Magic Lands: Western Cityscapes and American Culture After 1940

Findlay describes Western cities by pointing out among other things that they, having grown most of their growth since World War II during the age of the automobile, are not set in structure like the ones in the East. What he means is that because these cities were built from smaller beginnings much more recently their structure is a reflection of new trends. The West has a much higher proportion of its population in urban areas than other parts of the country. The Great Basin not being a hub of agriculture this is easy to see. When you drive out of Phoenix, once you leave the urban sprawl there is very little else until you reach the next city. Findlay cites Phoenix as an example of a city that was developed to cater to the automobile by permitting low density developments. In fact he suggests that local leaders believe that the low density neighborhood lifestyle has attracted a lot of people to Phoenix and allowed it to grow. Phoenix allowed multiple urban centers to flourish rather than forcing development into a central business district. Migrants (domestic) were and are attracted to the comfortable suburban low density life. This is in stark contrast to the “smart growth” and new urbanism advocates who want a return to high density cities based on mass transit and “walkability” rather than automobile based communities. Findlay spends most of the book discussing several examples of such centers which he labels magic kingdoms which not surprisingly refers to Disneyland which is one of the centers studied. The others are Stanford Industrial Park, Sun City, and the Seattle Center. Findlay explains that: “[These centers] were among the earliest and boldest exemplars of the new urban form in their respective metropolitan areas. They changed the look of cities, both by contributing landmarks to the urban scene and by providing models for other developments. They represented achievements in the realm of culture as well as contributions to a sense of community. “ In other words it is the cultural contributions of these centers that is the most significant asset. For examples with respect to Seattle Center, it is a fairgrounds with a monorail going to it from nearby Downtown Seattle and it is home of the Space Needle, which as well as know is Seattle's most famous landmark. That tower has become the symbol for Seattle. Seattle Center was built for the 1962 World's Fair but unlike many other such facilities a lot of remains today. Findlay uses as an example that Seattle Center does not generate a profit to the city, but it has come to define it and is a cultural asset to Seattle much like the Eiffel Tower and Arc de Triomphe is to Paris. Findlay cites criticisms of San Jose being described as an urban mess by scholars who hold onto a Nineteenth Century Eastern based idea of what a city should be. He gives a number of examples of how cultural and political leaders in the West including architect Richard Neutra have stated that the East cannot be used as a model for this part of the country. Urban planners and the politicians who listen to them have a distinctly Eastern bias. Findlay argues that these Western cities were built more by choice and design than the Eastern historical cities. The migrants many of whom left Eastern cities dreaming of a Western lifestyle came wanting these low density cities. He cites the exmaple of the contrast between San Francisco, which is an Eastern style city and Los Angeles a Western style one. Actually, just compare San Francisco with nearby (and ironically larger) San Jose and you will see the same contrast. The author not only argues that the Western lifestyle has attracted migrants, he says that the migrants are much more motivated by this than by money. Also mentioned is how a love for nature attracted many migrants to the West. The ability to ski and go to the beach on the same day is a draw to Southern California. This “outdoorsy” mentality can be credited for the rise of the environmental movement in California making that state a leader in that area. Another example is that white flight is not so much a problem in the West as in the East. Findlay cites a migrant who left the city in Detroit only to move to a suburban area in Phoenix rather than in Michigan. Concepts such as white flight are Eastern in nature and do not adequately account for most of the West. The best thing about this book is that it raises the self esteem of the entire West. We no longer have to define ourselves in terms of the East. The Eastern lenses can be tossed out and our West is the new normal. These Magic Lands are urban centers created by design rather than by historical accident like in the East. The cities of the West represent a new level of human achievement in that our urban conglomorations are designed based on our needs and desires rather than by the patterns of settlement 100 or 200 years ago.

In Magic Lands John M. Findlay argues that in twentieth century planned communities arose across America to offer alternatives to urbanization. Finlay examines four case studies: California's Disneyland; Silicon Valley; Arizona's Sun City; and the Seattle World's Fair. These "magic lands" were sources of recreation, inspiration and optimism for the rest of the country.Magic Lands begins with a look at the West's rapid growth at mid-century. Findlay credits the military spending of World War II and a post-war boom driven by the G.I. Bill for increasing populations and changing landscapes. New industries--such as Hewlett-Packard in Silicon Valley and Boeing in Seattle--aided this growth by driving the west to new economic heights. With new jobs came an increase in demand for housing and shopping plazas. The result was the "horizontal" urban community, one which sprawled outside of the urban center creating sprawl. Reacting to this eastern-style growth, westerners escaped to planned communities for amusement and alternatives to urban lifestyles.The alternative communal visions presented in Magic Lands varied drastically. Walt Disney envisioned Disneyland both as family entertainment and as his example as "the city of tomorrow". Stanford built an industrial center that relied on the surrounding natural geography and climate to draw its workforce. Sun City transformed the natural landscape to provide an "ideal" active retirement community. Seattle rehabilitated a run down neighborhood to house it's 1962 world's fair. In each case, changes in these areas transformed their adjacent communities geographically, economically, and culturally.The reasons for transforming these landscapes was constant, but the methods by which these Magic Lands were constructed varied drastically. Disneyland was built under the close supervision of Walt Disney, who envisioned his planned community as an example for the entire country, but Stanford's Industrial Park (i.e. Silicon Valley) never had a master plan--simply a goal: to build a leading high tech industrial center. In the case of Sun City, a drive for profit (and little else) led to the construction of this rich and green retirement community in the Arizona desert. Seattle's World Fair aimed to revitalize its downtown district--it ultimately failed. In each case, the results of these communities influenced national ideas on architecture and urban landscapes.While Magic Lands offers a compelling look at these four planned communities, their similarities are tenuous at best. Comparisons of Disneyland to the Seattle World's Fair are sometimes a stretch, while Sun City shares little in common with Seattle. These are vastly different and unique communities. More compelling is Findlay's final chapter that shows the impacts of these communities today in places like Irving and Los Angeles. These planned communities had vast cultural and environmental impacts, and these topics could be covered more in depth. These are minor criticisms. Magic Lands is an insightful read that will both appeal to scholars and lay-readers interested in urban development and the growth of the American West.

I was assigned this book as one of my textbooks for a "History of the West" classes I'm taking. I've read well over 20 "textbooks" in the last couple of years of college and I can say with confidense that this is easily the worst I've ever read. Part of the problem is that so much of it isn't really relevant to the class, but that's not the fault of the author. However, the book is so poorly edited and poorly written that much is it is unreadable. Or at least it was to me and some other people in my class. It's as if the author collected a huge amount of information about the cities featured in this book and then decided that he was going to include every last bit of info in this book no matter how overly cluttered it makes the book. The way this book just rambles on and on, spewing unorganized facts and details makes it a real snoozefest. I struggled to stay awake through much of it and I ended up just skimming/skipping over entire paragraphs (and sometimes complete pages) just to get through it.While I think that the author was somewhat overly optomistic with the accuracy of some of the conclusions he made, I actually did find some of the information interesting and I did learn from it. But there was so much unnecessary detail and it was so poorly organized and edited that it drowned out the positive parts. The professor for the class I'm taking is the worst I've had in almost two years and his decision to include this book in this class just confims it.