Le Spleen de Detroit: pondering on decay, creative destruction, defectiveness and violence.
When the low, heavy sky weighs like a lid
Once upon time Detroit was the flagship of the industrial and productive America (Kepper, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007).The city was the cradle of Fordism (Harvey, 1989) and the manufacturing centre of United States (Kepper, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013; Booza & Metzger, 2004). Furthermore, Detroit was the leading centre of automobile production (Kepper, 2001) with the three biggest corporations based in its area (Kepper, 2001). Suddenly, the situation changed. In the sixties, the city began to decompose and became in three decades a postindustrial sarcophagus (Le Duff, 2013). Nowadays, the city once dominated by chimneys and factories (Zukin, 1991) seems characterised by empty spaces and neglect (Steinmetz, 2006), which remind Baudelaire’s discourses about Paris and the life outside the circuit of Debord’s spectacle.
When the earth is changed into a humid dungeon
Detroit isn’t a very exciting place. Big chimneys.
Black Smoke. (Zukin, 1991: 103)
In the twentieth century, Detroit shifted from being the symbolic landscape of the productive United States to being the tomb of the American Dreams. As a matter of fact, from the beginning of the 1900s until the sixties Detroit was a booming city (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013; Booza & Metzger, 2004), one of the most prominent and powerful of America (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013; Booza & Metzger, 2004). At those times, Detroit’s population grew rapidly (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter- Williams, 2007; Ryan and Campo, 2013), and by 1950 it was almost two millions of people were living in the area (DeRuiter-Williams, 2007: 26). According to DeRuiter- Williams (2007), this was in part due to the Great Migration from the southern states of America. Undeniably, thousands of people seeking for fortune moved to Detroit in order to get an employment in its developing industries (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Ryan and Campo, 2013).
“With this growing industry came employment opportunities for unskilled or semi-skilled individuals who were fleeing the South for a better or more equitable life in the North.” (DeRuiter-Williams, 2007: 26).
In fact, in Detroit were concentrated different types of factories (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Ryan and Campo, 2013); in particular, the city was the leading centre of automobile production (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Friedman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013). As suggested by Keppler (2001), in Detroit were located the headquarters of the three major American car producers: General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler. Those corporations built several plants such as the Ford River Rouge Complex (Ryan and Campo, 2013), which alone by the 1960s was employing thirty thousand workers (Friedmann, 2004: 27).
Geographically speaking, “Inside the 139-square-mile Detroit city limits, a high degree of centralization and rational planning was exercised.” (Freemann, 2004: 23), the city was characterised by “a superb network- grid of ports, railroads, and infrastructure,and settling within and around the grid factories, homes, and community facilities.” (Freemann, 2004: 23).
Its chimneys, factories, and highways defined not only Detroit’s landscape but also Detroiters themselves (Brent & Campo, 2013: 2; Zukin, 2007; Booza & Metzger, 2004). However, at the beginning of the sixties, the Motown slowly began to die (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Friedman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013). Even though urban decay was widespread in America (Beaureyard, 2003), the city seemed “a textbook case of urban decline” (Booza & Metzger, 2004: 44). However, before going into details, it should be mentioned the classic symptomatology of urban decay. DeRuiter Williams (2007) date the onset of Detroit’s illness back to the riot in 1967, when five days of uprisings shacked the city; whereas, other scholars pointed at the shift in the world economy that began after the World War II, when decentralization made inroads (Harvey, 1989; Booza & Metzger, 2004; Beaureyard, 2003; Keppler, 2001; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013). Since the 1973 crisis, Detroit’s decay speeded up its pace (Booza & Metzger, 2004; Beaureyard, 2003; Keppler, 2001; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013); and after the 2008 speculative bubble, the city became ruled by crime, corruption, and mayhem (Le Duff, 2013). It can be argued that clinically Detroit’s decomposition can be addressed to capitalism’s inner contradictions; indeed, several scholars on Motown’s decay and what triggered it.
