that combine elements of condominium apartments and nursing
homes. And new kinds of flexible transit that combine aspects of taxi and bus service might easethe mobility problem. If crime rates continue to decline in large cities, empty nesters might
increasingly sell their suburban tract homes to move to urban apartments, where a full rangeof services can be found within walking distance. But most aging baby boomers will probably
be forced to struggle with a suburban environment that responds inadequately to their needs.
4. Perpetual ‘underclass’ in central cities and inner-ring suburbs
This prediction represents perhaps the most disturbing implication of this survey’s number 1
prediction of growing disparities in wealth. If the trends in our winner-take-all society have disproportionately benefited the top 5% who have isolated themselves in elite suburbs or gentrified urban cores, these same trends have left behind an under-class--disproportionately African
American and Hispanic--stranded in our inner cities. Although recent government policy--mostnotably Empowerment Zones and the HOPE VI housing program--have attempted to reverse
past policy errors, there is little evidence that the relatively limited government role can deal
with the scope of the problem. Moreover, the full effect of the 1996 welfare reforms that limit
eligibility to five years have yet to be felt for the core welfare population. In the past, great cities
have effectively combated poverty by providing richer opportunities for education (both formal
and informal) than rural areas. But the crisis of the urban school systems has produced a profound mismatch between the skills required in the new urban service economy and the very
limited skills most inner-city young people bring to the urban job market. This mismatch virtually guarantees the perpetuation of an urban underclass well into the 21st century.
5. ‘Smart growth’: environmental and planning initiatives to limit sprawl‘Smart growth’ means essentially planned growth, especially planning initiatives to limit sprawl
at the edge of a region and preserve open space. But proponents of ‘smart growth’ realize thatfor such measures to be effective at the edge, they require action throughout the region. In the
Portland, OR, metropolitan region, the national showcase for ‘smart growth’, planning initiatives
include:¬ an urban growth boundary to stop sprawl,¬ efforts to focus growth around transit lines and their stops,¬ redevelopment of the downtown to give the region a coherent focus,¬ a new emphasis on ‘infilling’ within already developed areas rather than ‘greenfield’ development at the edge,¬ design guidelines developed by the New Urbanism that emphasize walking-scale communities
instead of automobile-based sprawl,¬ an elected regional government to administer these programs and maintain popular supportand debate.

DETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 26

As the Portland model shows, ‘smart growth’ must be backed by a wide-ranging regional coalition that includes good working relationships between the central city and its suburbs, andbetween urban and rural interests. It also requires good working relationships among the different levels of government: municipal, county, state, and federal. These conditions have rarely
been met in American cities and regions. Nevertheless, the grassroots desire to stop sprawl andthe loss of open space--combined with the economic imperative that regions with a high quality of life succeed best in the global economy--have made smart growth a movement that politicians and developers must reckon with.
6. The Internet
As the English urbanist Sir Peter Hall has observed (1998), the difficulty in predicting the impactof the Internet on our metropolitan areas can be compared with the difficulty observers faced
80 years ago in predicting the impact of the automobile. Intelligent observers then could see thatthe automobile would change the structure of American cities, but they could not actually imagine Los Angeles or the other automobile cities that would eventually emerge. In the next 50
years, as the exchange of information increasingly replaces the physical production and movement of goods as the primary function of cities, the Internet will inevitably change the structureof our built environment, but we cannot imagine today the new metropolitan areas that will
emerge. Perhaps the most that can be said at present is that, compared with previous means of(physical) communication such as canals, railroads, or highways, the information super-highway
is radically flexible. While railroads tended to favor the big cities and highways favored the suburbs, the Internet can potentially spur economic development on the most remote mountainside,in the densest downtown, and anywhere in between. Some observers assert that the Internet
will doom cities to obsolescence as cyberspace communication replaces the face-to-face contacts that cities used to provide. Others see big cities reborn as hip environments where the art
world and other urban-based centers of creativity meet the new technology of communications.
7. Deterioration of the ‘first-ring’ post-1945 suburbs
When Levittown and similar suburbs were built soon after World War Two, they seemed theincarnation of the American Dream. But many of these suburbs have aged badly: Houses andlots are small compared with more recent designs, the residents themselves are aging, and eventhe plywood has started to come apart after 50 years. Where these areas had once defined theouter edge of the metropolis, they now comprise a first ring, too close to the central city and its
problems, but now far from the affluent edge. Such first-ring suburbs often lack the tax base andlocal government agencies to deal with the social problems that have been unexpectedly thruston them. Yet the well being of the first-ring suburbs is of great concern not only to those wholive there, but also for the future of the whole region. If these suburbs deteriorate, this will mean
an increasingly divided metropolis as the affluent flee ever farther to the edge, the poor aretrapped in increasingly isolated inner cities and adjacent first-ring suburbs, and the middle classdivides between those who are able to follow the affluent to the edge and those left behind in
deteriorating areas. But if these suburbs are able to use both public and private resources to
upgrade their housing stock and take advantage of their strategic location between the core andthe edge, they could become new models for adaptive reuse, smart growth, and social diversity.
If so, the first-ring suburbs could again incarnate a new version of the American Dream.
8. Shrinking household size
The size of the average American household has shrunk by 26% during the past 50 years, andexperts predict that it will decrease slightly in the next decade. Our respondents believe that thistrend will continue for the next half century. Not only are traditional two-parent families having
fewer children, but such families make up a shrinking percentage of total households. Over theDETROIT / The American Metropolis at Century’s End

III | 27

past three decades, the proportion of households consisting of married couples with children
declined from 40 to 25%. The remaining three-quarters of American households typically consist of smaller, nontraditional single-parent families, couples living without children, and oneperson households. As with the aging of the baby boomers, numbers alone cannot predict therole that shrinking household size will play in our cities and regions. Suburban developers havefor some time provided non-traditional housing types for non-traditional households, including
a wide range of condominiums and rental apartments. The continuing shrinkage will probably
mean that the present identification of suburbia with the single-family detached house and the
traditional family (already somewhat mythical) will soon seem as outmoded as ‘Leave It to
Beaver’ reruns. A more speculative possibility is that shrinking household size will encourage
the revival of central cities, as nontraditional households seek the flexibility, convenience, anddiversity that cities provide.
9. Expanded superhighway system of ‘outer beltways’ to serve new edge cities
TEA–21, the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (the latest successor to the1956 Highway Act), allows regions to ‘flex’ some of the record $218 billion in federal funds tobe spent by 2006 to mass transit and other non-highway uses. But most of our respondents
believe that the money will be used in the old-fashioned way: to lay more concrete for more
highways. Almost every American region has plans for a massive and expensive outer beltway
to relieve the congested inner beltways of the 1956 act. And like the earlier beltways, these willalmost surely draw development to an even more remote edge of the region. The consequencesof this expanded super-highway system would thus intensify the other pre-dictions on the list:
increasing distance between rich and poor, increasing stress not only on central cities but on thefirst-ring suburbs stuck on the declining inner beltway, loss of open space at the edge of theregion, and (ironically) more traffic congestion as drivers are forced to travel longer distances
commuting between widely scattered office parks on the expanded outer beltways.
10. Racial integration as part of the increasing diversity in cities and suburbs
This prediction goes against the trend indicated by most of the other items, but enough respondents chose it and the related number 5 (‘smart growth’) to win them a place in the top ten. If
the suburban political majority chooses to use its power to promote ‘smart growth’ rather thansprawl, and if economic trends reverse themselves to promote economic and racial equality,
then central cities and perhaps first-ring suburbs will be able to support genuinely diverse
neighborhoods. Already a few areas--Adams-Morgan in Washington, D.C.; West Mount Airy in
Philadelphia; Jackson Heights in Queens, New York City; and South Pasadena in Los Angeles-are home to an exciting if bewildering mix of races, languages, cuisines, and cultures. Suchneighborhoods could be the proving grounds for a new and vibrant multicultural identity for thewhole country. But, as the rest of our list indicates, given other trends, the future of racial integration and cultural diversity remains endangered.
Published on: http://www.fanniemaefoundation.org/programs/hpd/v11i1-fishman.shtml--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------References
Peter. Hall, Cities in Civilization, Pantheon, New York 1998
U.S. Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders,. The Kerner Report, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.,
1968----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 28--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I REMEMBER DETROIT
Jerry Herron (2004)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Detroit is a really old place, as far American places go, and this one has gone about as far asa place can and still continue to exist. But it does. Detroit has existed for 300 years, ever sincea deal-maker named Antoine Laumet paddled up an as yet unnamed river one July morning in
1701 with a group of like-minded speculators, cruising for local opportunities--it was the 24th,a Sunday. There were 25 large canoes in all, carrying a hundred some men--50 voyageurs,
like Laumet, 50 soldiers, two priests (one Jesuit and one Recollet), as well as Laumet’s nineyear-old son, Antoine. A number of Algonquins accompanied the party as independent contractors. Laumet was 43 years old, a nobody, economically speaking. If he was going to makeit in New France, he didn’t have any time to spare. He and his party had been surveying thecoastline for a couple of days, trying to figure out the best spot to establish an outpost. Finally,
they settled on a place where the river narrows and then takes an odd, east-to-west bend,almost doubling back on itself. (Because of that quirk, and because the river would one day
become an international border, Detroit today has the peculiar distinction of being the only placein the U.S. where Canada lies to the south.) Think of it this way. If you remember your highschool health-class, and if you remember that diagram of the see-through human body, showing the various organs, liver and kidneys, etc., maybe you also remember the duodenum, which
is where the stomach skinnies to a narrow tube and then wraps down and up and around before
emptying into the intestines. Adults often get re-acquainted with the duodenum because that’s
one of the places where things begin predictably to go wrong when a person reaches a certain
age. Same goes for Detroit. But that’s skipping ahead. Like the duodenum, between two bigger
things at either end, Detroit’s location is similar, on the narrows of a river that connects two of
the great lakes, Erie to the south, and Huron to the north. No wonder Laumet liked it. Anythingnavigating these vast inland waterways, especially anything English, would come within a canon
shot of whoever commanded the heights above the strait.
Laumet ordered his company to put in along a stretch of sandy beach on the north bank. It wasa great relief for the voyageurs, as they were called, rough men, squatty with tree-trunk thighs,
tough from carrying boats and baggage overland (their packs weighing 90 pounds or more, notto mention the canoes that they had to carry, whenever the water became un-navigable), menwith barrel chests, muscles hardened by paddling. No standing up in those large canoes, 25 feetin length, no histrionic posing, the birch bark delicate and easily punched through--they had tobe constantly pulling the canoes ashore to patch the seams with pine gum. No matter what
awaited them on land, it had to be better than the punishing life in one of those boats. So theysplashed ashore, pulled up their boats, and then climbed a low bluff, about 20 feet high, to see
how things looked from up there. The choice seemed ideal, with good sight lines up river anddown, so Laumet planted his flag, and knelt to thank God for granting him such bountiful country, claiming everything in sight for his sovereign, King Louis of France. Not that he really needed to. Adrien Joliet had already navigated the Detroit River in 1669, followed by Robert La Salle
ten years later. The claims of New France were well established (if not universally respected)
by the time Laumet arrived, in other words. But those earlier explorers were only passing
through. Laumet was here to stay--or at least that was his plan. He wanted to found a vast, baronial holding, modeled on the great country estates of France.
In keeping with that lofty vision, he decided to invent a better-sounding name for himself--one
appropriate for a great lord of the New World. And that’s how he’s usually remembered thesedays, if he’s remembered at all: Antoine de la Mothe, Sieur de Cadillac. “De la Mothe,” heDETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 29

plucked out of thin air--as to the “Sieur de Cadillac,” Laumet was Sire of nothing, except a lot of
nerve, his home village in Gascony, St. Nicolas de la Grave, being nowhere near Cadillac. But
who was going to say no? Nobody. „Since you have directed me to render an account of it, I
will do so,” Cadillac began his report to the Sun King, Louis XIV:
“ … the freshness of the beautiful waters keeps the banks always green. The prairies arebordered by long and broad rows of fruit trees which have never felt the careful hand of thevigilant gardener. Here, also, orchards, young and old, soften and bend their branches, under
the weight and quantity of their fruit, towards the mother earth, which has produced them …
[O]ne sees assembled by hundreds the timid deer and faun, also the squirrel bounding in his
eagerness to collect the apples and plums with which the earth is covered … The hand of thepitiless reaper has never mown the luxurious grass upon which fatten woolly buffaloes, of magnificent size and proportion. There are ten species of forest trees … In a word, the climate istemperate, and the air purified through the day and night by a gentle breeze … None but theenemies of truth could be enemies to the establishment [of the town Cadillac proposed] sonecessary to the increase of the glory of the king.” (Detroit Perspectives, pp. 27–28)
It was a lie, of course, this exigent little rhapsody about a virgin, ownerless paradise, with fruit
and wildlife thick upon the ground, and nobody there but Cadillac to gather them in, just like his
new name was a lie, with its bogus allusion to noble lineage, which is only to say that Cadillac
was a visionary man of his time, neither better nor worse than might be expected, although his
town-building scheme was both personally shrewd and also more enlightened than the usual
snatch-and-run tactics of colonial exploiters. (He laid out plans for what would become St. Louisand New Orleans, as well as Detroit, although he would not be the one to benefit from this vast
scheme.) But this isn’t his story, regardless of how indicative that story turned out to be. “This
Cadillac is the most uncooperative person in the world,” his commander at Port Royal, LouisAlexandre de Meneval, had written in a dispatch to the king, “a scatter-brain who has been driven out of France for who knows what crimes.” Cadillac failed to achieve the preferment hesought, the seigneury of Detroit. After a rocky, up-and-down career, he’d end up back in France,
governor of a provincial wide-spot-in-the-road. Somebody else’s problem to solve.
Instructive though this career might have been there wasn’t anything unusual about Laumet’s
troubles. New World speculators often fell victim to their own hype, some much more spectacularly, and lethally, than Cadillac. La Salle, for instance, who had been the first to navigate the
Detroit River in a sailing ship, was assassinated by angry co-investors in a failed Texas land
venture in 1687, which lends whole new dimension to the idea of a hostile take-over.
Nevertheless, there was something special about Cadillac’s situation and the way Detroit, eventhen, began to assert itself. Politics, and greed, absentee landlords and the defeat of ideals, thecurdling of expectations artificially sweetened with lies: it’s our story all right. The problem with
Detroit--from the very beginning--has been figuring out what the place was good for, and thenfiguring out who to blame when things turned out other than as planned. It’s doubtful that anyother city has given rise either to so many idealistic propositions, or to so much blaming--or toso much signifying as a result. Detroit was providing a type for this made-up country of ours
almost a century before the United States even existed.
Trappers and traders arrived, just as planned, and set up business with the local Indians, whom
Cadillac invited to settle near his stockade, making Detroit, on the spot, perhaps the largest
minority-run city in the North America. (If he was going to live baronially, he’d need peasantsto do the work.) Contemporary estimates place the combined population of Detroit, by 1705, at
about 2,500--20% white, 80% minority, just as it is today. (The population of New York City, atthe time, was 7,000; Philadelphia 6,700; Boston 4,400.) Tsugsagrondie--“where the beaver are
more plentiful”--is what the Wyandots called the country Cadillac had claimed as his. All thosebountiful meadows and orchards notwithstanding, animal pelts were about the only thing ofvalue that New France had to offer the Old World, at least for the time being: bear, elk, deer,DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 30

marten, raccoon, mink, lynx, muskrat, opossum, wolf, fox, and beaver. But the European market became so glutted with product that King Louis tried to close down settlements and limit trapping in order to maintain prices. Cadillac was hauled up on charges in 1705, and acquitted ofwhat we’d probably now call insider trading. In the end, the settlement, like his career, waslargely a bust. The population began to shrink, from a high of about 200 settlers who were living here by the time Cadillac left in 1711. (The native population suffered no such decline, but
this isn’t really their story either.) There were periodic skirmishes, even pitched battles, like theones with the Ottawas in 1706, during which the town lost its priest, Father Nicolas de L’Halle.
In 1712, the Fox Indians put the settlement under siege for 19 days, but to no avail. In 1716
Louis XV revoked all Cadillac’s local land grants. By then, half the European population had left.
What kept them here--the ones who stayed--isn’t clear, really; about as many people as you’dbe standing around with at the luggage claim in an airport nowadays, waiting for your bags.
That was all the town amounted to. The stockade walls had fallen into disrepair, wild animals
wandered the streets. (As to those streets, there were four, Rue St. Joseph, Fur St. Jacques, Rue
St. Anne, and Rue St. Louis. The whole settlement was contained within an enclosed square lessthan 200 feet on a side--an area smaller than a typical high football school stadium.) The placelooked so forlorn that Peter Charlevoix, a clergyman who visited in 1721, thought the settlement
had been abandoned. That was probably the first time, but it wouldn’t be the last, when a tourist
was led to ask if anybody still lived in Detroit, and if they did, then why?
Just when the place was all but done for, somebody else’s troubles turned out to be good business for Detroit. Not the last time that would happen either. By the 1730s, the continental bickering of England and France had spilled over to the colonial frontier. Not until then did Cadillac’s
outpost seem to be worth much to anybody--anybody except the native people who had lived
here for hundreds of years, in numbers far greater than the European late arrivals: Hurons,
Ottawas, Cippewas, Sacs, Foxes, Miamis, Potowatomis among them. The Indians had a lot clearer idea then we did what they were about. Yondotiga, “great village,” is the old Algonquin namefor their settlement that existed long before Cadillac’s. The Yondotega Club on East Jefferson isabout the only recollection left today of that earlier residency. (Jefferson is what Cadillac’s mainstreet, Rue St. Anne, would come to be called, and it still is.) The choice of name the Yondotega
was meant to be ironic, I suppose, by the society leaders, a century ago, who founded a club so
exclusive, behind its high brick walls and its Georgian façade, that Henry Ford--the original one-was supposedly denied membership, despite his being the world’s first certified billionaire. The
feeling was that his money was simply too recently made. True story or not, the club is still
there, where it’s been since 1891 on the water side of Jefferson, and so are a few of the neighboring houses built by Detroit’s 19th-century gentry-mansions, some of them, all ‘historic.’ But
no one actually lives there any more. The places left standing have either been built over, orelse retrofitted by lawyers or accountants or architects for business purposes, or else they’ve
given way to parking lots, and whatever else has followed.
Next door to the Yondotega there’s a combination liquor store, beauty supply, ATM, and Chinese
carryout restaurant. All under one roof. It’s an interesting piece of architecture, with period-lookbrickwork and a faux-neoclassical façade. The building’s twin pediments--replete with lunettes-quote the Yondotega architecture back in a way just short of mockery. Or maybe not short at
all. The parking lot’s full, it’s a busy place. You’ll need to watch where you walk or drive, since
there’s plenty of broken glass, old whiskey and beer bottles, discarded cups and wrappers--thematerial residue of spontaneous sociability. From the parking lot, which sits on a slight incline,
you can look down, over the Yondotega wall, into their sequestered courtyard, where not nearly as much seems to be happening. There are two entrances to the commercial interior. Walkin the left-hand side, and you’re in Han Beauty supply (straightener and wigs a specialty--guaranteed “100% human hair”). Take the door on your right, and you’re in Amori’s Marketplace,“liquor, beer, wine, imported & domestic.” The store is huge, and immaculate, and unexpectedly

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 31

urbane. No bulletproof glass, no high-security apparatus. Two Arab clerks preside over the
goods, from Dom Perignon in special wooden presentation boxes to half pints of Mohawk vodka
and a cooler full of 40-ounce malt liquor bottles. Over in the corner, three ancient Chinese cooks
are getting the steam tables ready for the lunchtime rush at Fu Wah Food and Deli. There’s probably a little parable here, waiting to be told, about adaptive re-use and making do in the city. But
who’s going to tell it? That’s a kind of parable too, the fact that nobody will, because there’s nothing left to say about Detroit. Not any more. At least that’s the popular wisdom about the place.
It’s not just lately that things got to be this way, though, which is the fundamental truth people
often get wrong. They imagine they are the first generation to live under conditions of enforced
nostalgia, bereft of an idyllic ‘before’ that we can only long for, now, sentimentally, ‘after.’
But the truth is, we’ve been nostalgic from the very start--all the dreamers who came to America
imagining a ‘New Jerusalem’, or some other version of synthetic paradise. And the future has
always looked better, purer, more ideal when contemplated retrospectively, from that momentin the past when we first thought it up, before harsh realities intervened. Before we actually did
anything. Nostalgia for the future became the basis for all subsequent American dreaming, even
before there were Americans--strictly speaking--to propagate the vision further. It was in thevery nature of this place to call forth such imagining. Antoine Laumet would have understood
what I’m talking about. “The hand of the pitiless reaper,” he rhapsodized, in his letter to KingLouis, “has never mown the luxurious grass upon which fatten woolly buffaloes, of magnificent
size and proportion.” This is not merely a prelapsarian vision, from before the fall. Cadillac has
imagined himself all the way back--he’s there at God’s elbow, present at the creation before
Adam (or anybody else) had shown up in paradise: “It is in this land, so fertile, that the ambitious vine, which has never wept under the knife of the vine-dresser, builds a thick roof with its
large leaves and heavy clusters, weighing down the top of the tree which receives it, and often
stifling it with its embrace.” (Detroit Perspectives, p. 27) He knew enough to know the place wasn’t as empty, or as bountiful, as he’d made out. It was not the reality, though, but a paradisal
nostalgia that he was trying to get down on paper. And so he did--for all the good it would do
him in the end, which was none at all.
In 1763, France lost the Seven Years War to the English. In the colonies, the conflict became theFrench and Indian War. At the end of it, Fort Pontchartrain du Détroit quit being French and it
also quit being Fort Pontchartrain, the name Cadillac invented to flatter his patron, Count
Pontchartrain (King Louis’ Minister of Marine), and also to identify the straits, le détroit, thatmade this a strategically appealing location. Cadillac’s trading post simply became Detroit (minus
the accent). The English colonial village of about 500 citizens would subsequently get
Americanized, but not until 15 years after the Revolution ended. It took that long to get the British
to give Detroit up. That’s an indicative story too about enforced migration and not knowing whento let go. The Brits would be the first, maybe, but surely not the last to quit this place not bychoice, but because ‘events’ had made them go, their nostalgias trailing after them. During the
War of 1812, the town became English again for a little while before returning to American
hands for good, or ill, depending on the view a person takes. For over a 100 years, the fort continued to be the main reason for Detroit’s existence, urbanity having not yet supplanted strategic significance as a reason for being. Cadillac’s little stockade gave way to a more substantial
enclosure by the mid-18th century. Then came a succession of increasingly modern fortifications. Fort Larnault, built by the British during the Revolution, grew into Fort Detroit when theylost, and then in the War of 1812 that gave rise to Fort Shelby. Finally, in 1827, when forts nolonger seemed necessary, and new land close to downtown was, Fort Shelby was dismantled,
and the remains were dumped into the Detroit River as landfill. Not until then did the city seemto have sufficient warrant of its own for existing. The population at that point was 2,222. The
size of the town was 2.56 square miles, ranking Detroit as the fifty-third largest municipality inthe 1830 U.S. Census.

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 32

Time passed, and along with it--among other things--the University of Michigan, which wasremoved from Detroit to Ann Arbor in 1837. This was followed by the removal of the capital toLansing in 1847, ten years after Michigan became a state. The change was purportedly for reasons of moral probity, Detroit by then having already acquired a reputation for citified dissoluteness. (The population was 21,019; the size, 5.85 square miles, making Detroit the 23rdlargest city in the country.) During the Civil War, Detroit was the scene of various upheavals-draft riots and racial melee, heroic escapes on the Underground Railroad, unprecedented
numbers of enlistments and subsequently of casualties. This is where the Grand Army of the
Republic---America’s first veteran’s organization--would make its national headquarters, in agreat castle on Grand River Avenue. “All quiet on the Potomac,” people greeted each other on
the streets, at war’s end. One of them, Sergeant Wesley D. Pond of the 4th Michigan Cavalry,snatched Jefferson Davis’ dressing gown as a war souvenir. He brought it back to Detroit withhim, where it was displayed proudly on civic occasions. James Vernor would hang it in the window of his drug store, at 235 Woodward, on the corner of Clifford, with a little hand-letteredcard identifying what the hapless garment was. Vernor was a veteran himself, who would profit in an unexpected way as a result of the War. When he enlisted at age 19--also in the 4thMichigan, along with Sergeant Pond--he left some flavoring concoctions aging in his basement,in oak barrels. By the time Vernor returned home, he’d forgotten all about them, but one, at least,
he liked the taste of when he tried it. So he used it as the basis for a ginger drink. This meticulous young man (holder of Michigan pharmacist’s license no.1) had invented what would
become America’s first successful soft drink. It was potent. (Hospitals used it as a tonic.) The
stuff would go right up your nose: “Vernor’s Ginger Ale Deliciously Different! Flavors mellowed
in wood 4 years.” By 1880, Vernor’s modest hometown had a population of 116,340. For 30
years, as the citizenry grew, it would occupy the same rank among U.S.-cities, holding steadyat number 17. Then, all at once, life changed in ways that would leave nothing the same, hereor anywhere else.
Detroit, the dynamic. City beautiful, city of trees. That’s how James Vernor’s hometown variously captioned itself. “In Detroit, Life is Worth Living,” a vast outdoor billboard proclaimed, above
the Campus Martius at the very center of downtown. I have an image of that sign preserved ona postcard. “Mother,” the penciled inscription reads, on the reverse side, “I am having a rare oldtime.” It is signed “Clarence,” and bears a postmark, June 23, 1912, 7:30 PM. It’s hard to imagine
what the Detroit that Clarence wrote home from might have become--might have, but didn’t.
Already something else was on the way that would establish a new purpose for Cadillac’s citythat nobody previously could have guessed. “Detroit, Capital of the World’s Greatest Industrial
Empire.” That’s how the city would be thinking about itself by 1923. (Population 993,695, twice
what it had been only ten years earlier when Clarence wrote his mother back in Kalamazoo.)
By then everything had changed. Forever. A modest town of lumber barons and stove makers,
brewers and locomotive engineers, cigar merchants and seed vendors was on the way to
becoming the capital of Fordism and modernity, home of the Model T, the Arsenal of Democracy,
Motown. Just the right people, with the right kinds of skills, all showed up here fortuitously, with
ample natural resources and plenty of available capital, so the future could be assembled from
off-the-shelf elements. That’s how it started, anyhow, pretty much a local affair, but before long,everybody--it seemed--would be on their way to Detroit, and from places Detroiters had nevercome from before.
By 1925, almost half the new citizens of Detroit were foreign born, according to one estimate.
That’s a larger immigrant influx than any other U.S.-city, then or now. Russians and Poles,
Italians and Hungarians displaced the earlier Irish and Germans, English and Scots as latest to
arrive. “Nowhere in the world may the trend of the new industrial cycle be perceived moreclearly than in Detroit,“ a visiting journalist, Matthew Josephson, wrote in a by-then typicaldescription of the city, published in Outlook magazine, February 13, 1929 (population 1,568,662;

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 33

size 139.6 square miles, what it is today): “In this sense it is the most modern city in the world,
the city of tomorrow. There is no past, there is no history. Neither traditions nor the accumulated handiwork of man’s leisure time or deeply reflective moods obtrude upon the eye. There is
primarily the wealth of mechanism and ‘turnover.’ One day, thousands and thousands of humanbeings turned themselves over and found that they were in the huge metropolis of Detroit.”(Detroit, pp. 163–164)
Detroit was the fourth largest city in the country, after New York, Philadelphia and Chicago. It
would hold that same rank for the next 30 years and more, with a peak population reaching
1,849,568 in 1950. (Unofficially, the total was said to have exceeded two million by the mid1950s.) The city has shrunk to half that size today, with 80% of the almost five million residents
in this Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (as the Census Bureau calls it) preferring not tolive in or even enter the erstwhile metropolis that gives a name to our collective address. 3.8
million people live around the city, fewer than a million still in it. And not without reason. The‘City Beautiful’ became the ‘City of the Riot’, where the bottom fell out, the ‘Murder Capital’ (which
it has been, off and on, since the 1970s), the place where ‘Devil’s Night’ happens, last person toleave turn out the lights. “We’re talking about Detroit. Once a symbol of U.S.-competitive vitality,
and some say still a symbol: a symbol of the future, the first urban domino to fall.” That’s how
Diane Sawyer put it when PrimeTime Live came to cover Detroit (November 8, 1990). But hers
was a short-sighted view. All the things that seemed to be going so un-precedentedly wrong
with Detroit--violence, corruption, racial conflict, abandonment--had been going wrong for thelast 100 years, just as they had in every other American city. The only difference is that before
there’d always been some larger story to explain those problems away. What was more important, there had been sufficient prosperity--even in the ‘Depression,’ eventually--to make thatstory seem believable: recovery, reform, relief just around the corner. Whatever. But not any
more. “Most big cities do have the same problems as Detroit,” Judd Rose allowed in thePrimeTime report, “And in some cases they’re worse. Washington has more murders, L.A. hasmore gangs. New York has more racial violence. America’s cities are on a dark and dangerous
road. But you come here and you get the feeling this, this is what the end of the road looks like.”
True or not, that was the version of Detroit a lot of people wanted to believe by 1990. And sothey did. This was the exception that would allow the rule of normalcy to remain in force foreverybody else.
In sum, a lot has ‘turned over’ in Detroit since 1929, to use the Outlook writer’s term, not least
the ownership of a city that started out European and white and has ended up America’s greatest black metropolis, with 81% of the current population being African American. City of tomorrow: it was and still is. “There is no past, there is no history.” If there were, and if the people
who live here had ever paid much attention to it, then none of the things that have happened in
Detroit would have been possible, good or ill, because some thing or some body would havestopped them. We’d have just known better than to try. No assembly lines and no freeways, nosuburbs and shopping malls, all of them invented here. No ‘white flight’, no ‘projects’ and urban
blight. No Motown, no funk, no riot, no crack. No hip-hop, no techno, no raves in vast old warehouses. Detroit is the most abandoned place in America. “Neighborhoods collapsed,” Coleman
Young explained to Judd Rose, who was taxing the mayor with the “war-zone appearance” ofthe city, “because half the goddam population left.” There was simply no stopping us--any of us
who lived here, going in or coming out.
But it’s not for all the cliché reasons that Detroit has become a cliché. That’s the open secret of
this place, and the truth practically nobody credits, for reasons not hard to understand. Detroit
is not a fluke, a freak accident that ought to have ended up some other way. Like the writer said,
three quarters of a century ago, Detroit is the way it is because it is the city of tomorrow, “a symbol of the future,” to quote Diane Sawyer (though she meant no compliment). Detroit is the way
it is because of who we are as Americans, all of us together, and because we are the ones who

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 34

made this place, and then let the place make us over in return. Detroit took us in, gave us jobs
and made us rich, beyond any working man’s or woman’s wildest dreams. It provided houses
and cars of our own, and moved us along in the world, with boats and summer places ‘up north’and college for the kids. Wealth unprecedented in human history flowed out of this place on thegreat concrete rivers of our freeway system. That flood of prosperity carried people and storesand offices and jobs along with it, right out of town.
We’re a mobile people, a post-urban people. We drive away from the past, leaving its problems
in the rearview mirror. We’re an affluent people, in love with our cars, a people wedded toviolence, with a boundless appetite for energy. We consume the world’s resources without athought, as if they belonged to us, personally. We murder each other with a casual abandon, 42of each other per day. We see gun control as a question of individual liberty, and vote it down.
We let our history and our freeways fall apart. The rich get richer--a whole lot richer--and thepoor stay behind, in the city. Americans consume more goods and services than any humans
in the history of our species. Meanwhile, 16.5% of us live in poverty. We’re dedicated to selfhelp. We’re individualists. This is the land of opportunity. “Give me your poor, your tired, yourhuddled masses, yearning to breathe free.” We believe what it says on the Statue of Liberty.
We get along by living further and further apart, on bigger lots in gigantic houses, with fewer
people in them. Each person has their own TV, and a lounger to sit in watching it. We’d preferto have somebody just like us living next door, no matter how far away that next door is.
We ride alone in our ever-enlarging cars. There are more automobiles than there are licensed
drivers to operate them. Half of us are overweight. We’re adamant about freedom. To preserve
our liberty, we put more of each other behind bars than any other people on earth. We’re nostalgic beyond all reason. But not about the past. We treasure a memory of the future that can
only be achieved by retroactive means. The conclusion seems obvious: we’re all from Detroit,
the most fully revealed American spot on earth.
In this country, we came late to cities. The English, for example, were already urban by 1850,
at least the majority were, and still are, like the citizens of every other industrialized nation. But
it wasn’t until the 1920 census that the majority of Americans became urbanized. We wouldn’t
stay that way for long, though. By the 1970s, we’d hardly got settled in when the city was over,with most of us moving on to something we thought--or had been persuaded to think--was better.
Suburbia, I mean, where the majority now live--or else beyond, in states of hyperbolic disconnection that nobody has yet figured out what to call or how to comprehend, except to point out
that no people on earth have ever undertaken such a vast emptying-out of their society. Not until
us. That’s what makes Detroit representative: it’s gone so far ahead that it has all but ceased toexist. But this disappearing act is no accident. Everything that’s happened is the result of a design
built into the nature of things. This is the place that every other American place would be like
if those other places had gone all the way like Detroit did. That realization--however dimly
apprehended--makes people afraid. It makes them want to believe in some kind of urban exceptionalism, like PrimeTime Live was offering. Not to worry, this is a special case. Detroit isn’t
about you, or what’s inside of you, it won’t happen to the place where you live. But nobody really
believes that, not really, and it makes us afraid.
The city taught us what we needed to know to become the people we thought we wanted to
become. Preeminently, it has taught us how not to need it any more, so we put it aside like aworn-out appliance, or a set of old tires that you prop up against the garage wall, or put downin the basement, not wanting for some reason to just throw them away, but not having any real
use for them either. The capital of our republic may be in Washington, but the capital of ourculture is in Detroit, where the future is all behind us. Americans don’t want to go back and livein the city, even the cities that supposedly work--New York or Chicago, say--or else the newsunbelt cities that were never real cities in the first place--Houston or Tucson or Atlanta. They’re
all just incomplete versions of Detroit anyhow, and most of us choose to live elsewhere. But weDETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 35

can’t seem just get over the city either, like the broken toaster or the old set of tires that every
time you pass by it, you say to yourself, I’ve got to do something about that stuff. But what? Thecity is the last place we remember being, all together, before everything happened that got us
to where we are now. We’ve prospered, sure, a lot of us did anyhow. But it’s a weird kind ofprosperity that makes people feel shaky and isolated, or else fills them with rage. The city seems
to hold some secret, about not being left alone. It’s the last place the future was seen alive before
it disappeared into now.
I knew about Detroit long before I moved here. (We all know about Detroit.) And now here I am.
I own an apartment in a building where Diana Ross once lived. Baby love, Oh baby love. My
high school girlfriend in the segregated south whispered that song into my ear at the dance. The
white boy band, up on stage, tried to sound like Marvin Gaye or Smoky Robinson. My dad, whosold Oldsmobiles, would tell us, at dinner, my mom and me, what “the boys from Detroit” said
about the new car coming out each Fall, back when the model change meant something, whencars were real. I walk down the street now, past windows in an old storefront that the Dodge
brothers had painted with their sign in 1901: Dodge Brothers Engineers and Machinists. The
glass is still there, and you can read the faint imprint of the once gold lettering. It thrills me--I’mserious--to see these things, to walk this consequential pavement. The Dodges, John and Horace,
were sitting there, behind their pane of glass one afternoon, when Ransom Olds came calling.
He wanted them to make the running gear for a new car because his own factory, on Jefferson
Avenue, the world’s first automotive plant, had just burned down, and his little curved-dash prototype was the only thing he’d been able to save from the fire. The Dodges said OK: “Come awaywith me Lucille, in my merry Oldsmobile.” The song was a hit--the first car song ever to becomeone--and so were the cars. Olds became the first millionaire in automotive history. His little
curved-dash runabout sold for $625. By 1903 when the total number of vehicles produced
annually in the U.S. was just over 11,000, one third of those were Oldsmobiles.
I drive past the old Packard plant on East Grand Boulevard, abandoned now, and probably to
be demolished. “Ask the man who owns one. Packard.” The President always drove a Packard,
and so did my grandfather, who was the Packard dealer in the dusty little West Texas town
where I grew up. The gypsy king drove a Packard too--he’d stop to buy a new touring car every
fall, from my grandfather, pay cash for it, no questions asked. And then nobody would see him
again for a year, until he came back for the new model. That’s how the story got told to me anyhow.
I sat watching TV, the summer before college, with my friend and his dad, who had just offered
us boys a beer. I was impressed. He called us “men.” Whatever it was we were watching got
interrupted. There was live coverage from Detroit. The city was in flames, the army was goingin. People were being shot, it looked like a war. “I hope they kill them all,” my friend’s dad said.
I didn’t know then what he meant. But I would find out. Two years later he was dead. Stuck a
twelve-gauge in his mouth, and blew off the top of his head.
I know things about this place. I know things because of this place that I would never have cometo know if I didn’t l live here. But whether I knew them consciously or not, whether I lived here
or not, they’d still be true, those things I know, about what it means to be an American, and whatbeing American has done to us, and for us all who live here in this country. And the most important thing I’ve found out is that our history is unlike the histories of all the other people whohave ever lived. Not that this should come as a surprise, if you pay attention. Exceptionalism,
it’s called. E pluribus unum. That’s what it says on the dollar bill, and it’s true: from the many,one (though the working out of this ideal is what people usually get wrong, which is where
exceptionalism comes by its deserved bad name). It’s not that we’re special in some holy sense,
the one and only people ordained by God, hope of the world, something like that. That’s not what
I’m talking about. It’s that we’re the one people whose history is not based on memory, but onforgetting. Which is not the same as saying we have no history at all--a mistaken view held by

