What do you think?
Rate this book
City: Rediscovering the Center
Named by Newsweek magazine to its list of "Fifty Books for Our Time."
For sixteen years William Whyte walked the streets of New York and other major cities. With a group of young observers, camera and notebook in hand, he conducted pioneering studies of street life, pedestrian behavior, and city dynamics. City: Rediscovering the Center is the result of that research, a humane, often amusing view of what is staggeringly obvious about the urban environment but seemingly invisible to those responsible for planning it.
Whyte uses time-lapse photography to chart the anatomy of metropolitan congestion. Why is traffic so badly distributed on city streets? Why do New Yorkers walk so fast—and jaywalk so incorrigibly? Why aren't there more collisions on the busiest walkways? Why do people who stop to talk gravitate to the center of the pedestrian traffic stream? Why do places designed primarily for security actually worsen it? Why are public restrooms disappearing? "The city is full of vexations," Whyte avers: "Steps too steep; doors too tough to open; ledges you cannot sit on. . . . It is difficult to design an urban space so maladroitly that people will not use it, but there are many such spaces." Yet Whyte finds encouragement in the widespread rediscovery of the city center. The future is not in the suburbs, he believes, but in that center. Like a Greek agora, the city must reassert its most ancient function as a place where people come together face-to-face.
408 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1989
28 people are currently reading
1110 people want to read
About the author
William H. Whyte
19 books55 followersWilliam Hollingsworth "Holly" Whyte (1917 - 12 January 1999) was an American urbanist, organizational analyst, journalist and people-watcher.
Whyte was born in West Chester, Pennsylvania and died in New York City in 1999. An early graduate of St. Andrew's School in Middletown, Delaware, he graduated from Princeton University and then served in Marine Corps. In 1946 he joined Fortune magazine.
Whyte wrote a 1956 bestseller titled The Organization Man after Fortune magazine sponsored him to do extensive interviews on the CEOs of corporations such as General Electric and Ford.
While working with the New York City Planning Commission in 1969, Whyte began to use direct observation to describe behavior in urban settings. With research assistants wielding still cameras, movie cameras, and notebooks, Whyte described the substance of urban public life in an objective and measurable way.
These observations developed into the Street Life Project, an ongoing study of pedestrian behavior and city dynamics, and eventually to Whyte's book called City: Rediscovering the Center (1988). City presents Whyte's conclusions about jaywalking, 'schmoozing patterns,' the actual use of urban plazas, appropriate sidewalk width, and other issues. This work remains valuable because it's based on careful observation, and because it contradicts other conventional wisdom, for instance, the idea that pedestrian traffic and auto traffic should be separated.
Whyte also worked closely with the renovation of Bryant Park in New York City.
Whyte served as mentor to many, including the urban-planning writer Jane Jacobs, Paco Underhill, who has applied the same technique to measuring and improving retail environments, Dan Biederman of Bryant Park Corporation, who led the renovation of Bryant Park and the Business Improvement District movement in New York City, and Fred Kent, head of the Project for Public Spaces.
His books include: Is Anybody Listening? (1952), Securing Open Spaces for Urban America (1959), Cluster Development (1964), The Last Landscape (1968; "about the way metropolitan areas look and the way they might look"), The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980; plus a companion film of the same name in 1988), and City: Rediscovering the Center (1988).
Whyte was born in West Chester, Pennsylvania and died in New York City in 1999. An early graduate of St. Andrew's School in Middletown, Delaware, he graduated from Princeton University and then served in Marine Corps. In 1946 he joined Fortune magazine.
Whyte wrote a 1956 bestseller titled The Organization Man after Fortune magazine sponsored him to do extensive interviews on the CEOs of corporations such as General Electric and Ford.
While working with the New York City Planning Commission in 1969, Whyte began to use direct observation to describe behavior in urban settings. With research assistants wielding still cameras, movie cameras, and notebooks, Whyte described the substance of urban public life in an objective and measurable way.
These observations developed into the Street Life Project, an ongoing study of pedestrian behavior and city dynamics, and eventually to Whyte's book called City: Rediscovering the Center (1988). City presents Whyte's conclusions about jaywalking, 'schmoozing patterns,' the actual use of urban plazas, appropriate sidewalk width, and other issues. This work remains valuable because it's based on careful observation, and because it contradicts other conventional wisdom, for instance, the idea that pedestrian traffic and auto traffic should be separated.
