[sustran] Re: Book Review

Jonathan E. D. Richmond richmond at alum.mit.edu
Mon Oct 10 10:51:33 JST 2005



I am writing a paper on Bangkok right now...

Of course, there is no reason why public transport should cover its costs.
It can be a worthwhile public investment to finance an alternative to the
car. The problem is that rail systems are very expensive to build and, as
we are seeing in certain Asian situations -- perhaps Bangkok especially --
their impacts can be regressive, with fares charged on systems built at
heavy public expense beyond the reach of lower-income residents who need
public transport the most.

                                       --Jonathan

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote:

> And the problems light rail had stemmed from the 1920s, when their fares
> were too low and they started to fold. People begrudgingly got cars --
> so said a UC Berkeley
> Geography Prof in his take on this in the late 1980s..
>
> How about the Delhi or Bangkok metros? The LA "Metro" with the boutique
> stations? How about the outer parts of US systems like Metro in
> Washington DC or BART?
>
> >>> "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" <richmond at alum.mit.edu> 10/9/2005 9:38:09
> PM >>>
>
>
> All good questions.
>
> The point is that while GM did indeed want to get rid of rail lines,
> the
> demise of rail was not the result of any such conspiracy but a response
> to
> the market which had made rail uncompetitive. Rail companies were
> making
> big losses as automotive-induced decentralization became a fact of
> life, and trying to get out of the business.
>
>                                                      --Jonathan
>
> On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Lee Schipper wrote:
>
> > Thanks, this looks very interesting. It's always fun to fly in to LA
> and
> > see if you can spot the Blue Line train (I usually only see one)!
> >
> > I am just old enough to remember the Red cars in LA in the 1950s. WE
> > lived about 1/2 km from Venice and La Cienega, where the red car went
> by
> > on an overpass.  I wonder, how much longer would have the old red
> car
> > light rail lasted in LA without the alleged "conspiracy"? Maybe the
> > problem was people were not clustering homes at the stations or
> along
> > the lines?    Why did the French remove their rail from Paris in the
> > 1950s? Why did the social democrat Swedes do this in Stockholm too
> (as
> > well as ripping up lots of the key diesel-based rail lines
> connecting
> > small towns)?  Why did Hanoi rip up its light rail decades ago, only
> to
> > let the French donate one last year?
> >
> > There seem to be a message here, GM conspiracy or not.
> >
> > >>> richmond at alum.mit.edu 10/9/2005 9:07:24 PM >>>
> >
> >
> > Here's a review of my book in Technology and Culture, which most of
> you
> > on
> > this list probably would not otherwise see!
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >             --Jonathan
> >
> >
> > Technology and culture, July 2005
> >
> > Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los
> > Angeles. By Jonathan Richmond. Akron, Ohio: University of Akron
> Press,
> > 2005. Pp. xix+498. $49.95.
> >
> > "This book is a study about the failure of thought and its causes,"
> > writes
> > Jonathan Richmond in his introduction to Transport of Delight. "It
> > starts
> > with a bizarre decision: to construct a comprehensive rail passenger
> > system in an environment where it appears incapable of providing
> real
> > benefits." Richmond analyzes the decision to redeploy rail-borne
> > public
> > transit in a metropolitan area infamous for its congestion, smog,
> and
> > sprawl, and, most importantly, where he believes that by any
> rational
> > measure buses provide a superior mode of transit. He finds the
> > explanation
> > for this decision in the power of myth and symbol, image and
> metaphor,
> > citing extensively from linguistic experts such as Susan Langer,
> > George
> > Lakoff, and Martin Fossand on his first page quoting a passage from
> > Russell Ackoff's The Art of Problem Solving: "We usually try to
> reduce
> > complex situations to what appear to be one or more simple solvable
> > problems . . . sometimes referred to as 'cutting the problem down to
> > size.' In so doing we often reduce our chances of finding a creative
> > solution to the original problem." This is exactly what Richmond
> > believes
> > happened in Los Angeles beginning in the 1980s.
> >
> > Richmond has done his homework. His book is based in part on more
> than
> > two
> > hundred interviews with public officials. He presents a history of
> > Henry