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 36

many so-called experts. There are too many things we’ll never get over, so long as any of us
now living is still alive: Vietnam and Watergate, and all the killings, Medgar Evers and Dr. King,
Bobby Kennedy and the kids at Kent State, and of course his brother John, and slavery, and Little
Big Horn. And good things too, the moon landing, and I have a dream--a speech first deliveredin Detroit--and Ask not, and the Mustang, which is also from Detroit, and the Little GTO, and thecure for polio, and Elvis and La Choy Chinese in cans (also a Detroit original). And Baby love,
Oh baby love. And that’s not all, by any stretch, on either side. There’s no shortage of memories, in other words, or people to propagate them. Americans are the most nostalgic people onearth, in love with souvenirs. If we have a common culture, then that’s got to be it--collecting.
And that’s what makes us different--the way our collecting tends to obliterate history rather thanpreserve it. And that’s what is so revelatory about Detroit.
“History is bunk,” Henry Ford is supposed to have said. What he actually said is a lot more interesting, and also smarter about what keeps us together, as Americans, regardless of the differences that drive us apart. “History is more or less the bunk,” Ford told a reporter in 1916, afterlosing a famous libel suit against a Chicago paper that had called him an “ignorant idealist.” “Wewant to live in the present,” he said, “and the only history that is worth a tinker’s damn is thehistory we make today.” The problem with a history like that--one being made up fresh eachday, on the spot--is that it requires a lot of clearance work, which is where the souvenirs andthe culture of collecting come in. You have to constantly be making bunk out of the past--converting historic fixity into transportable souvenirs--if the ground is to be kept free for new construction, whether it’s architecture or machines or memory you’re talking about. That’s what
Cadillac was doing, for instance, with his self-invented name, and his ‘Garden-of-Eden’ versionof the landscape, which became the first urban clearance project in Detroit’s history. Making it
all up fresh, for the occasion. But also making it sound like something old--the prelalpsarian
geography, his ancient-sounding synthetic name: souvenirs of a nostalgia for the authenticity
which his histrionic acts had just obliterated. It worked, for a while anyhow, just like Henry Ford’s
history worked, better even than anybody might have expected. And that has made Detroit what
it is, and it makes Detroit a revelation about America, where our history is not a history straightout, but a history of forgetting how to remember certain things and places and people. That’s
what makes us who we are. Exceptional.
Five miles east of Detroit, in the rural farm village where he grew up--a place called Dearborn-Henry Ford built the first theme park in U.S. history--or out of history, which is closer to thetruth, since getting out of history is what the place is all about. There are two elements to Ford’s
invention, which he began contemplating in the early 1920s, but didn’t get started on in earnest
until the ‘Great Depression’ had begun in October 1929. The Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield
Village is what the place is called, officially, and those are its twin elements, a museum and avillage-based theme park, each carrying out brilliantly Ford’s proposition about history and bunkand souvenirs.
Here’s how the place works. Start with the museum, which is an outsize replica of colonial
Philadelphia architecture, here scaled to the ambitions of its creator. The façade represents three
separate historic structures--Independence Hall, Congress Hall, and the Old City Hall--now combined into a single twice-larger-than-life building, with twelve acres of internal exhibition space.
The museum’s collections are the result of Henry Ford’s compulsive enthusiasm for material history: steam locomotives, farm machinery, kitchen implements, old light bulbs, the largest collection of tractors in the world, airplanes, the chair Abraham Lincoln was sitting in when he wasassassinated, a vial containing Thomas Edison’s dying breath. Ford the compulsive souvenirhunter had been amassing this stuff for years, and kept at it until the end of his life, shipping
endless quantities of things back to Dearborn for the museum. There are unique objects, like the
Lincoln chair, but there are also endless repetitions of the same thing, kitchen utensils for example,
and farm implements, as if Ford were trying to achieve a certain authority by sheer quantity

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 37

alone. The collection, even now, after modern curatorial attempts at organizing and weeding out,
still bears the stamp of the creator, and his madman’s-attic version of historic preservation. The
hoard is so vast, so encyclopedic seeming that it creates a kind of authenticity by intimidation.
How could all this real, historic stuff not stand for something? But what? That’s the question.
And the answer is Greenfield Village, the mid-western hamlet that lies, anachronistically, justbeyond the monumentalized copy of Independence Hall. The Museum indemnifies visibly thesynthetic version of history being worked out on the ground there. It’s the money in the bank,materially speaking, that the village can draw upon, which is a good thing, in terms of credibility. To begin with, there never was a Greenfield Village. The name, like the place, is pure makebelieve, a compound of the Dearborn neighborhood--Greenfield--where Henry Ford’s wife,
Clara, had grown up, together with the village ideal that became Ford’s primary device for mythmaking. But this is no Disney fabrication. At the same time, it’s not a meticulous, Williamsburglike re-enactment either (which Henry Ford was familiar with, and in fact inspired by, but which
he rejected because it was inadequate to his purposes.) Greenfield Village is neither fake nor
real--instead, it’s a real fake, a pure fabrication comprised of historically authentic materials, orat least materials that Henry Ford thought were authentic at the point when he acquired them.
For instance, there’s the Wright brothers workshop, and homestead--not a copy, but the realthing, brought here--and the birthplace of William Holmes McGuffey, whose Reader Henry Fordthought of as a model of pedagogical excellence. And there’s Stephen Collins Foster’s home
(probably not authentic), and Luther Burbank’s house and garden, and Noah Webster’s house,
and the schoolhouse of Mary Elizabeth Sawyer (also probably not authentic) whose pet lambbecame the source of the poem, Mary had a little lamb, etc. Henry Ford’s own birthplace is preserved here, along with a replica of the rented coal shed where he built his first car. (The original had been torn down before Ford was in a position to preserve it.) But the real prize, so far
as Ford was concerned, was the Menlo Park laboratories of Thomas Edison, moved here fromNew Jersey, along with three rail cars full of Menlo Park dirt for the buildings, authentically, tosit on. And that kind of documented, fake authenticity is the genius of the place. There neverwas, nor could there have been, such a place as the one Henry Ford imagined here. Historicalfacts--about time and place and culture--make the village an impossibility: Stephen Foster didn’t,
couldn’t, wouldn’t have lived next door to Thomas Edison, who didn’t, couldn’t etc., when it cameto Mary who had the little lamb. And so on down the line. And that’s the genius of the place, its
meticulously authentic fakery.
Greenfield Village advances a proposition about history that is powerful precisely because it
is impossible. It relocates famous, historical artifacts--the Wright cycle shop, Edison’s lab
where he invented the light bulb--“within the context of no context,” to borrow a phrase from
George W. S. Trow--a phrase he used to characterize the culture of TV. But the culture of television is merely the self-conscious outcome of the modern life Henry Ford inaugurates here,
anachronistically, in the nostalgic past, from which the future that became the 20th century still
lay ahead, unsullied, like Cadillac’s empty paradise. And that’s the place--or the point of departure--from which Ford wanted to examine modernity, so that’s where he sited his village, within the context of no context, as if historical cause and effect could be suspended, just as here it
visibly has been. Not arbitrarily, though, but always in the name of some vast, higher authority,by which I don’t mean God, or even Henry Ford, but the authority of all those real, commonplace pieces of life which are banked in the Museum. All that stuff adds up to something, allright: the inescapable weight of the past, here monumentalized. And just at the spot where thatweight is apparently the greatest, that’s where Henry Ford levitates his myth of village life freeof historic entanglements. He venerates the past, with a wish-fulfilling intensity, by forgetting how
to remember that it finally matters, except as a source of souvenirs.

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 38

Which is to say this is not about history at all, strictly speaking, but something else--something
fundamental to our national character. Now, by history, what I mean is a cause and effect relationship with the past. Or rather a consciousness of that relationship, which exists whether a person is aware of it or not. Cadillac, for instance, seems not to have had a clueless about history.
But that didn’t keep him from getting run around by it. It only made him bitter. He scripted apersonal myth for himself about baronial entitlement, and tried to live up to it. But history--thecause and effect relations that brought him here--was not to be so easily outsmarted. He
remained a historical actor, in other words, regardless of how clearly he understood his role as
one among a host of colonial exploiters who remained useful only so long as their ventures produced a profit for the king of France, whose interest in the New World had more to do with
Europe than it did with Detroit. History, then, is a way of asking questions that puts things-beaver pelts, forts, fake titles--back in the context of a specific context. It’s a way of asking questions about the past so that memory adds up to something more than personal: who am I, where
did I come from, what should I do? It’s how I begins to turn into we. History places limitations
on an individual, then. (Cadillac, regardless of wishes to the contrary, would never be a nobleman.) But it also gives you something to belong to. History is an explanation. What makes
Cadillac and Henry Ford different is that Cadillac thought he could simply escape the past--newworld new name, etc. Ford knew it was more complicated than that. It wasn’t just the past people would have to forget, it was how to remember the past. And not only that. Ford wanted tomonumentalize specific acts of forgetting, and to turn those into a new kind of history, a historyof forgetting itself: “History is more or less the bunk. We want to live in the present, and the only
history that is worth a tinker’s damn is the history we make today.” So that’s exactly what he did
at Greenfield Village. He created a model for imagining the past fresh each day so that the nostalgic future could be infinitely replenished.
That was a powerful service, particularly when he started up, in October of 1929. He launcheda myth of historical contingency that people were going to want, desperately, to believe in--a lotof them, anyhow. (And a lot still do, for that matter.) But especially then, it must have felt good
to be told that there was a future that needn’t be polluted by the past. All you had to do was
imagine it, and forget whatever bunk made it seem impossible. “We’re in the money,” the Gold
Diggers sang in 1933. They were a hit. That fantasy appeals specifically to Ford’s version ofhistory as a forgetting how to remember the past. If you forget how to remember to be poor, ora failure, or down on your luck, then you won’t be. It’s up to you, individually. Of course, noteverybody was willing to accept this, any more than everybody could afford to live like Ford’s
isolated geniuses at Greenfield Village, each modeling an ideal of personal achievement andresponsibility, as if that were the way nature intended things. Union organizers weren’t so takenwith that view, and the ‘Red’s’ weren’t. And Henry Ford hated them all. He built Greenfield Village
to honor “the real world of folks,” and those folks of his didn’t want anything to do with organizing, or sit-downs, or history. At least that’s what Ford wanted to believe. And the point at
Greenfield was to keep all the troublemakers out, which he did.
It’s a common observation about Ford to say he wasn’t really much of an inventor. He didn’t
have all that many original ideas, on his own. But he was an off-the-shelf genius when it cameto seeing how things might be put together: the moving assembly line, Greenfield Village, hisview of history. As to the latter, I’d claim that everything Ford knew about history, he knew
because Detroit had revealed itself to him, just like it was Detroit that brought him all the elements he needed to assemble the modern world. Being a genius, he realized at once what hehad, although it took him a while to figure out how to set the pieces in order. And that’s what
it’s like, even now, coming to Detroit: it’s a matter of getting things in order, to see what’s here.
The city is empty, sure (as empty as a city of 900,000 people can be), and it looks abandoned(as abandoned as a place would look where half the population and 80% of the jobs just got up
and went somewhere else). Right, it’s all those things: ruined mansions with crackheads living

DETROIT / I Remember Detroit

III | 39in the rubble, a failed school system, a 300 year-old city with weeds and wild ailanthus trees
growing from the collapsed roofs of abandoned skyscrapers, and human misery and greed, andrenewal and new sports stadiums and casinos and politicians talking about comebacks, andacres and acres of tall grass and tumbleweeds growing over the ruins where neighborhoods
used to be and only ghosts live now, and finally the lives of a million people who just live here,
day to day.
You look at this place, and the vast waste of wealth and glory that have been squandered here,
and it makes you want to imagine that somebody else must be responsible: their problem, notmine. It has nothing to do with me. But the weird thing about Detroit is that it defies getting overin that easy way. The city may be a monument to the history of forgetting, but it is also impossible to forget, or turn away from. People come from all over to have the last word, finally bury
the place once for all. But none of them succeed. And they won’t, either. The history of Detroit
is the history of America’s confrontation with itself, and all the things we’ve preferred not toknow, and how not knowing has made us powerful and hopeful and strong, and also weak andstupid and mean. It’s the most modern place on earth, and the most ruined, a puzzle that confounds simple explanations. Just like us. It’s a written-over place, inscribed with successive plans
and excuses, going all the way back to Cadillac, if not before. It’s a place you’d like to write off,
as many have tried to do. Given where we’ve got to, as Americans, it hardly seems relevant any
more. Except it is. And that’s why Detroit defies forgetting. The undoing of this place is a revelation--of a design that is frightful and wasteful, but also profoundly ours. Somebody else is not
responsible--truth is, the place is ours, just as we have made it. Home.
This is a pre-print of the introductory chapter of the proposed book I Remember Detroit: An AllPurpose Guide to American Forgetting by Jerry Herron--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------References
Melvin and G. Holi (eds.), Detroit: New Viewpoints, New York 1976
Peter Gavrilovich and Bill McGraw (Eds.), The Detroit Almanac: 300 Years of Life in the Motor City, Detroit Free
Press, Detroit 2000
David Lee Proemba (ed.), Detroit in Its World Setting: A Three Hundred Year Chronology, 1701–2001, Wayne State
University Press, Detroit 2001
Wilma Wood Henrickson, Detroit Perspectives: Crossroads and Turning Points, Wayne State University Press, Detroit
1991
Don Lochbiler, Detroit’s Coming of Age, 1873–1973, Wayne State University Press, Detroit 1973
Robert G. Szudarek, How Detroit Became the Automotive Capital, Typocraft Co., Detroit 1996
Arthur. M. Woodford, This Is Detroit, 1701–2001, Wayne State University Press, Detroit 2001
Frank B. Woodford and Arthur M. Woodford, All Our Yesterdays: A Brief History of Detroit, Wayne State University
Press, Detroit 1969------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 40--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DETROITJohn Gallagher (2004)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Let’s begin with a fable. One day in Windsor, Ontario, a pleasant Canadian city just across theriver from Detroit, Michigan, a father and his young son were sightseeing. The child gazed wideeyed at all the urban sights he was seeing, evidently for the first time--the skyscrapers on bothsides of the river, the traffic rushing by, the busy people, the sun sparkling off the water. Finally
he could contain his curiosity no longer.
“Daddy,” he cried, “what is this place?” The reply could make one think the battle is already lost.
“It’s called a city,” the father said. “It’s sort of like a shopping mall.”Well, yes. What strikes me about this little anecdote is what it says about our orientation toward
the urban landscape. The majority of Americans today live in an environment that is urban without being what we normally call a city. We could use the common term for this new form-suburbia-–but that doesn’t quite capture the revolutionary nature of the change in the urban
landscape.
The word ‘suburb,’ after all, connotes an attachment to some superior place--a city--and subjugation to its more dominant physical, cultural, and moral influence. Perhaps the term dates towhen cities for safety’s sake occupied the highest ground, and the insignificant suburbs with theirless important interests clustered at their feet. To cite a modern illustration, no one would suggest, for example, that the community of Hoboken, New Jersey, which lies across the river fromNew York City, does anything but draw its economic life’s blood and vitality from the metropolis across the Hudson. Until recently, this relationship between cities and their suburbs has
always remained clear.
Modern suburban sprawl threatens this basic relationship across America. But in Detroit, as inno other American city, it’s the suburban landscape, with its spatial orientation both chaotic andregimented, that has become the dominant model. And as the suburbs in Detroit have thrived andgrown, sucking the life out of the older central city, Detroit itself has withered and shrunk.
Today, in Detroit more than in any other big American city, residents have moved so far beyond
their urban roots that many of them are almost totally unfamiliar with a traditional city. In many
parts of suburban Detroit today, this morphing from an older urban landscape to something
entirely new has created a toxic attitude toward the old, deteriorating city at its heart. Many suburbanites boast of never stepping foot in Detroit for years at a time--as though the city and its
suburbs were two distinct countries, rather than one unified, if troubled, city state. So different is
the spatial orientation of the newer suburbs from the traditional Detroit landscape that the city
seems to many suburbanites not quaint or nostalgic, but ugly, dangerous, cramped, and noxious.
For centuries, perhaps, rural dwellers have dismissed the crowded cities in much the same terms.
What is different today is that those doing the dismissing are themselves urban dwellers, but wholive in a type of urban landscape unknown until just a few decades ago. This newer suburban landscape is less densely populated than the city, often by a factor of 50% or greater, and this lower
density produces a sensation of endless little pockets of nothingness. To drive alone a typical avenue
in suburban Detroit today is to view an endless array of wasted spaces--empty parking lots, lawns
that no one walks upon, the desolation of highway median strips, the dead spaces lying beneathand around entrance and exit ramps. In the older cities men and boys used to play handball orbocce beneath the piers of bridges; nobody ever plays beneath a suburban highway overpass. If in
a city every square foot must be husbanded, if indeed the very overcrowding of the city’s landscapegave birth to the high-rise skyscraper as a way of multiplying space, in suburban Detroit, space isfrittered away without a second thought, as if an endless amount of it lay just around the corner.

DETROIT / Detroit

III | 41

Incredibly, much of this vast spatial waste, these vacancies between and around individual suburban houses and commercial uses, is not accidental, but planned and, indeed, demanded. In
suburban Detroit, words like ‘setback,’ a term that describes the minimum legal distance a houseor commercial business may sit from the street, now define the suburban landscape and its
attendant vocabulary. The language of suburban design is the language of emptiness. It is filledwith words that describe voids, like the much overused cul de sac to describe the empty turnaround at the end of a private residential street. This term virtually defines suburban neighborhoods. How different from the more urban words ‘corner’ and ‘intersection,’ which, describing
the juncture of two streets, capture the coming together of disparate public elements in the middle of a city. The reigning suburban vocabulary talks of parking lots and setbacks, and it delineates the moat-like distances between one type of commercial use and its nearest residential
neighbors. If the city’s urban vocabulary teems with words that capture the crowded vitality ofcity life--words like sidewalk and alley, bus lane and no-parking zone, skyscraper and parade
route--the suburban vocabulary is heavy with terms like mall and metrodome that describe, inthe memorable phrase of author James Howard Kunstler, a “geography of nowhere”.
Again, this is a national, not just a local, phenomena. But it must be repeated that nowhere has
the contrast between the spaces in the older central city and the newer suburbanized spaces
emerged so clearly as in Detroit, the incredibly shrinking city.
Even successful cities--Chicago, say--lost population to the suburbs in the 1960s and onward.
But no city lost so many people as Detroit--the only American city ever to fall below one million in population having previously surpassed that number. Detroit, in fact, once boasted a population of more than two million; today it can barely muster 900,000 for census takers.
Ironically, Detroit itself now offers all the empty space a suburban builder would want. Street
after street shows burned-out gaps in the neighborhood fabric; parks sit mostly unused muchof the time; the city’s magnificent waterfront, offering stunning views of Windsor and the busy
Great Lakes shipping trade, is deserted but for a few fishermen and boaters most of the year.
Space, then, is wasted both in Detroit and in its suburbs. But the wastage in Detroit reflects a
tragic abandonment, while the wastage in the suburbs signals a thoughtless profligacy.
Scholars normally attribute Detroiter’s flight to the suburbs to white racism and the deleterious
effects of deindustrialization. What has been less well studied, though, has been the lure of thisnewer suburban landscape, so different from the older model left behind in the city itself. Racismand deindustrialization may have propelled many people to the suburbs, but once there, theyfound a new landscape that exerted a grip all its own.
To put it another way, it was the promise ahead, not just the problems behind that enabled hundreds of thousands of Detroiters to flee the city with a clear conscience. In this sense, the older
central city has been not so much abandoned as replaced by a new model. To fully grasp thispoint, we can examine some of the elements this new landscape, and show how those elements
contributed to the shrinkage of Detroit. We begin with that icon of American individualism, thesingle-family house.
In the years of Detroit’s greatest growth--say, 1900 through 1950--hundreds of thousands ofhouses were built in the city. Many were small, designed in haste for workers at the auto plants
springing up all over the city. These houses were crowded into neighborhoods anchored byparish churches, by neighborhood banks, by tightly packed rows of commercial enterprises. A
resident might live a whole life in such a neighborhood, emerging just for the occasional outing
to a baseball game at Tiger Stadium just an easy streetcar ride away, or to a Christmas-shopping spree at the downtown Hudson’s store. But even the upscale city neighborhoods, such as
Detroit’s university district and Palmer Woods and Rosedale Park, all featured houses that aresmall by the standards of new houses being built today in the suburbs. A new house built in
1950’s Detroit might measure 1,000 square feet, and sit on a lot measuring as few as 30 by
120 feet, or 3,600 square feet in all. The house next door might be less than ten feet away.

DETROIT / Detroit

III | 42

Residents could hear their neighbors’ television sets and the doors slamming during family
arguments.
Beginning about the same time that Detroit filled out to its borders in the 1950s, a new type ofhouse has evolved on the American scene. Among other things, these new houses are built bigger and bigger each year. The median size of new houses built in suburban Detroit today measure more than 2,000 square feet, or at least 100% larger than a new house built in Detroit 50
or 60 years ago. Moreover, lot sizes have grown to a median size of around 9,000 square feet,as every home-buyer wants his or her own big backyard. Then, too, all the new houses today
come with amenities that would dazzle the Sun King--central air conditioning, multiple bedrooms
and bathrooms even for a family with just one, or no, children; and, of course, that sine qua nonin a car-dominated culture like Detroit’s, the attached multiple-car garage. Most houses built in
the city of Detroit don’t even have garages, or, if they do, the garage is detached from the houseitself and built back in the yard. It would be hard, if not impossible, to find a suburban Detroit
housewife today who would even look at a home that didn’t provide an attached garage, the better to bring in groceries without being exposed to the elements.
The handful of new houses built each year in Detroit itself exhibit these same qualities, sincehome-builders have learned their lessons well. But that hardly matters when the hundreds ofthousands of houses built prior to 1950 don’t have them. Asking home-buyers to purchase ahouse in Detroit that has none of the features they desire, when the houses in the suburbs arefilled with them, is like trying to turn back the tide. It just doesn’t work. There are some wonderful houses in the city of Detroit, but their luxury represents the elegance of the 1920s, notthe 1990 or early 21st century. Given a choice between a 1920s home, with its leaded glass
windows and ornate woodwork, and a 1990s home with its bigger bathrooms and central air
and attached garages, most home-buyers will opt for the newer version without a moment’s hesitation.
We could examine all the dominant architectural types--factories, retail stores, churches, schools,
airports--and we’d find that the defining characteristic of each and every built form in suburban
Detroit today is that it requires more land, more space, than the older comparable model in thecity itself. Movie theaters are a good example. Most of the old elegant movie palaces built in
downtown Detroit in the 1920s, which were tucked tightly into the existing street grid, have beenabandoned or razed. The new suburban multiplex theaters sit amid acres of asphalt parking lots
and offer 18 screens where the older palace downtown offered one. Perhaps it is no coincidence
that the popcorn and drink containers have swelled to gargantuan size, too, and that the theater
seats are wider now to accommodate bigger bottoms.
Airports pose another interesting example. Air fields like the old Detroit City Airport or Midway
Airport on Chicago’s Southwest side coexist with nearby residential neighborhoods, with houses just yards from the ends of the runways. It would be unthinkable to build a new airport today
in so cramped a location. Detroit’s Metro Airport, the newer, international hub, sits a good 20
miles outside downtown, and each year work crews, like Roman legions conquering anotherprovince, demolish yet more houses on the far outskirts of the perimeter of the airport zone.
Even churches in suburban Detroit require vast amounts of parking spaces, as though worshippers needed a sport utility vehicle to sing hosanna. The majestic charm of the older churches in traditional Detroit is that they were set among, and not remote from, the houses and shopsof their parishioners, who could walk to them with ease. Driving to church in suburban Detroit
today feels much the same as driving to the mall. Indeed, it’s striking how the newest American
cities, such as Phoenix and Houston, which are places built almost entirely along the newer suburban model, require three or four times as much land as Detroit itself. The older city of Detroit
occupies less than 140 square miles. Houston sprawls across some 600.
The greatest urban spaces in traditional cities, the places offering the most majestic vistas andmost memorable gathering spots, used to belong either to civic buildings or cathedrals. These,

DETROIT / Detroit

III | 43of course, include the wonderful plazas and public parks of so many cities. Indeed, it’s no accident that the peaceful revolution that swept Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War happened
first in the cities as tens of thousands of residents gathered in traditional squares and plazas todemand greater freedom. If a similar revolution tried to get started in suburban Detroit today,
there’d be no place for it to happen. There are no significant civic spaces with the same weightand majesty of Detroit’s much older Campus Martius and Cadillac Square.
In suburbia today, everyone wants more land, but everyone demands that it be private land,
from a big fenced backyard to a private parking space at one’s suburban office building. In thecity, space is a public concept captured in such elements as sidewalks that we all share andsidewalk cafes that provide a transition from the fully public to the partially private. In suburbia, space is mostly a private concept, defined in ‘gated communities’ and fenced backyards andprivate parking spaces.
Not, of course, that most suburbanites in Detroit understand this or particularly care about it.
Detroit’s suburbanites are a little like that boy in Windsor that we met earlier. They’re so used
to the newer, suburban, model of urban life that they don’t know--and can’t appreciate--the older,
traditional model.
And that, finally, is the dilemma facing those would like to see Detroit rebuilt. They’re pitching
the wares of a city built roughly between 1900 and 1950, when people understood that weshare a common space with our neighborhoods, and that the words civic and civilization springfrom the same root. Yet the spatial products that people are buying today--whether new houses, or shopping malls, or office buildings, or airports, or whatever--are, by and large, the typebuilt after 1950 and mostly since 1975, when the concept of a shared urban space had been
shredded.
Somehow, to truly rebuild Detroit, to stop the shrinkage, we have to find a way to do one of twothings. We need to either educate the public that the traditional urban form is as useful as thenewer suburban one, even without the attached garages and central air. Or, we need to demolish large swaths of the existing city and replace them with the suburbanized landscape mostpeople seem to prefer. Neither option sounds very easy. That’s why rebuilding cities like Detroit
will be so difficult.
But unless we find a way to make people see and talk about our urban landscape in a way that
accepts a traditional place like Detroit, we’re going to be as lost as that little boy in Windsor who
had never heard of a city.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 44--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ON SOME SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF DETROIT
Jason Booza and Kurt Metzger (2004)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I. INTRODUCTION
The popular image of Detroit is the Motor City of the world. In fact, Detroit has had manymonikers over the past century including Arsenal of Democracy, Motown, and most recently
Most Segregated City in America. While these titles have not always been pleasing, they do tell
the story of Detroit’s growth and change in history. From its inception as a small trading outpost
along the Detroit River, Detroit now boasts a population near one million and remains the coreof the largest manufacturing region in the world. Between these periods, Detroit has also been
in turn an industrial powerhouse, a textbook case of urban decline and finally a site of urban
rebirth and renewal. The following essay will chronicle Detroit’s journey over these years, andalong the way, readers will get an understanding of the events and circumstances that shaped
the city of Detroit and later the region.
The growth of Detroit and the factors that shaped its existence can be viewed through the industrialization process. From this point of view, four distinct eras have had the largest impact on
Detroit. The first is the genesis of industrial formation, which takes place from the Civil War up
until World War One, which is then followed by Detroit’s industrial boom during the World Wars.
Both of these two eras signify Detroit’s emergence as a national and international industrial center. Following Detroit’s industrial climax is its industrial decline and the emergence of a regional dichotomy. The first of these time periods is the suburban flight that followed World War Two
up until the 1970s and was characterized by the growth of Detroit as a region. This was followed by the modern growth period in the region, which saw further suburban development aswell as continued central city decline and most recently a glimmer of downtown and neighborhood revitalization.
The methodology employed in this paper is threefold. First, the eras of development will be
discussed in-depth, not only to provide a context for socio-economic changes, but also to define
the important internal as well as external factors that shaped Detroit. This includes the spatial
as well as the social structure of the city and the development of the region. Second, the essay
will discuss the changes and patterns of socioeconomic changes as they are related to postindustrial development. This includes changes in race/ethnicity, immigration, family structure,occupation and income. These changes and patterns are put into the context of the changing
economic structure of Detroit city and region. Altogether, this essay will chronicle the events andfacts that led to the growth the Detroit as a city and region.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------II. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Since it’s founding in 1701, the key to Detroit’s industrial growth has been the role that transportation has played in political, social and economic affairs. Detroit was settled on the banks of
the Detroit River by the French to control the fur trade on the Great Lakes as well as a strategic
military outpost. Detroit was easily defensible because it was located 40 feet above water level
and the river is narrow and without obstructions (Poremba). As the small trading outpost known
as Detroit grew and eventually changed hands from French to English and finally to American
control, it also grew in size yet still relied on fur trading and to a lesser extent agriculture as its
main source of commerce. During this time, Detroit and the Northwest Territory were considered a frontier in American and travel was limited to waterways and horseback. With the opening of the Erie Canal in 1825, Detroit’s population began to grow, as settlers were able to move

DETROIT / On Some Socio-economic Aspects of Detroit

III | 45

from east to west with much greater ease. Not long after this, railways were built throughout
America, which further increased the efficiency of transporting people and goods. Detroit wasin a prime location to take advantage of both travel by water and rail because of its strategic
location between the ore fields of the lake Superior region and the coalfields of Appalachia.
Thus, by the time the Civil War broke out, Detroit was an ideal location to produce the many
war materials that were need by northern forces. This was Detroit’s first real boost to its industrial development and signals the beginning of its industrial formation.
Industrialization
The demand for war materials gave Detroit’s fledgling manufacturing industry a boost. Factories
began developing before the war, but because of Detroit’s small population, demand was limited
to the region. However as the Civil War raged on, factories, employment and finally population
began to grow. The key to Detroit’s development during this early industrial formation wascentralization (Sugrue). Factory, foundry and steel mill location was determined by access to raw
materials and transportation routes. Thus, much of Detroit’s industry was centrally located in thecity along the river and railways.
Following the war, industry still continued to play a vital role as Detroit was a major producerof pharmaceuticals, furniture, railcars, carriages and stoves. As railways grew along withintrastate road networks, demand for products and services grew. After the Civil War, European
immigration to the United States aided in the growth of many cities including Detroit. By 1900,
Detroit’s population was 285,704 persons and quickly growing. The next important era in
Detroit’s emergence as an industrial center was its role in the World Wars.
The emergence of the United States into two World Wars created Detroit’s industrial infrastructure. Prior to World War One, Detroit automobile companies began to form as a result of accessto raw materials, technology and numerous machine and tool shops. Most of all, Detroit had alarge stock of immigrant labor from the American South, Canada and Eastern Europe. Detroit’s
auto industry would not have been as prosperous as it was if it were not for the United Statesentering World War One. As with the Civil War, Detroit was called upon to supply armaments,
tanks, boats and chemicals. However, unlike the civil war, transportation by railway was nolonger the most efficient form of transportation. With the advent of the truck and tractor, Detroit
was able to produce the means of transportation to get the goods it produced to the East Coastfor shipment over to Europe. In fact, Detroit experienced a nine-fold increase in truck production between 1914 and 1919 (Farley). By 1920, Detroit had grown to near one million people
making it the fourth largest city in the country. As a result, Detroit experienced severe shortagesof housing and transportation as people flocked to Detroit in search of defense industry jobs.
After World War One, Detroit’s factories switched back over to automobiles and other domestic
goods, but production of these goods were limited as a result of the impending stock market
crash in 1929. However, World War Two and further industrial growth was just around thecorner.
Industrial production for Detroit and most of the country was limited during the depression, but
after the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the entrance of the United States into World War Two,industrial production shifted into an all time high. In fact, the Detroit region led the nation in
defense contracts by the end of the war with over twelve billion dollars worth of federal money
being pumped into Detroit to supply the military overseas and at home (Poremba). Because
space was limited in Detroit to build new factories, companies began setting up new factories
around the region to build jeeps, planes and tanks for the war. In addition to Henry Ford’s Rouge
Complex, the Willow Run factory which produced planes gave America the infamous image of‘Rosie the Riveter’ to symbolize the female contribution to the war effort. The Chrysler Warren
Tank Plant was dubbed the ‘Arsenal of Democracy,’ later used to praise the Detroit region for
supplying the war. Overall, World War Two represented Detroit’s economic and industrial zenith.

DETROIT / On Some Socio-economic Aspects of Detroit

III | 46

Post-Industrial Detroit
Detroit’s early industrial development, and much of what followed, was characterized by centralization of factories. When the United States entered World War Two, Detroit began to growbeyond the city limits, and the Detroit region, consisting of Macomb, Oakland and Wayne counties,
began to develop. This new post-industrial era, which took off after World War Two, is characterized by decentralization. In fact, the region began to deindustrialize, which meant that factories began to close, downsize, or relocate (Sugrue). The following analysis discusses the resultof deindustrialization through the suburbanization of the region and the decline of the central cityof Detroit.
Much of the suburban flight of both population and industry affecting Detroit occurred between
the end of World War Two and 1970. June Manning Thomas found that this era in Detroit city’s
history was characterized by a deteriorating downtown, transportation congestion, inadequate
housing, racial conflict and industrial exodus.These factors encouraged or pushed many families out of Detroit while federal programs pulled them towards the suburbs. Following the war,
two federal public policies helped to drive suburbanization. First, the government helped spur
new housing construction and purchase through subsidized loans for returning soldiers(Sugrue). Further, government and private home loans were limited to areas that were considered racially homogeneous, which excluded many neighborhoods in Detroit. Thus, the government created incentives for people to buy homes outside of the city of Detroit. With the wealththat was saved during the war, many people were in the market to buy not only homes but
automobiles as well. Auto companies rushed to keep up with consumer demand following thewar. To alleviate traffic congestion in the city and help create a national transportation system,
the second incentive that the federal government created was the construction of a highway
system. The Federal Highway Act of 1956 set up a fund that paid for up to 90% of highway
construction costs in order to build a national system to move goods and people--a systemmodeled after the German system that America found during World War Two (Sugure). As aresult, Detroiters were armed with wealth to buy homes and automobiles so they headed to the
Detroit suburbs to live and work. Much of this process continued through the 1950s to the
1960s as Detroit city’s population declined from nearly two million following World War Two to
only 1.5 million in 1970. This period of suburban flight ushered in an era of central city decline
as Detroit’s population continued to fall, going below one million in 2000.
The 1970s through the late1980s represented slow economic times for the Detroit region, but
the city of Detroit was hardest hit. The oil shortages of the1970s, manufacturing decline of the
1980s and the overall transition in the United States economy from goods production to service provision created problems for many central cities. Detroit was no exception. By 1980, it had
the highest unemployment rate in the country (Poremba), as well as increase poverty, crime andmortality rates. The suburban flight of previous decades left Detroit with an aging infrastructure
and a mostly minority population that faced recurrent bouts of poverty and unemployment.
Along with population decline came neighborhood and downtown deterioration, as homes, factories and office buildings were vacated in favor of suburban locations. By this point in theregion’s development, much manufacturing and industrial employment had moved to suburban
Detroit, but an even greater portion began to move much further away, signaling the entry of
the United States into a global economy. As the job market became tighter and more competitive, so did disparities between high- and low-wage jobs. The result for the spatial structure of
the region was polarization based on social class and race. Detroit city represented a bulk of theregion’s minority population, as well as its most impoverished groups, while the suburbs represented the white population, if differentiated by class. When the economy picked up throughthe 1990s, the trend toward polarization continued, as newer suburbs were being built on thefringes of the region and older cities like Detroit, as well as older suburbs, lost more and more

DETROIT / On Some Socio-economic Aspects of Detroit

III | 47

people. Detroit became not only the epitome of sprawl but also of racial segregation, as theprocess of sifting and sorting continued along class and racial lines. However, the late 1990s
and early 2000s have seen a renewed interest in the birth of Detroit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------III. SOCIO-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE
Educational Attainment
The educational level of Detroit’s residents has always trailed that of the population residing in
the remainder of the tri-county area. This fact has had implications for the occupational opportunities available to Detroit’s residents, particularly in the 1990s when high-paying, low-skill
jobs became increasingly unavailable.
In 1970, 41.8% of Detroit’s ‘25 years old and over’ residents had high school degrees. Whilethe last 30 years have seen increases in high school graduation rates throughout the region, thedifferential between Detroit and its suburbs has remained virtually unchanged. Recently released
results for 2000 show that while Detroit’s rate has increased to 69.6%, the suburban rate of
85.3% remains almost 16% higher (an insignificant change from the 16.6 point differential of
30 years earlier). Trends in college graduation rates present a very different picture--one ofconcern to the region. Suburban residents had a college graduation rate of 11.5% in 1970, compared to 6.2% in Detroit. By 1990 this differential had nearly doubled from five percentage
points to 11.5 percentage points--21.1 vs. 9.6%, respectively. The 2000 Census results showthat this gap has continued to widen--now 16.1 percentage points--as Detroit’s rate increased to
11% while the suburbs came in at 27.1%. While these differentials present obstacles to breaking down socio-economic barriers between city and suburbs, there is an even more important
fact buried in these numbers that must be addressed. While one could easily leap to the conclusion that the differential exists primarily because Detroiters are not attending and completing
schooling to the degree that their suburban counterparts are, a second structural issue is ofequal concern. Data show that Detroit students are completing high school and that many--morethan statistics show--are going on to complete college. The problem is that the City of Detroit is
not viewed by college graduates--whether former residents or outsiders--as an attractive place
to live. Employment, housing and recreational opportunities beckon in the suburbs and otherareas of the country. Detroit must change its image so as to become a destination for a young,educated and diverse population.
Economic Structure and Jobs
It has been well documented over the last two decades that the United States is moving from amanufacturing economy to a service-based economy. This has certainly been in evidence in the
Midwest and Northeast, where manufacturing jobs have either been eliminated or have moved
south. The bulk of these jobs have exited the large urban centers of these regions.
In 1970, 201,445 Detroit residents reported that they were employed in the manufacturing sector-35.9% of the total. A large portion of these jobs were those that attracted the large waves of
migrants in the early part of this century--relatively high-paying, low-skill jobs in the auto industry.
Good paying jobs with unbeatable benefits, created in the early years of the 20th century, continued to be available to those with high school degrees and less. The departure of businesses
that had begun in the 1960s continued during the 1970s and 1980s, so that by 1990, the manufacturing industry employed only 69,000 Detroiters and manufacturing accounted for only
19.4% of employed Detroiters. In spite of the improved economy that was in place when the2000 Census was conducted, manufacturing jobs for Detroiters continued their decline--down to62,235--and accounted for just 18.8% of their jobs. While manufacturing jobs were decreasing,the improved economy did contribute to increasing rates of labor force participation, as previously discouraged workers began to look for jobs again, leading to decreasing unemployment
rate. The 14.3% unemployment experienced by Detroiters in 1990 fell to 6.5% in 2000.