Whyte also worked closely with the renovation of Bryant Park in New York City.
Whyte served as mentor to many, including the urban-planning writer Jane Jacobs, Paco Underhill, who has applied the same technique to measuring and improving retail environments, Dan Biederman of Bryant Park Corporation, who led the renovation of Bryant Park and the Business Improvement District movement in New York City, and Fred Kent, head of the Project for Public Spaces.
His books include: Is Anybody Listening? (1952), Securing Open Spaces for Urban America (1959), Cluster Development (1964), The Last Landscape (1968; "about the way metropolitan areas look and the way they might look"), The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980; plus a companion film of the same name in 1988), and City: Rediscovering the Center (1988).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews
December 18, 2009
Most of the books I read are either science fiction or in the physical sciences. And I'm involved in "hard science fiction" (SF that tries to be consistent with known science). However, my college degree was in the social sciences and social issues concern me.
Many people interested in hard SF tend to assume the social sciences can't be "hard sciences". The social sciences are subject to such chaos factors that it's difficult to be precise as in physics - but the same is true of physical sciences such as meteorology, ecology and climatology.
The book City is mainly about urban planning, but from the perspective of those who wanted to optimize a city's physical structures to facilitate human social needs. In that sense, at least part of City is about social behavior. The urban planners involved in these projects were true to science. They had hypotheses on what social behaviors there were and what city planning might facilitate that, but they would always check to see what was really happening in the real world.
In one example that has stuck in my mind, they already thought they knew what would be helpful. Then they put up video cameras outside to see what people really did. People did not do as they expected. The urban planners accepted the evidence and changed their concepts.
This isn't the social sciences on a grand, society-wide scale being presented as a hard science, but it does at least give an idea of a hard science approach in matters involving the social sciences. From such beginnings perhaps one day a hard social sciences can be built.
Many people interested in hard SF tend to assume the social sciences can't be "hard sciences". The social sciences are subject to such chaos factors that it's difficult to be precise as in physics - but the same is true of physical sciences such as meteorology, ecology and climatology.
The book City is mainly about urban planning, but from the perspective of those who wanted to optimize a city's physical structures to facilitate human social needs. In that sense, at least part of City is about social behavior. The urban planners involved in these projects were true to science. They had hypotheses on what social behaviors there were and what city planning might facilitate that, but they would always check to see what was really happening in the real world.
In one example that has stuck in my mind, they already thought they knew what would be helpful. Then they put up video cameras outside to see what people really did. People did not do as they expected. The urban planners accepted the evidence and changed their concepts.
This isn't the social sciences on a grand, society-wide scale being presented as a hard science, but it does at least give an idea of a hard science approach in matters involving the social sciences. From such beginnings perhaps one day a hard social sciences can be built.
January 31, 2012
This is about New York City, but a very different New York City than i live in. I guess 20 years, a balanced city budget, and some heavy gentrification will do that to a place. The Lexington in the 50's that Whyte describes is a barely recognizable place, with the 3-card monte, hawkers, and undesirables all but gone from the neighborhood.
It has some very interesting stuff. Until you go to read the entire book. To get all the interesting stuff out, you need to make a pretty big commitment to read the whole thing -- or become a very dedicated/skilled skimmer. I chose the latter, often rolling down the lines until I found the payoff sentence that explained the lesson learned. I can only imagine how boring the data gathering must have been!! He makes the most scientific studies possible, although they are far from scientific, give that no location place is like another. Still, comes to reasonable conclusions based on observed data -- and bucks conventional wisdom in the process.
All in all, I don't think I'll ever pick this up again, but I found it interesting enough to at least page through for a few hours.
It has some very interesting stuff. Until you go to read the entire book. To get all the interesting stuff out, you need to make a pretty big commitment to read the whole thing -- or become a very dedicated/skilled skimmer. I chose the latter, often rolling down the lines until I found the payoff sentence that explained the lesson learned. I can only imagine how boring the data gathering must have been!! He makes the most scientific studies possible, although they are far from scientific, give that no location place is like another. Still, comes to reasonable conclusions based on observed data -- and bucks conventional wisdom in the process.
