Portland 1-4

Parr McQueen

FullSizeRender

 

IMG_6332

Portland 1:

Both books emphasize the study of place. Define the geographic concept of “place”. Illustrate the concept by describing the place where you are this summer.

Place is what makes a location different. There are many distinctions between locations that may have very similar characteristics. When looking at certain statistics many different geographical regions can seem to be exactly the same, when in reality they are very different What makes up the place are things that make these locations different from the places. Every place is unique and includes the people and things that cannot be found anywhere else. Most of my summer was spent on campus for research. The UR campus exists in a relative bubble of isolated learning. Sometimes it is hard to remember that there are real things going on in the outside.

Before reading this book, think about your preconceived idea of the City of Portland. From this introductory material, describe two things that matched your preconceived notion of Portland. Describe two things that you had not previously associated with Portland.

I enjoyed reading more about where Portland is described as an “Ecotopia” where alternative lifestyles flourished. I was again reminded of the common use of bicycles for transport and function, instead of simply recreation, this is a great thing. Similar to this is the commonness of renewable offsets for electricity, as I know this is something my family does because it costs very little but can have a big impact. One thing I was not aware of that has connections to Portland is the Cascadian Independence Project. I knew that many parts of Oregon are very rural and almost self governing, but I never made the connection that the more liberal city of Portland would be connected to this. Another thing I did not associate with Portland is their seeming obsession with beer, I pictured that as more of a Midwest thing.

Why did the authors choose to introduce Portland as a Cascadian City? What does it mean to be a Cascadian City?

The authors chose to introduce Portland as a Cascadian City because this is the best way to note the geographic location, without drawing in similarities to other cites. Other descriptors like north west or American would be too broad and non descript. It would make the reader try to imagine what that descriptor means and then assume Portland is exactly like the other cities which are described in that way. The word Cascadian allows the reader to see where Portland is, but it also shows how Portland is different. This in turn invites the reader to try to learn more about Portland. A Cascadian City is not defined by any straight lines on a map. One could define it by its water shed, or the tectonic plates or mountain range, but it is more then that. A Cascadian City is flexible, and it is this uncertainty and uniqueness defines Portland.

What is the essence of Portlandness? Why are maps a useful way of presenting this idea?

Portlandness is all of the things that make Portland a different place then other cites; from the eco-hippies and the public transport, to the craft brewers and the old fashion loggers. To understand Portland one cannot rely on “default interpretations” and instead need new perspectives. This book attempts to do that by collecting all the different maps, with all the things that define Portland as a place, and make it special.

For three of the main sections of the book (I-VII), choose one of the perspectives presented (e.g., for I. Urban Landscapes, you could choose Bridgetown, Under the Bridges, Where the Sidewalk Ends… or Naked City), and answer the following questions (no more than a short paragraph per answer):

 Portland 2

 What is the main concept illustrated in this section (e.g., what is an Urban Landscape)?

This first section of the book focuses on the “Urban Landscape”. Landscapes traditionally refer to natural settings of foliage and assorted plants, but an Urban Landscape is different. Inside the city there is not much untouched by man. Everything was brought in, placed or created, for a reason. Changes could be done for the purpose of more housing or the light rail system and other public transport. Even simpler the Urban Landscape could be the trash on the sidewalk. But every city, and every place has different trash on their sidewalks, and different styles of buildings. These manmade differences between locations help form the Urban Landscape.

What perspective did you choose to read for this section (e.g., Bridgetown, Under the Bridges, Where the Sidewalk Ends… or Naked City)? Why? How would you describe Portland according to this perspective in a few sentences?

The “Stop! Writing on Stop Signs” is an intriguing section that raises a few questions for me. I chose this section because the idea of stop sign graffiti is puzzling to me. The examples shown in the book are all supporting one cause or another. Someone cared enough to go write on the stop sign in an attempt to share their views with others. But this is still vandalism and I personally think would make the city less attractive, but it is not tagging or thoughtless destruction. For these reasons I would start to describe Portland as a place where its residents really care about issues. Then I would spoil that statement by adding that while the residents have great passion, they don’t always have productive ways to express that.

What map would you produce for Richmond to represent this concept? Why? What would be the title of the map? What might the map look like? (go ahead and sketch it, if you feel you can. Don’t worry about the technology, if you can’t post the drawing.)