DETROIT / On Some Socio-economic Aspects of Detroit

III | 48

In spite of the improved employment climate for Detroiters, the decade of the 1990s did notbring more jobs to Detroit. The new jobs that were developing in southeast Michigan were nolonger locating in the city of Detroit. Business owners were not interested in refurbishing older
buildings, or dealing with contamination cleanup, when there was plenty of ‘green space’ available and communities willing to offer assistance. Southeast Michigan has experienced the phenomenon known as ‘urban sprawl.’ The jobs and the population continue to leave the inner coreof the region and move farther and farther out. While population sprawl was covered earlier,employment forecasts from the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) showthat job sprawl is even greater. Between 1990 and 2000, SEMCOG estimates that the City of
Detroit lost 67,066 jobs while the remainder of the tri-county area experienced a job increaseof 338,871. This has resulted in the abandonment of existing infrastructure and the constantneed for infrastructure expansion. This shift in the regional job mix is best evidenced by thechanging commuting patterns of workers.
In 1960, 56% of all work trips ended in Detroit. Detroit residents working in Detroit accounted
for more than a third of all trips--38%. By 1990, only 21% of work trips ended in Detroit, andDetroit residents working in the city accounted for only 11% of the total. 1990 found 79% of all
work trips ending in the suburbs, with 71% of the work trips taken by suburban residents. New
results from the 2000 Census show the percentage of all work trips ending in Detroit had
dropped once more to 17%--evenly divided between Detroit residents and suburban commuters.
While the jobs have moved to the suburbs, Detroit residents have not been able to take advantage of the shift, as Detroit residents found 49.7% of their jobs within the city limits and 50.3%
in the suburbs. This is a result of two major factors--a large number of households with noautomobile available (22% in 2000), and a poorly funded and divided public transportation network. It is important to note, in this context, that the Detroit metropolitan area led the nation inits share of resident workers who travel to work alone by car.
Income and Poverty
Throughout this discussion there has been an acknowledgment of the differences between thecity of Detroit and its suburbs. While the city has suffered population losses, the suburbs, to alarge extent, have experienced gains. The city and suburbs demonstrate great racial and ethnic
differences. While the age structure of each has been affected by the ‘baby boom,’ the city has
maintained population at the ends of the age spectrum while the suburbs have seen large
growth in the ‘25–54 year old’ cohort. Households in the city are very different from those in
the suburbs, with large numbers of city children being born out-of-wedlock and raised in oneparent families. Educational attainment is much lower in the city of Detroit and the jobs have left
for the suburbs. Nevertheless, strong evidence exists that the suburbs still need the city to guarantee their future success.
The National League of Cities released a report in 1993 entitled, “All In It Together--Cities,
Suburbs and Local Economic Regions.” The first paragraphs of this report state the following:“There is a strong economic justification for addressing the needs of central cities and for cooperation among cities and suburbs to meet the mutual economic needs of their local economic
region. It can be found in the strong and consistent relationship between changes in central city
incomes and changes in suburban incomes. For every one-dollar increase in central city household incomes, suburban household incomes increase by $1.12. This documentation of the significant relationship between cities and their suburbs is critical to the debate about whether suburbs can prosper and succeed, regardless of the fortunes of their central cities. This finding,however, should not be surprising. Cities and their suburbs are not two distinct economies. They
are a single economy, highly interdependent with their fortunes inextricably intertwined.”
An analysis of income trends in the Detroit region lends strong support to the above findings.
The median household income for the Detroit suburbs was 1.43 times that of Detroit, and theDETROIT / On Some Socio-economic Aspects of Detroit

III | 49

percent of persons in poverty was slightly less than one third. The decade of the 1970s broughta more than doubling of household income to the suburbs while Detroit’s income was risingslightly less--about 1.8 times. The poverty ratio increased to 4 to 1.
As the buying power of city of Detroit residents dropped by 20.5% between 1980 and 1990,
however (based on median household income change), that of suburban residents fell as well(down 2.4%). Poverty in Detroit spiked to 32.4% and was now five times that of its suburbanneighbors. The rebound of the 1990s brought Detroiters just above the level at which they stoodin 1980 as their buying power rose by 21.4%, and their poverty rate fell to 27% (the ratio
falling back to 4 to 1). The city/suburban relationship remained strong as suburban residents
increased their buying power by 51.6%.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 50--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE CAPITAL OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURYDan Hoffman (2003, updated version)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------If Detroit is to be called “The Capital of the Twentieth Century.”1 It is not because of its architecture, monuments, or great cultural achievements. Detroit is the Capital because of its singulardevotion to the idea of industrial production, investing its resources into a product that has transformed the face of every modern city. In the process, Detroit has allowed itself to be reinvented
time and again, recasting its space, culture, and architecture in the form of the latest production
and marketing idea.
“The Capital of the Twentieth Century” is not a place but a product; a new style, a new mode of
production, ‘a better idea.’ The identification of this city and its urban fabric with a single industry
is confirmed in common speech when we refer to the American automobile industry as ‘Detroit’.
Nowhere else do we find a city so completely dedicated to a single industry and the obsessionsof modern technology. Detroit defines itself through the pursuit of material perfection. A new car
combines the latest technology and style, reminding us of the possibilities of the new and theliabilities of the old. It encourages us to forget the past in order to make way for greater perfections and pleasures. Perfection is an everyday thing in the Capital. New vehicles roll of theassembly line at the rate of five per second, delivering the experience of the new to a willing
and wanting public.
Practical ideas are the currency of the Capital. They are always simple, offering a way forward,
a framework for action. Ford was successful because he had ‘a better idea,’ the division of labor,
the assembly line, and the vertical factory. General Motors rose to prominence through its
corporate division of structure ‘under one roof,’ its horizontal factory production, and annualmodel changes. The recent success of Chrysler can be attributed to the ‘team’ model of design.
These practical ideas produce their own economy, reinscribe space and transform the city. Eachnew idea leaves the past in its wake, rendering vast sections of the Capital obsolete.
Assembly line production is reflected in the row upon row of single-family houses which madethe Capital the first suburban city. Paved roads bring the workers from the houses to the factories in cars, establishing the dominant development model for the century. Like the horizontal
factory with its flexible infrastructure of shelter, light and power, the suburban model provides
maximum flexibility. Factories pop up on the ever-expanding edge of the Capital, spawning suburban neighborhoods of workers complete with schools and shops. The horizontal model allows
for the easy separation of one sector (component) of the city from another. Management hierarchies are paralleled by strict economic separation between neighborhoods. The differences
are always clear. Separation also allows for maximum flexibility. Like the reconfiguration of theassembly line to accommodate the annual model changes, neighborhoods can come and go,following the migrating factories to the horizon in successive waves of growth and development.
Physical traces of the succession of different modes of industrial production register in layers ofurban development. In its most direct manifestation the major streets of the city (following themile square surveyors grid) are all associated with a specific technology. For example at Six
Mile Road we find remnants of casting technologies, Eight Mile Road is the focus of analog controlled machining, Ten Mile Road has electronics and plastics and injection molding, and at
Twelve Mile Road we see evidence of computer-guided machining and laser cutting. The horizon of technology is always receding, pulling the city along in its wake.
Monuments have short half-lives in the Capital. Things move too quickly and survival is morea matter of forgetting than remembering. Rather than being guided by images of the past, citizens
invest their beliefs in images that promise a stake in the new. As it is said, there is no future inDETROIT / The Capital of the Twentieth Century

III | 51

the past. Advertisements serve up the latest images, fresh from the frontiers of desire. In 1997
a billboard appeared along one of the major freeways showed an image of the new Ford
Explorer set in an Arcadian landscape of waterfalls and lush trees. Across the bottom of theimage is the phrase “The Best That the World has to Offer.” The image is filled with complex
messages and useful information. The “Best” is somewhere in nature beyond the edge of theCapital, away from its entropic sprawl. The message is that you can get there by the other halfof the best that the world has to offer, the new Ford Explorer. The way out is the way forward.
The Capital always points to the future. Advertising succeeds to the extent that it denies the context within which it is placed. The location of the billboard along the tired highways of the Capitalwould certainly support this equation. But there is something more to this image. The pairing ofan idealized nature and the technology of the vehicle carries with it a difficult truth that we arejust beginning to comprehend, that the Capital has extended its reach to the edge of the planet,that nature is no longer just beyond the horizon. The advertisement is a sign that the Capital hascome full circle upon itself. Maybe it is saying the car itself is a force of nature.
The history of the Capital is the history of motion. It begins with the moving assembly line.
Historians place its invention in Cincinnati, where pig carcasses were first moved on hooks
through various stages of slaughtering and carving.2 But its application to the assembly of automobiles by Henry Ford in 1913 brings the process its conceptual clarity: moving vehicles produced on a moving assembly line. A moving machine produced a machine that moves. Thisidea spawns a new world of motion, harnessing labor to the precise demands of the moving
line where it is divided into a multitude of serialized and optimized motions. The more efficientthe movement, the faster the line moves. The assembly line reduced the time it took to produce
a car from twelve hours to one and half-hours. This is Taylorism: the analysis of human motion
according to the principles of efficiency. Every little bit helps. The body becomes a componentof the machine.
A historic marker outside of the Ford Highland Park plant describes the Ford’s 1913 innovationof the moving assembly line for automobiles. A nearby plaque marks the location of the firstpaved mile of concrete in America. Mechanical motion begins to expand itself into the streets of
the Capital, a process that extends into neighborhoods and the home. They say that the Detroit
had the first suburbs, row upon row of single-family homes. As Ford said, “a car for every worker.” We assume that he meant a home as well. This simple, democratic ideal masked the epic
reorganization of society, the space and resources that were needed to fulfill this pledge.
Mechanical efficiency makes possible the mass production of the product, which generates the
profits to pay laborers enough to buy hat product, which in turn demands a public investment
in infrastructure, which creates additional demand, which allows further investment in efficientmachines. Efficiency is both an end and means. It works like a machine.
The early factories were vertical constructions with the assembly lines snaking their way
through multiple floors. At Ford’s 1908 Highland Park factory designed by Albert Kahn, premanufactured components were brought in by train and lifted to hoppers at the top of the factoryand distributed by gravity to stations along the assembly lines below. The top down distribution
made a lot of sense, mimicking the highly disciplined and ordered social mechanisms needed
to maintain the precise movements along the line. Poured-in-place concrete was the construction system of choice. Strong, cheap and fireproof, it provided a solid ground upon which toanchor the moving line. However, once the structure was established it was difficult to change.
Like the plumbing in a building, the lines often remained for years without changing. In the end
it was easier to build a new factory than to replace the line. The fact that Ford restricted his cars
to a single color, black was more a reflection of the inflexibility of the mechanism than any particular aesthetic choice. The efficiency of repetition was the engine that drove the industry. Value
was to be found in the modes of production itself. Order begets order, the acceleration andgrowth of which is profit.

DETROIT / The Capital of the Twentieth Century

III | 52

The new idea was to put the entire line on one floor and deliver parts to the line with motorized
vehicles. Used most effectively by General Motors at the Kahn designed Chevrolet Commercial
body plant of 1935, the new factory type featured saw-toothed skylights that allowed light toenter from above permitting unlimited horizontal extension. Multiple assembly lines could beestablished within the same building allowing modifications to occur without disturbing the paceof production. Another idea introduced during the same period separated the car’s drive train
frame from the body during the manufacturing process allowing modifications to the latter without requiring changes to the complex drive train, a central structure with changeable parts. This
paralleled the emergence of modern corporate structure, vertical management with horizontal
applications. The first idea (the moving assembly line) was all about production, the second wasabout flexibility and distribution.
In the 1930s the Capital looks out from its high perch atop General Motors World Headquarters
and sees a vast, horizontal expanse, beyond the Great Lakes and its procession of ore ships
headed to Detroit, beyond the Mississippi the distant mountains and seas. The potential is vastand the car with its smooth lines and interior comforts is ready to traverse the distance at highspeeds. The Capital has learned that the purchase of a car is the purchase of a personal space
between you and the ever-receding horizon, a smooth shell, an organ of speed projected into
space. Speed smoothes local differences, transforming the passing landscape into a compressed,
horizontal line. The toil of everyday life can now be relieved by the thrill of a quick escape.
However, production is still a labor-intensive affair and not all workers can afford cars. Density
remains a necessary part of production in the early years and so the Capital grows verticallyas well as horizontally, importing labor, building skyscrapers and factories. The population of
the Capital has more than tripled since the introduction of the assembly line. Skyscrapers
become part of the skyline as the downtown asserts in influence as the cultural, business focusof the region, creating a counter force to the centrifugal pull of the factories being built at the
periphery. Classicism is the preferred style with the austere and repetitive slabs of the General
Motors World Headquarters leading the way. Government and corporations seem to be cut outof the same cloth. As the saying goes, “What is good for General Motors is good for America.”
Some citizens see this as the golden age, a time when the expansive potential of the automobile
is balanced by a dynamic downtown representing the civic realm. The Capital boasts the highlevel of single-family ownership in the country while building theaters, ballparks, department
stores and office buildings in the downtown core.
The World War Two, and the focus shifts from cars to tanks. The Capital out produces them all.
There are problems. Black workers brought up from the south to fill the need for wartime labor
are perceived as a threat. Race riots ensure and the dream of the 1930s is over. It turns outthat density is difficult to manage. The pay-off for the war effort is the solution to the problem
of density; a new idea, build roads instead of cities. It could not have happened at a better time.
The Cold War is brewing and the nuclear threat makes density dangerous, the wartime image
is of a city in flames. As with all the great ideas in the history of the Capital, it moves things
forward by leaving something behind. The National Highway Defense Act of 1956 solves the
problem of density by building a way out of the city. You could say that the Bomb did its workwithout exploding. The Capital escapes from itself leaving behind its tall buildings and busy
streets for the quiet isolation of the suburbs. The genius of the Capital is its ability to start anew,
leave a part of itself behind. Unlike the railroad capitals of the previous century with their grandstations, plazas and boulevards the “Capital of the Twentieth Century” is built upon the promiseof the open road. Movement is power.
The second half of the century sees factories all over the countryside, connected by a networkof highways, which spawns the suburbs. Cars have become a necessity, an integral part of thenational transportation network. Some simple facts tell the tale. From 1950 and 1970 the numberof cars in the United States more than doubles and the number of two-car households double

DETROIT / The Capital of the Twentieth Century

III | 53

from 13 to more than 29% of households. The United States has over 40,000 miles of new
highways. But these changes are not enough to keep up with advances in production. Automation
speeds up the line, gradually replacing workers with machines, keeping production capacity
ahead of the demand curve. How to fill the gap? Another idea emerges, fabricating desires,transforming the needs of the consumer. The seduction of excess speed and comfort, images of
jet intakes and afterburners, glowing lights, precious indicators transcend the practical necessity of car ownership. The car becomes an accessory, one for him and one for her in matchingcolors. Leaving downtown behind has released citizens from the bounds of civic duty and propriety, releasing a flood of narcissistic energies. The Capital directs these energies toward
demands for its product.
The expansion continues to the end of the century, filling the continent, crossing the seas,seeding other lands. Meanwhile, back where it all began, we see the results of all this headysuccess. The factories and skyscrapers stand empty, whole neighborhoods are gone and theland turned back to prairie. Curiously, the headquarters remain along with a few factories built
into the emptied stretches of former neighborhoods. In 1992 Chrysler builds a one million
square foot plant on Mack Avenue five miles from downtown, an ambitious move given thecrack-fueled gang violence of the late 1980s in the surrounding in the surrounding, east side
neighborhoods. After nearly a century of delirious growth the Capital looks back. Is this the
beginning of a historical conscience? Maybe so, but as usual it takes the form of an idea that
increases production. The idea is simple: history sells. People have fond memories of the cars
they or their parents once owned or wanted. The retro Ford Thunderbird evoking the classic
1957 model has already been named a classic. The P/T Cruiser evokes a double nostalgia, one
for the customizing craze of the 1960s and a second for the bulbous, streamlining designs of
the1930s. The idea also works for the redevelopment of the Capital’s abandoned neighborhoods.
The suburb becomes the preferred redevelopment model for the city. Rows of single-family
houses with lawns and garages with names like Victoria Park and Brush Park to fill the empty
parcels. Home ownership is offered as the answer to urban poverty. Supported by government
backed mortgage loan guarantee programs and the low cost of land, developers are finally turning a profit. There is nothing like a monthly mortgage payment to keep one in line.
The new juxtaposition is curious; suburban houses with their manicured lawns adjacent torundown neighborhoods. The line that once existed between the white suburbs and the black
districts of the Capital has folded in upon itself making each street an economic and ethnic
threshold potential threshold. The intertwining of fear and power is seen in the gates that
regulate access to the suburban enclaves like Victoria Park with the bejeweled SUVs sporting
chromed-out mags circling ominously outside the walls. This ambivalence also is incorporated
into the latest desire images. A 2002 advertisement for the Hummer, the largest and mostfearsome SUV declares “It’s What You Need.” Need trumps want when it comes to fear as themilitarization of the gangsta style is pushed across the suburban threshold.
Need also trumps want when it comes to casino gambling, the new industry at the heart of theCapital. Since the legalization of gambling in 1996 three casinos have opened in the city.
Importing an idea from another capital, the citizens are looking to increase the tax base shrunken by the loss of factories. The ‘temporary’ site for the MGM Grand is in the former IRS building while the Motor City Casino is located in the former Wonder Bread factory. Aware of the perceived danger in its downtown location, the Motor City Casino publicity boldly states, “The area
is not pretty, absolutely no local ambiance. That’s alright because all the action is inside.” It goeson to say that “ … the background décor evokes images of a young and growing industrial city.”
A young and growing industrial city housed in an area with absolutely no local ambiance. The
Capital always finds of way of looking beyond itself to the promise of a new idea, even if thatidea exists in the form of a historical image. We are reminded that the Capital is not a place but
a product, the latest marketing idea.

DETROIT / The Capital of the Twentieth Century

III | 54First Published in: PRAXIS writing+building, issue 5, Cambridge 2003--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

Following Jerry Herron, Three Meditations on the Ruins of Detroit

2

Siegfried Giedion, Mechanization Takes Command, Oxford Press, N.Y. 1948, p. 125----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 55--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------MOTOR CITYCharles Waldheim (2002)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------“The belief that an industrial country must concentrate its industry is, in my opinion, unfounded.
That is only an intermediate phase in the development. Industry will decentralize itself. If thecity were to decline, no one would rebuild it according to its present plan. That alone discloses our own judgment on our cities.”1 (Henry Ford)
In the second half of the 20th century, the city of Detroit, once the fourth largest city in the U.S.,
lost over half its population.2 The Motor City, once an international model for industrialized urban
development, began that process of decentralization as early as the 1920s, catalyzed by Henry
Ford’s decision to relocate production outside the city to reduce production costs. While similar
conditions can be found in virtually every industrial city in North America, Detroit recommends
itself as the clearest, most legible, example of these trends evidenced in the spatial and social
conditions of the post-war American city.
“Forget what you think you know about this place. Detroit is the most relevant city in the
United States for the simple reason that it is the most unequivocally modern and therefore
distinctive of our national culture: in other words, a total success. Nowhere else has American
modernity had its way with people and place alike.”3
In August 1990, Detroit’s City Planning Commission authored a remarkable and virtually unprecedented report.4 This immodest document proposed the de-commissioning and abandonmentof the most vacant areas of what had been the fourth largest city in the U.S. With this publication, uninspiringly titled the Detroit Vacant Land Survey, the city planners documented a processof depopulation and disinvestment that had been underway in Detroit since the 1950’s.5 With an
incendiary 1993 press release based on the City Planning Commission’s recommendations of
three years prior, the city Ombudsman, Marie Farrell-Donaldson, publicly called for the discontinuation of services to, and the relocation of vestigial populations from, the most vacant portions of the city:“The city’s ombudsman … is essentially suggesting that the most blighted bits of the city
should be closed down. Residents would be relocated from dying areas to those that still had
life in them. The empty houses would be demolished and empty areas fenced off; they would
either be landscaped, or allowed to return to ‘nature’.”6
Until the public release of the survey, the depopulation of Detroit was largely accomplished without the endorsement of, or meaningful acknowledgment by, the architectural and planning professions. What was remarkable about Detroit’s 1990 Vacant Land Survey was its unsentimental and surprisingly clear-sighted acknowledgment of a process of post-industrial de-densification that continues to this day in cities produced by modern industrialization. Equally striking was
how quickly the report’s recommendations were angrily dismissed in spite of the fact that they
corroborated a practice of urban erasure that was already well underway.
While European proponents of modernist planning had originally imported Fordism andTaylorism from American industry and applied them to city planning, it was the American city
(and Detroit in particular) that offered the fullest embodiment of those principles in spatial terms.
Ironically, while the American planning profession ultimately embraced the virtues of Fordist

DETROIT / Motor City

III | 56

urbanism in the middle of the 20th century, they were ill prepared for the impact those ongoingprocesses would have on forms of urban arrangement as evidenced by the condition of Detroit
at the end of that century. Among those impacts were the utter abandonment of traditional
European models of urban density in favor of impermanent, ad hoc arrangements of temporary
utility and steadily decreasing density.
While flexibility, mobility, and speed made Detroit an international model for industrial urbanism, those very qualities rendered the city disposable. Traditional models of dense urban
arrangement were quite literally abandoned in favor of escalating profits, accelerating accumulation and a culture of consumption. This of course was the genius of Ford’s conception: a culture that consumes the products of its own labor while consistently creating a surplus of demand
ensuring a nomadic, operational, and ceaselessly reiterated model of ex-urban arrangement.
That ongoing provisional work of rearrangement is the very model of American urbanism that
Detroit offers.
Typical of their peers in other American cities, Detroit’s city planners, architects, and urban
design professionals clinicalized the dying industrial city to the extent that Detroit came to represent an urban failure, as though the responsibility for its viability rested with the techniquesof modernist urbanism that shaped its development. This was to mistake effect for cause. As a
product of mobile capital and speculative development practices in the service of evolving models
of production, Detroit was a clear and unmistakable success. As promoted internationally by the
proponents of Fordism, Detroit served as a model of urbanism placed in the service of optimized
industrial production. With each successive transformation in production paradigms, Detroit
re-tooled itself more completely and more quickly than virtually any other city in history.
What was remarkable about the Detroit Vacant Land Survey and the City of Detroit’s plan todecommission parts of itself was not its impossibility, but rather the simple fact that it dared articulate for public consumption the fact that the city was already abandoning itself. This fact alone
did not make Detroit unique. In the 1990’s Detroit ranked a distant 22nd nationally in the percent of its population lost compared with other metropolitan centers, having already surrendered
the majority of its citizenry over the previous four decades.7 The original abandonment and subsequent suburban annexation of central Detroit began well before similar conditions emerged inother major cities. Unlike other cities, however, Detroit began its process of decentralization andurban abandonment sooner and pursued it more completely than any other city in the modern
world. Perhaps more importantly, Detroit was the only city that dared to publicly articulate a planfor its own abandonment and conceive of organizing the process of de-commissioning itself asa legitimate problem requiring the attention of design professionals. In a graphically spare document featuring maps blacked-out with marker to indicate areas of vacant land, Detroit’s planners rendered an image of a previously unimaginable urbanism of erasure that was already amaterial fact.8“One last question must now be asked: during a crisis period, will the demolition of cities
replace the major public works of traditional politics? If so, it would no longer be possible todistinguish between the nature of recessions (economic, industrial) and the nature of war.”9(Paul Virilio)
Over the course of the 1990’s the City of Detroit lost approximately 1% of its housing stock
annually to arson, primarily due to ‘Devil’s Night’ vandalism.10 Publicly, the city administration
decried this astonishingly direct and specific critique of the city’s rapidly deteriorating social conditions. Simultaneously, the city privately corroborated the arsonists illegal intent by developing,funding, and implementing one of the largest and most sweeping demolition programs in thehistory of American urbanism. This program continued throughout the 1990’s, largely supported by the city’s real estate, business, and civic communities. This curious arrangement allowed

DETROIT / Motor City

III | 57

both the disenfranchised and the propertied interests to publicly blame each other for the city’s
problems while providing a legal and economic framework within which to carry out an ongoing process of urban erasure. Ironically, this ‘solution’ to Detroit’s image problems completed theunsanctioned process of erasure begun illegally by the populations left in the wake of de-industrialization. Vast portions of Detroit were erased through this combination of unsanctioned burning and subsequently legitimized demolition.11 The combined impact of these two activities, each
deemed illicit by differing interests, was to coordinate the public display of social unrest withadministration attempts to erase the visual residue of Detroit’s ongoing demise.
In The Practice of Everyday Life, Michel de Certeau describes the limits of disciplinary relevanceabsent the human subjects demanded by professional authority: “ … the dying man falls outside the thinkable, which is identified with what one can do. In leaving the field circumscribedby the possibilities of treatment, it enters a region of meaninglessness.”12
For the architectural profession, the city of Detroit in the 1990s entered a similar condition of
meaninglessness precisely because it no longer required the techniques of growth and development that had become the modus operandi of the discipline. Absent the need for these tools,
Detroit became a ‘non-site’ for the architect in the same sense that de Certeau’s dead bodyceased to operate as a ‘site’ for the physician’s attention.13 As the city de-commissioned itself, it
entered a condition that could not be thought by the architectural and planning disciplines. As
Dan Hoffman put it, in the early 1990s “ … unbuilding surpassed building as the city’s primaryarchitectural activity.” 14. The fact that American cities began to dissolve as a result of the pressures of mature Fordist decentralization came as a surprise only to those disciplines with a vested
interest in the ongoing viability of a 19th-century model of urbanism based on increasing
density. Free of that prejudice, the development of American industrial cities can more easily beunderstood as a temporary, ad hoc arrangement based on the momentary optimization of industrial production. The astonishing pliability of industrial arrangement and the increasing pace ofchange in production paradigms suggest that any understanding of American cities mustacknowledge their temporary, provisional nature. The explosive growth of Detroit over the firsthalf of the 20th century, rather than constructing an expectation of enduring urbanism, must be
understood as one half of an ongoing process of urban arrangement that ultimately rendered its
previous forms redundant.15 Detroit can be seen as nothing more than the most recent idea about
production as manifest in spatial terms. The fact that American industrial urbanism would
decreasingly resemble its European and pre-Fordist precedents should come as no surprise.
Rather than a permanent construction, one must take American urbanism as an essentially temporary, provisional, and continuously revised articulation of property ownership, speculative
development, and mobile capital.16 Especially for those Modernists interested in mobility andnew models of social arrangement, the flexibility and increasing pace of technological change
associated with Fordist production served as models for an increasingly temporary urbanism.
The most obvious model for this iterative and responsive urbanism could be found at the intersection of industrial production and military infrastructure.17 For Le Corbusier, the origins of thecity itself could be found in the ur-urbanism of the military encampment. Commenting on thearchitectural myths of the primitive hut, this drawing of a circumscribed martial precinct reveals
the essentially nomadic pre-history of urban arrangement in European culture. Ancient rites forthe founding of Roman cities were essentially symmetrical with those for the founding of military encampments. In The Idea of a Town, Joseph Rykwert describes how performing the precise reverse of those founding rites was used to signify the decommissioning or abandonmentof an encampment, thus corroborating their essentially symmetrical status.18 With his Co-op
Zimmer project, Hannes Meyer commented on the collusion between the mass consumer products of Fordist production and their replication in the miscellany of modern military nomadism.19
Meyer’s project arranged a petit-bourgeois domestic ensemble of semi-disposable consumer
furnishings as the interior of an equally transportable military accommodation.

DETROIT / Motor City

III | 58

The most direct critique of modern urbanism as informed by 20th century military techniques
can be found in the projects of Ludwig Hilberseimer.20 Hilberseimer’s proposals for a radicallydecentralized pattern of regional infrastructure for postwar America simultaneously optimized
Fordist models of decentralized industrial production and dispersed large population concentrations that had become increasingly obvious targets for aerial attack in the atomic age.
Hilberseimer’s drawing of an atomic blast in central Illinois renders a clear imperative for theconstruction of a civil defense infrastructure capable of transporting dense urban populations
away from the dangers of the city and toward the relative security of suburban dissolution.21
This model of the highway as a military infrastructure afforded a form of civil defense throughcamouflage. Not coincidentally, the depopulation of urban centers in response to the cold war
argues quite effectively for precisely the kind of decreasing density that his previous work had
been predicated on in the name of efficient industrial production and optimized arrangement. In
both modalities, as military encampment and industrial ensemble, the vision of a nationallyscaled infrastructure of transportation and communication networks revealed a fundamental
sympathy between Fordist models of industrial production and military models of spatial
projection.
Much has been written on the military origins of the modern interstate highway system in the
U.S. and the impact of military policy on postwar American settlement patterns has been well
documented. While the highway is arguably the clearest evidence of Fordism’s impact on postwar urban arrangement in America, it is also clear that this most Fordist network is itself anessentially military technology. Given Ford’s well-documented sympathy to Nazism, the infrastructural and logistical logics of the German war machine provided an essential case study inthe virtues of Fordist mobility.22 Not simply a model of production, but an essential Fordist precept, mobilization was understood not only as a preparation for the projection of military power
but also the retooling of the very industrial process itself toward martial ends. It should come asno surprise that the modern interstate highway, the very invention Ford’s success postulated wasitself first proven necessary through German military engineering. By witnessing the logisticalsuperiority and civil defense potential of the Autobahns, the American military-industrial complex was able to articulate the need for the highway as an increasingly urgent matter of national security.
Not coincidentally, Detroit has the dubious honor of being the only American city to be occupied
three times by federal troops.23 Another evidence of the parallels to be drawn between military
encampments and Detroit’s temporary urbanism can be found in the symmetrical techniques
employed to enforce social order amidst the dense concentration of heterogeneous populations.
The history of Detroit’s labor unrest documents the various quasi-military techniques employed
to render a suitably compliant labor pool to serve the needs of the production line. Detroit’s social
history has oscillated between periods of peacefully coerced consumption (fueled by advertisingand increasing wages) and periods of profound social unrest, largely based on the desire forcollective bargaining, improvements in economic conditions, and to redress racial and ethnic
inequities. 24
Ford’s famous five-dollar day and five-day workweek were quite calculated levers intended tofuel the consumption of mass products by the working classes themselves. The volatile concentration of diverse populations of laborers in dense urban centers was among the factors that
led Ford to begin decentralizing production as early as the 1920’s.25 The combination of decentralized pools of workers each with sufficient income to consume the products of their own
labors produced a new economic paradigm in the 20th century and also helped to fuel the rapid
depopulation of post-industrial urban centers in postwar America.
In 1955, at the height of post-war emigration from the city, a uniquely talented team was assembled to renovate one of the city’s ‘failing’ downtown neighborhoods.26 A federally underwritten
Title I FHA urban renewal project that would come to be known as Lafayette Park, the work of

DETROIT / Motor City

III | 59

this interdisciplinary team offers a unique case study in a continuously viable and vibrant mixed
income community occupying a modernist super-block scheme. In light of recently renewedinterest in the problems of modernist planning principles, and the continual demolition of many
publicly subsidized modernist housing projects nationally, Lafayette Park offers a unique counterpoint, arguing precisely in favor of modern principles of urban planning, and recommending
a thoughtful revision of the perceived failures of modern architecture and planning vis-à-vis thecity.
Led by the developer Herbert Greenwald (until his untimely death in a 1959 airplane crash) anda team of real-estate professionals, the financial underpinnings of the project included $7.5 million in FHA loan guarantees (out of a total construction budget of $35 million) as well as a substantial federal subsidy toward the cost of the land. Originally planned as a mixed-income andmixed race development, Lafayette Park continues to this day to enjoy multiple original family
residents, high relative market value, and greater racial, ethnic, and class diversity than both thecity and suburbs that surround it. Greenwald’s original conception of the neighborhood remains
remarkably viable today, as the site continues to provide central city housing to a middle classgroup of residents with the perceived amenities of the suburbs, including decreased density,
extensive landscaping and public parks, easy access by automobile, and safe secure places forchildren to play.
Greenwald enlisted the professional services of architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe for thedesign of the project, with whom he had previously worked on the development of the 860–880
Lake Shore Drive Apartments in Chicago. Mies brought to the team Ludwig Hilberseimer, to plan
the site, and Alfred Caldwell, to execute the landscape design. Based largely on his previous academic projects in Germany and the U.S., Lafayette Park provided the most significant application of Hilberseimer’s conception of the ‘settlement unit’ as well as the most important commission of his career. Hilbs’ settlement unit was particularly apt as an aggregation of planning principals and types appropriate to the decentralizing North American city.27 Best known for his unbuilt urban design projects from the 1920’s (Hochhausstadt, 1924 et al.), Hilbs began to workon the notion of landscape as the primary medium for a horizontal and radically decentralized
post-urban landscape as early as the 1930’s. First evidenced in mid-1930’s projects for mixedheight housing schemes and the University of Berlin campus, these tendencies toward an ideaof landscape as urbanism are immediately evident in Hilbs’ plans for the Lafayette Park site, aportion of the city of Detroit that decentralized first, fastest, and most fully.
Hilberseimer’s plan for the site proposed landscape as its primary material element, the commission offering both sufficient acreage as well as an adequate budget for what could have otherwise been an uninspired urban void. Central to this was Greenwald’s finance and marketing
scheme, which positioned landscape as the central amenity in the form of an 18-acre parkbisecting the site and providing a much sought after social and environmental amenity in the
midst of Detroit. Lafayette Park removed the vestiges of the obsolete 19th-century street grid, infavor of a lush verdant and extensive green tabula verde. By rendering the primary spatial
structure of the site in a lush verdant layer of landscape, Hilberseimer accommodated the automobile completely at Lafayette Park, yet rendered it secondary to the primary exterior spacesof the site as the parking is in proximity to units, while zoned to the perimeter of the site anddropped by approximately one meter below grade. To the extent that landscape can be seen asa primary ordering element (in lieu of architecture) for the urbanization of the site, Hilbs’ collaboration with Mies at Lafayette Park provides a unique case study for examining the role oflandscape in post-war modernist planning more generally.
At the end of the 20th century at least 70 urban centers in the U.S. were engaged in an ongoing process of abandonment, disinvestment, and decay.28 While most Americans for the first timein history now live in suburban proximity to a metropolitan center, this fact is mitigated by thesteadily decreasing physical density in most North American cities. Rather than taking the aban-