All in all, I don't think I'll ever pick this up again, but I found it interesting enough to at least page through for a few hours.
April 20, 2023
Just amazing, a must read!
December 26, 2023
William whyte was perhaps the preeminent 20th century analyst of the role of public space in cities. While showing its age, This book is a great synthesis of his work, and, like the social life of small urban spaces, will undoubtedly change the way you look at the public areas of your town/city.
January 1, 2018
City: Rediscovering the Center takes the reader on a tour of William H. Whyte's 25+ years of observing and writing about the built environment. While it focuses primarily on 16 years of research conducted on urban public spaces, it echoes the ideas and concerns of many of his other works, including The Last Landscape (1968) and The Organization Man (1956).
To that end, the book can feel a bit disjointed at times. The first two thirds of the book is essentially an expanded version of his earlier "pre-book" The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980), while the final third diverges into issues of suburban sprawl, the corporate exodus, open space policies, cluster development, gentrification, and more. The organizing idea of the book—that cities must have a center, and planners are now remembering this—is not always strong enough to bring Whyte's brilliant individual insights together comfortably into one book. But if one accepts that it reads more like a collection of articles, they will find that City is an indispensable retrospective of Whyte's unique contributions to the study of cities.
To that end, the book can feel a bit disjointed at times. The first two thirds of the book is essentially an expanded version of his earlier "pre-book" The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces (1980), while the final third diverges into issues of suburban sprawl, the corporate exodus, open space policies, cluster development, gentrification, and more. The organizing idea of the book—that cities must have a center, and planners are now remembering this—is not always strong enough to bring Whyte's brilliant individual insights together comfortably into one book. But if one accepts that it reads more like a collection of articles, they will find that City is an indispensable retrospective of Whyte's unique contributions to the study of cities.
March 16, 2024
A dear friend of mine at work recommended I have a look at a video that was prepared on the work of William H. Whyte https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKEjW....
There is something that anyone who actually knows me knows – and that is that I’m terrible with names. The fact I’ve read quite a few books on cities and how people behave in them probably means I’ve come across this guy multiple times, but if I have he has not left a real impression before.
Recently, I’ve been writing a paper at work on the pedagogy of space, who spatial affordance of exhibits in museums, say, impact how and what we learn in those spaces. I have been using Goffman’s ideas – but the problem with Goffman (don’t get me wrong, the guy is a god) is that he is infinitely more interested in the interactions between people in his little dramas than he is in the material surrounding people in these dramas. All the world might well be a stage to Goffman, but the stage itself, and the various props contained on the stage, is less interesting to him than the bodily and spoken content of symbolic interactions.
Whyte is also an insanely close observer of human interactions, but his question was much more about how spaces themselves encouraged these interactions. For example, he notes that spaces work best, particularly as little squares in cities, if there are places where people can sit. If they can sit, people will. He also noticed that planning was best achieved if it didn’t interfere too much with people being able to improvise – so, if chairs could move, people would move them to suit the number of people in their group.
Many things I might have just taken for granted were disproven by Whyte. For instance, I’d always assumed that if two people were walking down a street and saw each other and decided to stop and talk, they would move to the side of the street, so others could get past them. But this is the opposite of what people actually do. The stand right in the middle of the busiest part of the street. I used to get annoyed when I saw people doing this, but after reading this book I can’t see the point in getting upset. It is human nature. He also says people might expect lovers to kiss in nooks or away from where they can be seen – but he also found the opposite. To kiss your lover on the street is a kind of public declaration and he even witnessed them sometimes looking around to see who had observed them, even while pretending to be so lost in their love as to be unaware of others anyway. The rule seems to be that the more people there are, the happier we tend to be – the exact opposite of what we might believe intuitively.
He talks of the best height for stairs, and how this is often based on someone’s observations from many centuries ago, but that these measurements are now out of date, given we have gotten taller since. But stairs too can also be used as seats, as just about anything that is vaguely chair like can be. If we can be located where we can sit and watch others, we couldn’t really be happier.