> > Huntington's Pacific Electric, the storied Red Car system that once
> > operated 1,100 miles of track radiating in all directions from Los
> > Angeles. He evaluates the case for modern light rail and the
> > forecasting
> > methodology used to predict passenger demand for the first route
> > planned
> > for the Los Angeles area, the Blue Line connecting with the region's
> > second-largest city, Long Beach. He reports that ridership forecasts
> > were
> > initially inflated. Then, just before the line opened, they were
> > deflated
> > in order to make the actual numbers look good.
> >
> > Transport of Delight devotes considerable attention to the political
> > decision-making process that led to passage of Proposition A, the
> > local
> > half-cent tax that funded the return of electric railways, a process
> > ultimately dependent on "availability of a set of symbols, images,
> and
> > metaphors which come together coherently to create a myth that acts
> > with
> > the power of truth" (p. 6). The human body's circulation system, for
> > example, became a powerful metaphor for transit planners. Likewise
> > valuable was the perception among civic leaders that electric trains
> > were
> > "sexier" than buses, a perception Richmond addresses at length in a
> > section titled "The Train as Symbol of Community Pride: Penis Envy
> in
> > Los
> > Angeles."
> >
> > Richmond notes the power of the mental image that remained after the
> > last
> > Red Cars disappeared in 1961, an image that gave rise to the notion
> > that
> > [End Page 661] the demise of a superior mode of transit was the
> result
> > of
> > a conspiracy in which General Motors played a key role. The first
> > local
> > railway started running between the harbor and downtown Los Angeles
> in
> > 1869, the last Red Car line operated along this same corridor, and,
> > thirty
> > years after service ended on that line, rail-borne transit was
> reborn
> > in
> > the form of the Blue Line. This, Richmond feels certain, was a big
> > mistake. In his view, buses are a superior mode of transit for Los
> > Angeles, particularly in terms of their cost-effectiveness; just
> about
> > everything involving an electric railway is vastly more expensive
> than
> > rubber tire on paved roadway.
> >
> > The Blue Line was brought into existence not on the basis of any
> > rational
> > assessment of available choices, but to reward political acumen,
> > particularly that of County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn (now deceased,
> > though
> > his son became mayor of Los Angeles), through whose Fourth District
> > was
> > routed not only the Blue Line but also two other new electric rail
> > lines -- all this in the wake of devastating riots in South Central
> > Los
> > Angeles and repeated recommendations that improved transit would
> have
> > beneficial social consequences.
> >
> > The problem was "cut down to size," yes, but Richmond is certain
> that
> > it
> > was the wrong size. Whatever one may happen to think about the
> virtues
> > of
> > different modes of urban transit, Transport of Delight presents an
> > excellent case study in the power of myth, and it provides us with a
> > compelling picture of a place where culture and technology blend
> > seamlessly.
> >
> > James Smart
> > Jim Smart is adjunct professor of journalism and public speaking at
> > California State University Fullerton and Cal State San Bernardino.
> > From
> > 1981 until 1998 he served as head of media relations for the
> Southern
> > California Rapid Transit District and the Los Angeles County
> > Metropolitan
> > Transportation Authority.
> >
> > Permission to reprint a review published here may be obtained only
> > from
> > the reviewer.
> >
> >
> > -----
> > Jonathan Richmond
> > 182 Palfrey St.
> > Watertown MA 02472-1835
> >
> > (617) 395-4360
> >
> > e-mail: richmond at alum.mit.edu
> > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/
> >
> >
> > ================================================================
> > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing
> countries
> > (the 'Global South'). Because of the history of the list, the main
> focus
> > is on urban transport policy in Asia.
> >
>
>
> -----
> Jonathan Richmond
> 182 Palfrey St.
> Watertown MA 02472-1835
>
> (617) 395-4360
>
> e-mail: richmond at alum.mit.edu
> http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/
>
>


-----
Jonathan Richmond
182 Palfrey St.
Watertown MA 02472-1835

(617) 395-4360

e-mail: richmond at alum.mit.edu
http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/



More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list