What do you think?
Rate this book
The City of Today is a Dying Thing: In Search of the Cities of Tomorrow
288 pages, Paperback
Published February 13, 2025
7 people are currently reading
53 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
August 22, 2025
Gotta say I wasn't a fan of this one. There's some generally interesting ideas, but the author loves to strawman her opponents while offering up a really weak defense of modernism. Out of the 250 pages dedicated to calling street trees racist, she only bothers to acknowledge the incredibly real benefits of urban trees on shade and air quality in one paragraph hidden in the middle. Plus, the smug and elitist tone is funny at first, but beyond grating by the end. Only really finished this to see what stupid claims would be made next.
June 3, 2025
I have wanted to read this book for a while and it didn’t disappoint. Looking at all the contrasting ideas theory’s and schools of architecture and the city it pulls them all together to see how far we have moved away from nature in our building and city planning. Throughout the book the author writes with humour and passion linking people’s emotions to the challenge of the urban environment. Rest assured you will not look at an urban tree in the same way a great book.
September 2, 2025
Main takeaways form this book:
1. Nearly every major figure in urban planning history is as either racist or fascist (no sources provided of course), therefore their ideas should be entirely disregarded.
2. Urban parks are bad because they were invented during the Industrial Revolution to make factory workers just healthy enough to keep producing profit for factory owners.
3. Basically every scientist with decades of research in their specialised field is wrong—simply because the author feels like they are. No evidence, no reasoning, just vibes.
Like… what?? Was really excited to get a fresh perspective on the future of town planning, but instead got a dude with a surface level understanding of urbanism throwing out sweeping criticisms of everything, all with zero data, minimal logic, and not a single credible counterargument in sight.
It got so absurd I ended up reading it all the way through, half expecting some kind of twist—maybe he’d turn around and reflect on the ridiculousness of his own points, or at least try to tie it all together in a coherent conclusion. But the fact that there wasn’t even an actual conclusion chapter indicates this isn’t a constructive review of urban planning but rather an incoherent rant.
Honestly, one of the book’s main points—that adding forests and biodiversity to cities is unnecessary and disrupts the idea of cities as “unnatural” spaces—isn’t just wrong, it’s reckless. In the middle of a climate crisis, pushing that kind of narrative feels as dangerously out of touch as anti-vax rhetoric during the pandemic.
1. Nearly every major figure in urban planning history is as either racist or fascist (no sources provided of course), therefore their ideas should be entirely disregarded.
2. Urban parks are bad because they were invented during the Industrial Revolution to make factory workers just healthy enough to keep producing profit for factory owners.
3. Basically every scientist with decades of research in their specialised field is wrong—simply because the author feels like they are. No evidence, no reasoning, just vibes.
Like… what?? Was really excited to get a fresh perspective on the future of town planning, but instead got a dude with a surface level understanding of urbanism throwing out sweeping criticisms of everything, all with zero data, minimal logic, and not a single credible counterargument in sight.
It got so absurd I ended up reading it all the way through, half expecting some kind of twist—maybe he’d turn around and reflect on the ridiculousness of his own points, or at least try to tie it all together in a coherent conclusion. But the fact that there wasn’t even an actual conclusion chapter indicates this isn’t a constructive review of urban planning but rather an incoherent rant.
Honestly, one of the book’s main points—that adding forests and biodiversity to cities is unnecessary and disrupts the idea of cities as “unnatural” spaces—isn’t just wrong, it’s reckless. In the middle of a climate crisis, pushing that kind of narrative feels as dangerously out of touch as anti-vax rhetoric during the pandemic.
June 6, 2025
Des Fitzgerald thoughtfully explores the complex (and more than occasionally fascist) politics of green cities with nuance and scorchingly dry humour. This book was just as likely to make me gasp in horror as it was to make me laugh - or even exclaim, ‘why is it always the Nazis?’ In all seriousness, Des treats the history and future of anti-urbanism with a curious (if cynical) gentleness that leaves the reader themselves more curious, and, simultaneously, more educated. The best quality a non-fiction book can have is to call you deeper down whatever rabbit hole it concerns - which this title most definitely does. Also, shoutout to Catholic architecture.
August 30, 2025
Unfortunately, I really struggle to see any alternative ideas being presented in this book and I generally found the tone to be quite bitter which wasn't enjoyable.
Individuals and groups with often innocent ideas of improving the world and cities are depicted as fascists more often than I expected for a 250 page read.
Individuals and groups with often innocent ideas of improving the world and cities are depicted as fascists more often than I expected for a 250 page read.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews