In this immensely practical book; Timothy Beatley sets out to answer a simple question: what can Americans learn from Australians about ldquo;greeningrdquo; city life? Green Urbanism Down Under reports on the current state of ldquo;sustainability practicerdquo; in Australia and the many lessons that U.S. residents can learn fromthe best Australian programs and initiatives. Australia is similar to the United States in many ways; especially in its ldquo;energy footprint.rdquo; For example; Australiarsquo;s per capita greenhouse gas emissions are second only to those of the United States. A similar percentage of its residents live in cities (85 percent in Australia vs. 80 percent in the United States). And it suffers from parallel problems of air and water pollution; a national dependence on automobiles; and high fossil fuel consumption. Still; after traveling throughout Australia; Beatley finds that there are myriad creative responses to these problemsmdash;and that they offer instructive examples for the United States. Green Urbanism Down Under is a very readable collection of solutions.Although many of these innovative solutions are little-known outside Australia; they all present practical possibilities for U.S. cities. Beatley describes ldquo;green transportrdquo; projects; ldquo;city farms;rdquo; renewable energy plans; green living programs; and much more. He considers a host of public policy initiatives and scrutinizes regional and state planning efforts for answers. In closing; he shares his impressions about how Australian results might be applied to U.S. problems. This is a unique book: hopeful; constructive; and filled with ideas that have been proven to work. It is a ldquo;must readrdquo; for anyone who cares about the future of American cities.
#778499 in eBooks 2012-08-31 2012-08-31File Name: B009KA4GE2
Review
10 of 10 people found the following review helpful. The Adam Smith of Art CriticismBy Katya CohenI fully understand David Hickeys impulse in writing these essays. The strongest essay being the one in which he reacts to the Academys defense (or not) of Robert Maplethorpe during the culture wars of the 80s. I thought it was really incisive and a truly creative way of seeing things. and it gave me a lot to think about. As to his more general thoughts on Beauty. the essays themselves are cogent and in the abstract. if not in the particulars. convincing.Hickey is basically ranting against the "Academy" (or Art Establishment). and not because he sees it as colluding with the market. like some reviewer inferred. in fact. quite au contraire. In these essays Hickey defends the marketplace for being the ultimate arbiter. through democratic wrangling. of value. beauty. and meaning.Again. I do get the impulse behind this kind of thinking. It must be born of years of looking at too much uninspiring art sanctioned by the Academy due to its prescriptive value instead of that thing that good art can do. which is move us in ways that perhaps will always remain essentially undefinable. And boy is there ever a lot of that crap out there passing for Art (and the word Art still implies "good". even after all these years since Greenberg).Hickey decries the Academy (in which he includes even what I find to be our no-real-lover-of-the-arts Government) for funding such art on the basis of it being "good for us" instead of "making us happy". And he does this by riffing on the Declaration of Independence and by quoting Thomas Paine. And again. I feel his pain; but I think his approach might be simplistic. In essence. Hickey calls for Beauty to be determined in the Forum. the laissez-faire marketplace. Given that in this day and age a lot of the art sanctioned by the Academy has precisely to do with investigating the deleterious effects of the market on the production of "true" art. I can see where he might have ruffled some feathers; and I smile at the thought of that.I love his attitude and his writing; and I viscerally feel what he is longing for. but his solution does not ring true. And I say this as a person who believes that markets work for the good of the people. most of the time; but even laissez-faire capitalism needs some regulation when decisions made according to its principles do more harm than good. The market alone has made as many mistakes about what is good art as the Academy has. Norman Rockwell is still crap. as is Thomas Kincaid. Unfettered democracy might produce what the people want. and Hickey has the right to slap the word "Beautiful" on the result; but I dont think its that easy. That being said. the book is a good read and gets one really involved in determining and arguing ones own value system.2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. A Nice Read. At TimesBy C. HallWhile I did not agree with everything he presents. I do accept his main precept. concerning the importance of beauty (or any aesthetic. for that matter). Much of contemporary art has abandoned aesthetics. or at best. has made it secondary to a critical concept. I dont share his preference of illusionistic art over the flatness of modern art. but that is okay. That is a matter of taste. Concerning the language. it is strange that Hickey vacillates between being completely accessible to being completely opaque. At least the moments of accessibility are a pleasure to read.2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. The dirty bomb of art theory. and thats a good thing.By Hunter RausoThis collection of Hickeys essays blew my mind wide open. The content is most appropriate for those who are under the impression that they have a firm idea of the place of beauty and meaning in contemporary art. The concepts that were explicated over the course of these five essays introduced cracks in just the right places in my theories of art to allow Hickey to drop sticks of dynamite down into their cores. Read every word with the care required of one handling a nuclear weapon.
