RESTORING THE REAL NEW ORLEANS
How do we save the Crescent City? Re-create the
unique building culture that spawned it.
February 14, 2007
Like so many others, I have long
been a visitor to New
Orleans. In my case this goes
back to 1979, when we studied the city to influence the design of Seaside,
Florida. I have often been back
because New Orleans
is one of the best places to learn architecture and
urbanism in the United States. My emphasis on
design might seem unusual, but it shouldn’t: the design
of New Orleans has a quality and character
comparable to the music and cuisine that receive most of the attention.
In all those visits, I regret to admit, I did not get to know the
people—not really. The New Orleanians I met were doing their jobs but not necessarily being themselves.
Such is the experience of the
tourist. This all changed when Katrina brought me back in the
role of planner. Engaging the planning process brought me
face to face with the reality.
Apart from the misconceptions of the
tourist, I had also been predisposed by the media to
think of New Orleans as a charming
but lackadaisical and fundamentally mismanaged place that had been subjected to
unwarranted devastation, with a great deal of anger and resentment as a result.
That is indeed what I found at first. But as I engaged in the
planning process I came to realize that the
anger I witnessed was relative. It was much less, for example, than the bitterness one encounters in the
typical California
city plagued with traffic. The people of New Orleans
have an underlying sweetness and a sense of humor, irony, and graciousness that
is never far below the surface. These
are not hard people.
Pondering this one day, I had an additional insight. I remember specifically
when on a street in the Marigny
I came upon a colorful little house framed by banana trees. I thought, “This is
Cuba.”
(I am Cuban.) I realized at that instant that New Orleans is
not really an American city, but rather
a Caribbean one. I understood that, when seen
through the lens of the Caribbean, New Orleans is not among the
most haphazard, poorest, or misgoverned American cities, but rather
the most organized, wealthiest, cleanest, and competently
governed of the Caribbean cities. This insight was fundamental
because from that moment I understood New Orleans and
truly began to sympathize. But the
government? Like everyone, I found the city
government to be a bit random; then I thought that if New Orleans were to be governed as
efficiently as, say, Minneapolis, it would be a different place—and not one
that I could care for. Let me work with the government the way it is. It is the human flaws that
make New Orleans the most
human of American cities. (New Orleans came to feel so much like Cuba that I was driven to buy a house in the Marigny as a surrogate for my
inaccessible Santiago de Cuba.)
When understood as Caribbean, New Orleans’s
culture seems ever more precious—and vulnerable to the
effects of Katrina. Anxiety about cultural loss is not new.
There has been a great deal of anguish regarding the diminishment of the black population,
and how without it New
Orleans could not regain itself.
Just so. But I fear that the
situation is more dire and less controllable. I am
afraid that even if the majority of the
population does return to reinhabit its
neighborhoods, it will not mean that New Orleans, or
at least the culture of New Orleans,
will be back. The reason is not political but technical.
The lost housing of New Orleans is
quite special. Entering the damaged and abandoned houses,
you can still see what they were like before the hurricane. They were exceedingly
inexpensive to live in, built by people’s parents and grandparents or by small
builders paid in cash or by barter. Most of these simple,
pleasant houses were paid off. They had to be because they do not meet any sort of code and are therefore
not mortgageable by current standards.
It was possible to sustain the unique culture of New
Orleans because
housing costs were minimal, liberating people from debt. One did not have to
work a great deal to get by. There was the
possibility of leisure. There was time to create the fabulously complex Creole dishes that simmer forever; there was time to practice music, to play it live rather than from recordings, and to listen to it. There
was time to make costumes and to parade; there was time
to party and to tell stories; there was time to spend all
day marking the passing of friends. One way to leisure
time is to have a low financial carry. With a little work, a little help from the government, and a little help from family and friends, life
could be good! This is a typically Caribbean
social contract: not one to be understood as laziness or poverty—but as a way
of life.
This ease, which has been so misunderstood in the
national scrutiny following the hurricane, is the Caribbean way. It is a
lifestyle choice, and there is nothing intrinsically
wrong with it. In fact, it is the envy of some of us who
work all our lives to attain the condition of leisure
only after retirement. It is this way of living that will disappear. Even with the federal funds for housing, there is
little chance that new or renovated houses will be owned
without debt. It is too expensive to build now. The
higher standards of the new International
Building Code are superb but also very expensive. There
must be an alternative or there will be very few
“paid-off” houses. Everyone will have a mortgage that will need to be sustained
by hard work—and this will undermine the culture of New Orleans.
What can be done? Somehow the building culture that
created the original New Orleans
must be reinstated. The hurdle of drawings, permitting,
contractors, inspections—the professionalism of it
all—eliminates self-building. Somehow there must be a
process whereupon people can build simple, functional houses for themselves, either by themselves
or by barter with professionals. There must be free house
designs that can be built in small stages and that do not require an architect,
complicated permits, or inspections; there must be
common-sense technical standards. Without this there will
be the pall of debt for everyone. And debt in the Caribbean doesn’t mean
just owing money—it is the elimination of the
culture that arises from leisure.
To start I would recommend an experimental “opt-out zone”: areas where one
“contracts out” of the current American system, which
consists of the nanny state raising standards to the point where it is so costly and complicated to build that
only the state can provide affordable housing—solving a
problem that it created in the first place.
However it may sound, this proposal is not so odd. Until recently this was the way that built America
from the Atlantic to the Pacific. For three centuries Americans built for themselves. They built well enough, so
long as it was theirs. Individual responsibility could be
trusted. We must return to this as an option. Of course, this is not for
everybody. There are plenty of people in New Orleans
who follow the conventional American eight-hour workday.
But the culture of this city does not flow from them; they may provide the
backbone of New Orleans
but not its heart.
* * *
Original Story Can Be Found At:
http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=2510