Urban Theory Final Exam: Choose Three Of The Five Questions ✓ Solved

Urban Theory Final Exam: Choose THREE of the five questions

Be sure to respond to the entire question and back up your response with descriptive examples from the texts. You may use quotes sparingly; put responses in your own words. Answer three of the following questions:

Question 1 (Jane Jacobs): For a city to be truly vital, Jacobs suggests it needs to be diverse. What criteria (see ch. 7) did Jacobs suggest is needed to create urban diversity? Explain why these criteria are important.

Question 2 (Sharon Zukin): What is the cycle of displacement as laid out by Sharon Zukin? Describe the change from "authentic" working-class neighborhoods, to transitional communities, to high‑income communities, and the signs of these phases.

Question 3 (Setha Low): Describe two of the following terms—social splitting, purified living, racialization—first defining them and then explaining how they apply to the psychology of someone living in a largely homogenous, gated community; use one example from the text.

Question 4 (Naomi Klein): What does she mean by "shock" and how does it relate to "disaster capitalism" or the "disaster industry"? Define disaster capitalism and explain what she finds problematic for cities, using an example.

Question 5 (Comparative): What parallels exist between the urban theories of Mike Davis, Sharon Zukin, and Naomi Klein? Identify overlaps in their views of urban development and explain how those approaches might impact different groups of people, with an example from each text.

Paper For Above Instructions

Answer to Question 1 — Jane Jacobs: Criteria for Urban Diversity

Jane Jacobs argues that vibrant urban diversity depends on a set of interlocking physical and social conditions that create mixed uses, active streets, and resilient neighborhoods (Jacobs, 1961). Key criteria from her discussion include: short blocks that encourage pedestrian movement and multiple routes; mixed primary uses (residential, commercial, institutional) so streets remain active at different times; a varied age and condition of buildings to provide affordable spaces for different functions and economic levels; a dense concentration of people to sustain street life and services; and a balance of functions and population that allows informal supervision or "eyes on the street" for safety (Jacobs, 1961). Each criterion matters because together they produce continual contact, economic opportunity, and informal social control: short blocks and mixed uses keep people moving and encountering one another, mixed building ages enable incremental adaptation and affordability, and density sustains shops and services (Jacobs, 1961). Without these elements, urban space becomes mono-functional, sparsely used, and easier to redesign in ways that displace existing social networks. Jacobs’ prescription is as much about preserving social networks and economies as it is about preserving physical forms—diversity is produced by urban form that encourages encounter, exchange, and multiple scales of use (Jacobs, 1961).

Answer to Question 2 — Sharon Zukin: The Cycle of Displacement

Sharon Zukin frames gentrification as a discernible cycle that transforms "authentic" working-class neighborhoods into sanitized, high‑income spaces through sequential economic and cultural shifts (Zukin, 2010). The cycle typically begins with an "authentic" neighborhood characterized by affordable housing, small-scale local businesses, and social diversity. The next phase is transitional: artists, students, and other pioneers move in attracted by affordability and character; new cultural entrepreneurs and boutique businesses appear; media and real estate narratives begin to brand the area as desirable. Signs of transition include changing storefronts, rising rents, and an influx of aesthetic-focused businesses (galleries, cafes) (Zukin, 2010). The final phase is high-income commercialization: property values and rents escalate, chain stores and upscale services replace local businesses, and original residents are economically displaced. This phase often exhibits homogenized consumption spaces and the loss of the very "authenticity" that attracted newcomers (Zukin, 2010). Zukin’s cycle emphasizes how cultural valorization (branding a neighborhood as authentic) combines with capital investment to produce displacement; her analysis links cultural meanings and market mechanisms to show why authenticity can be commodified and erased in the same process (Zukin, 2010).

Answer to Question 3 — Setha Low: Social Splitting and Purified Living in Gated Communities

Setha Low uses psychological and anthropological concepts to explain how gated communities produce exclusionary subjectivities. Two useful terms are social splitting and purified living. Social splitting refers to the cognitive and social process by which residents categorize insiders and outsiders, exaggerate differences, and attribute danger or moral deficiency to the excluded group (Low, 2003). Purified living describes the attempt to cleanse daily life of perceived threats—noise, diversity, informality—by designing physical and social environments that enforce uniformity and control (Low, 2003). In a largely homogenous gated community, social splitting encourages residents to view the outside world as a source of risk; homogenized internal spaces then reinforce in-group trust and out-group suspicion. Purified living manifests in strict rules, uniform architecture, and controlled public spaces meant to minimize encounters with difference (Low, 2003).

For example, Low’s ethnography of gated developments shows how residents narrate fears of crime, "decline," or cultural disorder—stories often amplified by media or selective personal experience—which justify walls, security gates, and private amenities (Low, 2003). Those physical barriers both reflect and reinforce psychological separation: residents feel safer because separation validates their belief in distinct moral geographies. Over time, such practices limit empathy and civic engagement, producing not only spatial inequality but also emotional and political distance between groups (Low, 2003). Thus social splitting and purified living are not just design outcomes but active psychological processes that sustain social exclusion.

Conclusion

Across these three thinkers, urban form, cultural narratives, and psychological processes are tightly linked. Jacobs shows how physical design fosters inclusive diversity; Zukin traces how cultural valorization and capital transform and displace neighborhoods; and Low explains how gated forms institutionalize social splitting and purified living. Together, their work highlights that whether cities become diverse and resilient or segregated and commodified depends on architecture, markets, and everyday practices of belonging (Jacobs, 1961; Zukin, 2010; Low, 2003).

References

• Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House.
• Zukin, S. (2010). Naked City: The Death and Life of Authentic Urban Places. Oxford University Press.
• Low, S. M. (2003). Behind the Gates: Life, Security, and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America. Routledge.
• Klein, N. (2007). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Picador.
• Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. Verso Books.
• Davis, M. (1990). City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. Verso.
• Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. New Left Review, 53, 23–40.
• Smith, N. (1979). Toward a Theory of Gentrification: A Back to the City Movement by Capital, Not People. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(4), 538–548.
• Lees, L., Slater, T., & Wyly, E. (2008). Gentrification. Routledge.
• Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class. Basic Books.