S0808 Sinking and Shrinking Cities: New Orleans and Venice in Comparison
,
Both Venice and New Orleans are shrinking and sinking cities. Both are caught in a dialectic between the ecology and human interventions. The two choices appear: protecting the city and hurting the ecology or protecting the ecology and endangering the city. Both cities were founded in coastal eco-systems that have the highest bio-service values in the world. Both cities have or had harbors that serviced an enormous hinterland. Both cities have shrinking populations also due to deindustrialization and loss of manufactures. In terms of demographics and economics both cities belong to the losers of globalization. Both cities try to compensate their losses with tourism, convention centers, casinos and universities.
Venice is much older and has acquired more experience in finding a balance between anthropogenic interventions and ecological protection. In New Orleans the ecological problems have emerged after massive human interventions in the last 100 years with a strong increase after WWII. Hence the ecological consequences of such human interventions are more dramatic there than in the Veneto. The wetlands around New Orleans are vanishing at a much faster pace than in the Lagoon. This is partly due to the port of New Orleans which is one of the largest of the US. A combination of salination, shipping and oil industry has had a fateful impact on the wetlands. The port of Venice on the other hand was much reduced due to ecological concerns.
Historically Venice began as a multicultural metropolis that became over time demographically homogeneous. Yet contemporary Venice is becoming ethnically diverse again, particularly at the cheap labor end and in domestic services.
New Orleans, on the other hand, is marked by ethnic and racial divisions that are both historically old and socially deep. However, the most important difference is the following: the world heritage value of Venice is beyond any doubt. Europeans and Americans are active in the movement to save Venice. The world heritage value of New Orleans is in serious doubt, surprisingly more at home than abroad. Many prominent Americans have suggested giving up parts of the city (religious leaders in America saw hurricane Katrina as God’s punishment for a sinful city.) Hence the cultural heritage of New Orleans remains largely intangible, even to the American public. Most of it belongs to the (black) popular arts and therefore lacks legitimation or visibility. Much of the cultural capital of the city is buried in a complex racialized history, which needs to be rescued from oblivion, for it treasures those sedimentations, which give New Orleans its spectacular urban aura. Venice, on the other hand, exactly because of such world attention to preservation, is torn between being one of the centers of a wider metropolitan area and being a tourist citadel in the middle of a watery natural park. It is controversial whether it is the first or the second option the best to achieve preservation. In a series of comparative case studies we will bring out the similarities and differences in the cultures and ecologies of these remarkable cities.
Venice is much older and has acquired more experience in finding a balance between anthropogenic interventions and ecological protection. In New Orleans the ecological problems have emerged after massive human interventions in the last 100 years with a strong increase after WWII. Hence the ecological consequences of such human interventions are more dramatic there than in the Veneto. The wetlands around New Orleans are vanishing at a much faster pace than in the Lagoon. This is partly due to the port of New Orleans which is one of the largest of the US. A combination of salination, shipping and oil industry has had a fateful impact on the wetlands. The port of Venice on the other hand was much reduced due to ecological concerns.
Historically Venice began as a multicultural metropolis that became over time demographically homogeneous. Yet contemporary Venice is becoming ethnically diverse again, particularly at the cheap labor end and in domestic services.
New Orleans, on the other hand, is marked by ethnic and racial divisions that are both historically old and socially deep. However, the most important difference is the following: the world heritage value of Venice is beyond any doubt. Europeans and Americans are active in the movement to save Venice. The world heritage value of New Orleans is in serious doubt, surprisingly more at home than abroad. Many prominent Americans have suggested giving up parts of the city (religious leaders in America saw hurricane Katrina as God’s punishment for a sinful city.) Hence the cultural heritage of New Orleans remains largely intangible, even to the American public. Most of it belongs to the (black) popular arts and therefore lacks legitimation or visibility. Much of the cultural capital of the city is buried in a complex racialized history, which needs to be rescued from oblivion, for it treasures those sedimentations, which give New Orleans its spectacular urban aura. Venice, on the other hand, exactly because of such world attention to preservation, is torn between being one of the centers of a wider metropolitan area and being a tourist citadel in the middle of a watery natural park. It is controversial whether it is the first or the second option the best to achieve preservation. In a series of comparative case studies we will bring out the similarities and differences in the cultures and ecologies of these remarkable cities.
Readings
Evaluation
Syllabus
Evaluation
Syllabus