DETROIT / Motor City

III | 60

donment of these previously industrial urban centers as an indicator of the so-called ‘failure’ ofthe design disciplines to create a meaningful or coherent public realm, these trends must be
understood as the rational end game of industrial urbanism itself, rendering legible a mobilityof capital and dispersion of infrastructure that characterize mature Fordist urbanism as prophesied by Ford himself.29 In spite of a decade long attempts to ‘revitalize’ the city of Detroit withthe construction of theaters, sports stadia, casinos and other publicly subsidized, privately
owned, for profit destination entertainment, Detroit continues to steadily lose population andbuilding stock. These latest architectural attempts to proclaim Detroit ‘back’ have effectively committed the city to a future as a destination entertainment theme park for its wealthy suburban
ex-patriots. Rather than signaling a renewed ‘vitality’ or life for the post-industrial city, theseprojects continue to mine the brand name of Detroit, while the city continues to abandon itself toa decentralized post-industrial future. In spite of a massive federally funded advertising campaign and a small army of census takers, the 2000 U.S. Census showed Detroit’s population
continuing to shrink.30
As Detroit decamps it constructs immense empty spaces, tracts of land that are essentially void
spaces. These areas are not being ‘returned to nature,’ but are curious landscapes of indeterminate status. In this context, landscape is the only medium capable of dealing with simultaneously decreasing densities and indeterminate futures. The conditions recommending an urbanism of landscape can be found in both the abandoned central city and on the periphery of thestill spreading suburbs. Ironically, the ongoing process of green-field development at the perimeter of Detroit’s metropolitan region brings up similar questions posed by the incursion of opportunistic natural environmental systems into areas of post-urban abandonment. For these sites,
both brownfield and greenfield, what is demanded is a strategy of landscape as urbanism, alandscape urbanism for Detroit’s post-industrial territories.31
The decommissioning of Detroit’s vacant lands recommends strategies for staging or setting-up
reserves of open land of indeterminate status. These reserves of open space necessitate infrastructural strategies for social and ecological arrangement in the context of an indeterminate
future. Also needed are collective conceptions of these spaces that are capable of rendering
Detroit’s post-industrial territories legible to various populations and constituencies. Rather thanallowing these spaces to be legislated by brand naming and destination tourism, their future viability as true void spaces depends upon the imaginary and mythic conditions of their founding.
Toward this end, the decommissioning of these territories requires the same kind of public participation and rites that attended to their original annexation and incorporation.
Published in: Edward Robbins and Rodolphe El-Khoury (eds.), Shaping the City: History, Theory,and Urban Design, Routledge, London 2003, pp. 79–99
The origins of this essay can be found in the research and design project Decamping Detroit
co-authored with Marili Santos-Munne in: Stalking Detroit, ACTAR, Barcelona 2001, pp. 104–121.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------References
1

Henry Ford as quoted in Ludwig Hilberseimer, “Cities and Defense,” 1945, and reprinted in: Richard Plommer,
David Spaeth, and Kevin Harrington (eds.), In the Shadow of Mies: Ludwig Hilberseimer, Architect, Educator, andUrban Planner, Rizzoli/Art Institute of Chicago, New York/Chicago 1988, pp. 89–93

2

In the first half of the 20th century, the population of Detroit grew from under 285,700 in 1900 to over
1,849,500 in 1950. That number dropped steadily in the second half of the century to 951,270 at the 2000
Census. For more on Detroit’s declining population see Witold Rybczynski, “The Zero Density Neighborhood,” in:Detroit Free Press Sunday Magazine, October 29, 1995, pp. 14–17, 19

3

Jerry Herron, “Three Meditations on the Ruins of Detroit,” in: Daskalakis, Waldheim, and Young (eds.), Stalking
Detroit, ACTAR, Barcelona 2001, p. 33

DETROIT / Motor City

4

Detroit Vacant Land Survey, City of Detroit, City Planning Commission, August 24, 1990

5

Ibid., pp. 3–5

6“Day of the Bulldozer,” in: The Economist, May 8, 1993, pp. 33–34

7

III | 61

U.S. Census Bureau figures for Detroit indicate that the populations of 21 metropolitan areas in the United States,
including St. Louis, Washington D.C., and Philadelphia, were shrinking at a faster rate than Detroit’s during thedecade of the 1990s

8

Detroit Vacant Land Survey, City of Detroit, City Planning Commission, August 24, 1990

9Paul Virilio, “The Overexposed City,” in: Zone 1–2, Urzone, New York 1986, trans. Astrid Hustvedt. In 1998,
Detroit’s Mayor Dennis Archer secured $60 million in loan guarantees from the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development to finance the demolition of every abandoned residential building in the city. See “Dismantling
the Motor City,” in: Metropolis, June 1998, p. 33

10

On ‘Devil’s Night’ in Detroit, see Ze’ev Chafets, Devil’s Night: And Other True Tales of Detroit, Random House, NewYork 1990, pp. 3–16. While precise numbers of houses lost to arson are hard to quantify, local myth places thefigure at a conservative 1% annually. On media coverage of arson in Detroit, see Jerry Herron, AfterCulture:
Detroit and the Humiliation of History, Wayne State University Press, Detroit 199311

On the urban impact of Detroit’s massive demolition program, see Dan Hoffman’s “Erasing Detroit,” in: Stalking
Detroit, ACTAR, Barcelona 2001, pp. 100–103

12Michel de Certeau, “The Unnamable,” in: The Practice of Everyday Life, University of California Press, Berkeley
1984, p. 190, trans. Steven Rendall

13

Ibid., p. 190

14

See Hoffman, Erasing Detroit. According to research by Sanford Kwinter and Daniela Fabricius, between 1978
and 1998 approximately 9,000 building permits were issued for new houses in Detroit, while over 108,000
demolition permits were issued. See Kwinter and Fabricius, “Contract with America”, in: Mutations, ACTAR,
Barcelona 2000, p. 600

15

Following Dan Hoffman, “The Best the World has to Offer,” in: Stalking Detroit, ACTAR, Barcelona 2001,

16

Following Patrik Schumacher and Christian Rogner, “After Ford,” in: Stalking Detroit, ACTAR, Barcelona 2001,

pp. 42–47
pp. 48–56
17

Paul Virilio has commented on the fundamentally warlike conditions of Fordist urbanism. See Virilio, “TheOverexposed City,” Zone 1-2, Urzone, New York 1986, trans. Astrid Hustvedt

18

Joseph Rykwert, The Idea of a Town: An Anthropology of Urban Form in Rome, Italy and the Ancient World, MIT

19

Michael Hays, “Contra the Bourgeois Interior: Co-op Zimmer,” in: Modernism and the Posthumanist Subject, MIT

Press, Cambridge 1988
Press, Cambridge 1995, pp. 54–81
20

Ludwig Hilberseimer, The New Regional Pattern, Paul Theobald & Co., Chicago 1949. See also Richard Pommer,
David Spaeth, and Kevin Harrington, In the Shadow of Mies: Ludwig Hilberseimer, Architect, Educator, and Urban
Planner, Rizzoli / Art Institute of Chicago, New York/Chicago 1988

21

Ludwig Hilberseimer, “Cities and Defense,” in: In the Shadow of Mies: Ludwig Hilberseimer, Architect, Educator,and Urban Planner, ed. Richard Pommer, David Spaeth, and Kevin Harrington (New York/Chicago: Rizzoli / Art
Institute of Chicago, 1988),pp. 89–93.

22

For a discussion of the military imperatives of modernist urbanism, see Sanford Kwinter, “Mies and Movement:
Military Logistics and Molecular Regimes,” in: Detlef Mertins (ed.), The Presence of Mies, Princeton Architectural
Press, New York 1994, pp. 84–95

23

For a description of the martial enforcement of civil order in the context of race relations in Detroit, see Thomas
Sugrue, The Origins of the Urban Crisis, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1996

24

Thomas Sugrue, “Crisis: Detroit and the Fate of Postindustrial America,” in: The Origins of the Urban Crisis,Princeton University Press, Princeton 1996, pp. 259–271

25

See Schumacher and Rogner, After Ford26

For an excellent overview of Lafayette Park, see David Spaeth, “Ludwig Hilberseimer’s Settlement Unit: Origins
and Applications,” in: Richard Pommer, David Spaeth, and Kevin Harrington (eds.), In the Shadow of Mies: Ludwig

DETROIT / Motor City

III | 62

Hilberseimer, Architect, Educator, and Urban Planner, Rizzoli / Art Institute of Chicago, New York/Chicago 1988,
pp. 89–93
27

Ibid., pp. 89–93

28

Alan Plattus, Undercrowding and the American City: A Position Paper and a Proposal for Action, unpublishedmanuscript, pp. 1–8

29

See Schumacher and Rogner, After Ford30

The aggressive and unsuccessful federally funded campaign to count Detroit’s citizens for the 2000 census wasaimed in part at maintaining Detroit’s eligibility for certain federally funded programs available only to cities witha population of one million or more. See “Census should show if Detroit is successful in its comeback,” in: Chicago
Tribune, June 5, 2000, A-1, p. 10

31

Waldheim coined the term ‘landscape urbanism’ in 1996 to describe the emergence of landscape as the most
relevant medium for the production and representation of contemporary urbanism.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 63--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TROUBLE IN MOTOR CITY
Joe Kerr (2000)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------“Detroit is seven counties, 233 communities, nearly five million people and 300 years of history,
and that’s just since the Europeans arrived. On one block it looks like ground zero of the rust
belt, the next, like Jay Gatsby’s front lawn. Burdened by an image of grime and crime, bigger
than Madrid, Miami, Saigon and Sydney, beholden to a troubled recent past, metro Detroit is a
tough place to figure out.”1
There’s trouble in Motor City, but then that’s nothing new. Detroit always seems to be in somekind of bother--industrial strikes, civil-rights clashes, race riots, urban depopulation and dereliction, unparalleled crime rates--and all of that in the last of its three centuries of history. To
be fair, Detroit has recently looked to be on the way up again--with the city celebrating its
tri-centenary in style, and with new construction promising to breathe life into its downtown for
the first time in decades--but trouble there undoubtedly is, trouble of a familiar kind for the MotorCity.
For the car companies are once again in deep financial gloom, signaling the latest crisis in theAmerican economy as it lurches unsteadily from boom to bust. When Ford, the second largestof the ‘Big Three’ American motor manufacturers, says it will shed five thousand jobs and cut
production, then its home city starts to worry. And when General Motors, the world’s largest corporation, announces a 73% drop in income for the second quarter of 2001, then the whole
American economy braces itself for the onset of recession. For as they say in the Motor City,‘What’s good for General Motors is good for America’--and vice versa. It is with almost laughable hubris that Wall Street has tried to ignore these recent storm warnings, with one analyst
claiming that ‘unless the rest of the economy goes off the end of a cliff, the … recession in theauto business is over.’2 But then that was in August 2001, and the following month the economy did fall over the proverbial edge.
Detroit has shrugged off the consequences of economic downturn many times in the past, andthe current recession has actually arrived on the back of a long period of booming sales. But
this time around, the long-term prospects are especially ominous, with foreign car companies
circling like vultures over the wounded giants of the American automotive industry.
So has Motor City finally run out of road? If so, it would bring to a close the most remarkablechapter in the history of American manufacturing. For in the 106 years since the first motorized
vehicle took to the streets of Detroit, the city has been at the heart of America’s relentless economic expansion. We may think of New York or Los Angeles as the quintessential cities of modern America, yet Detroit could lay as good a claim to that particular honor. For despite its threecenturies of white settlement, the city only assumed its role as America’s powerhouse in the 20th
century, when it grew to become the largest industrial site in the entire world. But it is precisely because Detroit was in the vanguard of America’s growing economic dominance in the firsthalf of the 1900s that its subsequent headlong decline into redundancy seems so extraordinary.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DRIVING THE WORLD ECONOMY
For the enormous wealth which Detroit’s car plants once generated, and which helped to build
it into the third most populous city in the U.S., has long ceased to sustain it. Only a quarter ofAmerican cars are still made in Detroit, and those in highly automated plants, with a consequentloss of half the city’s post-war population to the suburbs or beyond. The details of Detroit’s longdecline are complex, but the reasons for it are clear, for the Motor City and its rustbelt neighbors
are the most conspicuous victims in the Western world of the relentless progress of globalization.

DETROIT / Trouble in Motor City

III | 64

In Detroit’s case, it is the rise of the Japanese car industry, and the relocation of manufacturing
and assembly facilities to cheaper and less unionized labor markets, that has done the damage.
The irony of this abject decline is that the Motor City was once at the forefront of what economic
historians now identify as globalization’s first phase, when, in the first couple of decades of thelast century, the way the world did business was utterly transformed by an unprecedented
expansion in trade. A combination of surplus wealth for overseas investment, improved communications to keep track of those investments, a dramatic improvement in both the speed andthe cost of transportation, and the increased mobility of labor created perfect conditions in which
the 20th century’s new industries could flourish and grow.
Already a successful but modest manufacturing and trading city, Detroit provided a fertile environment for the fledgling automobile industry, replete as it was with the resources that the newindustrial barons required: Existing factories forged metal components and constructed wooden
car bodies. Machine shops milled tools and parts for automobile production. Most important,
Detroit’s marine engine makers already knew how to make gasoline engines. Detroit was also
the home of highly successful lumber, mining, and shipbuilding entrepreneurs. These people had
capital to invest in the emerging car business.3
Even so, it is remarkable how rapidly car-making took root there, and how quickly Detroit grew
to become not just the most important American manufacturing center, but quite simply thelargest site of industrial production in the world. The figures only hint at the extraordinary acceleration of this young industry at the turn of the century. In 1896, Charles Brady King drove
Detroit’s first horseless carriage down its principal thoroughfare, Woodward Avenue. In 1901,
pioneer manufacturer Ransom E. Olds built 425 of his famous Curved Dash Olds, the first
volume production of cars in America. And in 1913, only ten years after establishing theFord Motor Company, Henry Ford introduced the moving assembly line at his new Highland
Park factory. Within three years, he was responsible for making 50% of all American cars and
40% of cars around the world. By the time war broke out in Europe, Detroit was turning out
78% of America’s cars and had already acquired its famous and enduring sobriquet, Motor City.
Having had the apparent good fortune to acquire the major new industry of the 20th century,
Detroit exploded at a staggering rate, expanding from 23 to 139 square miles in the first quarter of the century. Hordes of European immigrants beat a path from Ellis Island to the Motor
City, part of the biggest migration in human history. In 1904, the car factories employed lessthan 3,000 workers, but by 1919 that number had jumped to over 75,000 in Detroit alone, without counting the thousands who flooded into the new industrial communities--Flint, Hamtramck,
Highland Park and Pontiac--that now ringed the city. Even before stricter immigration controls
introduced in 1924 cut off that supply of unskilled labor, agricultural workers from the southern states of America began the long trek to Michigan, lured by Henry Ford’s famous promiseof $5 a day. As Blind Blake sang in his “Detroit Bound Blues:”“I’m goin’ to Detroit, get myself a good job
Tried to stay around here with the starvation mob.
I’m goin’ to get me a job, up there in Mr. Ford’s place
Stop these eatless days from starin’ me in the face.”4Ford was one of only a handful of industrial companies that employed significant numbers of
black workers. The influx of African Americans from the deep South may have been largely
responsible for Detroit’s unique musical culture, but it was the tide of immigrants from within
and without America, allowed to settle in tight-knit communities, that sowed the seeds for manyof Detroit’s subsequent woes.

DETROIT / Trouble in Motor City

III | 65-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------COMETH THE HOUR
In these boom years, however, the city fathers paid scant attention to issues such as racial integration, given the pressing need to attract hands of whatever color or creed to work the new
production lines. Although more than 350 different makes of car were produced in the area at
one time or another, it was not long before a few select manufacturers began to outstrip theircompetitors, most remarkably Henry Ford.
Although Ford was not the unique innovator delineated by his many apologists, his successstemmed from the successful implementation and integration of many of the new ideas thatflowed from the pioneers of the automobile industry. Ford’s own most important contribution was
to look beyond the luxury market pursued by his competitors and to concentrate his efforts ondesigning and producing low-cost, reliable and universally affordable vehicles. It was his single-minded ambition to push down unit costs that led to his most significant innovations, suchas the moving assembly line and the standardization and simplification of parts.
It was to realize these ends that he built his revolutionary new factory at Highland Park, where
his first experiments with mass production were made on the Model-T assembly lines in 1913.
The benefits--to Ford at least--were instantaneous: the time needed to make a single Tin Lizzie
dropped from 12-1/2 man-hours to 93 minutes, while the price plunged from about $850 fora hand-built Model T in 1908 to $298 for the same car rolling off the automated assembly line
in 1922. By the time that production of the world’s first mass-produced auto ceased in 1927,
Ford had made over 15 million of them, and at one time it was said that every other car in theworld was a Model T. The price paid for these innovations by the assembly workers themselves,and by the workers on every subsequent mass-production line, was extremely high and laid thefoundations for Detroit’s subsequent history of bitter labor disputes.
By the outbreak of World War Two, Detroit’s dominance of the market was complete, and its auto
manufacturers had expanded into every corner of the globe. General Motors, which became andstill is the world’s largest corporation, commenced its overseas operations in Canada in 1918,
established itself in Europe with a plant in Copenhagen in 1923, in Brazil in 1925, in South
Africa, Japan and Australia in 1926, and in India in 1928, opening the first assembly plant
there. By 1939, it was also operating in Belgium, Argentina, England, France, Spain, Germany,
New Zealand, Egypt, Uruguay, Chile, Java, Mexico and Switzerland, and its overseas sales had
exceeded 350,000 vehicles.5-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------‘WHERE LIFE IS WORTH LIVING’6
In September 1937, labor activist Eli Oliver declared that “Detroit, not Washington, is the capitalof the United States today.”7 With a war looming, Detroit could look back on an era of unprecedented growth and prosperity. Not only had it become the forge of America’s new industrial
empire; the city itself had taken on the guise of a great metropolis.
High-rise offices and hotels had sprouted in the downtown area, transforming the city in themanner of the classic American vision of the City Beautiful. By contrast, the enormous automotive factories ringing the city had become celebrated icons of the European Modern movement. For just as the Detroit industrialist Henry Ford had revolutionized the means of production,
so the Detroit architect Albert Kahn had pioneered a new form of architecture in which to housethe new assembly lines. Most factories of the time were still being constructed on the model
established by 18th British mills, but Kahn superseded the standard factory building with something quicker and cheaper to build, and infinitely more fireproof. The system of reinforcedconcrete construction he introduced at the Packard Factory in 1905, and refined at Highland
Park in 1908, provided large, uninterrupted spaces between columns, essential for the new production methods, and allowed natural light to flood in from floor-to-ceiling windows.
Detroit became an essential pilgrimage destination for avant-garde artists and architects, eager

DETROIT / Trouble in Motor City

III | 66

to witness the miracle of mass production. Images of Kahn’s Highland Park factory appeared in
all of the pioneering Modernist texts, most famously Le Corbusier’s Vers une architecture(1923).8 The German architect Erich Mendelsohn visited Detroit in October 1924, later recalling:“At my first visit to the States in 1924 … two things stagger my imagination: Buffalo’s grain elevators and Albert Kahn in Detroit.”9 Mendelsohn would undoubtedly have seen Kahn’s newest
and greatest industrial structure, Ford’s River Rouge plant built from 1917, which grew in ten
years to become the world’s largest factory. This 1,000-acre complex, with its 100,000 workers, 14 miles of roadways and 92 miles of railway track, was described by Vanity Fair in 1928
as “the most significant monument in America”.10 The Rouge plant, universally received as the
epitome of modernity, was famously painted and photographed by such progressive artists as
Charles Sheeler, Diego Rivera and Frida Kahlo.11 But Kahn himself was no devotee of theModern movement, and he was happy to design Detroit’s grand public buildings in a variety ofclassical styles, while for the great mansions of the automotive barons he turned to European
domestic styles, most famously for the Edsel and Eleanor Ford House, designed as a Cotswold
manor house.
But Detroit did not feel like the center of the modern world for many of its citizens after the stock
market crashed in October 1929, an event that hit the industrial state of Michigan worse thanany other part of the U.S. Many of the smaller carmakers went under, and even in the larger
plants the workers who kept their jobs faced drastic wage cuts. At the Rouge, Ford workers saw
their hourly wage drop from 92 to 52 cents by 1933. Thus it was that in the 1930s, Detroit
again wrote itself into American history books, this time as the center of the struggle for union
recognition and workers’ rights. In 1932, a march by 3,000 Ford workers to the Rouge plant
was fired on by security guards, killing five. In 1935, the United Auto Workers (UAW) union
was formed, prompting a series of bitter and violent disputes that led to nation-wide
speculation as to whether revolution was imminent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE ARSENAL OF DEMOCRACY
Detroit and America were saved from the possibility of insurrection by the outbreak of war,
which returned the car plants to full production. The war was a godsend for certain previously
disadvantaged sections of the labor force, in particular African Americans and women who suddenly found themselves doing jobs that had not been open to them before, as other autoworkers
went off to fight. Even then, only a third of Detroit’s defense plants would hire African Americans,and in a telling portent of trouble ahead, the promotion of black workers was a common causeof many labor disputes during the later war years. In July 1943, racial tensions came to headwith the worst race riots the nation had seen. Two nights of violence saw 34 people dead andhundreds injured before troops restored order.12
The attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 may have killed demand for private cars, but
this proved no bad thing for the Motor City. Far from it; it merely served to underscore Detroit’s
total dominance of vehicle making. With one former GM President, William Knudsen, co-coordinating national war production and another, Charlie Wilson, later serving as Secretary of
Defense, it was perhaps inevitable that the city should prosper during the conflict, as its otherfamous nickname--Arsenal of Democracy--suggests. But even with friends in high places, thescale of the city’s contribution to the war effort was extraordinary, for it made 92% of American
military vehicles, 87% of its aircraft bombs, 75% of its aircraft engines and 56% of its tanks.
Henry Ford’s Willow Run bomber factory, designed by Kahn and opened in 1941 with theworld’s longest production line, produced 8,000 warplanes alone, while General Motors supplied a total of 12.3 billion dollars worth of war material. As Charlie Wilson famously observed
at his Senate confirmation hearings in 1952, “For years, I thought what was good for our country
was good for General Motors--and vice versa.”

DETROIT / Trouble in Motor City

III | 67-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE CARS THAT ATE DETROIT
By the war’s end in August 1945, Michigan’s industries had supplied 12% of all war materials
produced in the U.S., far outstripping any other area. But VJ Day did not mark the end of thegood years for Detroit. It seemed that Charlie Wilson was right, for as America entered an
unparalleled era of prosperity, increased demand for motorcars more than compensated for the
cessation of wartime production. Indeed, the 20-year period from 1945 has often been hailed
as the golden age of the American auto. High wages and low oil prices fuelled demand for theincreasingly extravagant products of the Motor City. Harley Earl’s flamboyant designs for
General Motors such as the 1955 Chevrolet Bel Air and the 1958 Cadillac Eldorado were thelast word in consumer-led styling, with their towering tail fins, wraparound windshields and outlandish dashboard gadgets. These supercharged monsters proved irresistible to a generation
experiencing a seemingly limitless growth in purchasing power, and in 1955 alone a staggering nine million cars rolled off Detroit’s tireless production lines.
Inevitably, there was a price to be paid for this insatiable production and consumption, and it
was Detroit that paid it. More cars meant more industrial facilities and more people to work inthem--on the face of it, highly beneficial developments for the city. However, the new plants werebuilt at some distance from the center, and around them new communities sprung up with amazing rapidity, acting like magnets on existing populations and new immigrants alike. It is estimated that Detroit itself lost nearly 150,000 manufacturing jobs in the first 20 years of peace.
General Motors’ fabulous new Technical Center, designed by Eero Saarinen in another great actof architectural patronage, opened in the auto suburb of Warren in 1956. Warren became thefastest-growing city in the state during the 1950s and 1960s as a complex web of assemblyplants and supply industries developed there, along with huge tracts of new housing. The
expanding expressway network facilitated the relentless migration from downtown to the suburbs. The first of these, the Detroit Industrial Expressway, was built during the war to carry
20,000 workers a day from metropolitan Detroit to the new bomber plant at Willow Run. By
the mid-1950s, 7,000 Detroiters had been displaced by motorways, and many previously flourishing inner-city neighborhoods had been bisected by them, precipitating rapid social decline.
In 1954, America’s first ‘cluster’ mall, the Northland Shopping Center, opened in the outer suburbs, developed by Detroit’s famous downtown department store, Hudson’s, and planned by theking of the post-war shopping mall, Victor Gruen. It was followed by the Eastland and Westland
centers, forming a noose to throttle the life out of downtown. Ever greater numbers of Detroit’s
population now drove their new cars along new roads, carrying them from new houses to newfactories and shopping malls. The city, like a tree, was dying in the middle as fresh growth
sprouted on the outside.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------‘MOTOR CITY IS BURNING’13
The phenomenon of ‘white flight’ was not unique to Detroit, although few other cities have experienced such a dramatic collapse in their inner-city populations. Between 1955 and 1960 alone,
Detroit lost as much as 25% of its population of two million, as those who could headed forcheap housing and low taxes in the suburbs, leaving the inner city with fewer tax dollars and aresidual population that was predominantly poor and black. It may have been well-paid jobs
that had drawn African Americans to the Motor City in the first instance, but it was poor race
relations that subsequently alienated them, in the process lighting a powder keg under the city’ssocial fabric.
For while Detroit is justly famous for nurturing a unique black musical culture, it is perhaps less
known outside the U.S. as a hotbed of the civil rights movement. When in June 1963, Martin
Luther King Jr. first declared “I have a dream,” he was speaking not on the steps of the Lincoln
Memorial in Washington, D.C., but in Cobo Hall in downtown Detroit, after leading a 125,000-

DETROIT / Trouble in Motor City

III | 68

strong civil-rights march up Woodward Avenue, the largest in America up to that time. And
while it is a well-publicized part of Detroit folklore that Motown founder Berry Gordy once
worked on the Ford production line, composing songs to alleviate the tedium of assembly work,
guidebooks to the city generally neglect to mention that at the same time Ford was also employing the future Nation of Islam leader, Malcolm X.
It can have come as no surprise to anyone when inner-city Detroit finally boiled over in July
1967, after a police raid on an illegal speakeasy sparked off a week of rioting that left 43 deadand 467 injured, the worst civil unrest in 20th-century American history up until that time. The
physical damage was immense, with about $50 million of property destroyed, including hundreds of homes and thousands of shops looted or burnt, leaving whole city blocks in ruins. But
it was the social damage that inflicted the biggest wounds on Detroit. Although segregation was
already a fact of life there, the riots left an enduring legacy of extreme polarization that further
contributed to the community’s social collapse. By the 1970s, Detroit had acquired the thoroughly deserved nickname of ‘Murder City.’ Its 1974 record of 714 homicides was the worst in
the nation, a feat it matched in several other years in the following decade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE END OF THE LINE?
Detroit’s social plight was reinforced by the steady decline and displacement of the auto industry.
Many famous carmakers had ceased production or been taken over, eventually leaving just the
Big Three: General Motors, Ford and Chrysler. While they continued to maintain a considerable
presence--including the world’s greatest concentration of research and technical facilities-increased rationalization and automation, and the relocation of production facilities to low-wage
economies, massively reduced their dependence on local labor. Added to this was the steadyloss of consumer confidence in American-designed and -built automobiles.
In this respect, the Motor City was once again the victim of its own earlier success. The outrageous excesses of its annual model updates had so successfully stimulated consumer desiresthat the manufacturers had devoted themselves more to innovations in styling than in technology. The disastrous consequences of this policy were exposed in 1965, when Ralph Nader’s
Unsafe at Any Speed slammed Detroit for designing and selling cars that were known to be dangerous, allegedly causing untold injuries and deaths on America’s roads. The Ford Mustang andGeneral Motors’ Corvair were singled out for particular criticism, with the result that sales ofGM’s fabled ‘muscle’ car fell by 93%. The American public was waking up to the fact that what
was good for General Motors wasn’t necessarily good for it after all.
Over-confident from decades of total domination of American markets, the carmakers were stillbuilding their unwieldy and antiquated products when the oil crisis hit in 1973. With petrol suddenly expensive and scarce, American buyers shied away from Detroit’s lumbering ‘gas guzzlers’ in favor of smaller, more fuel-efficient Japanese imports--particularly as growing concerns
over environmental pollution increased the attractiveness of less ostentatious private vehicles.
Throughout the 1950s, American cars had accounted for 95% of the American market, but by
the late 1970s imports had risen to as much as 25% of total sales. However, even that diminished market share seems like a strong performance given the parlous state of the industry
today. For, as the Detroit News revealed on the fateful morning of September 11:“The once Big Three … have seen their collective share of the U.S. car and light truck market
shrink from the 73% they enjoyed in 1993 at the start of the unprecedented sales boom tonearly 14 percentage points lower last month … Their share has sunk below 60% for the firsttime since 1920.14
It remains entirely possible that one day soon, cars will finally cease rolling off the productionlines of the Motor City. Chrysler continues to lose money and market share, despite having
merged with German car giant Daimler-Benz, and is in real danger of being displaced from the
Big Three by Toyota. Even mighty General Motors, the only one of the three to turn in a profit

DETROIT / Trouble in Motor City

III | 69

this year, has seen its market share slip continually, from 60% in the 1950s to 28% today. One
can only hope for America’s sake that its destiny is no longer so closely tied to the GM
Corporation.
But where does that leave the Motor City? As one drives past its derelict towers and shatteredneighborhoods, it might seem that God has deserted Detroit, but the automotive industry certainly
hasn’t yet done so. The city that witnessed the birth of the mass-produced automobile a century
ago is still home to the giants of American car production. General Motors, Ford and Chrysler
all maintain headquarters in the area.15 The very names of the city’s streets and buildings read
like an almanac of America’s most famous carmakers: Edsel Ford, Walter P. Chrysler, Packard,
Studebaker, Fisher.
Unfortunately, speeding past downtown Detroit, as opposed to wandering through it, is exactly
what most people are keen to do, intent on avoiding unimaginable dangers on the rutted streetsof this ruptured urban landscape. Although new buildings are once again rising in the city center, they are overshadowed by the empty shells of elaborate skyscrapers, including such oncefamous hotels as the Cadillac, the Madison and the Statler, whose only remaining function is tosupport microwave aerials for the new information technologies. The fabled department store
Hudson’s has been put out of business by its suburban progeny and was recently dynamited.
Many of Detroit’s theatres are destroyed or abandoned, while the grand auditorium of theMichigan Theater has been converted into a multi-level parking garage. The Fabulous Ruins of
Detroit is a website that charts the wreckage of the Motor City. With wry native humor, it compares Detroit to ancient Rome; the comparison seems all too plausible as one surveys the jagged
skyline of this decaying metropolis.
Moving away from downtown, the ring of inner-city suburbs that once housed the Motor City’s
workers have largely disappeared, creating one of the most distressed urban landscapes in theWestern world. Between the deep fissures dug for the urban expressways and the mountainous
hulks of the deserted car plants run streets almost wholly devoid of the buildings that once lined
them. The charred remains of timber-frame houses in various stages of collapse are interspersed with plots of grass, flowers and trees; the last surviving dwellings sit in semi-ruralsplendor, with some intrepid inhabitants even starting to cultivate the redundant acres aroundthem. A 1989 survey by reporters of the Detroit Free Press counted “15,215 vacant structures,
including 9,017 single-family homes, 225 apartment buildings and 3,404 vacant businesses.
The city estimated then that up to 200 structures a month were being abandoned in Detroit”.16
Detroit’s official motto, Speramus meliora, resurget cineribus--‘We hope for better days; it shallrise from the ashes’--was penned after a disastrous 19th-century fire. But as the industry thatonce drove 20th-century American expansion continues its inexorable decline, it is difficult toimagine how Detroit can ever rise from its present ruination. While the Motor City will always
hold a unique position in the history of America, it now seems less and less likely that it willplay a significant part in its future. Given that prospect, Henry Ford’s famous dictum, deliveredat a time of unbridled optimism in his adopted city, now sounds suspiciously like a verdict on
its demise: “History is more or less bunk. It’s tradition. We don’t want tradition. We want to livein the present, and the only history that is worth a tinker’s damn is the history we make today”.17
First published in: Peter Wollen and Joe Kerr (eds.), Autopia: cars and culture, Reaktion Books,
London 2002--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

The Detroit Almanac: “300 years of life in the Motor City”, in: Detroit Free Press, Detroit 2001, p. 3

2

Kenneth Gilpin, “G.M. Registers 73% Decline in Net Income for Quarter”, in: New York Times, August 12, 2001

3

Detroit Historical Museum, www.detroithistorical.org

DETROIT / Trouble in Motor City

III | 70

4

Quoted in Suzanne E. Smith, Dancing in the Street: Motown and the Cultural Politics of Detroit, Harvard University

5

General Motors Corporation, www.gmc.com

6

a late 19th-century slogan for Detroit, The Detroit Almanac, p. 287

7

Quoted in Mike Smith “Spirit of 1937”, in: Detroit at 300: Michigan History Magazine special issue, p. 62.

8

Le Corbusier had not visited America at this time, and it is said that he took the image of Highland Park from an

Press, Cambridge 1999, p. 12

earlier book by Mies van der Rohe
9

Quoted in the exhibition Albert Khan: Inspiration for the Modern, University of Michigan Museum of Art, Ann
Arbor, June 2001

10

The Detroit Almanac, p. 168

11

See Brian Carter (ed.), Albert Khan: Inspiration for the Modern, University of Michigan Museum of Art,

12

Charles A. Wills, A Historical Album of Detroit, in: The Millbrook Press, Brookfield, Connecticut 1996, p. 42

13title of John Lee Hooker song about the 1967 Detroit riot

14

John Schnapp, “It’s best, worst of times for carmakers”, in: The Detroit News, September 11, 200115

Ford’s World headquarters are in Dearborn close to the Rouge, General Motors has moved its world head-

2001)

quarters to the Renaissance Center in downtown Detroit, and Chrysler is headquartered in Auburn Hills--although
the world headquarters of Daimler Chrysler is now in Germany
16

The Detroit Almanac, p. 294

17Henry Ford, as quoted in the Chicago Tribune May 25, 1916. From Bob Allen, “Detroit: It starts with a T”, in:
Detroit at 300 , Michigan History Magazine, Then and Now, Crain Communications, Detroit 2001, p. 1------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 71--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEVIL’S NIGHT
Toni Moceri (2003)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Known in Detroit as ‘Devil’s Night,’ October 30 has become infamous around the world as the
day Detroit sets itself on fire. ‘Devil’s Night’ fires began in large numbers in 1983. That year,
Detroit had over 600 fires during the three-day Halloween period from October 29 to October
31.1 The following year, ‘Devil’s Night’ fires reached epic proportions and called international
attention to Detroit. ‘Devil’s Night’ in 1984 was the worst in Detroit’s history: the city experienced
297 fires on ‘Devil’s Night’ and 810 during the three-day Halloween period.2 Former Detroit Fire
Department Chief Jon Bozich describes the devastation of 1984: “1984 was our worst ‘Devil’sNight,’ the worst fire scenes I’ve seen since the riots of 1967. We had fires burning where there
were no fire companies available to respond … It was the worst thing I’ve seen on a non-riot
basis.”3
History: Halloween originates from the Festival of Samhain among the Celts. As part of thefestival, people set bonfires on hilltops for relighting their hearth fires for the winter and tofrighten away evil spirits.4 The Celts also believed that mischievous fairylike beings came out
during this period. As a result, people began performing pranks and blaming them on thesebeings. In the 19th century, large numbers of Irish immigrants came to the United Statesbringing their Halloween traditions with them. By the 20th century, Halloween had become
an established holiday in the United States. Halloween’s appeal came from its revelry, masquerading and cultural inversion. Nicholas Rogers notes that people were usually given a“special license” on Halloween, which included mischief and pranks. In some parts of theUnited States the mischief starts the night before Halloween. Depending on the area, people
call this night ‘gate night,’ ‘trick night,’ ’mischief night,’ ‘cabbage night,’ ‘goosy night,’ ‘devil’s
eve,’ or ‘devil’s night.’5 Rogers describes some early pranks: It was customary to root up vegetables from backyard gardens, disfigure jack-o’-lanterns on front steps or porches, unhingegates and shutters, tip over outhouses, pull down signs and fences, and even tear up thewooden boarded sidewalks.
However, the harsh realities of the 20th century began to transform the ‘harmless’
Halloween pranks. For example, David Skal argues that the Great Depression brought out
Halloween’s underlying sentiments of economic disparity, charity and class resentment during the Depression, pranks often resulted in the destruction of private and public property.
According to Skal, these pranks included breaking street lamps, smashing windows, overturning cars, and mob beatings. Throughout the second half of the century, authorities havemade several attempts to quell Halloween related pranks. However, during the 1970s and1980s,urban areas in the United States were experiencing a severe economic and social crisis.
Once again, Halloween pranks became a way in which people could express their civic
unrest and this time the method of choice was arson.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ORIGINSThe transformation of ‘Devil’s Night’ from a night of harmless pranks to one of arson was not
spontaneous. Instead, the progression of ‘Devil’s Night’ seems almost inevitable, the result of
Detroit’s ‘ills’ converging together with Halloween traditions. The ‘Devil’s Night’ phenomenon in
Detroit is a complex problem for the city. Through massive anti-arson efforts focused on thethree-day Halloween period, Detroit has reduced the number of fires that occur during that time.
Still, the city has not addressed the sources of the fires. Many of the same problems continue tobeleaguer Detroit and contribute to the city’s arson problem.

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 72

Thomas Sugrue argues that Detroit’s decline began in the middle decades of the 20th century.
He writes: “The bleak landscapes and unremitting poverty of Detroit in the 1970s and 1980s
are the legacies of the transformation of the city’s economy in the wake of Two World War, andof the politics and culture of race that have their origins in the persistent housing and workplace
discrimination of the postwar decades.”6 In the years preceding ‘Devil’s Night’ 1983, Detroit was
bleak. Increased arsons, large numbers of abandoned buildings, cuts in city services and highunemployment plagued the city.
According to the Fire Department, from 1969 to 1979 arsons increased from approximately
1,150 to 2,384.7 In 1980, the number of arson fires decreased to 2,001 out of 18,051 total fireincidents.8 Revenge accounted for the greatest number of arson fires, 668 fires or 33%9. Other
motives included fraud, juvenile arson, concealment of another crime, attempted arson andpyromania. According to Helen Fogel, there were 2,139 confirmed arson fires in 1981 and
2,156 in 1982.10
Arson: The Detroit Arson Squad must investigate a suspicious or incendiary fire to deem itarson. If the Detroit Arson Squad does not investigate a fire then it cannot be arson. The Fire
Department puts out a 24-hour sheet that lists every fire response in 24 hours. The responding company lists the fire as a probable electrical, suspicious, undetermined, etc. Whether or
not the Arson Squad investigates a fire depends on the severity of the fire and manpower.
Arson Investigative Priorities
1. Death
2. Burn injuries
3. Occupied Dwelling
4. Commercial
5. Vehicles
6. Vacant Properties
7. Others
Arson Investigative Techniques
1. Verify vehicle location.
2. Investigate from least amount of damage to the worst. This determines the area of origin.
3. Investigate the suspected origin to determine the cause:¬ Check for obvious clues (for example: Molotov cocktails).
¬ Eliminate accidental sources such as electrical ones.
¬ Take samples. Identify the least burned object and mark it for evidence, check for accelerants (flammable fluids).
4. Check to see if the fire started in multiple locations. Chances of multiple fires accidentally
occurring in a dwelling fire are slim to none.11-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ECONOMIC STRUGGLESMedia and officials blamed the increase in arsons on the recession and decreases in fire protection. Brian Flanigan reported that arsons in Michigan also increased in the early 1980s. He
quoted State Police Captain William Rucinski, “[In 1981] Michigan reported 8,607 fires of suspicious origin with losses of $31.2 million and 6,204 arsons with losses of $24 million.”12 The
increase in arsons and their cost was partially due to an increase in fraud. Detroit had increasing numbers of absentee property owners who found burning their properties more profitable
than maintaining them. Flanigan also quoted U.S. Attorney Leonard Gilman about Detroit’s arson
problem: “Arson is definitely a problem in this area, and it’s become an even greater problem
because of the economy. Individuals are having their business burned down to collect insurance
claims.”13 At a time when the economy was causing increased arson in Detroit, it was also affecting the Detroit Fire Department’s budget and its ability to protect the city against those very fires.
Fogel reported that cutbacks in funding for fire services resulted in 450 fewer fire fighters, 19DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 73

fewer fire fighting crews and 18 fewer firehouses.14 The cutbacks also affected Detroit’s arson
squad. Fogel quoted an arson detective as saying that his department is keeping up only with
big investigations; small fires, like garage fires that trouble residents at the neighborhood level,
simply had to go by the boards.15
The poor economy and cuts in fire protection were not the only circumstances contributing to‘Devil’s Night’ arson. Patricia Anstett spoke with over 24 experts and community leaders about
reasons for the ‘Devil’s Night’ fires.16 The reasons include:¬ Professional arsonists¬ Large number of abandoned buildings¬ Unemployment¬ Pent-up feelings of urban youths¬ Insurance fraud¬ Attention placed on the event¬ Lack of leadership in the community-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ABANDONED BUILDINGS
Detroit’s large number of abandoned buildings is a leading contributor to ‘Devil’s Night’ arson.
In general, abandoned buildings are more prone to fire. George Sternlieb and Robert Burchellfound that abandoned buildings were four times more likely than other types of structures in
Newark New Jersey to have a severe fire.17 Moreover, according to the National Fire Protection
Agency, two-thirds of fires in vacant and abandoned buildings were incendiary or suspicious.18
Kim Heron quoted Young as saying that the city’s 5,000 abandoned houses helped fuel ‘Devil’sNight’ arsons.19 Factors contributing to the Detroit’s abandonment problem include:¬ Declining population (between 1950 and 2000 Detroit lost almost half of its population)¬ Plant closures and companies relocating outside of Detroit¬ Falling property values¬ White flight¬ Aging homes¬ Failed HUD program (by January 1975 the federal government owned 16,774 houses andvacant lots in Detroit)
Detroit’s problems directly affected its population. Coleman Young describes the affects of unemployment in his autobiography. He states “ … that the high unemployment rate created feelingsof desperation and depression among Detroiters.”20 The lack of opportunity in Detroit hit the city’s
youth especially hard. Grace Lee Boggs writes: “Because of [the] high-tech industry and theexport of jobs overseas, young people could no longer drop out of school in the ninth grade andget a job in the plant making enough to raise a family. Then in the mid-1980s crack was invented, creating the basis for the crack economy. All over town young people started saying, ‘Why
continue going to school in the hope that eventually you’ll get a degree and make a lot of money
when you can make a lot of money right now rolling?’ As a result, turf struggles erupted andour neighborhoods became war zones where children walking to and from school risked being
shot and killed.”21
The growing divide between Detroit and its suburbs compounded the lack of opportunity. Youngargues that isolation and racism by the suburbs led to sentiments of self-hate and self-destruction among the city’s residents.22-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE MEDIA AND THOSE THAT FOLLOWEDThe media frenzy surrounding ‘Devil’s Night’ in Detroit ensured that all eyes focused on the city’s
fires. After the record-breaking number of arsons during the 1984 Halloween period, Detroit
had secured the title of Arson Capital of the Nation. The arson in Detroit had gained national andinternational media attention. Both the New York Times and Wall Street Journal featured articles

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 74

on Detroit’s ‘Devil’s Night’ and even the Tokyo-based Asahi-TV sent crews to document it.23/24
In 1985, The Free Press and WDIV-TV had a nationwide poll conducted to assess Detroit’s
image around the country. The poll showed that two out of three Americans regard Detroit as‘somewhat worse’ or ‘much worse’ than other big cities.25 Detroit’s unemployment and violence
were some attributes contributing to the city’s negative image. 37% of those polled had heard
about the ‘Devil’s Night’ fires while 59% heard about the 1967 riots.26
Reporters were not the only group flocking to Detroit to witness ‘Devil’s Night.’ Detroit began
attracting a new type of tourist, the ‘fire buff.’ Bill McGraw reported that the hundreds of fires on
the night before Halloween had made Detroit a (fire) buffs’ Mecca.27 The exact numbers of buffs
drawn to the city each year is unknown, but the article reported fire enthusiasts came from
Dallas, Washington, D.C., and New York City. ‘Devil’s Night’ even drew off-duty firefighters to
Detroit from the surrounding suburbs, such as Sterling Heights, to observe the fires.28 The large
crowds not only provided an audience for pyromaniacs and attention-seeking youth setting fires,but also made controlling ‘Devil’s Night’ and the city’s image more difficult. William J.V. Neillwrites: “Hollywood had inflicted the negative Robocop image on Detroit in films depicting random
urban mayhem, but the local Detroit tradition of ‘Devil’s Night’ was a self-inflicted image disaster.”29-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THE CITY RESPONDS
In 1985, Young appointed an Anti-Arson Initiative Steering Committee (initially known as theDevil’s Night Task Force) to achieve the goals of “reduced arson, raised community awareness,and increased community involvement in the fight against arson”.30 The committee included representatives from the mayor’s office, Detroit Neighborhood City Halls, city government departments and agencies, public schools, community-based organizations and the private sector.
Patricia Edmonds reports that the ‘Devil’s Night’ taskforce compiled data to prepare for future‘Devil’s Nights.’ Among their findings, they discovered that eight areas of the city, where 16% of
the population lives, were responsible for 65% of the fires.31 All but one of these areas was on
Detroit’s Eastside. Mayor Young also mobilized a group of approximately 8,000 people including the city’s Police and Fire Departments plus of city workers, mayoral appointees, and community volunteers to thwart the ‘Devil’s Night’ activities.32 The efforts spanned the three-day
Halloween period, October 29–31. Other anti-arson activities included switching radio frequencies so only police officers and fire fighters could receive them, installing new computer equipment to correlate emergency calls, and launching programs to remove abandoned buildings andloaded trash dumpsters.33
Fire Net: Fire Net is a multi-jurisdictional effort coordinated by the Detroit Fire Department
to catch and arrest arsonists during the Angels’ Night Campaign. Participating agencies haveincluded U.S. Marshals, Postal Inspectors, FBI, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms,
Michigan State Police, Michigan State Fire Marshal, and Wayne County Sheriff’s Office.
The Fire Net Command dispatches the Fire Net Teams to locations of ‘working fires.’ At thefire scene, Fire Net personnel must:
1. Block the intersections around the fire scene to prevent unnecessary vehicle traffic.
2. Clear the area around the fire ground of people who do not live in the area.
3. Attempt to locate witnesses who have information regarding the fire.
4. An Investigative Response Team is assigned to respond with each Fire Net Team. The
Investigative Response Team will determine the origin and cause of the fire.34
In 1986, according to Heron, the Detroit City Council approved the emergency curfew measure
byeight to one at Mayor Young’s request, avoiding public hearings needed to permanently
change city laws.35 The resulting curfew is from 6pm to 6am and affects all minors unless they
are accompanied by an adult or provide documentation verifying employment, night school, etc.
The article also reported that Young asked television stations to refrain from showing footage ofburning buildings until their 11pm newscasts.36

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 75

Police Investigator Denise Bilinski: “… Back in 1986 people didn’t believe the curfew … parents still let their kids out but as they found out that they had to go all the way down to headquarters to pick their kid up and pay a ticket it has been decreasing every year… no one will
be out the next few days … it will be quiet.”37 In 1987, the Young administration added a ‘Devil’sNight’ essay and poster contest to their anti-arson efforts. Edmonds reported that nearly 3,000
Detroit youth participated in the No More Devil’s Night contest.38-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------BACK IN THE SPOTLIGHT
By the late 1980s, the anti-arson campaign seemed to be working--’Devil’s Night’ fires had
steadily decreased. In 1988, there were 104 ‘Devil’s Night’ fires and, in 1989, there were 115
fires.39/40 In 1990, however, Detroit and ‘Devil’s Night’ were back in the national spotlight. On
July 29, 1990, the cover article in the New York Times Magazine was The Tragedy of Detroit
by Ze’ev Chafets. The first line states, “It was in the fall of 1986 that I first saw the devil on thestreets of Detroit.”41 On October 14, 1990, Random House published Chafets’ book, Devil’s Nightand other Tales of Detroit. In the opening pages of that book, Chafets writes: “… In 1983, forreasons no one understands, America’s sixth largest city suddenly erupted into flame. Houses,
abandoned buildings, even unused factories burned to the ground in an orgy of arson that lasted for 72 hours. When it was over the papers reported more than 800 fires. Smoke hung overthe city for days.”42
Chafets received national attention for his dramatic stories about ‘Devil’s Night.’ In response to
the nation’s renewed interest in ‘Devil’s Night,’ Mayor Young increased the anti-arson campaign
efforts.43 They included:¬ Concentrating efforts in hot spots--east side near City Airport, southwest side and parts ofnear northwest side
¬ Demolition of 600 vacant and abandoned houses¬ Removal of abandoned cars
¬ Greater number of community volunteers and city workers¬ Curfew for unescorted youth¬ ‘Aftercare’ teams to assist burned-out families¬ Billboards and phone banks urging people to get involved¬ Lawn signs promoting a positive image of Detroit¬ Adding ‘My Heart is with Detroit’ theme to de-emphasize the bad connotation of ‘Devil’s Night’
made worse by Chafets’ book this year.
Unfortunately, Mayor Young’s efforts were not enough and the ‘Devil’s Night’ fires increased to
141 fires.44 In the early 1990s, Mayor Young’s anti-arson efforts regained momentum. Devil’sNight fires hit record lows with numbers comparable to those of the 1960s.45
The following graph shows the number of fires during the three-day Halloween period by type.
Starting in 1984, buildings became the primary target for ‘Devil’s Night’ fires; previously, refuse
was primary target. The graph also illustrates the decline in fires after Mayor Young initiatedthe Anti-Arson Campaign.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 76-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Number of confirmed or suspected arson fires reported during the Three-Day Halloween
period (October 29–31), by type--Detroit, Michigan, 1979–1996*Occupied or vacant buildings and garages. **Brush or rubbish fires involving little or no monetary loss. This includes all children with matches fires.
Source: Detroit Fire Department, City of Detroit: Barbara J. Maciak et al., Urban Community Intervention to Prevent Halloween Arson-Detroit, MI, 1985–1996, Morbidity andMortality Weekly Report, 46.14, April 11, 1997-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ANGELS’ NIGHT
In 1994, Detroit had a new mayor, Dennis Archer. Because of the relatively small number offires in previous years, Mayor Archer decided that the Devil’s Night Anti-Arson Campaign was
not a priority and did not recruit necessary numbers of volunteers. Less than 5,000 volunteers
participated in the anti-arson campaign.46 As a result, the number of fires during ‘Devil’s Night’
increased significantly to 182.47
In 1995, the Archer administration began searching for an alternative name for the ‘Devil’sNight’ period and the Angels’ Night Campaign began.48 Mayor Archer renewed the anti-arson
efforts and mobilized more than 25,000 volunteers.49
Camden: Camden is located on the New Jersey side of the Delaware River across from
Philadelphia. Like Detroit, Camden experienced a mass exodus of businesses and residents
after World War Two. In Camden, the night before Halloween is called ‘Mischief Night.’ In
1991, the city experienced 133 ‘Mischief Night’ fires. Since that time, Camden has successfully reduced the number of fires with an anti-arson campaign modeled off of the Detroit‘Devil’s Night’ efforts. In 1995, the city only experienced seven building fires on ‘Mischief
Night’ at a time when the city was averaging 20 fires a night.
Barbara Maciak and her colleagues examined the multiple components of Detroit’s anti-arson
intervention from 1985 through 1996. They argue that both the decrease in annual Halloweenarson fires after the intervention began and the inverse relationship between the number of volunteers and the number of fires suggests a causal relationship between them.50 Moreover, they
espouse Detroit’s anti-arson campaign as a model for community collaboration. The following
graph shows the number of fires during the three-day Halloween period and the number of volunteers participating in the Anti-Arson Campaign. The graph supports the argument that highnumbers of volunteers result in fewer fires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 77-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Total number of fires (arson and non-arson) reported during the three-day Halloween
period and number of volunteers participating in anti-arson activities--Detroit, Michigan,
1984–1996**Volunteer data no available for 1990
Source: Detroit Fire Department, City of Detroit: Barbara J. Maciak et al., Urban Community Intervention to Prevent Halloween Arson-Detroit, MI, 1985-1996, Morbidity andMortality Weekly Report, 46.14, April 11, 1997

Mayor Archer maintained the vigilance of the Angels’ Night Campaign. For example, in 1998,
leaders of a gang prevention program said leaders of six gangs have agreed to refrain fromarson, violence, and vandalism during the three-day Halloween period.51 By 2001, Mayor
Archer’s last year in office, the city had 32,000 volunteers patrolling the city.52 Many of the components of Mayor Young’s anti-arson campaign continued as part of the Angels’ Night Campaign.
Volunteers could participate in the Neighborhood Patrol Program, Adopt-a-House Program,
Porch Light Program, Eyes and Ears, and Orange Ribbon Campaign. The youth could enter theposter and essay contests or partake in planned youth and teen recreational activities. The cityalso organized senior activities and enacted the youth curfew and sale of fuel ordinances. Before
the Halloween period, the Detroit Police Department and the Department of Public Works both
worked to remove possible arson targets. In the days before the 2001 Angel’s Night Campaign,
the Police Department removed 2,060 abandoned vehicles while the Department of Public
Works demolished 716 abandoned buildings.53
The Kilpatrick administration has continued the efforts of its predecessors. In 2002, Mayor
Kilpatrick mobilized over 40,000 volunteers and started an annual Angels’ Night Community
Rally.54 In 2003, Mayor Kilpatrick sought to get Detroit in the Guinness Book of World Records
for the largest mobilization of volunteers. On the first three Saturdays of October, Detroit employees canvassed neighborhoods to recruit volunteers and increase awareness for the Angels’Night Campaign.55 The efforts mobilized 46,000 volunteers.56 Mayor Kilpatrick fell short of theworld record but he broke the Detroit record for the second year.
Fire Department Logistics: The Fire Department calls a reported structure fire a box alarm.
A box alarm run includes three engines, one truck, one rescue squad, and one chief. When
the Fire Department experiences a high volume of box alarms, they call them specials to
avoid attention. During hi-lo operations, such as the Angels’ Night Campaign, extra firefighters are put on x-rigs. The Fire Department does not document x-rig fire service.57

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 78

The following chart shows the number of fires during the three-day Halloween period and thenumber of fires that occurred only on ‘Devil’s Night’ from 1983 to 2003. Some controversy overthe legitimacy of the numbers has existed over the years. For example, in 1989, Mayor Coleman
Young did not count trash fires to shrink the total number of fires during the ‘Devil’s Night’ period. Fire officials across the U.S. disagreed with the Young administration’s new fire classification
standards. According to McGraw, using national standards, the fire count for the 1989 three-day
period would have been 412 fire: the first increase in five years.58-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Total Fires ‘Devil’s Night’/Three-Day Halloween Period Detroit, Michigan 1983–2003.

Local newspapers have reported the average daily number of fires in Detroit as between 60–65
fires. For several years, the number of ‘Devil’s Night’ fires has been under or close to the daily
average. The Angels’ Night Campaign’s success in stemming fires is obvious. Law enforcement,
fire fighters, city workers and community volunteers saturate the city. Police Sergeant Sherry
Keyes and Police Investigator Denise Bilinski argue, “If they didn’t do these efforts fires would
increase … people know that forces are out in greater numbers … if curfew ended, we would
have more fires… these efforts are key.”59
Eminem: Just as when the infamy of ‘Devil’s Night’ seemed to be fading into Detroit’s past,
Eminem brought ’Devil’s Night’ and Detroit’s ‘practice of setting itself on fire’ into the world of
pop culture. In June of 2001, Eminem’s label Shady Records released D12, a.k.a. Dirty Dozen’s,
debut album, Devil’s Night. D12 includes Proof, Kon Artis, Bizarre, Kuniva, Swifty, plus
Eminem.60 The album’s title references Detroit’s annual ‘Devil’s Night’ tradition and seems anattempt to solidify the group’s connection with Detroit and the city’s violence. 8 Mile, the film
loosely based on the life of Marshall Mathers aka Eminem, includes a scene in which the film’s
hero, Rabbit, and his friends burn down an abandoned house in Detroit where a young girl was
reportedly raped. In March of 2002, the filming of the scene in a Detroit suburb, Highland Park,
caused controversy among the city’s residents. Although Universal Studios offered to demolish
two vacant homes, donate $2,000 to a Highland Park charity, give a lecture about the movie
business to high school students and compensate the residents inconvenienced by the location
shooting, many residents including the Highland Park City Council were opposed to shooting thescene in Highland Park.61 Residents argued that the burning of the house would set a bad example for the city’s young people and furthered Highland Park’s image as a ghetto.62 Residents helda protest rally, but the city’s financial manager, Ramona Henderson Pearson approved the scene.
She stated that that Highland Park had 1,600 vacant properties in the 2.9 square-mile city andthe demolition of two properties would help the situation.63

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 79

D12 recently entered the studio to record their second album, Devil’s Night II: Halloween. The
album is set to release in February 2004.64 The ‘Devil’s Night’ tradition continues …
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ORIGINS REVISITED
The truth is that the Angels’ Night Campaign does not provide long-term solutions to Detroit’s
problems. The Angels’ Night Campaign has become a positive tradition in Detroit: it allows
Detroiters to invest in their communities and unifies the city through a successful anti-arson
campaign. Nevertheless, without the massive community mobilization, the city would burn anddoes burn. According to the Detroit News, in 2002, the number of arson fires in Detroit reacheda high of 2,429.65
The same ‘ills’ that plagued Detroit 20 years ago and created an environment ripe for ‘Devil’sNight’ arson still exist today. The isolation of Detroit from its suburbs continues. Ron French andOralandar Brand-Williams reported that living in such a highly segregated metro area negatively
affects Detroiters.66 They found that Detroiters suffer from higher infant mortality, crime andunemployment than inner-city residents in less-segregated cities. Adding to the social isolation
are depopulation, abandonment and limited fire protection. Problems continue to plague Detroit’s
Fire Department. In 2000, several fire-related deaths prompted the Detroit News to investigate
the fire department. Some of their findings include:¬ In 1999, more than 2,000 of the city’s fire hydrants were reported out-of-service, some formore than four years. Moreover, no official count of how many of the city’s 30,400 fireplugs
are broken exists.67¬ In 1999, on 286 days, the fire department closed at least one of the city’s 71 fire companies
because of mechanical problems with trucks. On 49 days, the fire department closed
companies because of low staffing.68/69¬ In 1999, on 365 days the department failed to meet the national standard of assigning atleast four fire-fighters to each truck. Detroit routinely sends out trucks with three fire-fighters
ion board.70
In addition, the fire department’s equipment is oftentimes outdated, broken, or in violation ofsafety laws.71 Although, limited budgets and problems still inhibit the city’s fire department,
Mayor Kilpatrick has invested in the Fire Department. He reportedly purchased new fire equipment and increased the number of fire-fighters by 49.72
Detroit’s continued population loss and abandonment are problems that sometimes seem synonymous. From 1990 to 2000, Detroit lost 76,704 residents.73/74 The city’s vacancy rateincreased from 8,8 to 10,3% over the same period.75 Detroit has maintained a collection of
approximately 8,000–12,000 abandoned and vacant buildings. Mayor Kilpatrick and his predecessors have all grappled with the city’s abandonment problem. Moreover, both Mayor Youngand Mayor Archer acknowledged the relationship between ‘Devil’s Night’ and the city’s stock ofabandoned buildings. McGraw and Zachare Ball found that two out of every three houses thatburned on ‘Devil’s Night’ and Halloween in 1987 were still standing; few were barricaded, mostare in an advanced state of disrepair.76 In 2000, Archer stated, “I don’t think, at least for theforeseeable future, we can let our guard down. As long as we have abandoned houses in ourcity, there is also that temptation.”77
Auto Arson: Detroit’s auto arson problem ranks as the worst in the nation. In 1999, Detroit
had 4,506 auto arsons. Reasons include:¬ Insurance fraud,¬ Overstretched fire department,¬ Ineffective justice system,¬ Abundance of deserted lots, back alleys and side streets,¬ Concealment of other crimes.78

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 80-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------All Detroit auto fires, including arson, 1975–1999-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------How other cities‘ auto arsons compared to Detroit’s, 1990–1998
Despite a national trend of declining auto arson, Detroit’s problem persists.

Auto insurance companies pay out an estimated $18 million a year for auto arsons in Detroit.
Arsonists have a less that 2% chance of being caught. Detroit has had an estimated 19,000 incidents of auto arson insurance fraud in the past decade.79 In 1999, the Detroit Fire Department
created an Auto Arson Task Force. There were 4,064 vehicle fires in 2000 and 4,389 in
2001.80 Nancy Youssef reported that during 2001, auto arsons were up 7% and that the Detroit
Fire Department attributed the increase to the sagging economy and consumers’ efforts to cashin on the auto companies’ 0% financing offer on new cars last year.81 In May 2001, Detroit
began enforcing Michigan Public Act 413, passed by the state legislature in January 2001 thatenables fire investigators to question vehicle owners about suspicious fires before the insurancecompany will pay the claim.82 The law has made the investigators’ jobs easier. Because autoarsonists are largely first time criminals, they shy away from talking to the investigators andsometimes even confess.83
In his first year in office, Kilpatrick pledged to demolish 5,000 of the city’s abandoned buildings
by fall 2002. However, the city ran out of money and he fell short of his goal; the city only
demolished 2,000 buildings.84 New Wayne County efforts such as the Wayne County Board ofCommissioners’ adoption of an ordinance to bring nuisance-abatement proceedings against
owners of abandoned houses, and the Detroit and Wayne County Neighborhood Partnership may
help the city.85/86 In addition, Robert Thompson, a philanthropist, gave Detroit a donation to use
in $1 million installments over the next decade. The money will raze 1,400 buildings this year.87
However, with an estimated cost of $7,500 per building, the demolition of any meaningful
portion of Detroit’s abandoned buildings seems unlikely considering city’s budget woes.88

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 81A Message from the Past
The entire village of Detroit was burned to the ground by a massive fire in 1805. Below is the
Detroit Flag. The Detroit Seal portrays the city during that time. The fire is shown on the left next
to a woman who represents Detroit right after the fire. The Latin inscription above the womenreads, Speramus Meliora--‘We hope for better things.’ The woman on the right represents
Detroit’s hope. Behind her on the right is a picture of Detroit’s rebuilding. The Latin below reads,
Resurget Cineribus--‘It shall rise again from the ashes.’89-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SPERAMUS MELIORA
Overall, little has changed. During Detroit’s 20-year history of ‘Devil’s Night’ fires and anti-arson
campaigns, the status quo seems to have prevailed. For fiscal year 2003–2004, the Kilpatrick
administration projected a budget deficit of $196 million.90 With such a deficit, the administration will only be capable of continuing the Angels’ Night Campaign and managing the arson
problem for three days of the year. One day, Detroit will have to move beyond managing arson
and truly combat its causes. Until then the ‘Devil’s Night’ tradition will continue. Sugrue remarks:“What hope remains in the city comes from continued efforts of city residents to resist the debilitating effects of poverty, racial tension, and industrial decline. But the rehabilitation of Detroit
and other major cities will require a more vigorous attempt to grapple with the enduring effectsof the postwar transformation of the city, and creative responses, piece by piece, to the interconnected forces of race, residence, discrimination, and industrial decline, the consequences ofa troubled and still unresolved past.”91--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

Helen Fogel, Sandy McClure, “Devil’s Night hellish for city’s fire fighters,” in: Detroit Free Press, November 1,
1983, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

2

Robert Musial, “Devil’s Night, 1984,” in: Detroit Free Press, November 8, 1984, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public
Library, June 30, 2003

3

Micheal R. Greenberg, Restoring America’s Neighborhoods: How Local People Make a Difference, Rutgers
University Press, New Brunswick 1999, p. 109

4‘Halloween,’ Encyclopedia Britannica, 2003, Encyclopedia Britannica Online, August 26, 2003

5

Scott A. Golder et al., Dialect Survey--Question 110: What do you call the night before Halloween?, Harvard
University, July 25, 2003

6

Thomas J. Sugrue, The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit, Princeton University

7

Detroit Fire Department, Detroit Fire Department Annual Report--1979, City of Detroit, Detroit 1980, p. 21–22

8

Detroit Fire Department, Detroit Fire Department Annual Report--1980, City of Detroit, Detroit 1981, p. 10, 21

9Detroit Fire Department, Detroit Fire Department Annual Report--1980, City of Detroit, Detroit 1981, p. 21

Press, Princeton 1996, p. 271

10

Helen Fogel, “Arson losses increase,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 23, 1983, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public
Library, June 30, 2003

11

Bill B., personal interview, October 22, 2003

DETROIT / Devil’s Night12

III | 82

Brian Flanigan, “Increase in arson blamed on recession,” in: Detroit Free Press, June 15, 1982, News Bank, Inc.,
Detroit Public Library, August 12, 2003

13

Brian Flanigan, “U.S. helps battle arson wave,” in: Detroit Free Press, November 10, 1982, News Bank, Inc.,
Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

14

Helen Fogel, “Can Detroit still put out the fires? Layoffs, cash shortage threaten the city’s safety,” in: Detroit Free
Press, July 4, 1983, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

15

Ibid.

16

Patricia Anstett et al., “Why here? / Halloween fires in Detroit defy easy explanation,” in: Detroit Free Press,
November 3, 1985, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003, www.infoweb.newsbank.com

17

George Sternlieb and Robert Burchell, “Fires in Abandoned Buildings,” in: Fire Journal. 83.2 (1973), p. 28

18

National Fire Protection Agency, “U.S. fires in vacant buildings,” in: NFPA Fact Sheets, November 2001, October 19,
2003

19

Kim Heron, “Empty houses fan flames of Devil’s Night,” in: Detroit Free Press, November 1, 1985, News Bank,

20

Coleman A. Young and Lonnie Wheeler, Hard Stuff: the autobiography of Coleman Young, Viking, New York

Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003
1994, p. 282
21
22

Grace Lee Boggs, Living for Change: an autobiography, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis 1998, p. 210
Coleman A. Young and Lonnie Wheeler, Hard Stuff: the autobiography of Coleman Young, Viking, New York
1994, p. 282

23Bill McGraw, “Keeping the watch / Reporters, fire buffs, gawkers / Come to track night’s events,” in: Detroit Free
Press, October 31, 1985, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

24

John Bussey, “In Detroit, the eve of Halloween finds the whole city on alert,” in: Wall Street Journal, October 20,
1985, ProQuest, University of Michigan Library, August 30, 2003

25

Tim Kiska, “The city’s image is the worst, poll finds,” in: Detroit Free Press, November 24, 1984, News Bank,
Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

26

Ibid.

27

Bill McGraw, “Fire buffs flock to Detroit / to see the burning of a city,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 31, 1986,
News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

28
29

Ibid.
William J. V. Neill, Promoting the City: Image, reality and racism in Detroit, Reimaging the Pariah City: Urban
Development in Belfast and Detroit, Ashgate Publishing Company, Brookfield 1995, p. 148

30

Barbara J. Maciak, et al., Preventing Halloween Arson in an Urban Setting: A Model for Multisectoral Planningand Community Participation, Health Education & Behavior, 25.2 (April 1998), p. 198

31

Patricia Edmonds, “Young plans to go all out to douse Devil’s Night arson,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 17,
1985, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

32

Patricia Edmonds, “All-out Offensive / City’ s Devil’s Night plan began 3 1/2 months ago,” in: Detroit Free Press,
October 31, 1985, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

33

Edmonds: “Young plans to go all out to douse Devil’s Night arson.”

34

Detroit Fire Department, Angels’ Night 2003 Fire Net Halloween Roll Call, October 2003

35

Kim Heron, “City oks curfew to stem Devil’s Night Arson,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 25, 1986, News Bank,
Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

36

Ibid.

37

Denise Bilinski, personal interview, October 29, 2003

38

Patricia Edmonds and Bill McGraw, “City enlists pupils to dampen Devil’s Night,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 28,
1987, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

39

McGraw: “Devil’s Night arson tally fills Young with praise.”

40

William Kleinknecht, “Devil’s mayhem subsides, but not all escape chill, volunteers help to cool arson binge,” in:Detroit Free Press, November 1, 1988, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

41

Ze’ev Chafets, “The Tragedy of Detroit,” in: New York Times Magazine, July 29, 1990, Lexis-Nexis, University ofMichigan Library, August 30, 2003

DETROIT / Devil’s Night

III | 83

42

Ze’ev Chafets, Devil’s Night and other true tales of Detroit, Random House, New York 1990, p. 4

43Constance C. Prater, “City expands vigil against holiday arson plan adds volunteers, family aid” and, “My is with
Detroit’ theme,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 24, 1990, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

44

Bill McGraw, “Devil’s Night arson tally fills Young with praise,” in: Detroit Free Press, November 3, 1992, News
Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, August 12, 2003

45

McGraw: “Devil’s Night arson tally fills Young with praise.”

46

Kate McKee, “Fire fought, groups praise Devil’s Night preparation by Archer,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 30,
1995, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

47

Ibid.

48

David Ashenfelter, “End of fires may mean new name for holiday,” in: Detroit Free Press, October 26, 1995, News
Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, August 12, 2003

49

David Ashenfelter et al., “Volunteer vigil against arsonists pays off for city, Devil’s Night effort applauded nationwide,” in: Detroit Free Press, November 1, 1995, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, August 12, 2003

50

Maciak, Preventing Halloween Arson in an Urban Setting: A Model for Multisectoral Planning and Community
Participation, p. 206

51

AP Wire Service, “City: Detroit gangs pledge to behave around Halloween,” October 29, 1998, Lexis-Nexis,
University of Michigan Library, June 30, 2003

52

Gary Bowens, “Mayor Dennis W. Archer thanks thousands for their help in shaping a successful Angels’ Night
career,” City of Detroit, November 2, 2001

53

Ibid.

54

M.L. Elrick, “Angels’ Night best on record fires drop 30% from last year’s total,” in: Detroit Free Press,
November 2, 2002, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

55

City of Detroit, “Angels’ Night: the official newsletter update of Angels’ Night 2003,” November 8, 2003

56

Ibid.

57

B.M., personal interview, October 30, 2003

58

Bill McGraw, “Devil’s Night city fire total falls short on U.S. criteria,” in: Detroit Free Press, December 20, 1989,
News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, 30 June 2003, www.infoweb.newsbank.com

59

Sherry Keyes and Denise Bilinski, personal interview, October 29, 2003

60

D12 History, December 12, 2003

61

Christopher M. Singer, “Eminem film-set fire upsets Highland Park,” November 28, 2001 and August 12, 2003

62

Christopher M. Singer, “Eminem film maker’s request riles neighbors,” November 27, 2001 and August 12, 2003

63

Ibid.

64

Andrew Dansby, “D12 Ready for ‘Halloween,’” in: Rolling Stone, October 10, 2003 and December 12, 2003

66

Ron French and Oralandar Brand-Williams, “Blacks pay harsh price while whites suffer less--The Cost ofSegregation,”, “Part 2: paying the price for preferences,” in: The Detroit News, January 21, 2002 and December 15,
2003 www.detnews.com/specialreports/2002/segregation2/b01-395704.htm

67

Melvin Claxton and Charles Hurt, “Faulty trucks, mismanagement lead to deaths in Detroit fires,”, “Detroit Fire
Department: Out of Service,” The Detroit News, November 5, 2000 and August 12, 2003 www.detnews.com/
specialreports/2000/firedept/lead/lead.htm

68

Ibid.

69

Melvin Claxton and Charles Hurt, “Lack of staffing closes firehouses, Detroit Fire Department: Out of Service,” in:The Detroit News, November 6, 2000 and August 12, 2003

70

Ibid.

71

Melvin Claxton and Charles Hurt, “Equipment broken and old; some violates safety rules,” “Detroit Fire
Department: Out of Service,” in: Detroit News, November 5, 2000 and August 12, 2003

72

Tyrone Scott, “Idling fire units doesn’t imperil Detroit,” in: Detroit News, August 1, 2003 and December 11, 2003

73

U.S. Census Bureau, “1990 U.S. Census Data,” December 18, 2003

74

U.S. Census Bureau, “Detroit City, Michigan Fact Sheet,” in: American Fact Finder, December 18, 2003

75

John Gallagher, “Detroit empty housing up despite teardowns,” in: Detroit Free Press, 24 May 2001, News Bank,
Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

DETROIT / Devil’s Night76

III | 84

Bill McGraw and Zachare Ball, “Residents live with daily reminders, Devil’s Night takes toll on neighborhoods,”
in: Detroit Free Press, October 23, 1988, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, June 30, 2003

77
78

Cameron McWhirter, “Angel’s Night Score: 151 Fires,” in: Detroit News, November 3, 2000
Melvin Claxton and Charles Hurt, “Most arsonists don’t fit criminal profile, Auto Arson in Detroit,” in: Detroit News,
March 26, 2000 and August 12, 2003

79

Melvin Claxton and Charles Hurt, “Detroit auto arsons top U.S.; cost $22 million; few caught, Auto Arson in
Detroit,” in: Detroit News, March 26, 2000 and August 12, 2003

80

Suzette Hackney, “New task force to fight surge in car arson, vehicle-fire-for-hire rings will be main target in
Detroit,” in: Detroit Free Press, January 22, 1999, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, August 30, 2003

81

Nancy A. Youssef, “Theory links auto fires to financing, some downplay connection between deals, arson,”in: Detroit Free Press, February 18, 2002, News Bank, Inc., Detroit Public Library, August 30, 2003

82

Charles Hurt, “New law hinders auto arson,” in: Detroit News, March 19, 2001 and August 30, 2003

83

Bill B, personal interview, October 22, 2003

84

Darci McConnell, “Detroit building removal stalled,” in: Detroit News, March 25, 2002 and December 11, 2003

85

David G. Grant, “Four houses to be razed,” in: Detroit News, May 2, 2003 and August 12, 2003

86

Ronald J. Hansen, “Partnership is erasing blight,” in: Detroit News, July 28, 2003 and August 30, 2003

87

Darren A. Nichols, “$10 million gift to raze Detroit eyesores,” in: Detroit News, May 7, 2003 and August 12, 2003

88

McConnell, “Detroit building removal stalled,” in: Detroit News

89

Detroit 300, The Detroit Flag: Symbols of Our History, Telling Detroit’s Story--Detroit 300 Curriculum Guide,90

Darren A. Nichols and Darci McConnell, “Mayor wants 193 jobs cut to erase Detroit deficit,” in: Detroit News,

December 11, 2003
April 15, 2003 and December 11, 2003
91

Thomas J. Sugrue, The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit, Princeton University
Press, Princeton 1996, p. 271---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 85--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RACIAL DISUNITY
June Thomas (2004, updated version)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Overview: This chapter is taken from a book published in 1997, Redevelopment and Race:
Planning A Finer City in Postwar Detroit. The attached chart, drawn from that book, shows population changes in the three counties surrounding Detroit, including its own county, Wayne, from1940 to 1990. As the chart illustrated, Detroit’s population peaked during the 1950s at about
1.8 million; it had declined by the year 2000 to just below one million. Due to high rates of suburbanization, however, the three-county areahas grown to and maintained a population of close
to four million.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Figure 1: Population Change in the City of Detroit and the Three Largest Metropolitan
Areas (Three County-Area), 1940–1990

From the original text: Many things could stand in the way of the future well being of cities suchas Detroit, which is merely an archetypical example of the problems that confront other U.S.
cities. Among the potential barriers to improvement, perhaps the most difficult to resolve will be
the lingering effects of racial disunity. One of the most important lessons of postwar Detroit’s
redevelopment efforts has been that race conflict and change have formed major barriers to city
improvement. The Detroit metropolitan area has one of the nation’s highest rates of ‘racial isolation’. Such rates come from measuring the numbers of people of a particular race who live ina census block composed of at least 90% of their own race. While the amount of racial isolation improved from 1980 to 1990, it has remained a significant problem. Other metropolitan
areas continued to experience racial isolation as well, but in the Detroit area it increased to an
unusually high extent.
Another way of measuring racial segregation is by using an index of dissimilarity, which measures the minimum percentage of either group that would have to move between census tracts
in order to achieve even spatial distribution. By this measure, residential segregation of African
Americans was as high in the Detroit metropolitan area in 1990 as in 1980. In fact, black
segregation changed hardly at all between 1960 and 1990, standing at high readings of 87,
89, 87, and 87 on a 100-point scale for 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990. As Table 1 indicates,
Detroit‘s segregation index is higher than that of other metropolitan areas, although many ofthem experience similar conditions.

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 86-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Table 1: Isolation of Blacks in U.S. Metropolitan Areas in descending order of isolation
Metropolitan Area

Blacks in Isolation (%), 1990

Change in Isolation (%), 1980–1990

Chicago71-9.1

Cleveland67

0.4

Detroit61

4.0Memphis58-0.6

St. Louis

54

-3.3

Baltimore

53

0.1

Philadelphia

53

0.1

Buffalo48

2.6

New Orleans

47

-3.2

Kansas City

44

-6.0

Atlanta

43 -6.1

Milwaukee

42

-7.0

Average for 50 areas

37

-6.7

Note: ‘Isolation’ defined as living in a census block group that has at least 90% of the same race. Authors analyzed data for nation’s 50 largest metropolitan areas.
Source: Dan Gillmor and Stephen K. Dolg, “Segregation Forever,” in: American Demographics, January, 1992, p.50

These population statistics are all the more remarkable considering the fact that the number of
middle class blacks leaving the city had increased. As housing ‘opened,’ black families moved
to key suburban municipalities. Racial segregation continued in spite of this because of thepattern of residential exodus: blacks tended to move only to certain ‘safe’ suburbs in the metropolitan area. Simultaneously other suburbs gained no blacks, because of hostility or black
unwillingness to be the first to integrate. Hence suburban exodus did not appreciably reduce
racial isolation within the seven-county metropolis area. [Fig. 3]
Who is to blame for the state of racial disunity in the Detroit region is a matter of some debate.
Attention has tended to focus on personalities, particularly since the general public had a visible
figure upon which to lay blame: the city’s first African American mayor, Coleman Young.
Because Young was an outspoken advocate for Detroit with a brusque style and earthy language, it was easy to focus upon him as the cause of racial antagonism. For example, Young
had no qualms about verbally bashing suburbanites in full view of television cameras. But suburban politicians contributed to the general ill will, attacking Detroit and its citizens in sometimes
virulent tones as well. This created a confrontational environment of well-publicized verbal
volleys from public officials that inflamed quiet private prejudices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 87-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Figure 2: Black Segregation Index, Selected Metropolitan Areas, 1990

If Young’s controversial style was indeed the main cause of estrangement, Archer’s election
should have resolved all such problems. During the 1993 election, Mayor Young endorsed
Archer’s opponent Sharon MacPhail, a charismatic Afro-American woman who did not hesitate
to spar with the white power structure. In contrast, Archer was a natural diplomat. White
citizens and institutions would be hard pressed to find capable black mayor more open to negotiation and cooperation than Archer, although Archer also had strength of character and will. Onceelected, Archer soon found that his willingness to cooperate did not automatically eliminate suburban non-cooperation. During his first year of office, battles with regional leaders--particularly
over a proposed merger of city and regional transit systems--were bruising affairs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Figure 3: Black Population, Detroit Metropolitan Area

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 88

The current dilemma is far broader than personalities or political leadership, which only symbolize the chasm that separates regions and races. The divisions are deep-seated, symptomaticof a virtual spiritual malaise. This racial disunity threatens the future of the city and the metropolitan area. This is evident in the problem of discrimination, a major cause of geographic andeconomic segregation. Racial disunity is also manifest in the lingering problem of disparity
between the races. Finally, regional fragmentation is both a manifestation of, and a barrier toresolving, racial disunity. Each of these three phenomena will have to be overcome before any
real revitalization can take place for Detroit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DISCRIMINATION
The problem of discrimination is old and familiar. Residential discrimination is still a live andpowerful force within the metropolitan area. Researchers at the University of Michigan, administering one survey questionnaire in 1976 and again in 1992, found much higher intolerance
among white respondents than among blacks . The survey used picture representations of hypothetical neighborhoods and asked how various racial mixtures of residents would affect mobility. Black respondents were, on the whole, willing to move into racially mixed neighborhoods.
When the mixture was half black and half white, for example, 99% of black respondents werewilling to enter in 1976, and 97% in 1992. Blacks were also willing, by similar percentages, tomove into areas where their race made up 20% of the population. They hesitated only to be thefirst black person to move into a neighborhood; 38% would do so in 1976; even fewer, 28%,
would do so in 1992.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Table 2: White reaction to mixed neighborhoods, Detroit Metropolitan Area
1976

1992

Would feel uncomfortable living there

42%

30%

Would try to move out

24%

15%

Would not move in

50%

26%

If Blacks were 20% of neighborhood

If Blacks 50% of neighborhood
Would feel uncomfortable living there

72%

66%

Would try to move out

64%

52%

Would not move in

73%

56%

Source: University of Michigan Detroit Area Study, reported in Detroit News/Free Press, October 10, 1992, p.10A, Charlotte Steeh and Reynolds Farley, Detroit: A Metropolis
Divided by Race Report to Respondents, University of Michigan Detroit Area Study, Ann Arbor March 1993, p. 6

As Table 2 shows, many whites were unwilling to accept residential integration even as late as
1992. Over the 16-year period, tolerance among whites had grown. In 1992, 15% of the white
respondents would try to move out of a neighborhood that was 20% black. In 1976, 24% ofwhite respondents would have done so. By 1992, compared to 1976, tolerance has also
increased for a hypothetical neighborhood with a half-and-half racial mixture. Even thoughtolerance improved, two-thirds of the 1992 white respondents would have felt uncomfortableliving in a neighborhood where half of the families were black. Over half would move out, andover half would not move in.
This situation left metropolitan neighborhoods vulnerable to racial turnover. Blacks were willingto move to neighborhoods with few blacks, and in real life they opened up several suburban
communities. Whites were less willing to move into integrated neighborhoods, and they werequite likely to move out if integration went too far. A common scenario was for a few black
families to move into an area, prompting the most intolerant whites to move out. This increased

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 89

the percentage of black families. Eventually even the most tolerant whites moved out, or refused
to move in, which had much the same result. It took only a little white prejudice to trigger the
racial change cycle. In spite of federal legislation prohibiting discrimination, social gatekeepers
prevented blacks from moving freely or having free access to home financing. Surveys showedthat discrimination against potential renters thrived. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) sponsored a series of tests designed to detect such inequitable treatment. The
Detroit Fair Housing Center found that when it sent white and black home-seekers to the sameapartment units separately, the whites were favored in some manner in 50% of the test visits.
Snubs could be so subtle that blacks often failed to realize they had been discriminated against.
Only questionnaires asking the specifics of their experiences and comparing them by race
revealed the truth. Apartment managers gave different information about whether or not apartments were actually available or offered different incentives for moving into them. Many victims
successfully filed suit and publicized the results, but this did not deter other apartment managers
from discriminating. New bias cases arose to replace the old. The categories ‘Black’ and ‘White’hide great distinctions of class and ethnicity. We can use ‘Black’ as synonymous with African
American in most, but not all, cases. And the ‘White’ label covers a variety of people. When recent
studies have identified respondents by way of more subtle categories, what emerges is pervasive
prejudice against other races, ethnic groups, and nationalities as potential neighbors, friends, or
co-workers. Among some ethnic groups, tolerance of others is almost non-existent. Table 3 shows
this dramatically. When researchers asked parents in two different suburban school systems how
willing they were to accept members of other races as neighbors, the results varied widely. The
chart reflects responses on a 7-point scale, where a numerical score near 7 reflects a very
definite willingness to accept the other group, and a score near 1 reflects a very definite unwillingness to do so, and a 4 reflects neutrality. In Hamtramck, a suburb completely surrounded by
the city of Detroit, the mixture of Polish, Arab, Albanian, and African-American citizens lived
together in a state of unease. Each group was most willing to live near its own kind. This tendency was especially marked among Arab Americans, who barely tolerated living near Polish,
Albanian, or African Americans. Conversely, Albanians were not particularly willing to accept
Arab Americans as neighbors, and they were even less willing to accept African Americans.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Table 3: Mean Social Distance Ratings among Various Parent Groups
Hamtramck

Most Polish

Most Arab

Most Albanian

Most Black

Residents

Americans

Americans

Americans

Americans

Polish American

6.55

3.90

4.16

3.58

Arab American

2.67

6.48

2.69

2.33

Albanian American

4.85

2.80

6.77

1.78

Black Respondents

5.54

3.91

3.58

6.05

Pontiac

Most Puerto

Most Mexican

Most Black

Most White

Residents

RicansAmericans

Americans

Americans

Puerto Rican

6.90

6.80

6.68

6.80

Mexican American

5.80

6.45

5.20

5.78

Black

5.51

5.58

6.18

5.71

White working class

3.00

2.80

2.50

6.60

White middle class

5.80

5.98

5.68

6.45

Notes: The question was: How willing are you personally to accept these people as a close neighbor in your neighborhood or apartment building? Scale ranges from 1 to 7.
Choosing 1 indicated almost definite non-acceptance; 4 signaled neutrality; 7 indicated very definite acceptance. The lower the number, the higher the intolerance. Hamtramck
is an inner-city suburb of Detroit and Pontiac, a Detroit-area suburb. Source: Wallace E. Lambert and Donald M. Taylor, Coping with Cultural and Racial Diversity in Urban
America, Praeger Publishers, New York 1990, pp. 80, 103, 128, 152

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 90

In Pontiac, a multi-ethnic suburban city 20 miles from inner city Detroit, but still within the metropolitan area, the racial and ethnic mixture was different but discrete. This included Mexican
Americans, Puerto Ricans, Vietnamese, blacks, andwhites. Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans,and African Americans showed a fairly high tolerance for neighbors of other races, as did
middle class white respondents. Working class whites did not.
The researchers also asked about their respondents’ willingness to accept other racial groups
as family members through marriage, as close personal friends, and as co-workers at work.
Most respondents were unwilling to accept other racial groups into their families. Tolerance ofother races as personal friends was a little higher. But respondents indicated surprisingly low
tolerance even for “co-workers or partners at work.” Tolerance scores were neutral for Polish
American citizens, who accepted other groups as co-workers. Even more tolerant were Puerto
Ricans, Mexican Americans, blacks in both cities, and middle class whites. Arab Americans
scored near 2, indicating low tolerance, for Polish, Albanian, and African-American co-workers.
Albanians scored slightly intolerant of Arab-Americans and African-American co-workers, at
3.20, and white working class respondents were slightly intolerant of Puerto Rican, Mexican,
and African-American co-workers.
This study is particularly important because it indicates tolerance levels displayed by Hispanics,
fast becoming one of the country’s fastest growing minorities, and by Arab Americans, an
important minority group within the Detroit metropolitan area. Metropolitan Detroit has one of
the nation’s primary concentrations of Arab Americans. Already conflicts have risen between
this group and inner city African Americans, particularly since Arab Americans own many
inner-city grocery and convenience stores.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DISPARITY
Another well-known problem of disunity relates to the disparities in life chances and well-being
among the races, particularly blacks and whites. The fundamental imbalance that exists creates
an inherently unstable environment. Just as lasting peace is not possible within the world
so long as some nations have enormous resources and others do not, so prosperity is notpossible within the metropolitan area as long as life opportunities and living conditions vary sogreatly by race. Disturbing disparities of poverty and wealth exist in the metropolitan area.
Poverty affects a wide variety of social indicators, such as lifespan, health, unemployment,
income, educational attainment, and crime victimization. For each of these areas, central city
populations suffer more than their share. Even within central cities, quality of life varies markedly by race. Those whites who remained in the city, however, reached poverty rates in 1989 thatapproached those of blacks in 1969.
Health and mortality rates illustrate the reduced opportunities facing inner city blacks. A reliableindicator of health status is the infant mortality rate. While the black infant death rate improvedin the state of Michigan from 1970–1990, the differences between blacks and whites rose from1970 to 1990. In 1970, the number of black infant deaths per 1,000 live births was 30.6, compared to a white rate of 18.5. Thus blacks experienced 1.7 times the number of infant deaths
aswhites. By 1990, the black-to-white ratio climbed to 2.7, as blacks experienced 21.6 infant
deaths per 1,000 live births in the state compared to 7.9 forwhites. The black-to-white ratio
exceeded 2.4 every year between 1980 and 1990. Data for the city of Detroit for 1990 werealso discouraging. In that year black infant death rate stood at 23.0 or 2.6 times the white rate.
Even more dramatic have been the falling life opportunities for urban youth. Drug addiction
increased sharply in Detroit and Wayne County from 1981 to 1991. Treatment admissions forcocaine--popularized by its derivative, a viciously addictive drug called crack--rose dramatically from 1980 to 1991. In Detroit, 1,233 black women were admitted for crack addiction in
1990–1991, compared with 107 white women. Black men were more severely affected; 2,371
black men were admitted within the city for crack addiction in 1990–1991, compared with 185

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 91

white men. Even in the larger Wayne County, white admissions were low. The drug plague that
hit inner city blacks contributed to an increased homicide rate, as did an unchecked proliferation of firearms. In what four researchers called “an American childhood tragedy,” homicide
rates among 15- to 18-year old black males in the city and suburbs of Detroit climbed far
beyond homicide rates for white males. Those rates escalated sharply in the 1980s.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Figure 4: Poverty in the City and Balance of Tri-County Area by Race

Many white suburban residents appear to have inoculated themselves against compassion forthe compassion facing inner city blacks. This is most evident in interviews, when suburban residents display the extent of their disengagement. One prominent Oakland County elected official
expressed this most succinctly: “In no sense are we dependent on Detroit. The truth is, Detroit
has had its day. I don’t give a damn about Detroit. It has no direct bearing on the quality of mylife.” The interviewer asked, “What about the quality of life for Detroiters?” The official responded, “it’s like the Indians on the reservation. Those who can will leave Detroit. Those who can’t
will get blankets and food from the government men in the city.”
It became easier to hold such attitudes as the social structure collapsed within the city, causing
escalating crime rates and falling city services. In part because of this, some observers rejected
the argument that racial prejudice continued to fuel exodus to the suburbs. Even the term ‘White
Flight,’ such protestors claim, overlooked the influence of the American love affair with suburbanlife styles and disenchantment with deteriorating inner city life.
The truth is less simple. Flight to the suburbs has differed markedly by race largely because of
racial discrimination. Furthermore, racial disparity weaves a circular web. Racial isolation
aggravates poor social and economic conditions, which lead to desperation and its manifestations (drugs, crime), which lead to more isolation. As explained most cogently by William Julius
Wilson, when society isolates racial minorities and low-income people within inner cities, a “concentration effect” takes hold. When only low-income workers or welfare recipients live ina neighborhood, children have no positive role models. Their isolation in ineffective school
systems can make it appear education offers no way out. The lure of drugs and crime becomes
irresistible as legitimate means of employment fade. Marriage fragments--or never takes place-as males lose earning power. And all of these problems can cause more isolation.
Yet flight to the suburbs does not divorce suburbia from the city. Those U.S. metropolitan areas
with strong and healthy central cities are healthier than other metropolitan areas, because distressed central cities pull their suburbs down. When researchers at the University of Louisvillelooked at the prosperity of suburbs in 1979, as measured by per capita income, the Detroit suburbs ranked sixth. By 1987, however, suburban prosperity had declined in Detroit and othermetropolitan areas with high levels of inner city distress.

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 92

Furthermore, as Detroit area leaders gradually came to realize, Detroit’s bad reputation affects
business prospects. As business leaders travel abroad, they find that few foreigners makedistinctions between the city of Detroit and Oakland or Macomb Counties. The city’s poor crime
image affects all metropolitan areas.
One thing is certain: The chasm separating the well to do from the destitute is determined inlarge part by race. If citizens allow racial intolerance or disinterest to temper their support ofsuch improvement efforts, the future of the central city is bleak. And if the social and economic
conditions of the central city do not improve, the entire metropolitan area will suffer. Improving
the social and economic status of inner-city African Americans, therefore, must become part of
the race unity agenda.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FRAGMENTATION
The third part of the agenda is to recognize the relationship between political fragmentation andracial disunity within the region and to take deliberate steps to overcome that fragmentation.
The regional level is important because the metropolitan area really has become the essential
unit of analysis. Many of the problems Detroit faced came from the failure to view the metropolitan area as unified community, where everyone was responsible for the good of the whole.
This was the reason that regionalists, planners and labor activists wanted to restructure theregion in the 1940s. Yet it was easier for suburban communities to incorporate than for central
cities to expand. Local reliance upon the property tax encouraged middle- and upper-income
taxpayers to cluster in safe municipalities protected from the masses by restrictive zoning ordinances. The American attachment to local control or ‘home rule’ could not be shaken.
Mild forms of regionalism exist. As in many metropolitan areas, special regional districts provide several important municipal services. In 1940 the people of five metropolitan counties
established the Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority, which built and maintained several areaparks and recreational facilities. Other special districts provided hospital facilities, trash incineration, and transportation services. Municipalities established cooperative agreements among
themselves to provide services. Many area municipalities relied upon the city of Detroit to provide water services, sold on a contractual basis.
Attempts to provide stronger forms of regional governance and planning persisted. The Ford
Foundation provided the first million dollars to finance the Metropolitan Fund, a nonprofit
research group that sponsored a number of important studies over the years beginning in the
1960s. Some of these studies led to major organizations, such as the now defunct SoutheasternMichigan Transportation Authority (SEMTA), and the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG).
SEMCOG became the regional planning agency, but it had the same weaknesses as other councils of government and regional planning agencies. Membership for metropolitan municipalities
was strictly voluntary, for example. When regional promoters tried to develop a stronger formof metropolitan cooperation, they failed. In 1975 the Metropolitan Fund advocated replacing
SEMCOG with a stronger regional governing body. Every area unit of government would havebeen forced to belong to this new regional body, the Southeast Michigan Planning and Development Agency, which would have coordinated economic, housing, and transportation development. State Representative William Ryan introduced enabling legislation, the ‘Area Unity Bill,’House Bill 5,527, in 1975. The bill generated widespread political opposition, however, and did
not pass.
For suburbanites, the proposal brought out fears that suburban residents would have to pay tosupport Detroit. At the time opposition to cross-district school busing was heated, and groups ofwhite housewives staged acrimonious protests against a school desegregation court order.
Suburban fears of inner-city blacks ran at an all-time high, making it a bad time to suggest
regional governance. The distrust was mutual. Many city residents suspected that the largely

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 93

white metropolitan advocates were trying to dilute hard-earned black political power within
Detroit. Young verbalized the mistrust borne of decades of grievances: “These people who fled
to the suburbs to escape Detroit’s problems in the first place aren’t going to help support Detroit
now ... I’m not willing to deal with people who have refused to deal fairly with me. I’m going toturn over my autonomy to people like that? I have to look askance at this whole proposal.”
The fight for regional planning and increased cooperation continued through the years.
Periodically proposals arose for improving fiscal cooperation or mass transit in the Detroit area.
Regional transportation remained an active effort, as did other forms of regional cooperation
under SEMCOG. In general, however, the region remained fragmented. SEMCOG never gained
the clout necessary to enforce cooperation. The tension between urban and rural interests
remained a persistent problem. Pro and con positions over state legislation affecting Detroit
almost always took on racial overtones. It became almost impossible to understand the acrimony of debates over proposals to create a regional water authority independent of Detroit, institute mass transit, change the tax structure, or sever the city from county government without
understanding the racial tension that underlay all arguments.
For example, when suburbanites opposed a Detroit subway proposal, one Oakland County commissioner noted that a deep-seated antipathy to Detroit fueled the opposition. As she pointed out,
Oakland County residents expressed their anger toward Detroit “by attacking Coleman Young.”
Indeed they did. The Oakland Press published a special anti-subway supplement that included
a collection of racist letters, boldly signed by their authors. One suggested that the subway“would be an open invitation for murders and muggings. Who wants any part of black Detroit?”
Two letters suggested a “lynching party” for Young, and another that Young dig his subway vertically, straight to hell.
In spite of such feelings, signs appeared that Detroit area leaders were willing to rethink regional cooperation. An important incentive for doing so was the anti-growth movement, which arose
because of the increasing economic and environmental costs of suburban sprawl. SEMCOG usedfederal transportation funds to sponsor a series of public meetings in 1991, under the umbrella of the Regional Development Initiative (RDI). The purpose of RDI was to develop proposals
to halt sprawl and improve the unevenness of economic development. Forum topics revolved
around social impacts, the economy, transportation, the environment, public finance, and management and governance.
The daylong RDI sessions on social impacts frankly acknowledged that social conditions,
including crime, education, and racial fragmentation, posed a significant barrier to regionalism.
SEMCOG offered participants a series of choices for action strategies, and asked for a ‘vote’ oneach one. One draft strategy attacked discrimination, urging a renewed commitment to fair andopen housing practices. Other suggested actions focused on inner-city conditions. Participants
identified managing the rampant gun problem and improving drug enforcement as importantalternatives. Fairly popular as well was a ‘regional attack on poverty,’ via a regional sales tax
dedicated to job training and creating economic opportunities. To remedy poor race relations,the initiative proposed a strong effort to teach and celebrate multi-cultural education in theschools. This was not a strong strategy, but was meant to join with existing efforts, such as theongoing programs of New Detroit, Inc.
Prominent regional actors were still not ready to accept regional governance. Governance proposals for consolidation or regional government drew little support at the 1991 RDI sessions.
But at least those sessions revived the possibilities for more extensive regional coordination.
They also identified the negative effects of the lack of such coordination, and highlighted theimportant role of race in bringing about such reforms. Clearly, according to RDI, greater racial
unity was a part of the agenda for regional unity. The reverse is also true: regional cooperation
is a necessary component of a race unity agenda, as long as the metropolis remains fragmented by race and class.

DETROIT / Racial Disunity

III | 94

When David Rusk, author popular of the popular book Cities Without Suburbs, addressed 765
registrants at the Greater Detroit Chamber of Commerce’s 1993 annual conference on Mackinaw
Island, he told the attendees that southeast Michigan would never solve its problems without
increasing cooperation between city and suburbs. This would have to include, he noted, revenue
sharing between the mostly affluent and white suburbs and the mostly poor and black central
city; affordable housing programs across the suburbs; and regional cooperation on transportation, zoning, and planning. Someday, he suggested, the two poles of city and suburbs shouldeven consider sharing political power. Mostly people listened seriously and debated his concepts
enthusiastically. But Oakland County’s white county executive called Rusk--respected author andformer mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico--“Marxist” for making such suggestions. The AfricanAmerican head of New Detroit, Inc., judged Rusk’s remarks ‘racist’ for implying that cities withmajority black populations could not function independently of their suburbs. Perhaps Rusk’ suggestion had come too close to the truth.
Published in: Thomas, June Manning, Redevelopment and Race: Planning a Finer City in Postwar
Detroit, pp. 203–216, © 1997 (Copyright Holder), reprinted with the permission of the Hopkins
University Press----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 95--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A BRIEF HISTORY OF SEGREGATION IN METRO DETROIT
Celeste Headlee (2003)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Historian Thomas Sugrue grew up on Detroit’s northwest side, near Fenkell and Greenfield.
Growing up, he saw his city torn apart by racial conflict, so he has devoted years to researching the history of the Motor City. He has written a book called The Origins of the Urban Crisis:
Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit. A quotation: “Conventional wisdom in Detroit is that
Detroit’s racial problems date to the riot of 1967 or the rise of black power and identity politics
or the election of Coleman Young as mayor in 1973. But to understand what happened to Detroit,
to understand the racial divisions that beset our metropolitan area, we have to roll the clock
back.” (Thomas Sugrue). Years before it became Motor City, and Henry Ford lured thousands ofblacks to Detroit with the promise of high-paying jobs, the city was already experiencing racial
tension. Back in 1890, when there were only about 3,000 in Detroit, experts say it was still oneof the country’s most segregated cities.
Duke University assistant professor Abe Vigdor collaborated on a research project with professors from Harvard that sought to measure segregation in American society beginning with the1890 census. “Detroit has this reputation as being one of the nation’s most segregated cities and,according to our calculations, it ranks first in 2000 and first in 1990 as well. But the interesting thing to note is that Detroit is about as segregated now as it was in 1910.” (Abe Vigdor). The
first race riot in Detroit actually occurred in 1833 when some slave catchers attempted to returntwo escaped slaves to Kentucky. The Wayne County Sheriff took custody of the couple, but hundreds of blacks from the city and southern Ontario surrounded the jail, demanding the releaseof the fugitives. University of Michigan professor Reynolds Farley says he often takes visitors to
the corner of Monroe and Beaubien, where the riot began. So Secretary Cass dispatched troops
from the local fort to maintain order here in Detroit and that’s the first of four times that the federal military was called out to keep peace on the streets of Detroit.
Question: “Was this the beginning? Do we think of this as the cornerstone of racial tensions
in Detroit?”
Farley: “I think it was a very small black population, but there have always been racial
tensions in Detroit. And this riot and the Civil War riot in 1863 certainly gave an indicationof what was going to come in the 20th century, the kind of racial strife that has typified
Detroit for a long period of time.”
The riot in 1863 was precipitated by an attempt to lynch a local black businessman accused ofmolesting two white girls. Federal troops were called in and three people were killed. One of thegirls later admitted the allegations were entirely fabricated. By 1900, one in three Detroit residents was born outside the U.S., and the city was composed of many separate ethnic communities. Polish immigrants congregated in Hamtramck; there was a substantial population ofChinese immigrants in ‘Chinatown,’ at Third and Michigan, and the near west side of the city
became known as Corktown because it housed large numbers of Irish families. But as the 20th
century began, most black Detroiters lived on the lower east side. The largest neighborhood wascalled ‘Black Bottom’ centered around St. Antoine and Hastings Streets. Because of the auto
industry and because Henry Ford was actively recruiting black laborers, the African-American
population in Detroit grew more rapidly than in any other northern city between 1900 and
1940. “At one point there were 120,000 workers at the River Rouge plant. So this tremendous
increase in white and black population in Detroit strained all of the city’s resources, but thoseDETROIT / A Brief History of Segregation in Metro Detroit

III | 96

strains were often played out according to color.” (Reynolds Farley). But housing continued to bea significant source of racial tension. Housing was in short supply and all public housing wassegregated. The situation only worsened in 1926 when the state enacted strict annexation laws
to limit expansion of the city. That law guaranteed that all new growth would occur in the suburbs. Race relations continued to deteriorate. In 1925 and 1926, more than half of the people
killed by Detroit police officers were black even though African Americans made up only 8% of
the city’s population. City leaders actively recruited police officers from southern cities, perhaps
looking for men who would be tough on blacks.
There is a wall near Wyoming and 8 Mile that still stands today as evidence of the extreme segregation in Detroit after World War One. A developer wanted to build homes for whites in thatarea, but the home-owners’ loan corporation refused to grant federal approval for mortgages
because the homes were too close to a black neighborhood. “He was puzzled and stymied bythis, but he had a solution. He decided to build a wall about six feet high extending about a halfa mile south from Wyoming. A wall that would designate white occupancy on one side and black
occupancy on the other side. So far as I know this is the only place in the United States where
the American apartheid system was so physically developed that a wall had to be built.”(Reynolds Farley). After the wall was built the developer received his federal mortgage grants.
In 1942, because of the crowded living conditions and tension between the races, Life Magazine
predicted Detroit would probably explode into racial violence soon, with a headline that read
“Detroit is Dynamite.” That prediction turned out to be frighteningly accurate. Close to the intersection of Nevada and Fenlon, whites and blacks clashed violently over the construction of the
Sojourner Truth Housing Complex. The apartments were built in an attempt to provide better
housing for African Americans in Detroit. But when the tenants tried to move in, in February of1942, a large crowd of whites blocked the entrance. Fights broke out and more than 100 people were arrested. All but one were black. This kind of violence was typical when blacks
attempted to move into areas outside Black Bottom. “Often there was arson. Sometimes there
were petty attacks and in one case I documented, the white neighbors poured salt on the lawnof the first black family to move in. In another case, they broke in, turned on all the water faucets
and flooded the house. In another case, some folks tied a chain to their truck and pulled off theporch. Again, all these acts intending to signal to blacks that there is a high price to crossing the
racial line, to moving into what was considered to be white turf … A year later, Detroit’s third
race riot began. Unlike the riot of 1967, the 1943 riot was largely whites attacking blacks andpitched battles between blacks and whites on the streets of the city. Whites would jump on thestreetcars, haul off blacks and beat them up.” (Thomas Sugure)The 1943 riot started on a hot Sunday afternoon in June, when groups of young blacks andwhites started brawling on the Belle Isle Bridge. Violence spread quickly through the city. There
were 34 deaths in a day-and-a-half, most of them African Americans killed by white police officers. City leaders investigated the incident and placed the blame on older black residents who,
they said, should have socialized the blacks coming up from the South taught them proper deference to whites. “However, the newspaper reporters here in Detroit and then later an NAACP
investigation committee came to a very different conclusion. They pointed out that blacks faced
discrimination in almost every area of life in Detroit, that living conditions were really quite horrible because of segregation, that chances for recreation were quite limited because of the segregation in the parks, and that those factors gave rise to the riots, rather than the explanations
that the governor and the mayor put forth.” (Reynolds Farley). At the time of 1943 riot, Attorney
General Francis Biddle suggested that city leaders solve the problem of racial violence by preventing blacks from moving to northern cities. But nothing could stop the flood of African
Americans from moving to Detroit, looking for high-paying jobs.
Although many people believe that the riot of 1967 drove white residents from the city of Detroit,
experts say the exodus started much earlier. The economic decline of the city began not long

DETROIT / A Brief History of Segregation in Metro Detroit

III | 97

after the end of World War Two. “By 1950, the population had begun to dwindle. And what’s
happened is, as the population has dwindled, it has left the blacks with the neighborhoods andthe whites or those, or even blacks with money, have moved on beyond the city limits.” (Nicholas
Hood, former Detroit City Council member). At the same time blacks still faced limited choicesin the housing market. “You didn’t have much choice. You were consigned to certain areas. It
wasn’t until urban renewal began that you began to get a dispersion of the black population.”(Nicholas Hood).
Urban renewal, which many called ‘Negro removal,’ started in the late 1950’s. City officials
decided to build the Chrysler Freeway over Hastings Street, right in the middle of ‘Black Bottom’.
Experts say that route was chosen because it would affect very few white businesses, althoughstate leaders from the time deny that charge. Whatever the reason, the city’s largest black neighborhood was demolished to make way for the highway. Although displaced blacks received government money in order to buy or build new homes, their options were yet again limited. Usinga technique called ‘blockbusting’, real estate agents blatantly exploited racial suspicions in order
to sell more homes. “In one case, I found an incident where a real estate agent paid an African
American woman to walk her baby up and down an all-white block to convey to the whiteneighbors that blacks were moving in and they’d better sell quick. So then real estate agentswould bombard them with phone calls or with mail solicitations sometimes even door-to-door
solicitations encouraging them to sell now.” (Thomas Sugrue). Within two to five years neighborhoods would change from all white to mostly African American.
This entire history of segregation and racial suspicion had reached a critical level by Sunday,
July 23, 1967. About an hour before dawn, Detroit police officers raided an illegal after-hours
club on 12th Street, known as a “blind pig.” The officers thought they were carrying out a routine raid but as they emerged from the club, the quiet streets gradually filled with dozens ofangry people. The crowd taunted the police, then started throwing bottles and rocks. And thus
began the riot that would define Detroit for decades to come. Many blacks in the city were tiredof struggling to survive while their white neighbors enjoyed better housing, better jobs, and aseemingly better life. And he says they were especially tired of being harassed by the predominantly white police force. “There was a lot of anger built up and it just so happened on a normal police raid, evidently people just got tired of it. It was on a weekend, the police weren’t prepared, they figured they could continue doing the thing as they done it before, and it just erupted into a terrible experience.” (Nicholas Hood) 43 people were killed in the violence, and 7,200
were arrested. 2,500 stores were looted and burned, and nearly 400 families were displacedby the time the riots ended.
Damage to homes and businesses in the city was difficult to repair after the 1967 riot because
of insurance redlining. Insurance companies refused to insure buildings for replacement value,
based on the theory of moral hazard. In other words, they said if they insured a house for morethan what someone paid for it, the owner would have an incentive to burn it down. So if a homeowner suffered a kitchen fire and lost his appliances, the insurance company would only pay
him market value: 50 dollars for a refrigerator, 75 dollars for a stove. “If you’re only insured tothe market value, if you have a tornado come through your neighborhood, and you have a total
loss, you can’t rebuild your house. Because 75,000 dollars isn’t going to rebuild that house withthe oak floors and the woodwork and the plaster walls and the large bedrooms that you had.”(Shanna Smith, President of National Fair Housing Alliance). Because of redlining, it was impossible for many Detroit residents to rebuild their homes and businesses after the riots. Insurancecompanies would redline all homes built before 1960 and that meant only homes in the suburbs were fully covered. This situation worsened segregation because affluent whites didn’t wantto move back into the city, where they saw so many dilapidated homes. “And whites would drive
through urban communities and say, ‘See? THEY don’t take care of their property.’” (Shanna
Smith).

DETROIT / A Brief History of Segregation in Metro Detroit

III | 98

The city was still reeling from the aftereffects of the riots, when the racial landscape wasshaken again. In January of 1974, Coleman A. Young took office as Detroit’s first black mayor.
Nicholas Hood served on the city council while Young was in office. “Coleman Young was oneof the best things that’s happened to Detroit, because he really gave the citizens of Detroit a feeling that they were a part of the society. Up until that time, blacks in the community had been
living on the fringes.” (Nicholas Hood).
Others took exception to Young’s salty language, his bellicose demeanor, and what they calledhis ‘blatant racism’. But Coleman Young is nothing more than a convenient scapegoat for racial
problems that have existed in Detroit since the early 19th century: “It’s easy to blame racial segregation and racial division in metropolitan Detroit on that one guy and thus get yourself off thehook. We don’t have to confront our past and our city’s history of racial violence and tension.
We can just blame this single galvanizing, controversial elected official for our problems instead.
It’s an easy out.” (Thomas Sugure). Coleman Young may have aggravated the racial divide, but
he didn’t create it. And the solution to the problem of segregation probably lies on the other sideof 8 Mile Road. “Whites say to survey researchers that they’re willing to accept blacks living intheir neighborhood, living nearby, but in practice, in metropolitan Detroit, they vote with theirfeet. In neighborhoods that have any significant number of African Americans living in them,whites tend to pick up and move out. So I think the problem of segregation is largely, not completely, but it’s largely a white problem.” (Thomas Sugure). Blaming segregation on the 1967
riots or on Coleman Young has actually hampered attempts to reduce segregation in the area.
It’s imperative that residents of Metro Detroit understand how deep the roots of segregation go.
Only by looking back does the entire metropolitan area have the chance to look forward with
optimism.
The text is an edited version of a manuscript of the two-part radio feature The History ofSegregation in Metro Detroit by Celeste Headlee, broadcasted on WDET 101.9FM at June 23,
2003.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 99--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------REBUILDING DETROIT: AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE CASINOJames Boggs (1988)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Monday night I went to the graduation ceremony for one of my grandsons in Ford auditorium
at which Mayor Young was the main speaker. The student who introduced Young said, with asmile, that he was the only mayor she had ever known. Young then went on to say in the samejoking vein that maybe some of the students should come back in ten years and run for mayor
because by then he would probably have retired. Everyone laughed, but it is no joking matter.
The sad truth is that his Honor has been mayor for so long he thinks he owns the town andseems to have forgotten that the people elected him and may one day retire him before his
vision of Detroit leads us into even deeper chaos.
Coleman Young was elected mayor of Detroit 15 years ago because the city was majority blackand the time had come for a black mayor. Also blacks were furious with STRESS, the decoy
system that the Gribbs administration had created to catch street criminals. When he was elected,
Young had no program for stopping crime. All he could propose in his inaugural speech wasthat the criminals should hit 8 Mile Road. But he did have a dream, the dream that he could get
the corporations to stay in Detroit by bribing them with tax abatements.
Today Young’s dream has turned into a nightmare. Crime has not hit 8 Mile Road, but industry
has. Parke-Davis, Stroh’s, the Mack Ave. Chrysler plant are all gone. Young promised us 6,000
jobs if we allowed him to bulldoze l,500 homes, 600 businesses and 6 churches for a new GM
plant in Poletown. Today our taxes are still going to pay for Poletown, but there have never been
more than 2,500 workers at the Poletown plant and most of those are from GM plants whichhave been closed down in other parts of the city, creating a wasteland in once thriving communities, especially on the southwest side of the city. At the same time the East Side around theChrysler Jefferson plant has been bulldozed so that it looks like a moonscape. Despite protests,
small businesses have been forced to leave, as in Poletown. The reason Coleman Young’s dreamhas turned into a nightmare is that it was based on the illusion that we can bring back the goodold days when Detroit was the auto capital of the world, and hundreds of thousands of workers
came to the city to do manufacturing jobs at the decent pay which had been won through theorganization of the union. But today cars are being built all over the world, not only in Japan andWest Germany but in South Korea and Yugoslavia, and multinational corporations have exported
manufacturing jobs to the Third World where they can make more profit through cheaper labor.
Coleman Young knows, as we all do, that large-scale industry is not coming back to Detroit. That
is why he is now calling Casino Gambling an “industry” and trying to force it down our throats,promising us that it will bring 50,000 to 80,000 jobs, as the auto industry once did.
The workers who came to Detroit during World War Two, particularly from the South, had a
lot of hope. They also brought with them a sense of family and a sense of community or of
people living in harmony with one another. Working in the plant, they developed a sense ofsolidarity, at the same time earning enough money to buy homes and raise their families. As aresult, Detroit became known as one of the best organized and disciplined cities in the UnitedStates, with the highest percentage of working class home-owners north of the Mason Dixon line.
Today, however, the great majority of Detroiters no longer have any hope or solidarity with one
another. Born and raised in the city, they have had no experience of the culture that was second nature to those who had lived close to the land in small Southern communities. At the sametime, they can no longer look forward to the well-paying manufacturing jobs which enabled theirparents and grandparents to buy their own homes and raise their families. Instead, they accept
minimum wage jobs which offer no hope.

Detroit / Rebuilding Detroit: an alternative to the casino

III | 100

To begin with, we have to stop seeing the city as just a place to which you come to get a job or
to make a living, and start seeing it as the place where the humanity of people is enrichedbecause they have the opportunity to live with people of many different ethnic and social backgrounds. In other words, we have to see that our capital is in people and not see people asexisting to make capital for production or dependent on capital to live.
The foundation of our city has to be people living in communities who realize that their humanidentity or their Love and Respect for Self is based on Love and Respect for others and who
have also learned from experience that they can no longer leave the decisions as to their present
and their future to the market place, to corporations or to capitalist politicians, regardless of
ethnic background. WE, THE PEOPLE, have to see ourselves as responsible for our city and foreach other, and especially for making sure that our children are raised to place more value onsocial ties than on material wealth.
We have to get rid of the myth that there is something sacred about large-scale production for
the national and international market. Actually, our experiences over the last 75 years has
demonstrated that large-scale production, because it is based on a huge separation between
production and consumption, makes both producers and consumers into faceless masses who
are alienated from one another and at the mercy of economic forces and the mass media.
Instead, we have to begin thinking of creating small enterprises which produce food, goods andservices for the local market, that is, for our communities and for our city. Instead of destroying
the skills of workers, which is what large-scale industry does, these small enterprises will combine craftsmanship, or the preservation and enhancement of human skills, with the new technologies which make possible flexible production and constant readjustment to serve the needsof local consumers.
In order to create these new enterprises, we need a view of our city which takes into consideration both the natural resources of our area and the existing and potential skills and talents of
Detroiters.
Detroit itself is in the Great Lakes region, so we should think of how we can take advantage ofthis resource. We can start by developing a fishing fleet. This would mean training young people
to fish for a living as they do in New England and along the West and East coasts. It would alsomean building docks and cleaning facilities along the riverbank in order to supply fresh fish for
the whole area.
Michigan also has the best sand in the world. In this past this sand has been used mostly in thefoundries. We can use it to produce glass: glass to replace the broken windows that we can see
all around us; glass for the storm windows which will enable us to save energy and cut downon our heat bills in the winter; glass to harness the energy of the sun to heat our homes andour water. We can also use glass for greenhouses, which can be constructed in the many
abandoned buildings all over the city, so that we can grow vegetables for the local market all
year round. During the spring and summer we should ‘Green Detroit’ by planting gardens in thethousands of vacant lots all over the city.
Every day on the expressway we see hundreds of trucks and vans equipped with ladders, electrical tools and lumber, bringing carpenters, electricians and other skilled workers into Detroit to
do the work of repairing Detroit homes. Meanwhile, inner city youth, black and white, standaround doing nothing and waiting for the dope man. Our community colleges should be organizing crash programs to train our youth to use their hands and heads so that they can be doing
this work to improve our communities and our city instead of depending on suburbanites.
Detroit has raised many talented clothes designers, but they have all left for New York or
California because we have only been able to think in terms of large-scale industry and haven’t
recognized that Detroit could become a clothes-producing center for the State of Michigan.
Over the years Detroiters have become locked into the mentality that a party store is the only
small business that the average person can create and that shopping malls in the suburbs areDetroit / Rebuilding Detroit: an alternative to the casino

III | 101

where you go to buy most things. We need to be creating all kinds of locally-owned stores inour communities so that we can not only buy our necessities locally but so that our young people
can see stores not just as places where you spend money to buy what you want but as places
where local people are working to meet the needs of the community. In every neighborhood
there should be a bakery where families can purchase freshly baked bread and children canstop by after school to buy their sweets. In every neighborhood there should also be food shops
where working people can purchase whole meals to take home to eat together, instead ofliving off McDonalds and Kentucky Fried Chicken. This has been a common practice in othercountries.
We also need a fundamental change in our concept of Schools. Since the World War Two ourschools have been transformed into custodial institutions where our children are warehoused
for twelve years, with no function except to study and good grades so that they can win thecertificates that will enable them to get a job. What kids learn from books in schools has little if
any relationship to their daily lives. While they are growing up, they are like parasites doing nosocially useful work, spending their time playing and watching TV. Then when they become
teenagers, we blame them because they have not sense of social responsibility. We have tocreate schools which are an integral part of the community, in which young people naturally
and normally do socially necessary and meaningful work for the community, for example, keeping the school grounds and the neighborhood clean and attractive, taking care of younger
children, growing gardens which provide food for the community, etc. Connections should becreated between schools and local enterprises so that young people see these as an integral partof their present and future. Our goal should be to make Detroit the first city in the nation to use
our schools to support the community rather than as places where young people are upgradedto leave the community.
Because of our declining population, many school buildings in Detroit have been abandoned orare about to be abandoned. These schools can be turned into day care centers to care for thechildren of working mothers and fathers. They can be developed into political and cultural
centers for the community--the place for town meetings or for a local museum where the artsand crafts, the workmanship and the historical achievements of the community are proudly
exhibited.
These are only a few examples of the kinds of things we can do to rebuild Detroit once we realize that we can no longer depend upon the corporations or the politicians to save us and begin
thinking for ourselves about what we can do and must do. At this point, what we need most to
do is to begin discussing how we are going to rebuild our city, in every block club, every church,
every school, every organization and every home--because for the rest of this century and mostof the next, the major question in this country is going to be “How will we live in the city?” Up
to now we have come to the city expecting somebody else, meaning the corporations, to provide us with a livelihood. Now we are stuck here and we can’t run or hide any more. We can’t
go back to the farm, we can’t keep running from city to city. We must put down our roots where
we are and put our hearts, imaginations, minds and hands to work, so that we can empower
ourselves and one another to create an alternative to Casino Gambling. Coleman Young’s crisis
is our opportunity. Let us start the discussion here tonight.
Published on: www.locators.com/lctkeys_jump.php?str=public&amp;method=toolbarkeys-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 102--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ONE THING LEADS TO ANOTHER:
COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENTS IN URBAN COMMUNITIESGrace Lee Boggs (2000)-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I am going to talk about Detroit this morning not only because it is the urban community that I
know best but because over the years the hopes and fears of Americans all over this country
have been closely tied to the rise and fall of the city that has been my home for most of myadult life. Detroit isn’t just any American city. As Jerry Herron, head of the Wayne State
University American Studies Department, put it at last weekend’s meeting of the American
Studies Association, “Washington, D.C. is the capital of American government, but the capital of
American culture is Detroit.”
Up to a generation ago Detroit was a shining example of the success of American capitalism,
encouraging and reinforcing the conventional wisdom that technological progress is the key tosocial progress. By utilizing the new techniques of mass production, manufacturers like Ford
Motor Co., GM, Chrysler, U.S. Rubber and Parke-Davis Pharmaceuticals were able to attract
hundreds of thousands of workers to Detroit from Europe and other parts of the United States.
From the labor of these workers came the wealth that enabled the upper classes to build mansions for themselves and world-class symphony orchestras and museums for the public. And it
was not only the bourgeoisie who flourished. A mode of production that concentrated thousands
under a single roof made it possible for workers to create the great social movement of the
1930s that established the dignity of labor. During World War Two Detroit was the Arsenal of
Democracy. After the war Detroiters could boast that they were living in a city with the largest
number of working class homeowners north of the Ohio River.
In the last 25 years, however, as global corporations have moved overseas or to the South
where they can make more profit with cheaper labor, Detroit has become a wasteland. For the
media it has become the symbol of the coming collapse of American urban civilization--“the first
domino to fall” as Diane Sawyer put it on a national network special ten years ago. Detroit’s
population, which was two million in the l950s, now hovers around or below the million mark.
Physically the city is more devastated than Dresden, Berlin and Tokyo after the massive bombings of World War Two. Buildings that were once architectural marvels, like the Statler Hilton
and the Book Cadillac hotels, Union Station and the Michigan Theatre, lie in ruins, earmarks likethe Roman Colosseum of the decline of an empire. On city planning maps white spaces now
outnumber black ones, reminders of the hundreds of thousands of housing units that have vanished in the last 30 years. Many of the institutional structures that remain are fenced in or gatedand in most neighborhoods people live behind triple locked doors and barred windows.
Under these circumstances, it would be easy to abandon all hope for Detroit’s future--or to besatisfied with pseudo-solutions like casinos and luxury sports stadia. Yet precisely because physical devastation on such a huge scale boggles the mind, it also frees the imagination, especiallyof activists/artists/artisans, to perceive reality anew; to see vacant lots not as eyesores but asempty spaces inviting the viewer to fill them in with other forms, other structures that presage
a new kind of city which will embody and nurture new life-affirming values in sharp contrast
to the values of Materialism, Individualism and Competition that have brought us to this denouement.
This new kind of city can’t be built overnight. To create it is going to take time and struggle,
including political struggles over opposing policies and directions. It can’t be built from the top
down by politicians reacting to crises or by developers seizing opportunities to make mega-profits.

DETROIT / One Thing Leads to AnotherIII | 103

It must emerge organically from the initiative, imagination, commitment, passions and cooperation of a lot of different people with diverse skills and gifts, putting their hearts, heads andhands together to make a difference. I can’t predict the process by which this new kind of city
will become strong and stable enough to be a recognizable social formation, but I suspect that
it will be something like the one by which over the last 400 years capitalism slowly but steadily began to take root in Europe and from there spread to the rest of the world because it met
deep-seated human or spiritual needs for the individuality and freedoms that had been
repressed by feudalism. Analogously, as we enter the third millennium, capitalism’s destructionof community and of the biosphere, its denial of social justice and its consumerist monoculture
are creating spiritual and material needs for a new culture based on new human values. The
movement to create this new culture is emerging organically in Detroit because its physicaldevastation not only challenges us to begin thinking differently about who we are and how wewant to live but also frees up space for new beginnings.
Perhaps the best way for me to convey what I mean by ‘emerging organically’ is to describe
how my own thinking and activities as a Movement activist have evolved over the last nearly
50 years through my immersion in the community in close partnership with my husband,
Jimmy Boggs, until his death in July 1993.
I came to Detroit in the early 1950s because as a Marxist I wanted to be part of an American
revolution in which the workers in the auto factories would take the struggles of the 1930s toa higher level by struggling for workers control of production in the plant. My main differencewith traditional Marxists was my belief that blacks, women and young people, and not only
workers, would play pivotal roles in this revolution.
Living with Jimmy, who was active both in the Chrysler Jefferson plant and in the community, it
wasn’t long before I realized that my ideas had come mostly out of books and that my expectations had little or no relationship to the reality that was rapidly changing all around me. The
work force in the factories, instead of expanding and becoming more centralized, was being decimated by automation and decentralized by plant relocations. At the same time Detroit itself was
becoming predominantly black as middle and working class whites fled to the suburbs, aided
and abetted by a federal government providing FHA mortgages and spending billions of tax dollars
on freeway construction to help the auto industry expand. As a result, the predominantly white
police force began to act like an occupation army and the white city government began toresemble a colonial administration, setting the stage for the Black Power movement which webegan organizing in Detroit in the early 1960s, long before Willie Ricks and Stokely Carmichaelraised their fists and the Black Power slogan on the March through Mississippi in l966.
As we struggled for Black Political Power in Detroit in the 1960s, we were not thinking about
how we would organize or reorganize the economy. Our main concern was the racism of thewhite power structure. When whites asked us how Black Power would differ from white power,
our reply was usually a superficial “It couldn’t be any worse.”
Therefore, when the 1967 rebellion made Black Power inevitable by making it impossible forwhites to continue governing Detroit, Coleman Young, our first black mayor, was completely
unprepared for the ruthlessness with which multinational corporations were de-industrializing
the city. Taking office in 1974, Young could attack racism by desegregating the police and fire
departments. But he had no idea how to deal with the massive export of jobs overseas that was
making it impossible for young people to leave school in the ninth grade and get a job in theplant making enough money to get married and raise a family. All he could do was react-trying desperately to replace the jobs that had left Detroit--by any means necessary. Hence his
decision to bulldoze the Poletown community in 1980, over the protests of residents, destroying
1,500 homes, 600 businesses, and six churches, in order to build a GM plant that was supposed to provide 6,000 jobs but has never provided more than 3,000, a fraction of those lostby GM’s simultaneous shutdown of the Fisher Body and the Cadillac plants.

DETROIT / One Thing Leads to AnotherIII | 104

Hence also his attempts to bring Casino Gambling to Detroit. It was an ‘industry,’ he insisted, thatwould create 50,000 jobs. To defeat Coleman’s Casino Gambling initiative, we formed Detroiters
Uniting--a “coalition of community groups--blue collar, white collar, and cultural workers; clergy,
political leaders and professionals--who together embody the rich ethnic and social diversity of
our city.”“Our concern,” we said, “is with how our city has been disintegrating socially, economically, politically, morally and ethnically ... We are convinced that we cannot depend upon one industry or
one large corporation to provide us with jobs. It is now up to us--the citizens of Detroit--to put
our hearts, our imaginations, our minds, and our hands together to create a vision and project
concrete programs for developing the kinds of local enterprises that will provide meaningful jobs
and income for all citizens.”
During the 1960s, Jimmy Boggs had anticipated some of the economic challenges that Black
Political Power would face. “The ability of capitalists today to produce in abundance,” he wrote
in Black Power: A Scientific Concept Whose Time Has Come, “has brought the U.S. technologically to the threshold of a society where each can have according to his needs ... Therefore black
political power will have to decide on ... the aims and direction of the economy for the people.”Now watching the desperate efforts of Young to create jobs by means that were not only
manifestly parasitic and anti-human but ultimately futile, Jimmy began envisioning a Detroit
founded on different principles. In a 1985 speech he said we need to go where we have nevergone before and focus on ‘Creating Communities.’ In 1988, in a debate on Casino Gambling, heprojected a vision of a new kind of city whose foundation would be people living in communities and citizens who take responsibility for decisions about their city instead of leaving these topoliticians or to the market place and who create small enterprises that emphasize the preservation of skills and produce goods and services for the local community.
In pursuit of this vision, we organized a Peoples Festival of community organizations in
November 1991, describing it as “A multigenerational, multicultural celebration of Detroiters,
putting our hearts, minds, hands and imagination together to redefine and recreate a city of community, compassion, cooperation, participation and enterprise in harmony with the earth.”
A few months later, to engage young people in the movement to create this new kind of city, we
founded Detroit Summer as a multicultural, intergenerational youth program/movement torebuild, redefine and respirit Detroit from the ground up. Detroit Summer, which completed its
ninth season last summer, involves youth volunteers in planting community gardens, rehabbing
houses and painting public murals, while also expanding their minds and imaginations throughworkshops and intergenerational dialogues on how to rebuild Detroit.
Detroit Summer brought us into contact with the Gardening Angels, a loose network of mainly
African-American southern-born elders, who plant gardens not only to produce healthier foodfor themselves and their neighbors but also to instill respect for nature and process in young
people. Getting starter kits of seeds and tilling services from the city’s Farm-a-Lot program (started by Coleman Young) these elders work closely with 4H youth involving them in all aspects ofgardening, nutrition and food preservation.
The Gardening Angels stay active and in touch with one another mainly through the volunteer
efforts of Gerald Hairston, a master gardener, former auto worker and passionate environmentalist/intergenerationalist whose love for the Land, for oldsters and for youngsters is all of one
piece. Gerald has helped countless groups and individuals all over the city to start gardens:
neighborhood gardens, youth gardens, church gardens, school gardens, hospital gardens, seniorindependence gardens, wellness gardens, Hope Takes Root gardens, Kwanzaa gardens. He also
has close ties with the national and local Black Farmers movement which spreads the goodnews that “we cannot free ourselves until we feed ourselves,” i.e., it is only when we can provide
for our own basic needs that we are empowered to make our own choices.

DETROIT / One Thing Leads to AnotherIII | 105

About five years ago with the help of the Hunger Action Coalition of Michigan and Michigan
Integrated Food and Farming Systems (MIFFS), people from these gardens came together toform the Detroit Agricultural Network with the aim of promoting urban agriculture as a way ofgrowing people and communities. In turn, the Detroit Agricultural Network has inspired the formation of another coalition, consisting of health providers, emergency food providers, church
representatives, and university researchers who are working on a Food Security Plan that will
combine urban agriculture, food cooperative development in local congregations and youth
training programs in agriculture and quality marketing, so that Detroit can develop food selfreliance, create community wealth, better community health and keep dollars circulating locally.
The members of the Detroit Agricultural Network and the Food Security Coalition are ethnicallyand socially diverse. One of the most versatile is Paul Weertz, who teaches science at theCatherine Ferguson Academy, a high school on the west side for predominantly African
American teen-aged mothers. Paul is a jack-of-all-trades, an urban farmer, and a house builder
who has no use for schooling that is divorced from life. In the deteriorating neighborhood on theeast side where he lives, he has remodeled a block of houses and created a Hay and Honeyfarm. At the Catherine Ferguson Academy, which is surrounded by more vacant lots than houses, he has organized a college prep curriculum which teaches math and science through home
repair, small animal husbandry and agriscience. Students landscape, raise vegetables and fruit
trees, and plant, harvest and bale a two acre alfalfa field in back of the school to feed the small
animals that provide eggs, meat, milk and cheese for the school community. Last year Weertz’
home repair class spent every day of a whole quarter clearing out a five-bedroom house acrossthe street and worked towards acquiring the site for emergency student housing.
The community gardening movement keeps expanding. Just the other day I read an article abouta group of mostly young Detroiters on the east side, calling itself the Green Team, that hasbought four parcels of city owned land (the city owns approximately 40,000 usable parcels) ata cost of $100–$200 a lot, with the aim of “turning them into vibrant gathering places that provide a haven for children, fresh food for nearby residents and beauty where there was an eyesore.” Community gardens also revive neighborhood organizations. For example, the garden that
Ashley Klyber, University of Detroit Mercy landscape architect, designed for the Detroit Agricultural Network on the three acres surrounding Genesis Lutheran Church at the corner of Mack
Ave and E. Grand Boulevard just up the street from my house, has re-energized Mack Alive, theorganization formed by City Councilwoman Alberta Tinsley-Williams that had become dormant
in the last few years.
In the last few years, word of Detroit’s community gardening movement has spread. Journalists
from other countries and cities who come to Detroit to report on its decline go away renewed
after being driven around Detroit by Gerald who has given guided tours to countless student,
youth and church groups from Detroit and other cities. As a result, two years ago Kyong Park,
internationally known architectural and urban theorist who is a frequent visiting lecturer in the
University of Detroit Mercy Architectural School, decided to move to Detroit to establish theInternational Center for Urban Ecology (ICUE) in Paul Weertz’ neighborhood.
In the summer of 1999, the ICUE brought together students, architects and artists in a seminar
to explore what an ‘Architecture of Resurrection’ would look like. Among the participants were
Mel Chin from North Carolina and Deborah Grotfeldt from Houston. Mel Chin is a Chinese
American sculptor internationally known for his public art works that address issues of habitat
devastation, restoration and sustaining the planet’s diversity, especially for his Revival Fields
project which uses the biomass of plants to extract heavy metals from a Minneapolis brownfieldso that the land can be re-used. PBS will be doing a special on him this year.
Deborah Grotfeldt is an artist and administrator who, with African-American artist/activist Rick
Lowe, co-founded the award-winning Project Row Houses in one of the poorest AfricanAmerican neighborhoods in Houston, Texas, transforming an historic one-and-a-half block site

DETROIT / One Thing Leads to AnotherIII | 106of 22 abandoned shotgun houses into a center that has become a model for a holistic approach
to cultural, educational, economic and social needs. Some houses, for example, are used for
artist’s installations, others for children’s after school programs and still others for young single
mothers and their children.
Because she was so impressed with the movement already underway in the city Deborah
moved to Detroit a couple of months ago to spend a year organizing a project similar to Project
Row Houses in the Catherine Ferguson Academy (CFA) neighborhood. The CFA project will
include two houses rehabbed with reusable materials and volunteer labor and a new house,designed by a UDM School of Architecture studio, for mothers and children who need emergency or long-term housing. Also in the works are an art garden and space for revolving public art projects by local, national and international artists in a residency program. Mel Chin, who
has agreed to be the first artist in residence, has designed a gourmet mushroom/worm growing enterprise to be installed in an abandoned house in the neighborhood.
A studio of Kyong Park’s UDM architectural students at UDM has also created a vision of how
a five square mile area on the east side of Detroit can be developed into a self-reliant community with a vegetable farm to produce food, a tree farm and a sawmill to produce lumber, schools
which include community-building as part of the curriculum, and co-housing as well as individual housing. I have seen the two-hour visual of this Studio several times and am looking forward to showing it to community groups to broaden their imaginations on how they can rebuild
and respirit their communities.
I hope I have said enough to give you an idea of the movement that is emerging in Detroit sothat you will want to support it, join it, expand it, emulate it, innovate it--because that is whatmovements are for--to move people.
In conclusion, I need to give you a sense of the political struggle that is heating up in Detroit.
As Dennis Archer enters the final year of his second term as Mayor, it is becoming clear to a
growing number of citizens that he is trying to build what he calls a world-class city at theexpense of Detroit’s people and communities. He has used eminent domain to remove long-timeworking class residents from desirable locations (like Graimark and Brush Park) to make roomfor upscale housing, in the process enriching developers who include members of his family. He
is committing the obscenity of building $200,000 condominiums and half-million dollar
McMansions in a city where half the population lives below the poverty level, while at the sametime forcing the working poor into the ranks of the homeless by demolishing buildings that could
be rehabbed to provide low income housing. He has transformed city government into a deep
pocket for private interests and connived with Engler to remove the democratically-electedschool board and replace it with handpicked appointees. He is so determined to deface the east
Riverfront with three gambling casinos that he has sued to try to prevent residents in the areafrom exercising their constitutional right to submit petitions they have gathered to block thisassault on our senses and on our quality of life. Finally, by these repeated injuries and usurpations he has created an overall climate of such contempt for ordinary citizens that Detroit police
now kill people at a higher rate than in any other big U.S. city.
Meanwhile, the majority of the City Council, most of whom have accepted contributions fromcasino interests, has made these crimes against the people of Detroit possible by their continuing support of Archer’s policies.
That is why some of the most respected activists and representatives of community organizations in the city have come together to form the Committee for the Political Resurrection of
Detroit. We plan to run a slate of candidates in next year’s City Council elections on a programof resisting Archer’s community-destroying policies and supporting community building as the
key to the resurrection of Detroit. One of the main criteria for being on the CPR slate will berefusal to accept corporate campaign contributions. We are running to win, but our main objective is to create a movement so that even if we don’t win we will have created something--

DETROIT / One Thing Leads to AnotherIII | 107

at this point I don’t know what to call it--that will provide Detroiters with an alternative way of
thinking and acting to rebuild the city that all of us are proud to call our own.
The speech was hold at Keynote, Michigan Alliance of Cooperatives, E. Lansing, Michigan,
October 20, 2000
Published on: www.boggscenter.org/ideas/speeches/one-thing-leads.shtml---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 108--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BUBBLE METROPOLIS: EXPANDING DETROIT’S IDENTITY
THROUGH MUSICDan Sicko (2003)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I. NEVER CAN SAY GOODBYE
It’s 1972. Detroit’s population has now shrunk by 19% in a mere two decades. As much as thisloss affects the city and its inhabitants, it is the next few 100 people about to leave that will really hurt …
When Motown Records left Detroit for Hollywood, they left more than empty real estate. The
sudden and dramatic impact of losing a pillar of the city’s identity was hard to measure--at leastat first. One thing was certain: Detroit no longer had the music industry it once did. It wasn’t
dead by any stretch of the imagination, but it certainly was wounded.
And not so much from an economic standpoint as from a symbolic one. Motown became one
more institution not sharing in the collective ambition of the city. Reinforcing the coastal duopoly of New York and Los Angeles--the bookends of all American entertainment and culture. One
more city, lost in-between. Suzanne E. Smith writes:“Motown’s music … did make eloquent statements about the plight of black Americans left withthe ‘empty bag’ of urban America. Yet, without Motown’s cultural presence and financial profits
invested in the city, the songs could only passively speak about, not actively participate in,
Detroit’s continuing struggle to create itself anew”1.
To add to the cultural blight, the MC5 disbanded in the same year. Detroit’s first (and last?)
revolutionary rock tsunami were together for a mere eight years, but their influence on music,
especially Detroit music, still resonates as strongly as that of Berry Gordy’s progeny. And noother band was as intimately involved with Detroit’s social struggle--that is, as much as a rockand roll band could be involved. Their fierce intensification of rock clashed with the ‘1960s
movement’ and meshed with the realities of their city, creating a thunderclap of expanding air… the bang of an expanding universe. Along with Iggy and the Stooges, they populated thisnew world called ‘punk.’
Two monumental forces in music leaving their mark on the world and then abruptly leaving
Detroit. However, these absences did leave room for emerging voices. In some ways, it evenhelped Detroit create a more interesting identity, inclusive of more styles and cultures. But for
the time being, in the 1970s and 1980s, Detroit was shrinking, and shrinking fast. To the city’smusic scene, this disappearing of concrete, sheet metal and hit factories was a problem. What
presented a bigger problem was that understanding Detroit became increasingly difficult tograsp. It was increasingly at odds with itself: industrial and post-industrial, old and new, black
and white … a “monumental Gestalt puzzle.”2
To the optimistic, Detroit was boiled down to an idea. Or an ideal. A bubble. It simultaneously
became that much easier to forget and infinitely more malleable--open to new creative forcesthat would shape its destiny. Of course, that’s one way of looking at it. Those oblivious to thehope that remained focused on the empty husks of buildings, the plant closings, and the fires.
To the outside, and even the inside (if you include local media) Detroit was reduced to even lessthan an idea--it became a sound--bite. Detroit television news stations were, and to some degree,
still are obsessed with fires in the city, arson-fueled or otherwise. It’s a poor excuse for a sharedcultural experience that the media and its audiences still buy into.

DETROIT / Bubble Metropolis

III | 109

“Ya know, the Motor City is burning people, there ain’t a thing that white society can do.
Ma hometown burning down to the ground, worser than Vietnam.”(Motor City is Burning, MC5, John Lee Hooker, 1969)
Did it make sense for Detroit’s new generation of music-makers to have any other image of
Detroit than the mediated one right in front of them? No, but then again, to the outside, it didn’t
make any sense that a black middle class could produce a new form of modern music thatwould take the world by storm (let alone the recognition that there was even a black middle
class!). Techno was, as artist and DJ Derrick May is often quoted, “a complete mistake. Like George
Clinton and Kraftwerk stuck in an elevator.” Detroit, let alone America, wasn’t ready for it.
And they weren’t ready to hear about hip-hop from any other place but New York for 16 years,
and when they were, it of course came from Los Angeles. Another east coast/west coast pattern to marginalize everything in-between. Detroit hip-hop is just now starting to really get itsdue, thanks to the odd, but not all that surprising leading role Eminem plays in its community.
Detroit rock and roll suffered from a similarly narrow outlook on the musical landscape bymajor labels and radio conglomerates (Seattle being the ‘anomaly’ that broke the strangleholdon creative expression). Yet, over the course of more than two decades, Detroit’s musical underground prevailed and propelled all three of these genres to positions of national and international prominence. All thanks to the smallest sparks of positive forces countering cultural relegation. Conveniently, the biggest one was just as intangible as the city seemed to be at the time.
Under so much external pressure, the radio dial was the city’s perfect release valve. Being oneof the first strongholds of freeform programming, and one of the last holdouts as the corporations consolidated and closed in on its airwaves, Detroit radio was a powerful resource. Nowdefunct stations like WLBS, forgotten radio shows, and personalities such as The Wizard, Mike
Halloran and The Electrifying Mojo were immeasurably important to inspiring, developing, andin many cases, breaking talent on the air.
Mojo gets namechecked a lot. He was on the air the longest of these entities, on more stations
and with the most personality. Or lack thereof--mysteriously, Mojo almost never makes official
public appearances or had his photograph published--which only added to his mystique andimpact over time.
Mojo, like all the others, was trying to open up radio formats at the exact time radio stations andtheir parent companies were trying to make them strict and foolproof. His show, The Midnight
Funk Association, would feature R&B virtuosos such as Prince, the nascent (and often very electronic) sounds of hip-hop, thrown together Düsseldorf’s Kraftwerk, Hendrix, Tangerine Dream,
Was (Not Was) and even a dash of classical. All couched in the exact same combination of positivity and otherworldly trappings that framed a new outlook on Detroit.
Shaking up radio programming on a local level sounds like an easy task, and it was relatively
so in the days before MTV. Not only did MTV siphon off radio listeners, but over time it helped
reinforce the increasing segmentation and consolidation within the music industry. However,Detroit’s era of ‘freeform goodness’ was just strong enough to keep the bubble of cultural innovation and exchange permeable, yet protected from the negative stereotypes. The example I liketo give is of my junior high experience. Not something people usually look back on fondly. But
I remember Mojo’s influence vividly groups of white kids trying to memorize George Clinton’s
Atomic Dog, and black kids singing the girls’ parts in The B-52s’ Mesopotamia.
Commercial radio simply lacks the will to take chances like that today. So while it lasted in
Detroit, readily available variety was treasured. Its radio frequencies were the precious fertile
ground where sounds and cultures clashed and offered freedom for the next generation to either
build on the bedrock of funk and soul, reject it, or both.
In addition to its unique radio nirvana, Detroit’s next step forward was a small, but very important
physical one. Especially if you were one of its young residents, Detroit was seriously lacking inDETROIT / Bubble Metropolis

III | 110social outlets. Most of the people creating music there today were too young to enjoy what wasleft of the teen clubs (legal nightclub establishments catering to the underage), and violence had
all but extinguished anything more spontaneous happening outdoors. But, as time went on,
improvisation prevailed.
The Detroit party club scene of 1978–1982 was a microcosm of Detroit’s ongoing energy andprecursor to its importation and interpretation of rave culture. By ‘club’ I don’t mean night club,I mean clique. High-school cliques. Young black students, mostly from Detroit’s northwest sidecreated an entire network of little social cliques, inspired not only by European new wave andpost-disco sounds, but by all things seemingly European or sophisticated.
But they didn’t stop at image alone. Even for these predominantly middle-class kids, good, clean
entertainment was hard to come by in the wake of all that happened to Detroit in the 1970s. So
they became entrepreneurs: they made their own nightlife--rented halls, hired talent, threw parties. Had fun and got paid. Out of this sub-culture came almost all of Detroit’s modern-day DJ
talent, or at least the DJs who would teach and inspire everyone else.
As these parties grew and size and influence, a mutual awareness developed among the different ‘scenes,’ as did a kind of connection with the city, its more offbeat venues and historicalsignificance. A connection built on more than interesting juxtapositions and dissociations--thelack of ‘narrative competency’ present in so many hastily reutilized buildings.3 There was amore genuine feeling of place and even ownership in its culture, even though it was quite obvious that there was a decades-wide gap between the Detroit that was and the Detroit they wereimagining.
One great example is the former Women’s City Club on Park Avenue, just north of Grand Circus
Park. Since the 1920s it had been a sometime meeting place of women’s activist groups, but inthe early 1980s one could find a literal cross-section of the city’s subcultures. The growing techno and punk movements shared a determination and resourcefulness, and now they inhabitedthe same spaces, alongside people enjoying budding talents from the jazz scene. Three or morescenes and generations in one building on one night. This occurrence could be another sadstatement on the scarcity of space within Detroit, but instead it was testament to its slow but
steady transformation (unfortunately, hip-hop’s niche came even slower).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------II. THE CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER“Artists that can live anywhere in the world but choose to live in a city like Detroit are, tome, looking far into the future, because to live in Detroit you can only think about the future.
You cannot think about the past or you will suffocate in misery.”4 (Derrick May)
The next transformative step came as techno’s nucleus of DJs and artists began to produce
records, all of them living and working in adjoining lofts near Detroit’s Eastern Market area.
Derrick May and his Transmat Records are still located there, but at one time Juan Atkins and
Kevin Saunderson were there. This is where techno really became a movement, with its threemost prominent record labels coexisting and co-creating. The small stretch of Gratiot Avenue
between Riopelle and Russell streets has become known as ‘Techno Boulevard.’ In addition to setting up shop downtown (for the most part), Detroit’s new music scenes became defined by their‘quiet’ revolt against the music industry. In one sense, the mere fact that they had talent, momentum and something each of them knew was unique made them all rebels in their ‘forgotten’ town.
But most went one step further, keeping their productions confined to bedrooms, basements andthe like--away from the larger studios. Some of this was merely keeping art close to one’s vest,
but as time went on, it turned into an aggressive, almost rabid DIY (do it yourself) ethic. It becameless about recording space and music technology, and more about personal vision and control.
To say the least, Detroit underground music was still very un-mediated at this stage.

DETROIT / Bubble Metropolis

III | 111-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------III. THE BEAUTY OF DECAY“Bands that come up here are perfectly happy to have whatever happens to them locally,
and whatever happens to them beyond that is just frosting.”5 (Ben Edmonds)“It’s always been about insight and forward thinking. Also, Detroit is unlike any other city inthe transitions it has endured. When your surroundings change, you go through change.”6(Juan Atkins)
Detroit had every chance of coalescing its creative energies and rising to the top again in the
1980s, if it were not for the internalized ‘ghost town’ mentality, negative stereotypes and growing media powerhouses like MTV marginalizing or ignoring local phenomena. Exciting, worldchanging music from Detroit was an idea ahead of its time, but one that could not yet reachescape velocity.
As it began to mature, Detroit music reflected its surroundings in two very distinct and somewhat opposite ways: 1) a very distilled or orthodox approach, sometimes twisted into an
extreme, almost parodied version of reality and 2) a future-leaning amalgamations.
The former is from within the bubble, a circumscribe outlook. Perhaps best embodied by
Detroit’s notorious ‘horror-core’ subgenre (Insane Clown Posse [ICP], Esham, etc.), but also
including less intense extremes (Eminem, Obie Trice, etc.) Music of this type often embraces thenegative effects of Detroit to the point of wearing them on its sleeve. Equally comfortable delighting in a city’s problems and the street credibility that affords as it is defensive of its turf and idiosyncrasies. Interesting, yes, but not exactly an innovation in hip-hop. The degree of some ofthese extremes is, however, fascinating:“Rich boys think that is shitty
But I like fucking crackheads with one titty
And I do it at the drop of a dime
And I get the scabies almost every time.”(“Bugz on my Nugz,” Insane Clown Posse, 1994)
The squalor they depict and rhyme about is so outlandish that their fans can’t possibly believe
it all about Detroit and its inhabitants. But then again, this is the kind of stuff that led to their
number three debut on the Billboard charts with no support from MTV or radio.
A less obvious inclusion here would be the current crop of ‘garage’ bands like the White Stripes
and Detroit Cobras, who do not so much rely directly on Detroit’s bad rep as a cartoonish backdrop. Rather, they create their own kind of extreme by simplifying the rock sound (what, no bass
guitars?) perhaps further than punk ever did. To be fair, one might also include ‘hard’ technoand some of the ‘minimal’ techno variety. The starkness of such records can be equally shocking as ICP to those only familiar with Motown.
Outside the bubble, Detroit’s music reaches out to the world, and can verge on escapism: ‘Classic’
Detroit techno that sounds at once mechanical and warm, the so called ‘beautiful-ugly’ aesthetic of the Jay Dee/Slum Village wing of Detroit hip-hop, and even the jazz leanings of the MC5(quite the contrast given how extreme they were in their time) all share a solid street foundation, but have otherworldly trajectories.
Much of Detroit techno is steeped in science fiction and/or Futurism (in fact it is Toffler’s conceptof the techno rebel from which the genre gets its name). One of its earliest record labels, that ofJuan Atkins and his Model 500 material, was called Metroplex. A mega city, a „Techno City“7that only exists as an idea. Derrick May took the name from a Model 500 song, and began

DETROIT / Bubble Metropolis

III | 112

recording on the Transmat label. A sort of imaginary teleportation device that can transcend timeand space--two of the realities/humiliations of Detroit. By design, they were making music totake Detroit somewhere it might never go, constructing a city that did not yet exist. Yet, this outlook never really becomes too detached--most of these artists continue to live in Detroit. The
hope (or hopeless romanticism) is what fuels them.
And there isn’t as much middle ground on this psychographic scale as one would think. Youmight hear both of these approaches within one song, or possibly one album, but rarely anything Detroit’s music either paradoxically projects exactly the image it wants to hold dear andprotect, or it transcends the city, ironically raising its profile on the way up and out.
Comparing these two projections of Detroit is a worthwhile endeavor, albeit somewhat problematic. Few of the hip-hop lyrics on either side present complete pictures of the city. Detroit’s
techno music is brimming with references and audible cues, but it isn’t always apparent to thecasual listener. The easiest place to start would be something like the following passages fromThe White Stripes’ “Hotel Yorba”:“Well its 1 2 3 4take the elevatorat the Hotel Yorba
I’ll be glad to see you later
all they got inside is vacancy”
I been thinking
of a little place down by the lake …
… stomping our feet on the wooden boards
never gonna worry about locking the door”
Within that catchy two-minute song are glimpses of a supposedly transient existence, the ‘vacancy’ of the city and a very-Detroit yearning to head ‘up North,’ trading in urban life for a cottage
on one of the Great Lakes. Whether the Stripes actually hold this as a major representation of
the city is unclear, but it does feed into the idea of Detroit as a means to an end--the “throwaway city” to which Herron refers.8 It’s interesting how many references there actually are toleaving Detroit behind in music, including Eminem’s “8 Mile”:“Sorry, momma, I’m grown
I must travel alone
Ain’t gon’ follow no footsteps I’m making my own
Only way that I know how to escape from this 8 Mile Road”
And going all the way back to country music looking at Detroit City from the outside:“You know I rode a freight train north to Detroit city
And after all these years I find I’ve been wasting my timeThink I’ll put my foolish pride on a southbound train and ride
Heading back to the loved ones I left there waiting behind”(Detroit City, Danny Dill and Mel Tillis, 1963)
Contrast these sentiments with two more obvious techno selections: Underground Resistance’s“The Beauty of Decay” and “Backroad to Nirvana.” Both are at once admissions of Detroit’s shortcomings or hardships and the pride and hope that still lingers. This is not a temporary place forthose thinking, working and dreaming outside the bubble.