When the rain stretching out its endless train
Detroit’s fall seemed to be linked inexorably to the world economy shift, which began after the World War II (Booza & Metzger, 2004; Beaureyard, 2003; Keppler, 2001; Freeman, 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013). Since then, the industries in the region became to decentralize, and consequently, various factories closed and relocated somewhere else (Bluestone & Harrison, 1982; Booza & Metzger, 2004; Sugrue, 2004; Waldheim, 2002). This situation worsened between the seventies and the eighties (Booza & Metzger, 2004) during the economic and social restructuring post-crisis (Harvey, 1989), when some oil shocks sanctioned the death of the rigidity of Fordism (Harvey, 1989). According to Freeman (2004), Detroit’s decomposition followed specific steps. Moreover, as Freeman (2004) suggests:
“This regression to empty space is worsened by the city’s folding-back upon itself. As factories and jobs disappear, people leave the city. As a result, the city’s tax revenue base contracts. This tax loss leads to cutbacks and/or non-repair of basic infrastructure. The reduction of infrastructure leads morefactories and people to leave, and so forth in a circle" (Freeman, 2004: 22).
What caused this process or processes that lead the city eating itself like a sort of postmodern Erisittone? For Freeman (2004) this can be elucidated through a different set of trajectories, which encapsulate the world economic tendencies of the last two centuries. Between the 1933 and the 1963, United States built their power on production and industries; Detroit, which had already an industrial setting, became a powerful and prosperous city. However, between the 1963 and the 2004, the trajectory changed from the upsurge to decimation (Freeman, 2004).
“The years 1963-64 marked a crucial turning point, as the Wall Street-City of London’s financier oligarchy imposed the post-industrial society policy upon the United States" (Freeman, 2004: 26).
This means that the world witnessed the passage from a production orientated society to a consumption one. According to Harvey (1989) those trajectories represent the passage from modernity to post-modernity, from Fordism to Post Fordism. Symbolically, the cradle of Fordism was exactly in Dearborn, which is part of the Detroit metropolitan area (Harvey, 1989). Fordism was characterised by a modern organization of labour, the use of technologies, mass production, and consumption (Harvey, 1989); however, it would be a mistake considering it a mere new way to organise labour and production; Fordism was according to Harvey (1989) a brand-new way to think about the economic, social and cultural life. Fordism can be summarised as the rational and functional way to reach the American Dream. The passage from Fordism to Post Fordism annihilated Detroit (Keppler, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013; Booza & Metzger, 2004; Zukin, 1991, Waldheim, 2004).Post Fordism stresses on consumption rather than production; dominant cities have become according to some scholars those with finance centres and service oriented (Abrahamson, 2008; Dickens, 2007); Detroit is the spatial reflection of Fordism; therefore, it became a sort of urban fiasco (Waldheim, 2002). Although several scholars have studied the detrimental effects of this shift, alone it does not elucidate what causes Detroit’s decline. Some scholars point at the inner contradictions of capitalism; in particular, creative destruction seems the one that can explain the city’s decomposition. Schumpeter (2013) suggests that in order to create capitalism has to destroy; Zukin (1991) takes this idea further and applies it to space; indeed, creative destruction seems the only feature that can explain Detroit’s decay. Friedmann (2002) supports this view and in his work defines two types of space: the life and the economic one. Those spaces are in conflict with each other: the former is tangible, scaled and has boundaries; whereas, the latter is more abstract (Friedmann, 2002). The latter can expand resulting in the dissolution of the life spaces, which are absorbed by it. This causes the economic and industrial apocalypse that hit Detroit and its population. However, creative destruction effects go beyond abandonment and unemployment; indeed, Detroit has become a defective city.