We love the sun too. And this is a real problem, since many tall buildings – and the layout of the grid patterns of streets themselves – often actively work to cast shadows that steal sunlight from city streets. But warmth isn’t only provided by the sun, but also by colourful other humans. In the chorus of the song about Dublin, The Mero, it talks of Bang Bang, who shoots the buses with his golden key. This is exactly the sort of person being talked about here – or various street performers. Whyte says shop owners often hate them, but actually, they bring people into close proximity and set a mood where them going on to purchase things is probably more likely.
Of course, particularly in the US, the inner city has become associated with poverty and crime. Melbourne, where I live, was lucky to have had an explosion of office building in the late 1980s that then meant there was a chronic oversupply. This was solved by converting many of these office spaces into apartments. Melbourne, for a while, was one of the fastest growing residential areas in the country. And it therefore became known as one of the most liveable cities too. Cities are spaces where people interact. Without people they are terrifying.
In New York, where Whyte is particularly interested, since it is where he did most of his research, businesses started to move out to the suburbs. And this was one of my favourite bits of this book. The businesses said that they were moving to be more convenient for staff. But Whyte checked and the major staff member that was being helped by the move was almost always the CEO – the relocation just happening to be close to where they lived in most cases. I love it when people do a simple empirical test that shows something so interesting – and this book is over flowing with such bits and pieces of research and observation.
Really, a lovely book. I assume there has been more recent work done using similar or even better techniques – but this is so readable and so interesting, it is worth reading regardless.
There is something that anyone who actually knows me knows – and that is that I’m terrible with names. The fact I’ve read quite a few books on cities and how people behave in them probably means I’ve come across this guy multiple times, but if I have he has not left a real impression before.
Recently, I’ve been writing a paper at work on the pedagogy of space, who spatial affordance of exhibits in museums, say, impact how and what we learn in those spaces. I have been using Goffman’s ideas – but the problem with Goffman (don’t get me wrong, the guy is a god) is that he is infinitely more interested in the interactions between people in his little dramas than he is in the material surrounding people in these dramas. All the world might well be a stage to Goffman, but the stage itself, and the various props contained on the stage, is less interesting to him than the bodily and spoken content of symbolic interactions.
Whyte is also an insanely close observer of human interactions, but his question was much more about how spaces themselves encouraged these interactions. For example, he notes that spaces work best, particularly as little squares in cities, if there are places where people can sit. If they can sit, people will. He also noticed that planning was best achieved if it didn’t interfere too much with people being able to improvise – so, if chairs could move, people would move them to suit the number of people in their group.
Many things I might have just taken for granted were disproven by Whyte. For instance, I’d always assumed that if two people were walking down a street and saw each other and decided to stop and talk, they would move to the side of the street, so others could get past them. But this is the opposite of what people actually do. The stand right in the middle of the busiest part of the street. I used to get annoyed when I saw people doing this, but after reading this book I can’t see the point in getting upset. It is human nature. He also says people might expect lovers to kiss in nooks or away from where they can be seen – but he also found the opposite. To kiss your lover on the street is a kind of public declaration and he even witnessed them sometimes looking around to see who had observed them, even while pretending to be so lost in their love as to be unaware of others anyway. The rule seems to be that the more people there are, the happier we tend to be – the exact opposite of what we might believe intuitively.
He talks of the best height for stairs, and how this is often based on someone’s observations from many centuries ago, but that these measurements are now out of date, given we have gotten taller since. But stairs too can also be used as seats, as just about anything that is vaguely chair like can be. If we can be located where we can sit and watch others, we couldn’t really be happier.
We love the sun too. And this is a real problem, since many tall buildings – and the layout of the grid patterns of streets themselves – often actively work to cast shadows that steal sunlight from city streets. But warmth isn’t only provided by the sun, but also by colourful other humans. In the chorus of the song about Dublin, The Mero, it talks of Bang Bang, who shoots the buses with his golden key. This is exactly the sort of person being talked about here – or various street performers. Whyte says shop owners often hate them, but actually, they bring people into close proximity and set a mood where them going on to purchase things is probably more likely.