Following the general idea of stop sign graffiti, I think a compelling map might be one of different bumper stickers on parked cars in Richmond. People love expressing their opinion on their cars, and I feel like mapping where different political or social view points are more common would be a fun way to describe Richmond.

Portland 3

 What is the main concept illustrated in this section (e.g., what is an Urban Landscape)?

This section is called the “The once and future city”, describing the fact that Portland can not be described with a single snapshot. Portland is always changing, as soon as someone takes the picture, it has changed already. Anything from street names, township organization to the political views of the residents. Cites are dynamic and Portland is no different. If anything, it seems that Portland is able to evolve at a faster rate, and respond to new and improved trends than other comparable cites.

What perspective did you choose to read for this section (e.g., Bridgetown, Under the Bridges, Where the Sidewalk Ends… or Naked City)? Why? How would you describe Portland according to this perspective in a few sentences?

The section I focused on for this was “From Isle to Peninsula Swan Island”. Here the focus is on Swan Island, a place where extreme changes have happened. The city physically changed the landmass from an island to a peninsula, in order to improve transport and better use it as an airport. I chose this because it shows an extreme case of “The once and future city” physically changing their landscape. Most of the changes the city makes are minor, but the change that is happening right now has always been happening, and sometimes at an even larger scale. From this perceptive I would describe Portland as a place that is always looking for perfection, always looking for a better way and evolving into an improved form.

What map would you produce for Richmond to represent this concept? Why? What would be the title of the map? What might the map look like? (go ahead and sketch it, if you feel you can. Don’t worry about the technology, if you can’t post the drawing.)

A good way to illustrate this concept in the city of Richmond is to map out the the old rail road bridges that are no longer active. Over the James river there are a handful of old rail road brides that that are no longer in use. Many have degraded so much they are just concrete pilings in the sand. I have to imagine at one time these bridges were very active and carried thousands of tons of cargo or many people. Over time transportation trends have changed, and now Richmond has much wider highway bridges over the James. Comparing the new to the old shows the changing nature of the city by mapping out the important and very busy transport routes that were used at one time, but shifted to new locations.

Portland 4 

What is the main concept illustrated in this section (e.g., what is an Urban Landscape)?

This section is called “Views of the city”, which dives into the more qualitative aspects of Portland. Very few people care about statistics. Normal people don’t stay up late at night pouring over census data. What matters the most is how people feel about the city they are in. How the people there experience it, what stands out and how does it make them feel is much more important than population density.  It’s the using one’s gut to get a feel for what’s its like. These are the things people share with friends, not how many billboards there are per street.

What perspective did you choose to read for this section (e.g., Bridgetown, Under the Bridges, Where the Sidewalk Ends… or Naked City)? Why? How would you describe Portland according to this perspective in a few sentences?

The perspective I chose to illustrate the concept is “Sounds of the city”. I chose this section because it is the perfect example of unquantifiable data. There is no way to describe the differences in how streets sound without recording hours of audio and listening to it back to back.  Its not just total decibels that matters, its what stands out, and what people hear. Maybe the cars on the street are louder, but when walking downtown one hears the street performer instead. After reading this section, I would describe Portland as very diverse. The map in the text shows many different sounds coming from very different sources all within the same close area.

What map would you produce for Richmond to represent this concept? Why? What would be the title of the map? What might the map look like? (go ahead and sketch it, if you feel you can. Don’t worry about the technology, if you can’t post the drawing.)

Building height could be used to represent this concept in Richmond.  A person walking downtown and next to buildings like Federal Reserve sees a totally different view then someone walking in the the suburbs sections. Building height is also a way to visually see different statistics like population density and maybe even rent without looking at plain numbers. If someone was just dropped in to different parts of the city and was not aware of the others he would think very different ideas about what Richmond is as a whole.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Portland 1-4

  1. Rachel Lantz says:

    I agree with many of your assumptions about Portland. You talked about the section “Stop! Writing on Stop Signs” which stated that Portlanders generally care about many different issues. After visiting the city, do you still find this to be true? Personally, I found that the graffiti I saw was mainly artistic and not necessarily conveying a powerful message. Although I saw some evidence of these messages such as those relating to the Ammon Bundy trial, I did not see as many as I expected after reading this section of the book.

Comments are closed.