All at once the bells leap with rage
The industrial apocalypse (Beauregard, 2003) transformed Detroit from a productive to a defective city. Bauman (2007; 1998) defines as sacer or deficient those individuals who do not fulfil their duties as a consumer. Considering that the construction of identity works similarly as the social construction of a space following a specific cycle of buying and performs (Fontanelli, 2015), and that space is an object for visual consumption (Debord, 1994; Urry, 1995), it can be argued that Detroit became a faulty city, a city unsuitable for consumption. Zukin (1991) supports this view; indeed, she suggests that production and who is linked to it become a sort of synonym of being a loser. To put it briefly, Detroit’s decomposition leads the city became a defective space, unsuitable for visual consumption, in which, its spaces abandoned and empty symbolize important feature, which is rigidity. As Harvey (1989) suggests due to the shift, the world passed from the rigidity of Fordism to the flexible accumulation. According to Bauman (2007, 1998), rigidity is antithetical to post-modern society. Detroit with its rational planning and its chimneys is too tied to modernism and above all Fordism (Kepper, 2001; DeRuiter Williams, 2007; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013; Booza & Metzger, 2004). Detroit’s rationality became the symbol of a past that was unable to contain capitalism’s contradictions (Harvey, 1989); moreover, mobility and speed transformed Detroit in a disposable city (Waldheim, 2002). It should be noted that rigidity is not the only feature that makes the city defective. For instance, Detroit’s faultiness is constructed and reproduced through thousand portraits where it is depicted as dangerous and chaotic (Le Duff, 2013). Le Duff (2013) in his journey through hell, which reminds Dante’s journey, describes Detroit’s as a city governed by dark forces, where mayhem reigns. Whereas, other cities in the same conditions of Detroit reinvented themselves (Greenberg, 2009), Detroit chose its fate. This makes the city guilty; therefore, defective (Bauman 2007; 1998). Furthermore, Detroit and its peculiar structure and its tie with a blue-collar past is what Augé calls anthropological places, which are adverse to those post-modern non-places of consumption (Augé, 1995).
In conclusion, Detroit with “the disintegration of an urban landscape: streets and avenues interspersed with vacant lots and visually studded by extraordinary ruins, which display their own strange and bitter beauty. Ruins which speak of a lost history and a seemingly hopeless present, of abandonment and suppressed anger” (Steinmetz, 2006: 1) became a powerful a sign, where its sounds-image of defectiveness is both and admonishment and fascinating (Holdcroft, 1991).
The violence of capitalism has transformed Detroit in a sarcophagus of dreams, left there to remind the fate of every city if it cannot keep the pace of creative destruction. What is horrific is the legitimization of Detroit. According to Forrester (1999), a consumer society require legitimization, meaning that human beings legitimate profit and privileges, and it does not matter if those come at the expenses of the others (Forrester, 1999). This means that the economic and industrial apocalypse, which hit Detroit, is an act of objective violence, a type of violence hidden, systemic and part of the structure of the society (Zizek, 2008), a violence that is conceived as part of the everyday. This could be linked to Arendt and Elon (2006) banality of evil; even though, less bloodthirsty than the Nazi holocaust, Detroit’s decomposition is a act violence that can occur to anyone (Le Duff, 2013).
Once upon a time, Detroit was a flourishing city. During the splendour years of Fordism, the city increased in population and became the leading centre of industrial production (Kepper, 2001; DeRuiter-Williams, 2007; Freeman 2004; Ryan and Campo, 2013; Booza & Metzger, 2004). However, the city changed due, mostly to a period of inflation following the 1973 oil shocks (Harvey, 1989) and the consequent restructuring of the economic and social world. Specifically, the shift from Fordism to Post Fordism was characterised by a passage from a production society to a consumption one. This shift devastated Detroit and triggered a self-feeding cycle (Freeman, 2004) characterized by unemployment, abandonment, increase in crime rate and mayhem (Freeman, 2004; Le Duff, 2013). This process of creation and destruction has been called creative destruction, and it transformed Detroit, which became the sarcophagus of the American Dreams, a defective place too rigid almost embalmed, too tied to Ford’s view of the world; as Saussure would say Detroit is a sound-image that suggests defectiveness (Holdcroft, 1991). Important not only consider Detroit’s decomposition but the legitimization that follows those acts of objective violence. Indeed, society tend to omit decay, assuming that if a city decomposes is only because it would not keep the pace of capitalism and consumption. This reminds Arendt and Elon banality of evil, where the rejection of Detroit’s decay brings it to an everyday dimension; thus, it becomes a forgiveable event. On a broader perspective, Detroit’s fate should be analysed more in depth, as it could happen anywhere, speculation and finance are always looking for the next victim; cities such as Athens or Rome are not so far from decompose. However, this work does not analyse facts and events on depth; therefore, it can be argued that it does not glean the misery of capitalism. In any case, it can be said that more studies should be done on the Bauman’s Sacer concept, as it seems that nowadays identities and spaces are considered only for their purchase and performative character. To conclude, Detroit’s spleen is located in is inability to be part of the spectacle.
Abrahamson, M. (2004). Global cities. New York: Oxford University Press.
Augé, M. (1995). Non-places: Introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity. London; New York: Verso.
Baudelaire, C., & Dufay, P. (1863). Les fleurs du mal. Librairie des bibliophiles parisiens.
Bauman, Z. (1998). Work, consumerism and the new poor. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Bauman, Z. (2007). Homo Consumens. Lo sciame inquieto dei consumatori e la miseria degli esclusi. Brossura.
Beauregard, R. A. (2003). Voices of Decline: The Postwar Fate of U.S. Cities. Oxford: Routledge.
Bluestone, B., & Harrison, B. (1982). The de-industrialization of America: plant closings, community abandonment, and the dismantling of basic industry. New York: BasicBooks.
Debord, G. (1994). The society of the spectacle. New York: Zone Books.
DeRuiter-Williams, D. (2007). The Critical Nexus: Deindustrialization, Racism and Urban Crisis in Post-1967 Detroit. McNair Scholars Journal, 11(1).
Dickens, P. (2007). Global shift: Mapping the changing contours of the world economy.
SAGE Publications Ltd.
Fontanelli, L. (2015). Sacer Spaces: a critical (re)assessment of the geographies of heroin consumption. Swansea .
Forrester, V. (1999). The Economic Horror. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
Freeman, R. (2004). Death of Detroit: harbinger of collapse of deindustrialized America. Executive Intelligence Review, 31(16).
Friedmann, J. (2002). Life Space & Economic Space: Essays in Third World Planning. Transaction Publishers.
Greenberg, M. (2009). Branding New York: How a City in Crisis Was Sold to the World. Taylor & Francis.
Harvey, D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Herron, J. (2004). I remember Detroit. ARBEITSMATERIALIEN WORKING PAPERS, 28.
Holdcroft, D. (1991). Saussure: Signs, System and Arbitrariness. Cambridge University Press.
Le Duff, C. (2013). Detroit: an American autopsy. Penguin.
Merchand, Y., & et al. (2010). The ruins of Detroit. Steidl Göttingen,, Germany.
Ryan, B. D., & Campo, D. (2013). Autopia’s end: the decline and fall of Detroit’s automotive manufacturing landscape. Journal of Planning History.
Schumpeter, J. A. (2013). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Routledge.
Steinmetz, G. (2006). Drive-by shooting: Making a documentary about Detroit. Michigan Quarterly Review, 45(3).
Sugrue, T. J. (2004). The origins of the urban crisis: Race and inequality in postwar Detroit. Princeton University Press.
Urry, J. (1995). Consuming places. London: Routledge.
Waldheim, C. (2004). Motor City. ARBEITSMATERIALIEN WORKING PAPERS, 55.
Zizek, V. (2008). Violence. Picador.
Zukin, S. (1991). Landscapes of power: From Detroit to Disney World. Berkeley; Oxford:University of California Press.