Of course, particularly in the US, the inner city has become associated with poverty and crime. Melbourne, where I live, was lucky to have had an explosion of office building in the late 1980s that then meant there was a chronic oversupply. This was solved by converting many of these office spaces into apartments. Melbourne, for a while, was one of the fastest growing residential areas in the country. And it therefore became known as one of the most liveable cities too. Cities are spaces where people interact. Without people they are terrifying.
In New York, where Whyte is particularly interested, since it is where he did most of his research, businesses started to move out to the suburbs. And this was one of my favourite bits of this book. The businesses said that they were moving to be more convenient for staff. But Whyte checked and the major staff member that was being helped by the move was almost always the CEO – the relocation just happening to be close to where they lived in most cases. I love it when people do a simple empirical test that shows something so interesting – and this book is over flowing with such bits and pieces of research and observation.
Really, a lovely book. I assume there has been more recent work done using similar or even better techniques – but this is so readable and so interesting, it is worth reading regardless.
January 25, 2025
4.5 stars. This was an incredibly well-researched and thorough look at the city center, with so many observations that were eye-opening and timeless. That said, this book was written in the 80s, and it really showed. Even leaving the rest of the book in tact, I'd love to see an updated essay after each chapter on how the court cases that were in progress when the book was written resolved, how phones have changed city usage (or not!), whether New York or San Francisco or Dallas are still good/bad examples for the specific things they were called out for. Maybe that's a whole separate book, but maybe not; the research in here is beautiful and I'd love to see it built on directly.
June 7, 2023
empassioned, clear, technical, and witty. the book is first a sociological look at cities, then a study on how urban planning decisions impact the dynamics of human usage and interaction in and with the city. the book finishes with a number of topics in urban planning that determine the success of the city and its vitality.
very much in the shoup school of thought. this is a great read for lovers of shoup’s tome on parking.
very much in the shoup school of thought. this is a great read for lovers of shoup’s tome on parking.
April 7, 2024
This book is a masterpiece in observation and considered thinking on the subject of cities and their development. It was written in the late 1980s by an author who had decades of experience chronicling and influencing urban design. It is outdated only to some extent, as one might expect with a 40 year old examination, but in most ways it is still a valuable piece of reading for anyone interested in the subject.
June 9, 2020
Classic
April 1, 2025
a tome for the native new yorker
February 12, 2013
This book was sort of a micro-level sequel to the macro-level of Jane Jacobs' The Death and Life of Great American Cities, more focused on the elements like ledges, walls, and sunlight that made up excellent public spaces. Whyte also takes a much more methodologically-exacting approach, formally researching and recording behaviors for over a decade, and peppering his book with photos, diagrams, and exact accounts of which policies were the most successful.
Also unlike Jacobs, Whyte had some level of buy-in with many of the associations and governments he consulted with. As a result, you get a much better sense of the trial-and-error that accompanied his efforts—as well as evidence of the dramatic results with a handful of modifications. Jacobs' book is more an account and critique of two philosophies, as well as stories about how Robert Moses' planning has scarred or destroyed countless neighborhoods.
This comparison to Jacobs is not meant to impoverish Whyte, as his aim is slightly different. I really appreciated the "concrete" details he was able to provide, as well as the lively anecdotes about how surprising and wonderful public life could be in a city. The stories can be repetitive—and that was my main bone to pick with the book—but they're wonderful enough that you won't be annoyed when he shares them again. It's been six months since I moved away from Chicago, and I miss it dearly for many of the same reasons.
But this book is also a snapshot of an era: New York beginning to climb out of the hole before Giuliani came along to take all the credit, parking spaces increasingly demanding more and more land-area, and cities destroying their urban cores through poorly managed policies and the legacy of white flight. It's fascinating to see what concerns are shared with today's cities, as well the generational differences in how cities are viewed now—my parents' generation was still attracted by the suburbs, while I see my own generation drawn to Chicago, NYC, Boston, San Francisco even as they are harder to afford than the alternative.
I wish I could say that things were getting better, even as the momentum that he describes for suburbs has petered out somewhat, but cities are unique when it comes to public policy. Our urban planning decisions aren't quite set in stone, but concrete is almost as permanent. Once sprawl happens it can't be undone without a tremendous amount of pain, as Detroit would attest to. Even as more people flee rural areas to live in metropolitan ones, it can't be said that will necessarily redound to the urban core's benefit.
Raleigh, NC, where I live now, is a great example of how prosperity can be deeply unequal and harmful to cities. The area has a tremendous number of white-collar jobs, and one of the better growth-rates in the US. But all that growth is being applied to sprawl. People here love the trees, so much that they leave many up. But they're a false rurality, and all they do is contribute to a placelessness, where you can't see far and don't know how the different areas interrelate. Everyone drives everywhere, and new roads are constantly being constructed to house them all. People would rather be surrounded by space than by people, and fare lengthy commutes to do so. It's an atrocious area, and because of the bad decisions being perpetuated today, will likely stay that way even as the boom ends and people start to drift away and a city begins to rot because it didn't have any sense of itself.
Also unlike Jacobs, Whyte had some level of buy-in with many of the associations and governments he consulted with. As a result, you get a much better sense of the trial-and-error that accompanied his efforts—as well as evidence of the dramatic results with a handful of modifications. Jacobs' book is more an account and critique of two philosophies, as well as stories about how Robert Moses' planning has scarred or destroyed countless neighborhoods.
This comparison to Jacobs is not meant to impoverish Whyte, as his aim is slightly different. I really appreciated the "concrete" details he was able to provide, as well as the lively anecdotes about how surprising and wonderful public life could be in a city. The stories can be repetitive—and that was my main bone to pick with the book—but they're wonderful enough that you won't be annoyed when he shares them again. It's been six months since I moved away from Chicago, and I miss it dearly for many of the same reasons.
But this book is also a snapshot of an era: New York beginning to climb out of the hole before Giuliani came along to take all the credit, parking spaces increasingly demanding more and more land-area, and cities destroying their urban cores through poorly managed policies and the legacy of white flight. It's fascinating to see what concerns are shared with today's cities, as well the generational differences in how cities are viewed now—my parents' generation was still attracted by the suburbs, while I see my own generation drawn to Chicago, NYC, Boston, San Francisco even as they are harder to afford than the alternative.
I wish I could say that things were getting better, even as the momentum that he describes for suburbs has petered out somewhat, but cities are unique when it comes to public policy. Our urban planning decisions aren't quite set in stone, but concrete is almost as permanent. Once sprawl happens it can't be undone without a tremendous amount of pain, as Detroit would attest to. Even as more people flee rural areas to live in metropolitan ones, it can't be said that will necessarily redound to the urban core's benefit.
Raleigh, NC, where I live now, is a great example of how prosperity can be deeply unequal and harmful to cities. The area has a tremendous number of white-collar jobs, and one of the better growth-rates in the US. But all that growth is being applied to sprawl. People here love the trees, so much that they leave many up. But they're a false rurality, and all they do is contribute to a placelessness, where you can't see far and don't know how the different areas interrelate. Everyone drives everywhere, and new roads are constantly being constructed to house them all. People would rather be surrounded by space than by people, and fare lengthy commutes to do so. It's an atrocious area, and because of the bad decisions being perpetuated today, will likely stay that way even as the boom ends and people start to drift away and a city begins to rot because it didn't have any sense of itself.
April 22, 2011
Every once in a while, we need to step back from newly released books and return to those which have been around for a decade or two--if not much longer. If we’re interested in themes such as collaboration and community, we find works including Jane Jacob's "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" (1961) and Christopher Alexander’s "A Pattern Language: Towns – Buildings – Construction" (1977), "The Timeless Way of Building" (1979), and just about everything he has written since then to be essential reminders that certain ideas remain consistent and worthy of our attention. William Whyte's "City: Rediscovering the Center" (1988) is another of those gems, and not just for students and lovers of architecture and city streets--and the way we use them. Whyte's dynamic work, drawn from 16 years of filming life on the streets of New York, is, ostensibly, a study of what makes cities work; it actually is far more than that. In exploring simple themes including how pedestrians in crowded urban spaces manage to navigate sidewalks and streets without continually bumping into each other, he highlights the larger, more intriguing issue of how we learn to collaborate almost wordlessly and effortlessly with one another. When he explores the importance of well maintained trash receptacles (pp. 90-92) and well placed drinking fountains (p. 87) in making communities attractive to residents and visitors, he reminds all of us to not overlook the elements that make our homes, communities, workplaces, and social gathering sites compellingly attractive. When he suggests that stakeholders in business districts might benefit from actively seeking new proprietors to provide what is currently missing from those centers (p. 323), he is also subliminally reminding us to actively seek to fill the gaps in what each of us does and provides in our own personal, social, and professional lives. "It is the asking of [questions] that is the critical step." he suggests at one point (p. 270), and it is with that simple yet profound reminder that Whyte makes us not only look at the communities we inhabit, but makes us want to question why they are the way they are--and what we can do to make them even better, regardless of whether they are physical or virtual.