DETROIT / Bubble Metropolis

III | 113-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------IV. CONNECTION MACHINES
Of course, Detroit’s music is not without more tangible connections to the surrounding urban condition. Over the years, there have been many examples, some fleeting, some with more sustainability. In 1988, The Music Institute opened on Broadway near Gratiot. It was the first ‚proper’nightclub (although an alcohol-free one) downtown where the best of the best from Detroit’s houseand techno scene could play, week after week. It galvanized the energy in the scene and helped
put a public ‚face’ on Detroit techno. In addition to the added attention it brought, the Music Institutebrought visitors to the city. Mostly music industry types, artists like ABC and Depeche Mode but
a fair amount of displaced Detroiters who came home to share in the very real context of technoin Detroit. It was no longer merely an export. It would be about four years later before the practical, post-industrial aspects of rave culture collided with Detroit’s modernism. Parties beganspringing up in fields in the more remote suburbs, but eventually they began to centralize in
downtown warehouses. Of course, Detroit had a wealth of such locations. This allowed promoters great freedom to search around for the most interesting spots to throw parties. But after several years they ceased to be completely random. They were increasingly not the „temporalautonomous zones“ described by Hakim Bey. Detroit was building something--perhaps a condition it cannot avoid? Or maybe it was some of the remarkable locations that were reclaimed Chiefamong these locations was the former Packard plant, in which the Plus 8 label and others staged
increasingly elaborate events. It might be a stretch to say that this generation was picking up
where the ‚high school’ scene of the 1970s and 1980s left off, but Detroit’s underground music
has proved itself to be very much concerned with continuity. As Plus 8 co-founder Richie Hawtin
recalls, “In retrospect there was something ‘historic’ and special that we held so many events inthe buildings that had been important to Detroit’s history and success. I’m not sure that when wewere first doing the events that we were aware of this importance, we just found that Detroit was
full of old broken-down warehouses that were perfect for parties. As we continued to do them, I
think the notion of the irony of the situation, and the passion of the original builders started to
become more evident. Maybe it was unconscious and something that could never be removed
from the equation.” Today, one need not look any further than 3000 Grand Boulevard for a concrete example. Inside the former laundry worker’s union hall resides Submerge, the collective
started by Mike Banks of Underground Resistance and Christa Weatherspoon in 1992. Submerge
banded together several smaller techno and house labels under an umbrella that offers manufacturing, distribution and management services. While it operates independently within the sliver of capitalism that is the dance music business, Submerge did bring some logical collective principles to the table and allowed the smaller label to compete on a much larger scale. The 3000
Grand Boulevard location is a perfect match, in the shadow of the former General Motors headquarters and just down the street from Berry Gordy’s old Hitsville U.S.A. The union theme also
finds its way onto the circular yellow labels that adorn the twelve singles on the Local 3000
imprint. The new Submerge headquarters, like their old location at 2030 Grand River, is also asort of unofficial ‚welcome center’ for visitors to the techno scene. Complete with its own museum exhibit to complement the one at the nearby Detroit Historical Museum and the Somewherein Detroit record store which occupies most of its basement, the three story building serves as alocal meeting place for a global community.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------V. THE BUBBLE EXPANDS“But I don’t know what about Detroit it is. It’s
just, I think it’s just a pathetic city. It’s just sopathetic when you live there. It’s so behind
the times and such a not-modern city.”(Jack White)

DETROIT / Bubble Metropolis

III | 114

“But there’s always been a very strong rock‘n’ roll scene there. I mean that neverstopped. It’s been going underground for all
this time, so it just happened that it maybe got
more attention now. It’s always been there though.”9(Meg White)
Detroit techno as a culture has been exported to nearly every continent in its long journey toacceptance. Along the way it has been reinterpreted and mythologized in a never-ending cycle-a big reason for its success. Because of all of the artists, DJs and producers making such innovative music and backing that with their self-styled post-modern/futurist propaganda, Detroit has
truly become like Mecca for techno enthusiasts. Its street credibility has become much larger
than the boundaries of its streets.
The fact that the idea of Detroit has grown in spite of its shrinking physicality, even after so many
decades of decline is very promising. It’s almost as if the more that is taken away or that people attempt to take, the more important the city becomes to residents and to the country as awhole. It’s not so much desperation, but rather a self-defensive swell that alchemizes into pride
among its citizens. People talk of techno in general now much the way the uninitiated can boastof The Detroit Red Wings success.
They’re seeing home-grown music on the covers of magazines, on the silver screen, filling up
Hart Plaza. It is no longer ‘fringe culture.’ Of course there are the very real dangers of reinterpretation that techno has always had to dodge, that of branding, commodification, etc. What will
be more intriguing to watch is the new conflict that as arisen between ‘Detroit’ on both sides ofthe bubble (the imagined one and the real street life fueling hip-hop folk tales) and the reuse of
their cultural spaces. They are no longer the only artists reshaping the city.
But with events such as Movement 2003 (née DEMF), the techno exhibit at the Detroit HistoricalMuseum (despite its ‘commemorative’ aspect) and the depth of the coverage and interest in therock and hip-hop scenes, there are very positive signs.
Signs that both the outside world and (finally) the ‘official’ Detroit city government are reachingout to these various subcultures and really celebrating them. Perhaps a true Renaissance canstill occur.
Just as they took pride in throwing parties at YWCA halls and supper clubs, the high school kidsthat would grow up to form techno’s producers, artists and audiences are still acting with
Movement/DEMF being their crowning achievement. The impact this reunion of Detroit and its
homegrown culture is impossible to quantify. Only Motown coming back home could top it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

Suzanne E. Smith, Dancing in the Street: Motown and the Cultural Politics of Detroit, Harvard University Press,
Cambridge/Massachusetts 1999, p. 246

2

Jerry Herron, Afterculture: Detroit and the Humiliation of History, Wayne State University Press, Detroit 1993, p. 27

3

Ibid., p. 69

4

Raf Katigbak, “Motor City Magistrate,” in: Montreal Mirror, Vol. 19 No. 11, August 28–September 3, 2003

5

Larry Rodgers, “White-hot Stripes,” in: Arizona Republic, September 25, 2003

6

Dan Sicko, “The Roots of Techno,” in: Wired, Issue 2.07, July 1994

7

Also a song recorded by Atkins and Rick Davis as the group Cybotron in 19848

Jerry Herron, Throw-away Cities, Shrinking Cities, October 2003

9

“White Stripes sticking to the basics,” CNN.com, August 14, 2003----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 115--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------INITIATIVES AND PROJECTS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4-H clubs are closely associated with the county extension agency of the State University in eachstate. The 4-H Community Center of Detroit is used for building model rockets, caring for animals, raising crops, building airplanes, and studying for careers, but also provides space forother organizations.
contact: Mr. Mills, 4-H Youth Agent and Director, 5710 McClellan, Detroit, MI 48213 and640 Temple Room 616, Detroit, MI 48201, phone: 313-833-3410,
www.msue.msu.edu/wayne/4-Hindex.html
ADAMAH is an organization based on networking that grew from a student project that offereda vision for rebuilding a specific area of Detroit as a self-sustaining neighborhood. Now it provides support and insight into the building and maintenance of a sustainable society. It has beena key source of information as participants keep each other up to date on current projects . The
Detroit Greenmap, The Earthwalk, Sarvodaya are other activities related to ADAMAH.
contact: Jacob Corvidae, phone: 313-961-0264, www.adamah.org
Avalon Bakery “ … we strive to contribute to the rebuilding of Detroit by treating our work,
one another, our customers, and the earth with respect.” (Avalon International Breads). As oneof the few actual businesses that is actively involved in the agriculture of Detroit, Avalon Bakery
plays a unique role. It provides a meeting place, supplies food for meetings and fundraisers fordifferent activities and groups in Detroit like Detroit Summer, Back Alley Bikes, Food Not Bombs,
Trumbullplex, F.A.R.M., Catherine Ferguson Academy, and Genesis Garden among others.
contact: Ann and Jackie, 422 W. Willis, Detroit, MI 48201, phone: 313-832-0008, open:
Tuesday through Saturday 6am to 6pm
Back Alley Bikes Although Detroit is the ‘motor city,’ only 60% of the driving populace own
cars. By promoting a recycle the bicycle mentality, Back Alley reinforces one of the greatstrengths of Detroit. It creates enthusiasm for bikes, especially among young people. Beyond this,
it offers programs such as Community Drop Ins, Earn a bike, Mechanic Night, Workdays, Adult
Earn a Bike and bike art. BAB was founded as a Detroit Summer program.
contact: Lynn Roman and Paul Trombly, 3611 Cass Ave., Detroit MI, phone: 313-832-2904(Detroit Summer)
Cass Corridor Neighborhood Development Corporation (CCNDC) The corporation “ … wasformed in 1982 as a subsidiary of the Concerned Citizens of Cass Corridor (The four C’s) aneighborhood-based community organization representing residents and business owners within the Cass Corridor.” (CCNDC) The organization has responded to community concerns throughpartnerships with tenants to acquire distressed buildings from absentee landlords. It is also connected to Detroit Summer, Back Alley Bikes, ACA, Camp Detroit, and SAI (Service Adoration andIllumination) among others.
contact: Patrick Dorn, Executive Director, 3611 Cass, Detroit MI, phone: 313-831 2878,
fax: 313-831-2878
Detroit Agricultural Network (D.A.N.) The organization is made up of many people andinitiatives that face similar challenges with gardening in Detroit and have committed to help eachother out, and most importantly, to keep in touch. It regularly holds potlucks where area

DETROIT / Initiatives and Projects

III | 116

farmers meet and exchange ideas and resources, and also holds educational sessions and provides resources such as tilling, seedlings, and raised bed construction.
contact: Patrick Crouch, americore volunteer, D.A.N. is currently headquartered at F.A.R.M, 200
Parkhurst, phone: 313-865-7073 and 313-965-8117 (The Hunger Action Coalition),
www.geocites.com/detroitag and www.boggscenter.org/gardens.htm
Detroit Summer This initiative is actively involved in virtually every agricultural activity in
Detroit; it invites groups from both inside and outside of Detroit to work on projects. Students
from the University of Michigan, Antioch, Santa Cruz, Pomona and others come throughout thesummer. Projects and programming include: turning vacant lots into gardens, community spacerenovation, public art parks/public murals, park rejuvenation, community bike recycling, progressive hip-hop events, dialogs and workshops, community revisioning, poetry workshops,
renovating abandoned houses. Some programs developed within Detroit Summer before
becoming independent organizations.
contact: Detroit Summer Office, 4605 Cass Avenue, Detroit, MI 48201, phone: 313-832-2956,
detroitsummer@hotmail.com, www.geocities.com/detroitsummer
Earth Works Garden The project started in 1999 as a partnership between the Capuchin Soup
Kitchen and Gleaners Community Food Bank. The garden started as a small plot of land in the
inner city of Detroit and has grown to 3/4 of an acre on three plots near the Meldrum Street
Soup Kitchen. Complete with a hoop-style hothouse to extend the growing season, Earth Works’
primary goal is to educate Detroit area school children in science, nutrition and biodiversity as
related to organic agriculture. The project also yields fresh produce to benefit such programs as
W.I.C and the Soup Kitchen’s daily meals.
contact: Rick Samyn c/o Capuchin Soup Kitchen, 1820 Mt. Elliott, Detroit, MI 48207, phone:313-579-2100 ext. 211, www.earth-works.org
The Empowerment Zone This federal program, started by the Clinton administration in 1994,
has provided funds to blighted inner city neighborhoods. The Detroit Empowerment Zone, oneof the most successful in the U.S., directs these funds to local non-profits. Different urban areas
are targeted for federally supported urban revitalization, designed to create jobs, strengthenfamilies and rebuild neighborhoods. www.detez.com
Farm-a-Lot Founded under Mayor Coleman Young in the 1970’s, the program was supposed
to support the city’s 4,000 to 5,000 gardens and to establish urban agriculture on vacant lots.
In the beginning, there was support from the Ford Motor Company and Michigan Consolidated
Energy, who donated goods. Persistent budget shortages and lack of support from the city council threaten the program’s continued existence. Today, it mainly offers workshops at schools andcommunity groups.
contact: Mrs. Dent, The City of Detroit, Recreation Department, phone: 313-578-7524 or
313-935-3337
Gardening Angels Also known as Elder 4-H’ers. These women and men have created some of
the finest gardens in the city. Mrs. Clark and Mrs. Elam are examples of the Gardening Angels(see section on D.A.N.). Gerald Hairston was a motivating member of the Gardening Angels formany years. He was instrumental in the creation of the Genesis Garden.
The Boggs Center “Our aim is to help grass-roots activists develop themselves into visionary
leaders and critical thinkers who can devise proactive strategies for rebuilding, redefining andrespiriting our cities and rural communities from the ground up, demystify leadership, andDETROIT / Initiatives and Projects

III | 117

demonstrate the power of ideas in changing ourselves and our reality.” (James and Grace Lee
Boggs). The Boggs Center has been a central think tank of ideas. It is a space where people canattend meetings, discuss, plan, brainstorm and network.
contact: 3061 Field St., Detroit, MI 48214, phone: 313-923-0797 and 313-282-6983,
www.boggscenter.org
The Foundation for Agricultural Resources in Michigan (F.A.R.M.) is a non-profit educationalorganization committed to creating opportunities for youths, families and communities to experience, appreciate and enrich the values of agriculture and of natural resources. John Gruchalaand Tris Richardson can be seen almost daily out on the Farm, restoring and remodeling an old
auto shop, or working in the field. Detroit Summer volunteers spend hours a day during thesummer weeding and cultivating. F.A.R.M. is also in a ethnically diverse neighborhood and is
one of the epicenters of action in Detroit.
contact 1: John Gruchala, Parkhurst 161W, Detroit, MI 48203, phone: 313-867-1244,
jsgbase@aol.com
contact 2: Tris Richardson, Parkhurst 200W, Detroit, MI 48203, phone: 313-867-0319,
sirtmyson@aol.com
The Greening of Detroit is one of the more stable and established non-profits on the agriculturescene. The Greening has planted over 35,000 trees in Detroit since its founding in 1989 by
Elizabeth Gordon Sachs. “The Greening of Detroit exists to improve the quality of life in Detroit
by guiding and inspiring the reforestation of Detroit’s neighborhoods, boulevards and parks
through tree planting projects and educational programs.” (The Greening of Detroit)
Trumbullplex, located at Trumbull and Willis, is a cooperative living space that serves as ahome, a theatre, a meeting space, an art gallery, and a temporary residence for travelingactivists. Residents live in three houses owned by the project, and all are actively involved incommunity projects. “We support other projects which share our goals of dismantling racism,sexism, homophobia and the oppression of poor people through activities in our theater andhousing collective. Through consensus decision-making and full participation in carrying out ourdecisions, we create the circumstances and expectations for collective empowerment.”(Trumbullplex).
contact: Jesse Waters, 4210 Trumbull, Detroit MI, phone: 313-832-7952--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------WEB LINKS
www.ddc.com/blightbusters Motor City Blight Busters is a grass-root initiative that activates therevitalization of Detroit. Different kind of events/projects concentrate on the stabilization of housing, on the cleaning-up and renovation of vacant buildings, and onyouth education. A main focus
lies in coalition building.
www.detroitcommunity.org Future Leaders (2003) is an associated projects of the Detroit
Community Initiative. DCI collaborates with other groups to design and implement a comprehensive series of programs in such fields as neighborhood economic restoration, family resource
referral assistance, youth employment/leadership development and community education.
www.detroitsynergy.org is a “ … group of Detroit-area residents who share a vision for Detroit
and believe there are thousands of other people who, if given the opportunity, could bring theirvision of Detroit alive and awaken the potential of one of the world’s most misunderstood
metropolises.” (web-site)

DETROIT / Initiatives and Projects

III | 118www.detroityes.com Internet-based forums that invite people to participate in discussions about“all things” in Detroit. A more specific forum is focused on Northern Soul and Detroit Soul
www.furnacedetroit.com The Furnace is a Detroit-based literary journal published by the Corktown Press. It includes fiction, non-fiction, poetry, photography, intended to illuminate and engage
local culture, issues and talents.
www.heidelberg.org Founded by Tyree Guyton in 1986, the Heidelberg Project “ … develops
innovative ways to use art as a catalyst to halt the decline of the East Side neighborhood by preserving its homes, discouraging crime and offering new hope to its residents.” (web-site)www.newdetroit.org New Detroit Inc. is a private non-profit organization formed in response to
the civil unrest of 1967. It focuses on interactions between and coalitions of business, civic,
grass-roots, and religious communities. Various activities concentrate on economic equity, racial
justice and cultural collaboration, and youth development.
www.thedetroiter.com An internet-based interactive platform with monthly features and daily
updates, mainly about theater, art, and culture, as well as everyday life.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 119--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BIBLIOGRAPHY-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Robert A. Beauregard, Voices of Decline The Postwar Fate of US Cities, Oxford and Cambridge/
Massachusetts 1993
Based solely on statements by participants and observers--meaning texts by contemporaries innewspapers and magazines and quasi-official documents--the author depicts the American consciousness of urban decline. He is also concerned with the influence of often pessimistic andmelancholy mental constructs on the reality of urban decline in the U.S.A. Eight central chapters
dealing with the period between ca. 1900 to 1990 are framed by four additional chapters that
explain and depict the backdrop of ‘voices of decline,’ shaped by urbanistics and discourse theory.
Barry Bluestone and Bennett Harrison, The Deindustrialization of America Plant Closings, Community Abandonment, and the Dismantling of Basic Industry, Basic Books, Inc., New York 1982
The 1970s and 1980s were full of newscasts about plant shutdowns, about thousands jobs disappearing from communities, or about the frustration of workers unable to find full-time jobs orearn enough to support their families. In four parts, the book examines the contradiction between
capitalism and the community, the extent and consequences of deindustrialization, the Why andHow of the process of deindustrialization, and strategies to deal with its symptoms.
Melba Joyce Boyd and M.L. Liebler (eds.), Detroit Abandon Automobile, Detroit 2001
The book jacket shows a demolished car against the backdrop of a factory; beneath them is thetitle, an imperative. A New York critic says the young literature from the jungle of Detroit works
with such ‘resistance’ and such ‘humanness.’ Many of the authors, supported by Wayne State
University, come from the confident, combative segments of the working class; their families areoften of Hispanic or Slavic descent.
John J. Bukowczyk (et al. eds.), Detroit Images Photographs of the Renaissance City, Detroit 1989
The subtitle plays ironically with the idea of a Renaissance city--from which Detroit is far
removed--while alluding to the Renaissance Center, an office complex built in 1977 that houses the headquarters of General Motors. The photos, however, do not seek the rebirth of the cityin the sites of huge investment, but in everyday life on Michigan Avenue or in Tiger Stadiumand in the potential of abandoned areas and buildings. Two essays introduce the 19 topics andsites: one deals with the economic and political background of the state Detroit finds itself in,another with documentary photography of this city.
Robert E. Conot, American Odyssey A History of a Great City, Detroit 1986
With more than 700 pages, this is a voluminous, epic study. Originally published in 1974, it
deals with the rise and fall of the city of Detroit in the 20th century. The author places special
importance on depicting the interplay between technological and societal changes.
Georgia Daskalakis (et al. eds.), Stalking Detroit, Barcelona 2001
The title suggests that the editors want to sneak up on Detroit and hunt it down, while themselves,in turn, feeling pursued by the city. They remind cineastes of Andrej Tarkovsky’s film Stalker;
Detroit is headed for the fate of the ‘Zone.’ This multi-disciplinary anthology avoids attempting tosolve problems. The pictures by Spanish photographers Jordi Bernadó and Mònica Roselló arefollowed by contributions on the cultural, rather than touristic, appropriation of the ruins; on theinfluence of automobilism on urban development; and on Fordist and post-Fordist urbanism.

DETROIT / Bibliography

III | 120

Jerry Herron, After Culture: Detroit and the Humiliation of History, Wayne State University Press,
Detroit, MI 1993
“This is a book about Detroit; it is also, unavoidably, a book about representation because Detroit
is the most representative city in America. Detroit used to stand for success, and now it stands
for failure. In this sense, the city is not just a physical location; it is the place where bad times
get sent to make them belong to somebody else … Each essay that follows I intend as just that,literally--an attempt to understand the production of middle-class culture by essaying what has
happened in Detroit.” (Reprint from: Jerry Herron, After-culture: Detroit and the Humiliation ofHistory, pp. 9–10. © 1993. Wayne State University Press, with permission of Wayne State
University Press)
John A. Jakle and David Wilson, Derelict Landscapes The Wasting of America’s Built Environment,
Savage/Maryland 1992
The authors believe that Americans tend to regard neglected or abandoned architectural surroundings as a natural phenomenon, instead of viewing them as societally produced. They must
therefore underscore that the ruin or destruction of urban or rural areas since the early 1970s
has been primarily the result of unequal economic development, accepted and even promoted
by policy and culture alike. The ‘crime’ of the waste and decay of space is always based on a‘structuration.’ This term refers to the balance between active and passive, between room tomaneuver and constraints in the individual’s every decision.
Robert H. Mast (ed.), Detroit Lives, Philadelphia 1994
In the tradition of ‘oral history,’ this book narrates the tale of a city that has long struggled forsurvival. Interviews with participants in and observers of events since the 1930s illuminate thestruggle for equality and freedom among the ranks of workers, women, and Afro-Americans.
The aim in this struggle, continuing into the 1990s, has repeatedly been to retain educational
and training opportunities as well as other social services.
Michael Moore, Downsize This! Random Threats from an Unarmed American, Crown Publishers,Inc., 1996
“Moore, whose documentary film Roger & Me and television series TV Nation have a strong
cult following, takes on corporations, politicians and Americana in general in a mordant satirethat will leave both conservatives and liberals reeling with embarrassment. Downsize this!,
Moore’s first book, tears into corporations and labor unions alike. He scrutinizes the President,
Bob Dole, NAFTA, Cuban refugees and Pat Buchanan. A scathing, funny book packed with facts.”(©1996 Reed Business Information, Inc.)
Dan Sicko, Techno Rebels The Renegades of Electronic Funk, New York 1999
As an expert in the field, based on his own experiences, the author depicts the development ofTechno Music from its beginnings in Detroit in the late 1970s, to the leap to Rave Parties in
Britain of the 1980s, and finally to the worldwide success of the 1990s. Techno spans Chicago
House to Midwestern Funk and has ethnic as well as cultural implications. The author says thatTechno Music is and remains an “underground sound” in the struggle with a music industry
dominated by rock and pop. The volume closes with a discography comprising more than threehundred titles.
Robert Sinclair and Bryan Thompson, Detroit An Anatomy of Social Change, Detroit 1977
This sociological study focuses on the ‘System Detroit,’ with its six spatial units distributed
between an ‘Inner City’ and a ‘Metropolitan Area.’ It shows the dichotomy between a positive
factor, diversity, and a negative one, division. The diversification of spaces and strata has led toDETROIT / Bibliography

III | 121

societal instability, exclusiveness, and segregation in the relations among the six spatial units.
These tendencies, however, are countered by the competencies of five million residents ofextremely various descent.
Camilo José Vergara, American Ruins, New York 1999
In 1977, the photographer began amassing his New American Ghetto Archive. At certain intervals, he documents spaces and buildings characterized by abandonment and decay, but sometimes also by pragmatic resuscitation or aesthetic re-appropriation. The volume shows the desolation and devastation of areas in New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, and Los
Angeles. Views of train stations and city halls, factories and theaters, banks and villas, neonsigns and billboards--all in a state of decay--are the material of the growing photographic
archive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 122--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FILMOGRAPHY
Antje Ehmann and Michael Baute-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Grosse Pointe Blank, Director: George Armitage, U.S.A. 1997
Satirical killer movie filmed primarily in L.A., but still interesting as a depiction of (Detroit) suburbia.
Exit Wounds, Director: Andrzej Bartkowiak, U.S.A. 2001, 98 min.
A bad film that cannot be recommended, except possibly for specialized studies: a cop is transferred to the worst district of Detroit. And then the mindless action begins.
Beverly Hills Cop, Director: Martin Brest, U.S.A. 1984
Vehicle for star Eddie Murphy. In Detroit, he arrests street-wise drug dealers in broken-down
dead ends. Later he investigates on his own in Beverly Hills. The series (Beverly Hills Cop 2
and 3 followed in rapid succession) uses the contrast between the crime city and the glamour
city as the motor of its depiction.
Detroit Come Back City, Director: Walter de Bruijn, U.S.A./NL 1998, 48 min.
Television feature about Detroit and its problems as a shrinking city. Very vivid.
Narc, Director: Joe Carnahan, U.S.A./CAN 2002, 105 min.
One more Detroit cop story.
The Sprawling of America, Director: Christopher M. Cook, 2 parts, U.S.A. 2001, total 120 min.
A documentary TV film (in two parts) on the social and economic background of the decline of acity. It won many prizes in the U.S.A. The first part, Inner City Blues, treats Detroit as a case study.
Polish Wedding, Director: Theresa Connoly, U.S.A. 1998
Film about Polish immigrants in Hamtramck, a district of Detroit.
Tucker, the Man and His Dreams, Director: Francis Ford Coppola, U.S.A. 1988
Capraesque historical film (1940s) about an automobile aficionado.
Mr. Mom, Director: Stan Dragoti, U.S.A. 1983
Plays in Detroit, but was not filmed there. Michael Keaton loses his job in the automobile industry
and becomes a house-husband--‘Mr. Mom.’ Comedy, like a chamber play.
Forgotten Voices, Borderline: The Story of 8 Mile, The Hudson’s Building, Director: Gary
Glaser, U.S.A. 1995–1997
These three Detroit documentary films can be downloaded from the net. We (Shrinking Cities,
Office Philipp Oswalt) have not yet viewed them, but plan to acquire them.
Gridlock’d, Director: Vondie Curtis Hall, U.S.A. 1996
Biographical film on the Detroit native, rapper Tupac Shakur; but the film was made entirely in
Los Angeles. Interesting for its image of pop culture, here Hip Hop.
Detroit Devil’s Night, Director: Keith Hanley, U.S.A. 1994, 60 min.
A documentary about Detroit’s ‘Devil’s Night.’ A camera team drives to all the fires and films thework of the fire department. Fantastic pictorial material.

DETROIT / Filmography

III | 123

8 Mile, Director: Curtis Hanson, U.S.A. 2002, 106 min.
This film about rapper Eminem is well-known; the relevance to Detroit is obvious.
Taking Back Detroit, Director: Stephan Lighthill, U.S.A. 1980, 55 min.
Documentary film about politics in times of deep economic crisis in Detroit.
Strange Früt: Destroy All Monsters, Director: Cary Loren, U.S.A.
This video collects material from interviews with, among other people, the rock promoter ‘Uncle’
Russ Gibb, R & B musician Andre Williams, underground radio-DJ Dave Dixon, and other Detroit
archive material. The soundtrack is from Destroy all Monsters.
Albert Kahn—Architekt der Moderne, Director: Dieter Marcello, D 1993, 80 min.
Actually a film for those interested in architecture. Not always in good taste, but interesting.
Albert Kahn lived and worked in Detroit, too, and shows some footage of the city.
Renaissance Man, Director: Penny Marshall, U.S.A. 1994
Contains an opening sequence with realistic establishing shots of Detroit at the time of filming.
A feature film about “borderline army recruits ennobled by their exposure to William
Shakespeare.” With Danny de Vito and Mark Wahlberg.
Detroit 9000, Director: Arthur Marks, U.S.A. 1971, 106 min.
A blaxploitation movie full of car chases that provides a precise picture of Detroit. As early as 1971,
it already looks as if no trains run here and no factory is in operation anymore. The ad campaign
at the time claimed: “It’s the murder capital of the world--Motortown, where the honkies are theminority race!” Rediscovered by Quentin Tarantino, who used sequences from it in Jackie Brown.
The Purple Gang, Director: Frank McDonald, U.S.A. 1960, 85 min.
A rather mediocre cops-and-robbers film. We (Shrinking Cities, Office Philipp Oswalt) have notyet checked out its relevance to Detroit.
Roger and me, Director: Michael Moore, U.S.A. 1989, 90 min.
Moore’s classic is a genuine shrinking city film. It focuses exclusively on this problematic.
The Crow, Director: Alex Proyas, U.S.A. 1994, 120 min.
The young rock musician Eric Draven (Brandon Lee) and his fiancé are brutally murdered bya gang. One year later, Eric, guided by a crow, returns to the earth to take revenge on the perpetrators. The film is supposed to play in Detroit, but the constant rain and gothic gloom rendereverything unrecognizable.
RoboCop, Director: Paul Verhoeven, U.S.A. 1987, 103 min.
RoboCop 2, Director: Irvin Kershner, U.S.A. 1990, 118 min.
RoboCop 3, Director: Fred Dekker, U.S.A. 1993, 105 min.
All RoboCop films play in a Detroit of the near future. A corporation wants to privatize the police.
Its police-robot prototype, released before testing is complete, wreaks havoc, but, finally equippedwith humane values, becomes a rescuer. A treatment of de-industrialization and automation thatworks with extreme exaggerations.
Crimewave, Director: Sam Raimi, U.S.A. 1985
Cartoonish comedy (script: Joel and Ethan Coen) about exterminators who become hired killers.
The movie exploits Detroit’s image as a crime city.

DETROIT / Filmography

III | 124

Detroit Rock City, Director: Adam Rifkin, U.S.A. 1999, 91 min.
Sounds good, but is a very bad film that could play anywhere and nowhere. Need not be considered.
Scarecrow, Director: Jerry Schatzberg, U.S.A. 1973
A film with Al Pacino and Gene Hackman. Won a prize for directing in Cannes. Hackman as adrifter who takes a job in a car wash, where he meets Pacino. They become friends.
Blue Collar, Director: Paul Schrader, U.S.A. 1978
Everyday routine on the assembly line, a case of corruption in the trade union. Stringent,straight, realistically-staged drama about the end of the workers’ movement. Much of it wasfilmed in Detroit.
True Romance, Director: Tony Scott, U.S.A. 1993
Screenplay by Quentin Tarantino. Postmodern road movie about small-time crooks. It begins in
Detroit and ends in California. “The Detroit scenes encouraged the notion that the city was indeed
a rotting hulk full of people with bad tempers and long memories.”
Tiger Town, Director: Alan Shapiro, U.S.A. 1983
One of the many baseball films about the ‘Detroit Tigers,’ with Roy Scheider as an aging baseball star. A television production, very difficult to obtain, and probably not especially relevant tothe site.
Out of Sight, Director: Steven Soderbergh, U.S.A. 1998
Crime comedy based on a story by Elmore Leonard, with George Clooney and Jennifer Lopez.
Master thief Clooney escapes from prison and has to carry out his next coup with low criminals
from Detroit.
Collision Course, Director: Lewis Teague, U.S.A. 1987, 96 min.
A film--so warns Movie Guide--that one already forgets while watching it.
Hoffa, Director: Danny de Vito, U.S.A. 1992
Biographical film about union boss Jimmy Hoffa, played by Sylvester Stallone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 125

AUTHORS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------GRACE LEE BOGGS Ph.D., activist and writer
Detroit, co-founder of The Boggs Center to Nurture Community Leadership,
glbg@sbcglobal.net
JAMES BOGGS (1919–1993), activist and writer
Detroit, Author of The American Revolution: Pages from a Negro Worker’s Notebook, 1963
JASON BOOZA, geographic information specialist
Wayne State University, Center for Urban Studies, j.booza@wayne.edu
MITCH COPE, artist and independent curator
Detroit, mcope31@comcast.net
ROBERT FISHMAN, Prof., Dr.
University of Michigan, A. Alfred Taubman College of Architecture and
Urban Planning, fishmanr@umich.edu
JOHN GALLAGHER, journalist, architecture critic, and author
Detroit Free Press, gallagher@freepress.com
CELESTE HEADLEE, reporter
WDET-FM 101.9, Detroit Public Radio, a service of the Wayne State University,
cheadlee@wdetfm.org
JERRY HERRON, Ph.D., Prof. of English and American Studies
Wayne State University, Director, WSU Honors Program, jerry.herron@wayne.edu
DAN HOFFMAN, Prof., Architect
Arizona State University, College of Architecture and Environmental Design,daniel.hoffman@asu.edu
JOE KERR, Prof., art and architectural historianRoyal College of Art, Head of the Department of Critical and Hostorical Studies, j.kerr@rca.ac.uk
KURT METZGER, research director
Wayne State University, Center for Urban Studies, kurt.metzger@wayne.edu
TONI MOCERI, ethnographer
Detroit, tonimoceri@hotmail.com
KYONG PARK, artist
Detroit / New York, director of the International Center For Urban Ecology and a curator of the
project Shrinking Cities, icue.park@verizon.net
DAN SICKO, music critic and author
Detroit, dan@techno-rebels.com

DETROIT / Authors

III | 126

JUNE MANNING THOMAS Ph.D., FAICP, Prof.
Michigan State University, Urban and Regional Planning Program, thomasj@msu.edu
CHARLES WALDHEIM, University of Toronto
Director of Landscape Architecture Program and Associate Professor, Faculty of Architecture,
Landscape and Design, charles.waldheim@utoronto.ca---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III | 127

WORKING PAPERS———————————————————————-----------------------------------------------------------————I
Ivanovo (Eng./Germ. — Februar 2004)
I
Ivanovo (Russ. — Februar 2004)
II
Manchester/Liverpool (March 2004)
III
Detroit (March 2004)
IV
Halle/Leipzig (Februar 2004)
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX

Archive of Local Initiatives
Atlas of Shrinkage / Global Study
City Portraits
Shrinking City Music
Shrinking City Film

WORKING PAPERS is a series of print-on-demand publications from Shrinking Cities designed to supplement the
project’s book publications. It provides public access to studies, research, and discussion carried out for the project.
These publications are available as hard copy at the project’s exhibitions and events and as pdf documents from thehomepage www.shrinkingcities.com. Individual issues will be updated as needed and will then appear in a revisedand expanded edition. These contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial staff. Data and visual
representations are published without guarantee; the authors are responsible for the accuracy of the information.
Articles, tables, and visual representations may not be reprinted without written permission from the editor.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Colophon:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Detroit--No.III of the series WORKING PAPERS of the project Shrinking Cities.
©/Editor: Philipp Oswalt. Editing: Doreen Mende. Graphic design: Tanja Wesse. Berlin, march 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPENDIX: PHOTOGRAPHS DETROIT REGION--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Photo 1: Detroit Suburbs from the air

Photo 2: Downtown Detroit

Photo 3: Downtown Detroit

Photo 4: abandoned house in the inner city

Photo 5: abandoned house in the inner city

Photo 6: overgrown properties

Photo 7: burnt out houses in the inner city

Photo 8: closed public library (Highland Park)

Photo 9: derelict land in the inner city

Photo 10: derelict land in the inner city

Photo 11: New “suburban” developments near city centre

Photo 12: vacant building of Detroit’s central station

Photo 13: derelict gas station

Photo 14: urban agriculture in inner city

Photo 15: urban agriculture in inner city

Photo 16: Renaissance Center, downtown

Photo 17: Renaissance Center, downtown
All photographs by Philipp Oswalt.