August 26, 2017
"But they do not."
That's Whyte's favorite phrase. With variations, it occurs all throughout this book. He'll describe some predicted behavior by people in the city, something logical, or common-sensical, or assumed by planners, and then explain that he and his team observed to see if they follow this prediction: "but they do not." Or he'll explain how if planners, developers, governments, etc, were wise, rational, scientific, they would do the following thing: "but they do not." The observations are frequently fascinating and often hilarious: the tendency of people having a conversation on the sidewalk to move, not out of the stream of traffic, but as deep into the middle of it as possible, obstructing the way for everyone, for example. Nobody could predict it, it makes no sense, but that's what they do.
The rest is not as delightful. Whyte and I are on the same side of the walkable-city VS automobile-suburbia debate, so it's easy to cheer, but I've heard it all before. (Really you can get everything good about this book in a fraction of the time and twice the fun by watching Whyte's The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces.) Considering this book was written in the mid-80s, and almost everything is absolutely relevant to contemporary planning debate, the feeling is not 'hooray someone said it' as it might have been then, but rather, 'why have we gotten nowhere at all?' We still do all the terrible car-first planning and design, make assumptions based on what we think rather than what is true, and so on. The only thing that has changed is New York: there aren't any sleazy parts anymore. Whyte, to his credit, understood the sleaze to be an important part of the urban fabric, enlivening the space, even if the busybodies don't like it. He probably assumed it was eternal, and the three-card monte dealers, porno handbill passers, and shifty dope dealers would remain on Lexington Avenue forever. But they do not.
That's Whyte's favorite phrase. With variations, it occurs all throughout this book. He'll describe some predicted behavior by people in the city, something logical, or common-sensical, or assumed by planners, and then explain that he and his team observed to see if they follow this prediction: "but they do not." Or he'll explain how if planners, developers, governments, etc, were wise, rational, scientific, they would do the following thing: "but they do not." The observations are frequently fascinating and often hilarious: the tendency of people having a conversation on the sidewalk to move, not out of the stream of traffic, but as deep into the middle of it as possible, obstructing the way for everyone, for example. Nobody could predict it, it makes no sense, but that's what they do.
The rest is not as delightful. Whyte and I are on the same side of the walkable-city VS automobile-suburbia debate, so it's easy to cheer, but I've heard it all before. (Really you can get everything good about this book in a fraction of the time and twice the fun by watching Whyte's The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces.) Considering this book was written in the mid-80s, and almost everything is absolutely relevant to contemporary planning debate, the feeling is not 'hooray someone said it' as it might have been then, but rather, 'why have we gotten nowhere at all?' We still do all the terrible car-first planning and design, make assumptions based on what we think rather than what is true, and so on. The only thing that has changed is New York: there aren't any sleazy parts anymore. Whyte, to his credit, understood the sleaze to be an important part of the urban fabric, enlivening the space, even if the busybodies don't like it. He probably assumed it was eternal, and the three-card monte dealers, porno handbill passers, and shifty dope dealers would remain on Lexington Avenue forever. But they do not.
October 8, 2009
I adored this book... a wonderful exploration of what makes public space successful. And thanks to Whyte, every time I see a building with multiple doors... one of which is open... I think about his observation that an open door “is enormously attracting.”
He goes on to write: "Given a choice, people will head for the door that is already open, or that is about to be opened by somebody else. Some people are natural door openers. But most are not; often they will queue up three and four deep behind an open door rather than strike out on their own."
You know what? He's totally right. People WILL go through an open door...
He goes on to write: "Given a choice, people will head for the door that is already open, or that is about to be opened by somebody else. Some people are natural door openers. But most are not; often they will queue up three and four deep behind an open door rather than strike out on their own."
You know what? He's totally right. People WILL go through an open door...
March 19, 2013
In my opinion, part of being a successful business owner is learning about how your business is impacted by different influences. In City, Whyte discusses urban renewal and development and what is effective vs ineffective urban development as well as the impact it has on businesses. I learned a lot from this book and was able to apply some of it to a recent class on leadership that dealt with economic development. Economic development is definitely tied into urban development. This book explains a lot of that and also provides insights into the social life on the streets of any city.
February 17, 2010
Very interesting data and discussion about the uses of city streets and urban areas, encompassing the use of public squares, pedestrian flows, interactions on street corners, architecture and development and incentive zoning in cities for the years between 1972 and 1988. Made me wish very much what Whyte and his graduate students would uncover filming and observing city life in the age of cell phones, telecommuting, and the fall-off of pedestrian movement in the last twenty years.
August 7, 2016
I am hesitant to mark this as "finished" because while I did read it, I know I'll be dipping into it regularly, so it's one of those constantly open on the nightstand books for me. As a diehard urban person, who's lived / spent time in several of the cities in here, this is fascinating stuff. But whether you live in a city or not, if you've ever wondered about why a certain configuration of city space attracts or repels you, you'll love this book.
June 27, 2011
This is an impressive guide to the necessary elements of functional public space and the roles of public spaces within communities. Whyte not only challenges conventional thinking, but does it convincingly with detailed study. Because it focuses on the basic elements of public space and community life, this book will be relevant as long as there is civilization.
August 26, 2014
Classic!
很棒的城市規劃書！這位博士根據他幾十年的研究（包括徹底的紐約路上錄像）說明怎麼用城市規劃讓城市更溫暖、更有社交性，人文規劃城市何以培養團結以及創意。
The author, based on his decades of experience (including exhaustive video-recordings from the streets of New York), explains how to use public spaces to make cities warmer and more social and how humanistic city design cultivates solidarity between citizens and creativity.
很棒的城市規劃書！這位博士根據他幾十年的研究（包括徹底的紐約路上錄像）說明怎麼用城市規劃讓城市更溫暖、更有社交性，人文規劃城市何以培養團結以及創意。
The author, based on his decades of experience (including exhaustive video-recordings from the streets of New York), explains how to use public spaces to make cities warmer and more social and how humanistic city design cultivates solidarity between citizens and creativity.
February 25, 2009
An interesting study of what makes cities work. Although the book is now 20 years old, and some of the research 10 years older than that, human behaviour doesn't change. What makes a city work in 1976 is still true today. Just the clothes and the hairstyles would have changed in the pictures. ;)
March 26, 2009
I found the author's obsessive studies of pedestrian habits and habitats amusing and interesting. Also interesting was the insider view of NYC (and other city) planning commissions and their efforts (and oft-times failures) to create vibrant spaces in cities.
September 25, 2009
Read this like a follow-up to A Pattern Language: it has research-based info on what worked in city centers in the 1980s. The strange part is that the team videotaped public corners and plazas to determine pedestrian behavior.
Want to read
July 2, 2009newsweek 50 books for our times list
August 25, 2011
Amusing, insightful and fascinating. Perfect reading when you are in view of a downtown intersection.
Want to read
July 20, 2009Newsweek: "Using years of painstaking research, Whyte proved that the way to make a city work lies in the details -- the width of a park bench, the height of a subway step."
January 9, 2012
A bit dated in references, but not in concepts. A fascinating look at what makes streets work.
January 8, 2012
A great layman's [that's me] guide to the myriad aspects of city planning.
Written in 1988; would that an update version were possible
I own the hardcover edition
Written in 1988; would that an update version were possible
I own the hardcover edition
August 14, 2012
I loved this book when I read it twenty-odd years ago, and I still find Whyte's research fascinating--even in spite of occasional sexism and racism that wouldn't make it into print today.
Want to read
November 13, 2014William H Whyte keeps coming up, currently in the book On Looking, about walking in the city from different perspectives. Time to read some W Whyte.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews